St.

Matthew
Eschatology in Matthew
Submitted to :Rev.Dr.K.M.Mathew by:Ruby Mathews.
1.Etymology
The term eschatology, formed from the Gk adjective eschatos (meaning “last,” “final”) was coined in
the early 19th century by theologians to refer to that part of systematic theology which deals with
Christian beliefs concerning death, the afterlife, judgment, and the resurrection, i.e., individual
eschatology.1 The term is now used more broadly to refer to the whole constellation of beliefs and
conceptions about the end of history and the transformation of the world which particularly
characterized early Judaism, and early Christianity, and Islam, i.e., cosmic eschatology. The central foci
of these beliefs are the judgment of sinners and the salvation of the righteous. In early Judaism and early
Christianity eschatological beliefs were often linked with a sense of urgency in view of the imminent
expectation of the end of the age, although the degree of urgency or imminence varies in accordance
with the particular social situation in which such beliefs are thought meaningful (e.g., persecution,
feelings of alienation, etc.). The future is more important than the present since the existing world order
will soon be overthrown.
Characteristic of the Gospels is the note of eschatological fulfillment and the focus of eschatological
hope in the person of Jesus2
All four Gospels reflect the “already and not yet” pattern, but Matthew’s eschatology is more realized
than Mark’s3 .The length of the apocalyptic discourse in Matthew is longer than in Mark.Not only the
chapter 24 is longer than its Markan source, the author adds a whole chapter of material not found in
Mark , centering on the reality of eschatological judgment (the parables of the ten virgins (25:1-13)and
the last judgment(25:31-46) are unique to Matthew.4
Other unique eschatological material found in Matthew are 13:24-30,36-43;20:1-16 and 22:1-14. But the
apocalyptic threads run throughout the Gospel. A distinctive emphasis of Matthew is that the coming
judgment applies even to disciples (13:24–30, 36–43; Bornkamm 1963: 18). The Olivet discourse in
Matt 24 (based on Mark 13), is directed to the disciples generally, not to a restricted group of four as in
Mark; and it is more sharply focused on “when this will be and what will be the sign of your coming and
of the close of the age” (24:3). The author frequently uses the Son of Man designation in its apocalyptic
sense for Jesus (10:23; 13:37–41; 16:28; 19:28). The imagery of “weeping, wailing, and gnashing of
teeth” as a means of expressing the terrors of eschatological judgment occurs five times in Matt (8:12;
13:42; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30), though elsewhere in the NT it occurs only in Luke 13:28)5.

The technical word parousia which refers to the eschatological return of Christ , is found only in
Matthew(24:3,27,37,39) among the Gospels.G. Bornkamm has further more shown that the evangelist’s
eschatology is important to his ecclesiology,Christology and view of the law6.
In Matthew we can see the the future,the past,the present aspect of Eschatology.
The Future. Almost everything that can be said about Mark’s expectations holds equally for Matthew
(if one does not follow the few who have thought Mt 24 to be a realized apocalypse fulfilled in A.D. 70).
There will be a time of trial and difficulty. False prophets and false messiahs will arise (24:4 ,11,24).
1
David L.Peterson“Early Christian eschatology.ABD ed.David Noel Freedman (NY:Doubleday,1992),250
2
D.C.Allison Jr “Eschatology” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels ,eds.Green, Joel G.; McKnight, Scot; Marshall, I.
Howard , (Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,1998),209.
3
Ibid.
4
Donald A.Hagner,Word Biblical Commentary Matthew 1-13 (Texas:Word Book,Pub,1993),ixxiii
5
John P.Meier,”Gospel of Matthew”in The Anchor Bible Dictionary ,ed.David Noel Freedman(NY:Doubleday,1996),127
6
Ibid.

1
There will be wars, earthquakes and famines (24:6-7). The faithful will suffer (24:10). Palestine will be
afflicted with dangers (13:14–23). The heavens will show great signs (24:29,30). And then God’s
eschatological agent (Jesus) will appear (24:30,31). The one outstanding difference is a concentration on
Jesus’ role as the Son of man in the final judgment (13:41; 16:28; 25:31; etc.). Also, if krinontes in
19:28 means “ruling,” the verse implies the eschatological salvation of Israel (an idea not clearly present
in Mark).
The Past. The emphasis on realized eschatology can be seen from two facts in particular. First,
Matthew sprinkled his narrative with so-called formula quotations (1:23; 2:15, 18; etc.). These
constantly remind readers that Jesus fulfilled the eschatological hopes and messianic expectations of
Judaism. Secondly, 27:51b–53 (unique to Matthew) recounts that Jesus was not the only one to rise from
the dead: so did many saints. Thus the Messiah’s vindication cannot be viewed in isolation. Rather,
Jesus’ resurrection inaugurated the general resurrection7.
The Present. In Matthew, as in Mark, the present is eschatological time. Note especially that certain
end-time prophecies of Mark 13 have been transferred to Matthew 10, with the result that the Christian
mission draws to itself the language of eschatological tribulation. Also indicative of Matthew’s outlook
is the key promise of the Messiah’s perpetual supporting presence (1:23; 18:20; 28:20). This brings to
realization a Jewish eschatological expectation: God would be “with” his people especially in the latter
days (Zech 8:23; Jub. 1:17, 26; etc.). So the present is simultaneously the age of tribulation and the age
of the kingdom’s presence—precisely the view of Jesus.
When? There is no indication that Matthew held the consummation to be imminent. Though there are
several passages which suggest the imminence of the end (10:23; 16:28; 24:34), they have been taken
over with little change from sources (Strecker 1971: 41–43). Thus Matthew’s expectation of the end is
not as imminent as that of Mark. But his constant dwelling on eschatology and his conception of the
present imply that he expected the end to come sooner rather than later.8

2.Eschatological discourses in Matthew

Discourse (24:1–25:46). This discourse depicts worldwide upheavals and the universal
judgment on the last day.
The first half of the discourse (24:1–36) is basically from Mark and is more doctrinal, in that it
teaches the order of events up to the coming of the Son of Man. After an initial prediction of the
temple’s destruction (vv 1–2), Jesus proceeds to the Mount of Olives, where the disciples’ opening
question carefully distinguishes between the destruction of the temple on the one hand and the coming
of Jesus and the end of the age on the other (v 3).The first is an event in history and the second Eschaton
or the end of the world9. Writing after A.D. 70, Matthew is intent on not confusing the destruction of
Jerusalem (which receives little attention in this discourse) with the still outstanding Parousia (the return
of Jesus; only Matthew, among the evangelists, uses this word well-known in the epistles).
A whole series of terrifying events must occur before the end; they are not the end, but only the “birth
pangs.” The Church will suffer persecution from without and, worse still, apostasy, hate, false prophets,
wickedness, and lovelessness from within (vv 10–12). Matthew obviously writes from and for a church
that has known deep divisions. Yet even this is not the end; the gospel must first be proclaimed
throughout the whole world (v 14).

7
[Compare the pre-Pauline confession in Romans 3:3–4, which literally proclaims that Jesus was designated Son of God
by “(the) resurrection of the dead” (the Greek is the technical term for the general resurrection).]
8
D.C.Allison Jr “Eschatology” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels.,208.
9
Ulrich Luz , The theology of the Gospel of Matthew (UK: Cambridge University Press,2000),125.

2
 Instead of speaking directly of the temple’s destruction, as in v 1, Jesus now speaks of a desolating
sacrilege in the holy place; the vague reference allows an application to future horrors that Christian
apocalypticism expected before the Parousia. Included in such blasphemies are the false messiahs and
prophets who will claim to fulfill the hope of the Parousia. But the real Parousia will be a public and
cosmic event (vv 23–28). It will reveal the crucified Son of Man (“the pierced one” of Zech 12:10–14)
to be the Son of Man of Daniel 7:13–14, coming to judge and save the world. The Markan half of the
discourse ends with the parable of the fig tree, emphasizing that the end is certain and near, yet sudden
and incalculable. The tone of imminence comes from the Markan material; Matthew now balances that
with his emphasis on delay.
The second, a paraenetic half of the discourse (24:37–25:46) is more “Matthean” in that it comes to
grips with the delay of the Parousia and the problem of flagging vigilance. The Parousia is certain but
the time is uncertain10.The second half begins with three short parables from Q: the generation of Noah,
the two pairs of workers, and the thief in the night (24:37–44). The parables stress the need to be vigilant
in the face of the uncertain date of the Parousia. Then come the three great parables of vigilance during
delay: the prudent or profligate servant (24:45–51), the prudent and thoughtless virgins (25:1–13), and
the talents (25:14–30). Each parable sounds the theme of delay (24:48; 25:5, 19), thus balancing the note
of imminence in the Markan part of the discourse (e.g., 24:34). The servant parable warns Christian
leaders in particular not to become lax in the face of the Parousia’s delay. The parable of the virgins
warns that those who have not reckoned with the delay face the final separation from the elect that
constitutes judgment for Matthew. The parable of the talents defines being vigilant during delay not as
being inactive but as being faithful in doing God’s will with all one’s being. The conclusion (25:31–46)
is not another parable, but the truth behind all the parables.
The criterion for the final judgment and separation will be the deeds of mercy done to the poor and
outcast and therefore to the Son of Man, who declares his solidarity with suffering humankind. The Son
of Man then acts out this teaching in the climax of the gospel, the death-resurrection.11

3.Eschatological model of Jesus as understood by modern scholars

Even though there is wide disagreement regarding what can be known about the historical Jesus and
his teachings, two important features of his eschatological orientation have attracted the attention and
the speculation of scholars: Jesus’ views of the future (i.e., his eschatological perspective) and Jesus’
understanding of his own role within the framework of that eschatological perspective. Whether or not
Jesus considered himself an eschatological figure, his followers quickly placed him in that category
within a relatively few years following his crucifixion in 29 C.E.12

The four canonical Gospels are the end result of complex oral and literary processes which have
preserved a great variety of traditions about Jesus of Nazareth. While much of this material may be
rooted in the teachings and activities of the historical Jesus, most of it underwent various degrees of
modification by early Christians who transmitted the Jesus traditions. This complexity has made it very
difficult to reconstruct the teachings of the historical Jesus . It was , through the work of such NT
scholars as Johannes Weiss and Albert Schweitzer,by the early 20th century, that the eschatological or
apocalyptic character of early Christianity began to be more fully recognized and thereafter to be taken

10
John PMeier The Vision of Matthew (NY:Paulist Press,1978),173.
11
John P.Meier,”Gospel of Matthew” Anchor Bible Dictionary,127
12
David L.Peterson “Early Christian Eschatology” Anchor Bible Dictionary,250

3
more seriously. This modern rediscovery of the significance of eschatology for early Christianity has
been assessed in four very distinctive and influential ways.
a. The Consistent Eschatology Model. This view, which developed toward the end of the 19th
and the beginning of the 20th century, was formulated by Johannes Weiss (1971; originally published in
1892; 2d ed. 1900) and Albert Schweitzer (1964; originally published in 1901; 2d ed. 1913), and
accepted by a number of prominent NT scholars including F. C. Burkitt, B. F. Easton, M. Dibelius, and
R. Bultmann (survey in Perrin 1963: 13–36) and more recently by R. H. Hiers (1970, 1973). Schweitzer
eloquently exposed the tendency of liberal scholars to create Jesus in their own image by turning him
into a moral teacher who propounded timeless truths. Like Weiss before him, Schweitzer insisted that
the eschatological views of Jesus be taken seriously and understood against the background of early
Jewish apocalyptic literature (Schweitzer 1964: 367 f.). Ethics and eschatology in the teachings of Jesus
and early Christianity, it was argued, are not superficially related to one another . Both are essential.
Jesus was an apocalyptist with an eschatological timetable. The mission discourse which Jesus gave
when he sent out the Twelve (Matt 10:5–42) contained an explicit prediction of the imminent coming of
the Son of Man (Matt 10:23), identical with the dawn of the kingdom of God, and the sufferings which
the disciples would experience (10:34–39); both predictions failed to be fulfilled (Schweitzer 1961:
358–64). Since the tribulations heralding the end which Jesus had anticipated failed to materialize, he
resolved to suffer himself in an attempt to force the arrival of the kingdom (Schweitzer 1961: 387–97).
Since the end did not arrive, Jesus is an example of a failed prophet. The whole subsequent history of
Christianity is in fact based on the nonoccurrence of the Parousia and the consequent abandonment of
eschatology (Schweitzer 1961: 360; Werner 1957). While few scholars accepted Schweitzer’s thesis in
all its details, his emphasis on Jesus as an eschatological prophet has continued to dominate modern
conceptions of the historical Jesus.13
b. The Realized Eschatology Model. C. H. Dodd proposed that Jesus taught the essential presence
of the kingdom of God (survey in Perrin 1963: 58–78). Formulated in opposition to consistent
eschatology with its view of Jesus as a failed prophet, Dodd’s view of the continuing truth and relevance
of the message of Jesus was based on a careful exegesis of the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels,
particularly the parables. Though recognizing that Jesus referred to the kingdom of God in some sayings
as future and in other sayings as present, Dodd thought that Jesus’ emphasis on the presence of the
kingdom was the most characteristic and distinctive feature of his teaching (Dodd 1961: 34). Dodd
therefore objected to understanding the kingdom of God as an apocalyptic concept. The “kingdom of
God” is rather “the manifest and effective assertion of divine sovereignty against all the evil of the
world” (Dodd 1961: 35), i.e., “history had become the vehicle of the eternal” (Dodd 1961: 159). The real
problem for Dodd was not the delay of the Parousia or the de-eschatologization of early Christianity, but
rather how such doctrines as the imminent Parousia became such an integral feature of post-Easter
Christianity at all. While the Synoptic Gospels, Acts, Paul, and the Revelation of John represent the
entry of eschatology into Christian belief systems, according to this view the Fourth Gospel and
Hebrews retain the original emphasis on realized eschatology as taught by Jesus.
c. The Proleptic Eschatology Model. A number of scholars (J. Jeremias, O. Cullmann, W. G.
Kümmel), reacting to the antithetical alternatives posed by Schweitzer and Dodd, proposed that Jesus
held a paradoxical juxtaposition of the kingdom of God as both a present reality and a future expectation
(survey in Perrin 1963: 79–89). Though few scholars explain the relationship between present and future
in the teaching of Jesus in precisely the same way, the label “proleptic eschatology” is useful for
indicating that there is a tension between present and future in Jesus’ understanding of the kingdom of
God, in which the present is a critical stage in the full future realization of the kingdom of God. The
13
Ibid.

4
positions of consistent eschatology and realized eschatology can only be maintained by ignoring or
minimizing present or future elements in the eschatological teaching of Jesus. W. G. Kümmel (1961)
sought to demonstrate three theses: (a) there is incontrovertible evidence that in the teaching of Jesus the
kingdom of God is a future reality which will appear imminently (Kümmel 1961: 19–87); (b) there is
also incontrovertible evidence that the kingdom of God is a present reality in and through the words and
deeds of Jesus (Kümmel 1961: 105–40); (c) the eschatological message of Jesus must be contrasted with
the apocalyptic eschatology characteristic of early Judaism, for Jesus’ juxtaposition of present and future
means that the redemptive function of the eschatological consummation has already become a present
reality in the mission and message of Jesus (Kümmel 1961: 141–55). 14
d. Models De-emphasizing Eschatology. At the present time the proleptic eschatology model (a
synthesis of the antithetical consistent and realized eschatology models) dominates the modern
understanding of Jesus’ eschatological perspective. Yet some scholars have recently criticized the
assumption that the outlook of Jesus was primarily determined by eschatology, i.e., he understood his
mission and message within the framework of the actual end of the world in his generation (Glasson
1980, 1984; Borg 1986; Mack 1987). This critique is based on several arguments (cf. Borg 1986: 81–
102). (1) In recent critical discussions of the coming Son of Man sayings in the Gospels, many scholars
have concluded that such sayings are not authentic and that there was in fact no eschatological Son of
Man conception in early Judaism to which Jesus could have referred. (2) The conception of an
eschatological kingdom of God, which occurs so frequently in the Synoptic teachings of Jesus, is a
notion conspicuous by its general absence from early Jewish apocalyptic literature (Chilton 1987: 51–
75). Perrin (1963: 168–70) finds just five occurrences: Pss. Sol. 17.3; Sib. Or. 3.46 f.; Assum. Mos. 10.1;
1QM 6.6; 12.7 (though a more thorough investigation is found in Lattke 1984: 72–91). The conception
of the royal rule of God is completely absent from a surprising number of early Jewish apocalypses
(Martyrdom of Isaiah; 2 Baruch; 3 Baruch; 2 Enoch; 4 Ezra; cf. Lattke 1984: 78). (3) The notion that
Jesus’ proclamation of the arrival of the kingdom of God involved the end of the world is a conception
which has no basis in the kingdom sayings themselves. (4) The eschatological understanding of Jesus
has not been able to account adequately for the strong component of proverbial wisdom present in the
teachings of Jesus (particularly in Q, the Sayings Source). On the basis of arguments such as these, some
scholars have rejected the widespread understanding of Jesus as an eschatological prophet, based on the
apocalyptic context of his mission and message, and replaced it with the model of Jesus as a Cynic sage,
a model which attempts to deal more seriously with the substantial element of proverbial wisdom
preserved in the Synoptic Jesus tradition (Mack 1987:11–22). This construction has many similarities to
the earlier liberal view of Jesus to which Weiss and Schweitzer reacted so strongly, as well as to the
emphasis on realized eschatology begun by Dodd. A. Harnack, one of the more prominent Protestant
liberal scholars, rejected the proposal that Jesus must be understood within the context of Jewish
apocalypticism and emphasized instead the religious and ethical elements of the teaching of Jesus which
were so prominent in Q (Harnack 1908).15
e.Inagurated Eschatology
For Matthew the kingdom of heaven (literally, “king dom of heavens”; see Kingdom of God) is both
present (6:33; 11:12; 12:28; 13:24–30, 36–43; 16:19; 23:13) and future (4:17; 5:19; 8:12; 16:28; 25:1–
13; 26:29). This teaching both of the kingdom’s presence and its futurity has led a vast number of
interpreters to speak of “inaugurated eschatology” in the teachings of Jesus and the Evangelists (see
14
This view of the paradoxical juxtaposition of both the present and future aspects of the kingdom of God in the teachings of
Jesus became dominant in the early 1960s as evident in the almost simultaneous publication of three books in 1963–64, the
first two of which are primarily surveys of research (Perrin 1963; Lundström 1963; Ladd 1964).
15
David l.Peterson”Early Christian Eschatology” the Anchor Bible Dictionary,250.

5
Kingsbury, 128–60; Ladd; Jeremias). This article operates from this understanding and maintains that
the essential orientation of Jesus himself did not revolve exclusively around the presence of the kingdom
of God but around its potentiality or futurity and the impact that its nearness was to make on the present.
Interpreters disagree on the time of its full realization. The following presentation works from a view
that sees the kingdom being inaugurated in three phases (public ministry, passion and resurrection, to
which Luke adds Pentecost). We also assume that the kingdom of God has a future finality to it that can
be described as the consummation of the kingdom.
In its present aspects the kingdom (1) demonstrates itself in God’s strength and power (10:7–8;
12:28; 16:28; see Authority and Power); (2) is opposed by cosmic powers and their human allies (11:12;
13:24–30; 23:13); (3) demands responsible, righteous behavior (4:17; 5:20; 6:33; 7:21; 13:44–45; 18:3,
23; 19:12, 23–24; 21:31–32; 24:14); (4) is presently (for Jesus) Jewish but includes the unlikely or the
marginal and will in the future be universal (5:3, 10; 8:11–12; 13:31–32; 19:14; 21:31, 43; 22:1–14;
23:13; 24:14); and (5) warns of judgment on those who do not respond appropriately (16:19; 21:43).
In its future aspects the kingdom of heaven (1) will be brought to consummation at the Parousia of the
Son of man (13:24–30, 36–43, 47–50; 16:28; 25:1–13); (2) will begin with a judgment by God (8:12;
18:3; 19:23–24; 20:1–16; 22:1–14; 25:1–13); and (3) will be characterized by God’s final approbation of
his people (5:19; 8:12; 11:11; 13:43; 18:1, 3, 4; 20:1–16; 25:31–46; 26:29).
F . Potential Eschatology. During Jesus’ ministry the kingdom of God is spoken of always as a
future event. It is expected, hoped for and prayed for. But it is never said explicitly to have arrived, not
even at the Last Supper (see Last Supper). What is present is the agent of the kingdom of God, Jesus.
But because the agent of the kingdom of God is present and active through his teaching and mighty
works, the kingdom of God may also be said to be potentially present. However, the decisive event for
its coming, that is, for the release of its powers in salvific blessings, still lies ahead.
The term potential does not qualify the term “king dom of God,” but only the term “present in Jesus.”
Thus, it should not be construed as in any way implying uncertainty as to the kingdom’s coming.
Potential simply means that the kingdom of God in Jesus’ ministry is not present in any absolute or
independent sense but only in so far as it is represented by Jesus. Its arrival and presence in its own right
is depicted as a future event. Thus if we are to speak of eschatology in connection with the kingdom of
God during Jesus’ earthly ministry at all, then it is more accurate to speak of potential eschatology. This
is an eschatology that has not yet begun to unfold itself in final, catastrophic events, but the eschaton is,
nevertheless, in principle present in Jesus, because he, as Son of man, is the agent of the kingdom of
God. Nonetheless, the ministry of Jesus and his teaching look forward to the awful and more immediate
event of the cross, the event in which the Son of man fulfills his God-given mission for the arrival of the
kingdom of God.16

4.. The parables and Eschatology

The primary focus of the parables is the coming of the kingdom of God and the resulting discipleship
that is required. When Jesus proclaimed the kingdom he meant that God was exercising his power and
rule to bring forgiveness, defeat evil and establish righteousness in fulfillment of the OT promises. In
Jesus’ own person and ministry these acts were happening, and the kingdom was made available to
people. While a number of Jesus’ parables anticipate a future aspect of God’s kingdom, much of the
focus is on the kingdom as present and available to Jesus’ hearers. The kingdom is both present and still
awaits consummation in the future. With the focus on the kingdom as present comes an invitation to

16
C.C.Caragounis “Kingdon of God/Heaven” Dictionary of Jesus and the gospels ,425.

6
enter the kingdom and live according to its standards. Prayer and the use of wealth are two areas of
kingdom living that are treated specifically in the parables.
The Kingdom As Present. A short parable in Matthew 12:29 is one of the strongest statements about
the presence of the kingdom, and this parable also has christological implications. In response to the
charge that he cast out demons by the power of Beelzebub (Mt 12:24), Jesus pointed to the activity of
the Spirit (see Holy Spirit) in his ministry as proof that the kingdom was present (Mt 12:28). The parable
in Matthew 12:29 argues that no one can enter and plunder the house of the strong man unless he first
binds the strong man. Clearly Jesus viewed his ministry as binding Satan and plundering his house.
While all the parables are kingdom parables in one sense, the parables in Matthew 13 are grouped
specifically to provide insight into the kingdom. Several parables in this section seem designed to
answer questions from Jesus’ hearers about his claims that the kingdom was present. The Parable of the
Wheat and the Tares seems designed to answer the question “How can the kingdom have come if evil is
still present?” The kingdom is present and growing even in the midst of evil, and judgment will take
place in the future. Therefore, the kingdom invites both involvement and patience. The twin Parables of
the Mustard Seed and the Leaven both address the question “How can the kingdom be present if the
results seem so small?” The beginning may be small, but the effect will be large and extensive.
The parable of the wedding (Mt 22:1–14) affirm that all is ready and people should come now ( Mt
22:4).17

The Kingdom As Future. Jesus’ teaching on the future aspect of the kingdom is seen most clearly in
those parables that speak of judgment or of a master who returns to settle accounts. The parables of
growth also point to the future as a time of harvest. Particularly in Matthew parables of judgment point
to a separation between those who were obedient, faithful, prepared or merciful, and those who were
not. The first group enters the kingdom and experiences praise and joy.

Parables about the future are not intended to satisfy curiosity. They are intended to alter life in the
present. By focusing on judgment and the Master’s return, the focus of these parables is to encourage
faithfulness, wisdom and preparation. These themes are expressed in the parable of the faithful and
unfaithful servants (Mt 24:45–51 and Lk 12:41–48), the parable of the ten maidens (Mt 25:1–13) and the
parable of the talents (Mt 25:14–30 with a possible parallel in Lk 19:11–27). These themes are also
stressed in parables about the present. Both present and future eschatology have as their goal right living
in the present.18 Mt 25:31-46, though not strictly a parable, gives in story form an exposition of the
gospel teaching of judgment.
5.Sermon on the mount and eschatology
Interpreters like Albert Shweitzer and Johannes Weiss argues that in the sermon on the Mount Jesus
made extreme demands on his disciples because he expected the end of the world to come very soon.The
eschatology of the sermon begins with beatitudes but underlies the entire discourse.
For e.g. 5:3-12, the beatitudes point to some of the matters like heaven(5:3); will inherit earth (5:5); they
will see God(5:8); will have reward in heaven(5:12).

Mark Allen Powell in His article “Matthew’s Beatitudes: reversals and Rewards of the kingdom”says
that Matthew’s beatitudes can be interpreted as a coherent unit that promises both eschatological
reversals for the unfortunate and eschatological rewards for the virtuous.19
17
K.R.Snodgrass “Parables” Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels,599.
18
Ibid.
19
Mark Allen Powell“Matthew’s Beatitudes: reversals and Rewards of the kingdom” Catholic Bible Quaterly,58.Vol.3,1996,
465.

7
6.Miracles and eschatology
Almost all scholars believe that Jesus saw a direct connection between the miracles he performed
and his proclamation of the coming of God’s kingdom . In the opinion of advocates of consistent
eschatology, Jesus viewed his miracles as signs that the kingdom of God was on the verge of bringing
the present age to an end. C. H. Dodd, the principal voice of realized eschatology, argued on the basis of
his interpretation of Matthew 12:28 and Luke 11:20 that Jesus saw his miracles as actual expressions of
God’s reign, already fully present in his ministry. According to others, however, Jesus performed his
miracles knowing that in his ministry the reign of God was being inaugurated, yet also intending his
miracles to portend the cosmic renewal that the future consummation of the kingdom would entail.
This connection between Jesus’ miracles and his message about the advent of the kingdom accounts
for most if not all of the miracles attributed to him in the Gospels. According to Isaiah, in the future era
of salvation—the “kingdom of God” in apocalyptic thought—the deaf will hear, the blind will see, the
lame will walk and the mute will sing (29:18–19; 35:5–6; 61:1)20.
One can even posit an eschatological/apocalyptic background for the so-called nature miracles . All
three gift or provision miracles (feedings of five thousand and four thousand; Cana wine miracle)
actualize and foreshadow the messianic feast (Is 25:6–9; 2 Apoc. Bar. 29:4; Mt 8:11 par.), characterized
by an abundance of bread—the eschatological equivalent of the manna miracle (2 Apoc. Bar. 29:7–8; cf.
Jn 6:4, 14, 30–31; Rev. 2:17)—and wine (2 Apoc. Bar. 29:5–6). The two rescue miracles, Jesus’ calming
of and walking on the sea, are meaningful against the horizon of Yahweh’s assertion of his sovereignty
over the sea in creation (Job 26:12–13; Ps 74:12–15), the Exodus (Ps 77:16–20) and the eschaton (Is
27:1; cf. Rev 21:1). The miracles of Jesus are, however, not only integrally related to the coming of the
kingdom, but also support and promote the identity of Jesus as God’s eschatological agent, the
Messiah .21
7.Exorcism and Eschatology
An eschatological significance in Matthean exorcisms is found in the way the author retells the exorcism
stories.It is obvious that in the utterance (12:28)”But if I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the
kingdom of God has come upon you”.In 8:29, Matthew intended demoniac to declare rather than to ask
“ have you come here to torture us before time’ .Matthew is alluding to the coming of the Kingdom of
God and its messenger(6:10;16:28), through the use of the term ‘erchomai’22.In saying that the torture is
before time, i.e. before the final judgment , Matthew is saying that Jesus’ eschatological torture of the
demons has already begun. Thus Matthew is narrating from a point of view of realized eschatology.

8.Eschatology and Ethics. The traditional understanding of the message of Jesus links his proclamation
of the imminent but future arrival of the kingdom of God with repentance evidenced by changed
behavior in the present (Mark 1:15; Matt 4:17). However, many of the ethical teachings of Jesus appear
to have no logical relationship to his proclamation of the kingdom, such as the sayings on divorce (Mark
10:11–12 and par.; Matt 5:31–32)23. The reconciliation of the eschatology of Jesus with his ethical
teachings occurs in the demand of Jesus that people make a present decision which will affect their
future standing with God.
9.Eschatological events as recorded in Matthew

20
B.L.Blackburn “Miracles and miracle stories” Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels,558.
21
Ibid.
22
Charlie E.George, M.th Thesis -Exorcisms in the gospel of Matthew,2005,92.
23
John Barton, The Biblical World (Philadelphia:T &F press,2002),247.

8
Regarding the end , the teaching of Jesus is very clear on certain points , while others remain a mystery
or at least obscure24.The Gospels speak of the resurrection of the dead and of the final judgment on the
day of the lord.
9.1Sayings referring to the final destiny of man
(1).resurrection of the dead(Mt .19:28,25:31)( 2). the seperation between the evil and the
righteous(Mt 25:31-32; 24:40-41).In the parables of the kingdom instead of separation purification
of the kingdom is stressed (Mt 13:41,13:49). 3.the nature of the risen life : “…in resurrection they
never marry or given to marriage, but they are like angels in heaven(Mt.22:29-30).(4). The reward of
the just.( Mt 16:25;Mt 25:46)(.5)Punishment of the wicked-Mt 25:30(“ cast into outer darkness”),
Mt11:23
9.2Sayings concerning the destiny of the whole universe
Mt 24:29 “ ‘the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the
sky,and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.”;Mt 19:28 “I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all
things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne…”
10.Conclusion
Matthew’s understanding of eschatology is more of Inagurated eschatology.As we have seen
matthew deals more exclusively with eschatological ideas and events. Jesus preaching about the
kingdom of God, miracles he performed, exorcisms, healings ,parables all give hint about
eschatology.Jesus preached kingdom of God neither as a present reality nor exclusively as a future
event, rather he was aware that the future rule of god has already begun to breal into the
present.Thus this concept of eschatology is described as “inaugurated eschatology” by scholars.
According to J.Jeremias eschatology is in the process of realization.R.H.Fuller and H.V.Martin
termed it as proleptic eschatology. That means the kingdom of God stands at the end of time, but
nevertheless working proleptically , itspower re active even in this present age in the coming of
Jesus and his victory over sin and death.25

Bibliography

Allison Jr, D.C. “Eschatology” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels ,eds.Green, Joel G.; McKnight,
Scot; Marshall, I. Howard , IL: InterVarsity Press,1998.

24
Sebastian Vadakumpadan “The Eschatological perspectives in the Gospel of Matthew” Bible Bhashyam,1980,226.
25
K.M.Mathew, M.Th Thesis-“the relevance of healing miracles in the proclamation of the kingdom of God.According to the
gospel of Matthew”,1996.

9
Blackburn, B.L. “Miracles and miracle stories” Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. eds.Green, Joel G.;
McKnight, Scot; Marshall, I. Howard , IL: InterVarsity Press,1998

Caragounis , C.C. “Kingdon of God/Heaven” Dictionary of Jesus and the gospels. eds.Green, Joel G.;
McKnight, Scot; Marshall, I. Howard , IL: InterVarsity Press,1998

Charlie E.George, M.th Thesis -Exorcisms in the gospel of Matthew,2005

Hagner, Donald A.Word Biblical Commentary Matthew 1-13 .Texas:Word Book,Pub,1993.

Luz , Ulrich .The Theology of the Gospel of Matthew .UK: Cambridge University Press,2000.

Mathew, K.M. M.Th Thesis-“the relevance of healing miracles in the proclamation of the kingdom of
God.According to the gospel of Matthew”
Meier, John P. ”Gospel of Matthew”in The Anchor Bible Dictionary ,ed.David Noel
Freedman.NY:Doubleday,1996.
Meier , John P.The Vision of Matthew .NY:Paulist Press,1978.
Peterson, David L. “Early Christian eschatology.ABD ed.David Noel Freedman .NY:Doubleday,1992.
Powell, Mark Allen .“Matthew’s Beatitudes: reversals and Rewards of the kingdom” Catholic Bible
Quaterly,58.Vol.3,1996.
Snodgrass, K.R. “Parables” Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. eds.Green, Joel G.; McKnight, Scot;
Marshall, I. Howard , IL: InterVarsity Press,1998
.Vadakumpadan , Sebastian “The Eschatological perspectives in the Gospel of Matthew” Bible
Bhashyam,1980.

10