Matt 23:37–39 and Luke 13:34–35: NT Reaffirmations of the OT Expectation for Israel

Certain passages like Matthew 19:28, Luke 22:30, Romans 11:25-27, and Acts 1:6 explicitly reaffirm the Old Testament expectation of a restoration of the nation Israel. In addition, the passages of Matthew 23:37–39 and Luke 13:34–35 also appear to be New Testament evidence for such a restoration.[1]Matthew 23:37–39 records Jesus’ words to the inhabitants of Jerusalem:

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. Behold your house is being left to you desolate! For I say to you, from now on you shall not see Me until you say, ‘BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!’”

The text in Luke 13:34–35 is similar:

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it! Behold, your house is left to you desolate; and I say to you, you shall not see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!’”

             In these two parallel texts, Jesus announces that desolation will come toJerusalem and its temple because the Jewish inhabitants of Jerusalem rejected him. Jesus also announces that he will be hidden from the people of Jerusalemuntil the day they say, “BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!” The prediction that the Jews will one day cry out that Jesus is “Blessed” is clear, but the manner in which they will do so is disputed. Is this the exclamation of disobedient Jews facing eschatological judgment, or is it the cry of a repentantIsrael at the time of its restoration? 

             The latter view appears more viable. In our view, Matthew 23:37–39 teaches both judgment and hope. There is judgment for the present generation ofIsrael, but there is also the hope of restoration in the future. As Craig S. Keener states:

This passage reminds us that God does not forget his promises to his people. . . . Matthew places it among the woes of coming judgment, but in so doing transforms this into a promise of future hope. . . . Israel’s restoration was a major theme of the biblical prophets and reappeared at least occasionally in early Christianity (Rom 11:26), though the emphasis of early Christian apologetic came to focus on the Gentile mission.[2]

Others affirm this view. Gundry points out that Matthew 23:37–39 refers to “Israel’s restoration in the kingdom of the Son of man.”[3] David K. Lowery, too, agrees with this conclusion:

The quotation thus serves as a reminder that the chastening of Israel does not mean it has been abandoned by God. The cited words also imply thatIsrael’s restoration will be associated with repentance. . . . The quotation, therefore, expresses a note of hope that the rejection of Jesus as Messiah, which Matthew has portrayed, is not Israel’s last word concerning Him, nor is the pronouncement of woe God’s last word concerning them.[4]

             Luke 13:34–35 also holds out hope for a restoration of national Israel. As Robert C. Tannehill declares, “This lament over Jerusalem includes a continuing hope that a restored Jerusalem will find this salvation.”[5] Craig A. Evans points out that a positive reception of Jesus by the Jews, as described in Luke 13:35, is linked to the coming (parousia) of Christ:

The saying, therefore, likely alludes to the parousia, at the time the kingdom is finally restored to Israel (Acts 1:6, 11); then stubborn Jerusalem will finally bless the Messiah. But not until then will the inhabitants be gathered together under the wings of Messiah’s care and protection. The expectation is that someday, but not now, the Jewish nation will respond and be reconciled to the Messiah.[6]

John Koenig also links a joyful welcome of Jesus by the Jews with the parousiaand the restoration of Israel:

But this means that the prophecy recorded in Lk. 13:35 must look forward to some other future event. This other is probably Jesus’ Parousia descent toJerusalem as Son of Man Messiah in the Kingdom of God (Lk. 21:27; Acts1:11). On that day Jerusalemites will repent of their blindness and welcome Jesus with blessings. Thereafter the final restoration of Israel can proceed.[7]

             Hope for a future restoration of Israel in Luke 13:35 can be supported by other statements in Luke and Acts. As Darrell Bock says:

It is debated whether Luke by this remark holds out hope for Israel’s future. Luke 21:24 and the speech of Acts 3 show that Jesus and the church continued to extend hope to Israel. They believed that God would restore the nation in the end. In fact, the NT suggests that such a response will precede Christ’s return, thus Luke’s later reference to the current period as “the time of the Gentiles.”[8]

             We hold, therefore, that the exclamation, “BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!” is a joyful cry of a repentant Israel undergoing restoration and not the woeful cry of a condemned Israel undergoing judgment. Further evidence for this can be found in the Old Testament context of this statement. This exclamation that is referred to in Matthew 23:39 and Luke 13:35 is taken from Psalm 118:26. Psalm 118 is a psalm of thanksgiving for God’s saving goodness. According to Evans, “The rabbis understood Ps 118:26 in reference to the day of redemption.”[9]

             The joyful context of Psalm 118 makes it more likely that the quotation of this psalm in Matthew 23:39 and Luke 13:35 refers to a joyful deliverance of a restored Israel. Noting that the Jews regarded Psalm 118 as a messianic psalm of praise, Saucy declares, “It is far more likely that this statement following the pronouncement of judgment is to be taken as a promise of a joyful greeting of their Messiah by the people of Jerusalem.”[10] According to Larry R. Helyer, “It is hard not to see here a reference to the future conversion of Israel (cf. Rom11:25–26). The suggestion that the cry is a reluctant admission of sovereignty has little to commend it, especially in view of the context of the quotation from Ps 118:26.”[11] Bock, too, argues against the idea that the exclamation of the Jews is a forced recognition of Jesus: “Still another faulty explanation is that Jews will be forced to recognize him at the second coming. . . .The quotation from Ps. 118 is positive and anticipates a positive recognition, not a forced one.”[12]

             This interpretation, though, has come under criticism from supersessionists. R.T. France, for example, argues that there are “two factors” against the view that Jesus is speaking of a national salvation of Israel. First, he claims that the statement “until you say” in Matthew 23:39 is “expressed in Greek as an indefinite possibility rather than as a firm prediction.”[13] Thus, “This is the condition on which they will see him again; but there is no promise that the condition will be fulfilled.”[14] Second, France believes the judgment context of Matthew 23 and 24 argues against the idea that Jesus was speaking of a future hope for the nation Israel:

Secondly, a prediction of future repentance would be quite out of keeping not only with the flow of thought throughout ch. 23 (of which this is the climax) and ch. 24 which deals with judgment to come, but also with the perspective of the Gospel as a whole, which has repeatedly spoken of Israel’s last chance, and of a new international people of God (8:11–12; 12:38–45; 21:40–43; 22:7; 23:32–36; etc.).[15] 

              France’s points are not convincing. Supersessionists often stress the judgment context of Matthew 23:39 as evidence that Jesus was not speaking of a future salvation or restoration of Israel. Yet while the context heavily speaks of judgment, this does not logically mean that that there cannot be hope for Israelafter a period of judgment. As Goppelt writes, Matthew “may in fact have had in mind a saving encounter of Israel with the returning One at the parousia in23:39.”[16] Lange, too, states that Matthew 23:39 “is an intimation of a future conversion.”[17]

             A glimmer of hope can be offered in the midst of somber predictions of judgment. Thus, the conclusion here is that Matthew 23:37–39 and the parallel teaching in Luke 13:35 foretell a day when the inhabitants of Jerusalem will joyfully recognize their king. As Donald Senior states, “In Matthew’s perspective, the rejection of Jesus by the leaders is indeed a grave sin, one that brings divine judgment. Yet the story of God’s relationship to Israel is not concluded, and the day will come when Jerusalem will again receive its Messiah with shouts of praise.”[18] Ladd, too, points out that Matthew 23:37–39 is evidence that “Israel is yet to be saved.”[19] It is also evidence that Israel’s rejection is not final:

This rejection [of Israel] is not final and ultimate; the day will come whenIsrael will say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord’ (vv. 37–39). The Kingdom of God is not taken from the Jews that they might be forever abandoned; ‘all Israel’ is yet to be saved and brought within the redemptive purpose of God.[20]

             We conclude, therefore, that Matthew 23:37-39 and Luke 13:34-35 offer additional New Testament evidence for the restoration of the nation Israel.

• < Prev
• Next >