I was listening to an old series of lectures on Matthew by Steve Gregg who is a partial preterist. When he came to Matthew 13 he understood the end of the age to refer to the second coming. When he came to the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24, he explained that the end of the age referred to 70 AD. It was not so much that he was asserting the two were different but rather it seemed that this contradiction never even occurred to him. To properly understand partial preterist postmillennialism we must come to a solid, coherent understanding of the end of the age. Much of how we understand and exegete postmillennial eschatology hinges on how we understand this important concept. Matthew is the only one of the four gospels that mentions this phrase and includes it among the questions asked by the disciples in the Olivet discourse. Matthew mentions the “end of the age” 5 times. He mentions it three times in chapter 13 in the parables of the wheat and tares and the dragnet and once each in the Olivet discourse (Matt 24) and the Great Commission (Matt 28). He teaches the disciples about this term and then adds this to the disciple’s questions in the Olivet discourse. For Matthew, this is a point of emphasis he wishes to communicate to his readers. As such, the meaning of this phrase must be specific and consistent in all five cases. For example, it cannot mean the second coming/general resurrection in the Matt 13 parables and then also refer to the 70 AD destruction in the Olivet discourse.
Significantly, the parables of the wheat and tares and the dragnet (Matt 13), and the scene of the last judgment (Matt 25:31ff) are found only in Matthew’s Gospel. Matthew is the only one of the four Gospels that teaches about the end of the age. Matthew wrote about things he understood or witnessed. As an author of the scripture, he expressed truth using words and phrases inspired by the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s use of the end of the age is intentional and specific. Furthermore, Matthew also mentions the “age to come” three times. Matthew is not teaching multiple “age” paradigms. He is consciously linking the age to come with the end of the age. The concept in itself would’ve been difficult enough for first-century disciples without overloading it with multiple disparate meanings. Whatever Matthew’s meaning is, we must understand it to be intentional, coherent, and consistent.
Partial preterists hold that much of Daniel, Revelation the Olivet Discourse find their fulfillment in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. They disagree on the meaning of the end of the age. Some, such as Ken Gentry, Keith Mathison, and Greg Bahnsen understand it to refer to the second coming. Others such as Doug Wilson, James Jordan, Brian Godawa, and Jeff Durbin understand the end of the age to refer to 70 AD. Wilson memorably espoused the 70 AD view in the iconic Evening of Eschatology. It is my contention that the parable of the wheat and tares in Matt 13 is not compatible with both views. The parable of wheat and tares properly understood affirms the second-coming view and refutes the 70 AD view of the end of the age. Because it can be definitively determined by this parable it controls the meaning of all subsequent uses of the phrase. I will contend that the type of the field, the scope of the field, and the participants require the second-coming view held by Gentry, Mathison, and Bahnsen to be correct.
We note that in Matt 13:37 “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man.” Jesus is the sower of the wheat. The wheat is the elect. It is the Lord’s field and its purpose is to grow and harvest the wheat. Therefore it is a wheat field. “The good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one (V38)”. At harvest time, the field will be predominantly wheat with some tares scattered amongst the wheat. It is a wheat field, not a tare field. The field will be full of wheat with weeds scattered amongst them. The familiar pattern of cool spring weather and abundant spring rainfall producing slow steady growth of a bountiful harvest was the word picture story underpinning this teaching by the Lord on the Kingdom of God. A plentiful wheat harvest marred by a smattering of weeds would be the expectation of His hearers. A 70 AD understanding of the harvest puts its proponents in the same predicament as those that espouse amillennial view. Like amillennials, the 70 AD adherents must invert the premise of the harvest to mean an abundance of weeds with a smattering of wheat. This won’t do. A 70 AD harvest would require the weeds (faithless, non-elect Israelites) to be “burned up” at the 70 AD destruction leaving the elect safely behind. However, the wheat, the elect, the burgeoning church, and the Israel of God were a small minority in the land of Israel at the time of its destruction. Partial preterists that advocate a 70 AD understanding posit a view of the “end of the age” that runs counter to the premise of a harvest characterized by an abundance of wheat and a smattering of tares.
The scope of the field is the world (Greek: kosmos). It is the universe, the entire world. The 70 AD view would require a local field – the land of Israel at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. The 70 AD view attempts to link the Harvest of the Lamb in Revelation 14:14–20 which depicts the local judgment of the land of Israel and the escape of believers to the harvest in Matt 13:39. As such, the 70 AD view requires the harvest to be understood as the sorting of unbelieving Jews from the faithful, elect believing Jews making up the first-century church. This does not comport with the worldwide scope required by v38. Revelation 14 and Matt 13 are two different events.
Still, others among those holding to the 70 AD view will point out that the scope of this harvest is the Kingdom of God and focus on the fact that “The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace.” They assert that the comingling of believers and unbelievers requires a Mosaic Kingdom explanation since unbelievers cannot see the New Covenant Kingdom of God. As such, they reduce scope by suggesting that the tares represent unbelievers in the old Mosaic kingdom to account for the comingling of wheat and tares. In response, it must be noted that at the second coming/general resurrection as described in Rev 20:11-15 “the dead, great and small, standing before the throne” also pictures a comingling of the wheat and tares and describes a scene with remarkable similarity to that described in Matt 13:42. Furthermore, insisting that the tares are a veiled reference to the faithless in the old Mosaic kingdom undermines the point of the parable – the Lord’s intent to expound the prophetic Kingdom of God that is at hand. As foretold in Daniel 2, the Kingdom of God being inaugurated by Jesus is a fifth and final Kingdom that consumes the four world-ruling empires that preceded it. Attempting to inject a Mosaic Kingdom into this parable is a category error that short-circuits the Daniel 2 prophecy. The Mosaic OT “kingdom” has nothing to do with this parable or Jesus’ teaching on the Kingdom of God.
The participants in the harvest/reaping are all of mankind. The saved and the unsaved. The elect and the non-elect. The wheat and the tares. The field is said to be the world in V38 and yet curiously, at the harvest, the Lord is said “The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom”. The territory in which the seeds are sewn is the world but at harvest time the territory is called the kingdom. That is to say, the kingdom has been inaugurated in 13:38, but it is being consummated in v13:41. Only the elect will truly see the kingdom of God but trespassers have intruded into the territory of the kingdom until this time of harvest. At such time, all intruders will be will be permanently removed from the Kingdom. Kingdom trespassers didn’t cease their infiltration of Kingdom territory at 70 AD which further militates against 70 AD end of the age view. As D. A. Carson observes, “To pray ‘your kingdom come’ is . . . simultaneously to ask that God’s saving, royal rule be extended now as people bow in submission to him and already taste the eschatological blessing of salvation and to cry for the consummation of the kingdom.” The tares will continually evolve and survive until they are exterminated. This extermination did not happen in 70 AD as the weeds and the effect of the weeds still persists today. As the coming of the Kingdom progresses and the Lord’s wheat field matures, the effects of the persistent encroachment of the tares will diminish.
Yet another clue to the meaning of the end of the age in Matthew is the Lord’s resurrection reference in 13:43. This comes from Daniel 12:2-3, “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt 3 And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.” Daniel 12:1 is a pretty clear reference to the events of 70 AD. Some posit a spiritual resurrection in Daniel 12 because of its proximity to the 70 AD destruction. Since, of course, there was no bodily resurrection in 70 AD this must refer to a spiritual resurrection according to some. However, the resurrection reference is better understood via the already/not yet paradigm associated with the Kingdom. As Dale Allison explains, “..Jewish thinking could envision the final events—the judgment of evil and the arrival of the kingdom of God—as extending over time, and as a process or series of events that could involve the present. When Jesus announces that the kingdom of God has come and is coming, this means that the last act has begun but has not yet reached its climax; the last things have come and will come.” Thus, the bodily resurrection to occur at the second coming could be in view in Daniel 12:2-3 even though the immediate context is the events of 70 AD. The future bodily resurrection is within the already/not yet scope of the blessings associated with the deliverance of Daniel’s people. A reference to the general resurrection embedded in the explanation of the wheat and tares seems like an extraordinary clue that this parable points to the general resurrection at the second coming described in Matthew 25:31 ff. It is an important detail to include in the explanation. If this were a reference to a spiritual resurrection, then it seems like a detail that would lead to confusion, not clarity.
Viewing redemptive history through the lens of this age/age to come and locating the end of the age at the second coming does not preclude a partial preterist understanding of 70 AD. The destruction of Jerusalem and the temple has tremendous theological significance. Ken Gentry as quoted by Brian Godawa, sums it up like this: “it brings God’s wrath upon the Jews for rejecting their Messiah (Mt 21: 33– 44; 23: 37– 38; Ac 2: 36); it concludes the anticipatory old covenant era (Heb 1: 1; 12: 18– 29) which in the first century is “becoming obsolete and growing old” and is “ready to vanish away” (Heb 8: 13; cp. Gal 3: 23– 25); it finally and forever closes down the typological sacrificial system, reorienting the worship of God (Jn 4: 21; Heb 9– 10); it vindicates Christ’s followers against their first enemies (Mt 10: 16– 23; 23: 24– 24: 2; 1Th 2: 14– 17; Rev 6: 9– 11); and it effectively universalizes the Christian faith by freeing it from all Jewish constraints (Mt 28: 18– 20; Mk 2: 21– 22; Ac 15: 10– 11; Eph 2: 12– 22).”
Matthew superintended by the Holy Spirit traces the concept of the end of the age through the parables in Matthew 13, the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24-25, the resurrection and judgment in Matthew 25:31, and finally the Great Commission in Matthew 28. The parable of the wheat and tares sets the meaning of the end of the age. The remarkable correlation between Matt 13:39 -43 and Matt 25:31 places the end of the age at the second coming This brings clarity to the understanding of the Olivet Discourse. The end of the age is the last part of the question and the last part of the answer in 25:31. This brackets the answers regarding the 70 AD destruction. The answer leading up to and including the destruction of the temple continues through Matt 25:30.
The type of the field, the scope of the field, the participants, and the reference to the resurrection ground the end of the age at the second coming. It is a worldwide wheat field infested with tares that are exterminated at the end of the age. Viewing redemptive history through the lens of this age/age to come and locating the end of the age at the second coming results in a consistent, reliable hermeneutic affirming partial preterist postmillennialism.
