(15) The abomination of desolation.--The words, as they stand in Daniel 12:11, seem to refer to the desecration of the sanctuary by the mad attempt of Antiochus Epiphanes to stop the "daily sacrifice," and to substitute an idolatrous worship in its place (2 Maccabees 6:1-9). What analogous desecration our Lord's words point to, is a question that has received very different answers. We may at once narrow the range of choice by remembering (1) that it is before the destruction of the Temple, and therefore cannot be the presence of the plundering troops, or of the eagles of the legions in it; (2) that the "abomination" stands in the "Holy Place," and therefore it cannot be identified with the appearance of the Roman eagles in the lines of the besieging legions under Cestius, A.D. 68. The answer is probably to be found in the faction-fights, the murders and outrages, the profane consecration of usurping priests, which the Jewish historian describes so fully (Jos. Wars, iv. 6, ?? 6-8). The Zealots had got possession of the Temple at an early stage in the siege, and profaned it by these and other like outrages; they made the Holy Place (in the very words of the historian) "a garrison and stronghold" of their tyrannous and lawless rule; while the better priests looked on from afar and wept tears of horror. The mysterious prediction of 2 Thessalonians 2:4 may point, in the first instance, to some kindred "abomination."
The words "spoken of by Daniel the prophet" have been urged as absolutely decisive of the questions that have been raised as to the authorship of the book that bears the name of that prophet. This is not the place to discuss those questions, but it is well in all cases not to put upon words a strain which they will scarcely bear. It has been urged, with some degree of reasonableness, that a reference of this kind was necessarily made to the book as commonly received and known, and that critical questions of this kind, as in reference to David as the writer of the Psalms, or Moses as the author of the books commonly ascribed to him, lay altogether outside the scope of our Lord's teaching. The questions themselves had not been then raised, and were not present to the thoughts either of the hearers or the readers of his prophetic warnings.
Whoso readeth, let him understand.--The words have been supposed by some commentators to have been a marginal note in the first written report of the discourse, calling attention to this special prediction on account of its practical bearing on the action of the disciples of Christ at the time. There appears, however, to be no sufficient reason why they should not be received as part of the discourse itself, bidding one who read the words of Daniel to ponder over their meaning till he learnt to recognise their fulfilment in the events that should pass before his eyes.
Verse 15. - In this second strain of the prophecy contained in vers. 15-22, our Lord confines himself almost entirely to the fate of Jerusalem. Therefore. The illative particle carries us back to the signs given in the previous section (vers. 5-14). By saying when ye shall see, he implies that some of his hearers shall behold this mysterious sign, and have the opportunity of profiting by the knowledge thereof. The abomination of desolation (τὸ βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως). The term is from the Septuagint Version (with which Theodotion's agrees) of Daniel 12:11; in Daniel 9:27 we find βδέλυγμα τῶν ἐρημώσεων, where the Hebrew gives, Upon the wing [or, 'pinnacle'] of abominations shall come the desolater." Also in Daniel 11:31 we have the simple βδέλυγμα. What is meant by the term in our text is a matter of unsettled dispute. The prophecy in Daniel 11:31 has been generally referred to the doings of Antiochus Epiphanes (see 1 Macc. 1:54), and the present is considered to relate to something analogous. "Abomination" in the Old Testament is generally connected with idolatry or sacrilege; "of desolation" is equivalent to "that causes desolation." Among the many explanation; of this passage which have been offered, two only seem worthy of consideration.
(1) The desolating abomination is referred to the Roman armies encamped around Jerusalem (Luke 21:20), of which the symbol was the legionaries' eagles, regarded with reverence by the soldiers. But in opposition to this view it may be said, if the holy place, without the article, signifies the Holy Land, then the presence of the Latin forces would be no new sign to the Jewish people, as they had been familiar with such a sight for many years. If the temple itself is meant, it is plain that it would be too late to fly from that doomed city when the Roman eagles were already in the hallowed courts.
(2) The alternative interpretation, which has seemed to many more probable, explains it of the sanguinary deeds of the Zealots, who, after the war had been carried on for some years, seized the temple, put a stop to the daily sacrifice, deluged the sacred courts with blood, and were guilty of most hideous crimes and excesses, which, as Josephus testifies, were the immediate cause of the city's, ruin (see Josephus, 'Bell. Jud.,' 4:03, 7, etc.; 5:1, 2; 6:3; 5:9, 4; 6:2; and Wordsworth's note on this ver. 15). The presence and acts of these ruffians were to be the signal for the escape of the Christians. I must confess that neither of these explanations satisfies me. The primal fulfilment of Daniel's prophecy is found in the erection of the statue of Jupiter in the temple by the order of Antiochus Epiphanes, and the pollution of the altar by the sacrifice of swine thereon. Our Lord would seem to refer to something analogous which should give the Christians a signal for escape before the complete investiture of the city. The deeds of Zealots and assassins, however atrocious, could not with any propriety be described as "abomination that maketh desolate standing in the holy place." The term, according to scriptural analogy, must refer to some sacrilege and pollution connected with idolatry, of which certainly the Zealots were not guilty. The Fathers, recognizing this, have seen the fulfilment in the erection of images of the Roman emperors in the temple or its precincts. But we have no account of any such act preceding the final siege. Pilate's attempted introduction of the Roman ensigns was defeated by the threatening attitude of the people (Josephus, 'Ant.,' 18:03. 1), and the actual setting up of these ensigns in the sanctuary, and the erection of the statue of Titus, were subsequent to the capture of the city and temple ('Bell. Jud.,' 6:06. 1). Our Lord is plainly referring to something that transpired before the conclusion of the siege, otherwise we might recognize an allusion to the insurrection of Bar-cochebas, which ended in the destruction of the partially rebuilt city, the abolition of its old name, the erection of a temple to Jupiter on the site of the holy place, and the placing of a statue of the emperor upon the altar, A.D. 135. What the "abomination" was cannot now be accurately determined, though its character may be divined from what has been said, and it was probably some anticipation of the antichrist who is to appear before the final consummation, who "exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God" (2 Thessalonians 2:4, 8). Spoken of by Daniel the prophet, in three passages (Daniel 9:27; Daniel 11:31; Daniel 12:11), all obscure and difficult, and not necessarily referring to the same events. Christ takes it for granted that his auditors understand the allusion. Stand [standing] in the holy place. Those who take "the abomination" to be the Roman army, explain this clause to mean "posted on the holy soil." But τόπος ἅγιος, with or without the article, is never used but in reference to the temple and its adjuncts (comp. Acts 6:13; Acts 21:28; and in the Septuagint, Leviticus 10:13; Isaiah 60:13; 2 Macc. 8:17, etc.). Whatever the sign may be, it is to be seen within the temple. (Whosoreadeth, let himunderstand.) There are three ways of regarding this parenthetical clause.
(1) Alford takes it as "an eeclesiastical note, which, like the doxology in ch. 6:13, has found its way into the text" This is a mere conjecture which has nothing to support it.
(2) Others consider it to be a remark of St. Matthew, intended to call special attention to the warning; but such an observation is entirely without precedent in the synoptic Gospels, and it is found also in the parallel passage of St. Mark. It is scarcely probable that both these evangelists would have given the identical caution, if it arose from their own motion in respect of those who should read their words before the siege.
(3) It seems more natural to take the clause as uttered by Christ himself with a silent reference to the words of the angel to Daniel, "Know therefore and understand" (Daniel 9:25; comp. 12:10). The Lord would point emphatically to the prophecy of Daniel, and his own interpretation thereof (2 Timothy 2:7). He seems also to imply that the application is not at once obvious, and needs spiritual insight to discern it. (How, in the face of this declaration of the Son of God, any believer can deny Daniel's claim to be a prophet and the utterer of authentic predictions, is a curious case of mental obfuscation or invincible prejudice.)
24:4-28 The disciples had asked concerning the times, When these things should be? Christ gave them no answer to that; but they had also asked, What shall be the sign? This question he answers fully. The prophecy first respects events near at hand, the destruction of Jerusalem, the end of the Jewish church and state, the calling of the Gentiles, and the setting up of Christ's kingdom in the world; but it also looks to the general judgment; and toward the close, points more particularly to the latter. What Christ here said to his disciples, tended more to promote caution than to satisfy their curiosity; more to prepare them for the events that should happen, than to give a distinct idea of the events. This is that good understanding of the times which all should covet, thence to infer what Israel ought to do. Our Saviour cautions his disciples to stand on their guard against false teachers. And he foretells wars and great commotions among nations. From the time that the Jews rejected Christ, and he left their house desolate, the sword never departed from them. See what comes of refusing the gospel. Those who will not hear the messengers of peace, shall be made to hear the messengers of war. But where the heart is fixed, trusting in God, it is kept in peace, and is not afraid. It is against the mind of Christ, that his people should have troubled hearts, even in troublous times. When we looked forward to the eternity of misery that is before the obstinate refusers of Christ and his gospel, we may truly say, The greatest earthly judgments are but the beginning of sorrows. It is comforting that some shall endure even to the end. Our Lord foretells the preaching of the gospel in all the world. The end of the world shall not be till the gospel has done its work. Christ foretells the ruin coming upon the people of the Jews; and what he said here, would be of use to his disciples, for their conduct and for their comfort. If God opens a door of escape, we ought to make our escape, otherwise we do not trust God, but tempt him. It becomes Christ's disciples, in times of public trouble, to be much in prayer: that is never out of season, but in a special manner seasonable when we are distressed on every side. Though we must take what God sends, yet we may pray against sufferings; and it is very trying to a good man, to be taken by any work of necessity from the solemn service and worship of God on the sabbath day. But here is one word of comfort, that for the elect's sake these days shall be made shorter than their enemies designed, who would have cut all off, if God, who used these foes to serve his own purpose, had not set bounds to their wrath. Christ foretells the rapid spreading of the gospel in the world. It is plainly seen as the lightning. Christ preached his gospel openly. The Romans were like an eagle, and the ensign of their armies was an eagle. When a people, by their sin, make themselves as loathsome carcasses, nothing can be expected but that God should send enemies to destroy them. It is very applicable to the day of judgment, the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in that day, 2Th 2:1. Let us give diligence to make our calling and election sure; then may we know that no enemy or deceiver shall ever prevail against us.
When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation,.... From signs, Christ proceeds to the immediate cause of the destruction of Jerusalem; which was, "the abomination of desolation", or the desolating abomination; or that abominable thing, which threatened and brought desolation upon the city, temple, and nation: by which is meant, not any statue placed in the temple by the Romans, or their order; not the golden eagle which Herod set upon the temple gate, for that was before Christ said these words; nor the image of Tiberius Caesar, which Pilate is said to bring into the temple; for this, if true, must be about this time; whereas Christ cannot be thought to refer to anything so near at hand; much less the statue of Adrian, set in the most holy place, which was an hundred and thirty years and upwards, after the destruction of the city and temple; nor the statue of Titus, who destroyed both, which does not appear: ever to be set up, or attempted; nor of Caligula, which, though ordered, was prevented being placed there: but the Roman army is designed; see Luke 21:20 which was the , "the wing", or "army of abominations making desolate", Daniel 9:27. Armies are called wings, Isaiah 8:8 and the Roman armies were desolating ones to the Jews, and to whom they were an abomination; not only because they consisted of Heathen men, and uncircumcised persons, but chiefly because of the images of their gods, which were upon their ensigns: for images and idols were always an abomination to them; so the "filthiness" which Hezekiah ordered to be carried out of the holy place, 2 Chronicles 29:5 is by the Targum called, "an abomination"; and this, by the Jewish writers (w), is said to be an idol, which Ahaz had placed upon the altar; and such was the abomination of desolation, which Antiochus caused to be set upon the altar:
"Now the fifteenth day of the month Casleu, in the hundred forty and fifth year, they set up the abomination of desolation upon the altar, and builded idol altars throughout the cities of Juda on every side;'' (1 Maccabees 1:54)
And so the Talmudic writers, by the abomination that makes desolate, in Daniel 12:11 to which Christ here refers, understand an image, which they say (x) one Apostomus, a Grecian general, who burnt their law, set up in the temple. Now our Lord observes, that when they should see the Roman armies encompassing Jerusalem, with their ensigns flying, and these abominations on them, they might conclude its desolation was near at hand; and he does not so much mean his apostles, who would be most of them dead, or in other countries, when this would come to pass; but any of his disciples and followers, or any persons whatever, by whom should be seen this desolating abomination,
spoken of by Daniel the prophet: not in Daniel 11:31 which is spoken of the abomination in the times of Antiochus; but either in Daniel 12:11 or rather in Daniel 9:27 since this desolating abomination is that, which should follow the cutting off of the Messiah, and the ceasing of the daily sacrifice. It is to be observed, that Daniel is here called a prophet, contrary to what the Jewish writers say (y), who deny him to be one; though one of (z) no inconsiderable note among them affirms, that he attained to the end, , "of the prophetic border", or the ultimate degree of prophecy: when therefore this that Daniel, under a spirit of prophecy, spoke of should be seen,
standing in the holy place; near the walls, and round about the holy city Jerusalem, so called from the sanctuary and worship of God in it; and which, in process of time, stood in the midst of it, and in the holy temple, and destroyed both; then
whoso readeth, let him understand: that is, whoever then reads the prophecy of Daniel; will easily understand the meaning of it, and will see and know for certain, that now it is accomplished; and will consider how to escape the desolating judgment, unless he is given up to a judicial blindness and hardness of heart; which was the case of the greater part of the nation.
(w) R. David Kimchi, & R. Sol. ben Melech, in 2 Chronicles 29.5. (x) T. Bab. Taanith, fol. 28. 2. & Gloss. in ib. (y) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 94. 1. & Megilla, fol. 3. 1. & Tzeror Ham, mor, fol. 46. 4. Zohar in Num. fol. 61. 1.((z) Jacchiades in Dan. i. 17.
The words "spoken of by Daniel the prophet" have been urged as absolutely decisive of the questions that have been raised as to the authorship of the book that bears the name of that prophet. This is not the place to discuss those questions, but it is well in all cases not to put upon words a strain which they will scarcely bear. It has been urged, with some degree of reasonableness, that a reference of this kind was necessarily made to the book as commonly received and known, and that critical questions of this kind, as in reference to David as the writer of the Psalms, or Moses as the author of the books commonly ascribed to him, lay altogether outside the scope of our Lord's teaching. The questions themselves had not been then raised, and were not present to the thoughts either of the hearers or the readers of his prophetic warnings.
Whoso readeth, let him understand.--The words have been supposed by some commentators to have been a marginal note in the first written report of the discourse, calling attention to this special prediction on account of its practical bearing on the action of the disciples of Christ at the time. There appears, however, to be no sufficient reason why they should not be received as part of the discourse itself, bidding one who read the words of Daniel to ponder over their meaning till he learnt to recognise their fulfilment in the events that should pass before his eyes.
(1) The desolating abomination is referred to the Roman armies encamped around Jerusalem (Luke 21:20), of which the symbol was the legionaries' eagles, regarded with reverence by the soldiers. But in opposition to this view it may be said, if the holy place, without the article, signifies the Holy Land, then the presence of the Latin forces would be no new sign to the Jewish people, as they had been familiar with such a sight for many years. If the temple itself is meant, it is plain that it would be too late to fly from that doomed city when the Roman eagles were already in the hallowed courts.
(2) The alternative interpretation, which has seemed to many more probable, explains it of the sanguinary deeds of the Zealots, who, after the war had been carried on for some years, seized the temple, put a stop to the daily sacrifice, deluged the sacred courts with blood, and were guilty of most hideous crimes and excesses, which, as Josephus testifies, were the immediate cause of the city's, ruin (see Josephus, 'Bell. Jud.,' 4:03, 7, etc.; 5:1, 2; 6:3; 5:9, 4; 6:2; and Wordsworth's note on this ver. 15). The presence and acts of these ruffians were to be the signal for the escape of the Christians. I must confess that neither of these explanations satisfies me. The primal fulfilment of Daniel's prophecy is found in the erection of the statue of Jupiter in the temple by the order of Antiochus Epiphanes, and the pollution of the altar by the sacrifice of swine thereon. Our Lord would seem to refer to something analogous which should give the Christians a signal for escape before the complete investiture of the city. The deeds of Zealots and assassins, however atrocious, could not with any propriety be described as "abomination that maketh desolate standing in the holy place." The term, according to scriptural analogy, must refer to some sacrilege and pollution connected with idolatry, of which certainly the Zealots were not guilty. The Fathers, recognizing this, have seen the fulfilment in the erection of images of the Roman emperors in the temple or its precincts. But we have no account of any such act preceding the final siege. Pilate's attempted introduction of the Roman ensigns was defeated by the threatening attitude of the people (Josephus, 'Ant.,' 18:03. 1), and the actual setting up of these ensigns in the sanctuary, and the erection of the statue of Titus, were subsequent to the capture of the city and temple ('Bell. Jud.,' 6:06. 1). Our Lord is plainly referring to something that transpired before the conclusion of the siege, otherwise we might recognize an allusion to the insurrection of Bar-cochebas, which ended in the destruction of the partially rebuilt city, the abolition of its old name, the erection of a temple to Jupiter on the site of the holy place, and the placing of a statue of the emperor upon the altar, A.D. 135. What the "abomination" was cannot now be accurately determined, though its character may be divined from what has been said, and it was probably some anticipation of the antichrist who is to appear before the final consummation, who "exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God" (2 Thessalonians 2:4, 8). Spoken of by Daniel the prophet, in three passages (Daniel 9:27; Daniel 11:31; Daniel 12:11), all obscure and difficult, and not necessarily referring to the same events. Christ takes it for granted that his auditors understand the allusion. Stand [standing] in the holy place. Those who take "the abomination" to be the Roman army, explain this clause to mean "posted on the holy soil." But τόπος ἅγιος, with or without the article, is never used but in reference to the temple and its adjuncts (comp. Acts 6:13; Acts 21:28; and in the Septuagint, Leviticus 10:13; Isaiah 60:13; 2 Macc. 8:17, etc.). Whatever the sign may be, it is to be seen within the temple. (Whoso readeth, let him understand.) There are three ways of regarding this parenthetical clause.
(1) Alford takes it as "an eeclesiastical note, which, like the doxology in ch. 6:13, has found its way into the text" This is a mere conjecture which has nothing to support it.
(2) Others consider it to be a remark of St. Matthew, intended to call special attention to the warning; but such an observation is entirely without precedent in the synoptic Gospels, and it is found also in the parallel passage of St. Mark. It is scarcely probable that both these evangelists would have given the identical caution, if it arose from their own motion in respect of those who should read their words before the siege.
(3) It seems more natural to take the clause as uttered by Christ himself with a silent reference to the words of the angel to Daniel, "Know therefore and understand" (Daniel 9:25; comp. 12:10). The Lord would point emphatically to the prophecy of Daniel, and his own interpretation thereof (2 Timothy 2:7). He seems also to imply that the application is not at once obvious, and needs spiritual insight to discern it. (How, in the face of this declaration of the Son of God, any believer can deny Daniel's claim to be a prophet and the utterer of authentic predictions, is a curious case of mental obfuscation or invincible prejudice.)
"Now the fifteenth day of the month Casleu, in the hundred forty and fifth year, they set up the abomination of desolation upon the altar, and builded idol altars throughout the cities of Juda on every side;'' (1 Maccabees 1:54)
And so the Talmudic writers, by the abomination that makes desolate, in Daniel 12:11 to which Christ here refers, understand an image, which they say (x) one Apostomus, a Grecian general, who burnt their law, set up in the temple. Now our Lord observes, that when they should see the Roman armies encompassing Jerusalem, with their ensigns flying, and these abominations on them, they might conclude its desolation was near at hand; and he does not so much mean his apostles, who would be most of them dead, or in other countries, when this would come to pass; but any of his disciples and followers, or any persons whatever, by whom should be seen this desolating abomination,
spoken of by Daniel the prophet: not in Daniel 11:31 which is spoken of the abomination in the times of Antiochus; but either in Daniel 12:11 or rather in Daniel 9:27 since this desolating abomination is that, which should follow the cutting off of the Messiah, and the ceasing of the daily sacrifice. It is to be observed, that Daniel is here called a prophet, contrary to what the Jewish writers say (y), who deny him to be one; though one of (z) no inconsiderable note among them affirms, that he attained to the end, , "of the prophetic border", or the ultimate degree of prophecy: when therefore this that Daniel, under a spirit of prophecy, spoke of should be seen,
standing in the holy place; near the walls, and round about the holy city Jerusalem, so called from the sanctuary and worship of God in it; and which, in process of time, stood in the midst of it, and in the holy temple, and destroyed both; then
whoso readeth, let him understand: that is, whoever then reads the prophecy of Daniel; will easily understand the meaning of it, and will see and know for certain, that now it is accomplished; and will consider how to escape the desolating judgment, unless he is given up to a judicial blindness and hardness of heart; which was the case of the greater part of the nation.
(w) R. David Kimchi, & R. Sol. ben Melech, in 2 Chronicles 29.5. (x) T. Bab. Taanith, fol. 28. 2. & Gloss. in ib. (y) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 94. 1. & Megilla, fol. 3. 1. & Tzeror Ham, mor, fol. 46. 4. Zohar in Num. fol. 61. 1.((z) Jacchiades in Dan. i. 17.