I put this on a different thread but in case you didn't see it Ill post here as well:
Here is a great piece on this issue from the late Dr. Chuck Missler. One of the much missed points he makes is that the accounts in Luke and Matthew are spoken by Jesus at different times and locations:
Resolving the Olivet Discourse
Epistemology, Part 5:
by Chuck Missler
It is ironic that Jesus’ opening imperative in His “Olivet Discourse” is “Take heed that no man deceive you.”
1 This is His command, but it begs a question of means: “How do we avoid that?” There seems to be more conjectures and misunderstandings over this passage than almost any other in the New Testament.
The tools to avoid deception derive from a study of epistemology: the study of knowledge — its scope and limits. Our exploration of this passage will challenge more than simply our hermeneutics alone. It will challenge our grasp of the whole eschatological plan in its entirety.
For many students of eschatology — the study of last things — the so-called Olivet Discourse has proven to be a troublesome passage, with many finding it confusing and ostensibly self-contradictory; a hermeneutical battleground between the dispensationalists and the preterists, etc. The preterists insist that this passage — and the Book of Revelation — has been already fulfilled, and much of it is dismissed by them as simply allegorical. Yet even those who embrace a dispensational view have difficulty reconciling many of the Olivet Discourse passages.
Resolving Power
In optics, the resolving power of a telescope determines its ability to distinguish between two close, but distinct, stars. An apparent single star viewed with a cheap telescope turns out to be a
pair of distinctly separate stars when viewed with a telescope of better optical quality. This quality is known as the “resolving power” of its optics.
We seem to have an analogous situation here. In this case, we may benefit by setting aside our presumptions and presuppositions and let the several texts speak for themselves.
A Hazardous Tradition
The traditional “harmonization of the Gospels” is part of the problem. Ever since Augustine, scholars have attempted to meld the four distinct Gospels into a combined narrative. While this can be useful for a cursory review of the life of Christ, it can also result in a myopia of sorts and the Olivet Discourse (recorded in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21) is a salient example.
Since Matthew was skilled in shorthand, we tend to lean on his detailed rendering. And yet there seems to be a substantial disparity between his record and that of Luke’s. Numerous elements appear identical in both accounts, so it has been fashionable — for 1700 years — to assume that they both deal with the same event. Attempts to “harmonize” them have continued to yield a treacherous minefield of confusion.
Trusting the Texts
It seems that setting aside all of our presuppositions, and simply trusting the integrity of the texts may improve our “resolving power” in addressing these passages.
Jesus called us to respect the details,
2 so let’s take a closer look at each of them. They each may be focusing on different events from a different perspective and maybe even addressing different audiences on different occasions. The similarities of expression in the various accounts may have caused us to jump to premature conjectures, etc.
1
