Continuing our study of the various proof-texts used to support Hyper-Preterism, we come to Matthew 26: 64, which has often been taken by scholars out of its context and used to justify just about every subjective-based doctrine under the sun.  Yes, even Hyper-Preterism.  Standing before Caiaphas, the High Priest, our Lord said (in answer to his question whether He was Christ or not): “Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven” (Matt. 26: 64).

  Despite the general consensus, there is no difficulty in our Lord’s meaning.  The difficulty arises from the particular application of Christ’s words.  These words are correctly understood as referring to an actual event.  But what that event is, is a matter of dispute.  Hyper-Preterists attempt to solve the problem by placing the event within the lifetime of Christ’s original audience.  But the question may be honestly asked, who was Christ’s original audience?

   The Hyper-Preterists will say that it was the Sanhedrin.  But isn’t their interpretation somewhat subjective?  Because the Sanhedrin got knocked out of commission in A.D. 70, it is not impertinent to ask whether Hyper-Preterism only chooses this interpretation to support their own view.  But why the Sanhedrin?  May not Christ’s words be much broader in scope?  May they not apply to the Jewish nation as a whole?

  I confess that this is the interpretation which relieves the above text of all difficulty.  For Christ was firstly speaking to an individual; wherefore, Matthew records that “Jesus saith unto him.”  But He was addressing an individual who was representative of the nation as a whole.  And this is where the switch from third person singular to second person plural comes in.  Let us amplify the passage thus: “Jesus saith unto him [the high priest]; Thou [thyself] hast said [it].  Nevertheless, I say unto you [the nation of the Jews], Hereafter shall ye [the selfsame nation] see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of glory.”

  Note that the word rendered “hereafter” may also be translated as “later on” (see Dr. Bullinger’s note on Matt. 26: 64, Companion Bible, pg. 1374).  So, in effect Christ is saying that “later on,” that is, at some future time, the Jewish nation will see Christ coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 

   Now the question is, does this interpretation fall into line with other portions of prophetic Scripture?  Why, it most certainly does.  For in Matthew 24: 30, Christ Himself said that “all the tribes of the land” (that is, the land of Israel) will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven.  This is also referred to in Revelation 1: 7: “Behold, He cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him; and all the kindreds of the land shall wail because of Him.”  These verses quite manifestly point to the Jewish recognition of Christ as Messiah, Who will (like Joseph) make Himself known “the second time” (Acts 7: 13).

  The same event is referred to in Zechariah 12: 10, where it is written, “And I will pour upon the House of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplications; and they shall look upon Me Whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for Him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for Him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.” 

  Zechariah is prophesying what will happen when the Lord brings Israel into the New Covenant, at His second coming.  That this doesn’t refer to a past event must be conceded by every fair-minded student of Scripture.  Far from “acknowledging” Jesus as the Christ in A.D. 70, the Jewish nation lived to foment another rebellion in 135 A.D. under Bar-Chochebas.  Hence, in A.D. 70 there was no “mourning” or “recognition” on the part of the guilty nation which would answer to the prophetic type of Joseph becoming “known” unto his brethren.

   In his “Dialogue With Trypho the Jew,” Justin Martyr says to his opponent: “And if I had not explained that there would be two advents of His,– one in which He was pierced by you; a second, in which you shall know Him Whom you have pierced, and your tribes shall mourn, each tribe by itself, the women apart, and the men apart,– then I must have been speaking dubious and obscure things.  But now, by the means of the contents of those Scriptures esteemed holy and prophetic amongst you, I attempt to prove all [that I have adduced], in the hope that some one of you may be found to be of that remnant which has been left by the grace of the Lord of Sabaoth for the eternal salvation.” (xxxii).

  Hence Justin Martyr understood Zechariah 12: 10, and by implication the related Scriptures (Matt. 24: 30 and Rev. 1: 7) as still unfulfilled in his own day.  His opinion regarding the futuricity of these texts is also repeated in his “First Apology” (see chap. lii).  Thus much for the testimony of the early Christian church.

   But what more has Christ to say? In one of His last discourses, Jesus told the nation that they would not see Him until they repented.  “For I say unto you, Ye shall not see Me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord” (Matt. 23: 39).  Now who was Jesus speaking to?  The Hyper-Preterists will say, “the first-century generation.”  But the Bible says nothing about a first-century generation.  Rather, the phrase “this generation” is to be understood as the nation of Israel.

  To prove this, let us ask, to whom was Christ sent?  The apostle John says, “He came unto His own, and His own received Him not” (John 1: 11).  Who was Christ’s “own?”  Was it the first-century generation, or the nation of Israel?  Then, too, remember how Christ told the Syro-Phoenician woman, “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel” (Matt. 15: 24).  That is, He was sent to the nation of Israel, and not to the first-century generation.  This helps determine the scope of Christ’s statements concerning His second coming.

   Returning to the matter at hand, then, we find that Christ’s words in Matthew 26: 64 cannot be confined to the Sanhedrin, any more than other prophecies of the second advent can be restricted to the first-century generation.  Only show that the scope of Christ’s address takes in more than just a roomful of Pharisees, most of whom died before the temple was destroyed, and rather embraces the entire nation, and you’ll easily get at the true meaning of the solemn asseveration: “Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”