What kind of kingdom was Jesus describing, and when would it arrive? As explored in our three-part Daniel series, both the spiritual kingdom and Christ’s coming “on the clouds” would be fulfilled during the Roman Empire, when He would destroy one temple and “anoint” or consecrate / fill another “Most Holy Place” (Dan. 2; 7:13-27; 9:24-27). Let’s allow Jesus to further interpret Daniel, clarifying the nature, timing, and manner of His coming and Kingdom’s arrival.

These were the burning questions posed by the Pharisees in Luke 17:20, and they remain central to any serious discussion of eschatology today. Even as we see modern day Khazarian “Jews” like Benjamin Netanyahu try and usher in the messiah through waging war with Iran which is in sharp contrast to what Daniel and Jesus describe as the Kingdom and how it comes.  In this often-overlooked passage, Jesus delivers a striking and subversive answer: “The kingdom of God does not come with observation… for behold, the kingdom of God is within you [or within a person].” With this statement, Jesus shattered the expectations of a visible, political, and territorial messianic kingdom. He redirected attention inward—to the heart, to the spirit, to the transformative presence of the King Himself.

This chapter explores Luke 17:20–37 not merely as a preview of judgment, but as a revelation of the nature and timing of Christ’s kingdom and Parousia. Far from being a vague, futuristic promise or an indefinite reign waiting for physical realization, Jesus teaches that His coming would be as clear and all-encompassing as the rising sun—from east to west—and yet, paradoxically, not externally observable. It would be a judgment that would fall on unbelieving Israel like the flood in Noah’s day or fire in Lot’s day—sudden, decisive, and covenantal—yet a deliverance that would dawn like the morning light in the heart for the faithful.

Through a chiastic literary structure, Jesus distinguishes between false, external hopes for the kingdom and its actual, spiritual unveiling within the hearts of His people when He would be revealed from heaven like the light of day. This chapter will demonstrate that Luke 17 is not describing some distant, physical return of Christ, but the imminent and climactic transition from the old covenant to the new—a coming that would bring judgment on apostate Israel and resurrection life to those who recognized the kingdom already in their midst.

Luke 17:20–37

Now when the Pharisees demanded of Him when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God does not come with observation; Neither shall they say, ‘Behold, it is here!’ Or, ‘Behold, it is there!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is standing in the midst of you.” Then He said to the disciples, “The days will come when you shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and shall not see it. And they shall say to you, ‘Look here,’ or, ‘Look there.’ Do not go, neither follow them. For as the light of day, whose light shines from one end under heaven to the other end under heaven, so also shall the Son of man be in His day. But first it is necessary for Him to suffer many things and to be rejected by this generation. Now as it was in the days of Noah, so also shall it be in the days of the Son of man.They were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were being given in marriage, until the day that Noah went into the ark, and the Flood came and destroyed them all. And it was the same way in the days of Lot: they were eating, they were drinking, they were buying, they were selling, they were planting, they were building; But on  the day that Lot went out from Sodom, it rained fire and sulphur from heaven and destroyed them all. This is how it shall be in the day that the Son of man is revealed. In that day, let not the one who is on the housetop, and his goods in the house, come down to take them away; and likewise, let not the one who is in the field return to the things behind. Remember Lot’s wife. Whoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whoever shall lose his life shall preserve it. I tell you, in that night there shall be two in one bed; one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two men shall be in the field; one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.” And they answered, saying to Him, “Where, Lord?” And He said to them, “Where the body is, there will the eagles be gathered together” (Luke 17:20-37 AFV).

Just as Matthew 23–25 is structured with a chiastic pattern, Luke 17:20–37 also follows a chiasm. Some may be asking, “What in the world is a chiasm?” Simply put, it’s a literary structure in which ideas are presented and then mirrored in reverse order, often highlighting a central point.  Here is a classic example.

(A)  No one can serve two masters,

(B)  for either he will hate the one

(C) and love the other,

(C) or he will be devoted to the one

(B) and despise the other.

(A) You cannot serve God and money.

In a chiasm, the beginning and end usually mirror each other, while the center often contains the main message—the “meat in the middle.” In ancient Hebrew and Biblical times, this form of teaching was popular because the parallel structure made it easy to memorize the teaching.

Now notice how Luke 17:20–37 forms its own chiasm, framed by two questions. The central issue is the manifestation of Christ’s kingdom, specifically at His second coming:

(A)  The question by the Pharisees – When will the kingdom come or be realized (17:20–21)?  It will come “within the heart of a person.”

(B)  When the coming of the Son of Man is revealed as the sun (17:22–25)

(C)  This will be like in the days of Noah (17:26–27)

(C)  This will be like in the days of Lot (17:28–29)

(B)  When the Son of Man is revealed (17:30)

(A) The question by the disciples – Where, Lord? “Where the dead body is.”

This chiasm, centered around two questions—one from the Pharisees and one from the disciples— reveals when, how and where the kingdom would come. Jesus tells the Pharisees it will be unseen—internally realized within the hearts of believers—at the time when the Son of Man is revealed, in a judgment like that of Noah’s or Lot’s day.

To the disciples, Jesus answers that the location of this coming kingdom would be marked by judgment: their enemies would be gathered like a corpse, devoured by vultures—an image of divine retribution. This too happens when the Son of Man is revealed.

Elsewhere, Jesus says the kingdom would be taken from the Pharisees and given to a new “nation” (the Church) producing its fruit (Matt. 21:43–45). Our text here in Luke 17 describes, how, when, and where that transfer would be accomplished in the events of AD 67 – AD 70.

“Within You”

Some modern translators translate the Greek word entos as “among you” or “in your midst” without sufficient linguistic justification. They appear to do this for two reasons. First, they want to avoid associating Jesus’ spiritual and internal kingdom with the future, eschatological “not yet” of Christ’s parousia, thus comfortably situating the kingdom in the here and now of the “already.”  And, secondly, they fear translating the passage as “within you” might imply that the unbelieving Pharisees had the kingdom within them.

However, linguistic evidence strongly supports the translation “within you” or, better yet, “within the heart of a person.” Strong’s Concordance clearly defines entos as “within you”: “1787. ἐντός entós; adv. from en (1722), in. Within. Used also as a prep. with the gen. (Luke 17:21, “the kingdom of God is within you,” meaning it is located in your heart and affections, not external). With the neut. def. art., tó entós, the inside (Matt. 23:26; Sept.: Ps. 39:4; 109:22). Zodhiates, S. (2000).”

Consider the following arguments which prove with 100% certainty that entos should be translated as “within you” or, even better, “within the heart of a person”:

Contextual contrast: Luke 17:21 contrasts external, visible signs (“look here or there”) with something internal, spiritual, and unseen (“within you”).

Consistent NT usage: The only other NT occurrence of entos is Matthew 23:26, where Jesus contrasts outward appearances with inner spiritual reality, again clearly meaning “inside.”

Septuagint usage: The Greek Old Testament (LXX) consistently uses entos to denote something internal—either within a building (like the temple) or within a person’s spiritual or inward being (cf. Ps. 103:1; 109:22; Isa. 16:11).

External Greek usage: Outside the NT, entos never means “among.”

Alternative Greek for “among”: Luke, who frequently uses the Greek mesos (“among,” “in the midst”), certainly would have chosen it if he intended “among you.”

Lexical authority: Liddell-Scott’s Greek lexicon translates entos in Luke 17:21 as “in your hearts.”^[1]

Early Church Fathers: Those closer to Koine Greek consistently interpreted entos as “within you.”

Pronoun flexibility: Concerns that “within you” implies kingdom presence within unbelieving Pharisees ignore the flexible Greek pronoun usage. William Hendriksen clarifies that “you” can simply mean “a person” or “one,” not specifically Pharisees.^[2] Thus, Jesus’ teaching is that when the kingdom fully arrives at His second coming, it would not be physically observable, but experienced spiritually within the hearts of people.

Luke often follows theological teaching with a parable: Luke often concludes Jesus’ teachings with a parable emphasizing His main point (e.g., 6:20–49; 10:1–37; 11:14–36; 17:20–18:8).^[3]  Thus the “day(s) of the Son of Man” include the spiritual inheritance of the kingdom and Christ’s parousia, but also severe persecution requiring vindication.While the disciples may be tempted to want the same visible, political vindication desired by the Pharisees, Jesus assured them that vindication and deliverance from persecution would indeed come “quickly” (Luke 18:8) at His second coming, not thousands of years later.

Partial Preterist Admissions:  In discussing Luke 18:7-8 Keith Mathison gives exegetical reasons why he believes this “speedily” coming of Christ and judgment is his impending coming in AD 70 [the first being that Luke 17:20-37 is referring to AD 70]:

“a.  In the preceding chapter (Luke 17:20-37), he speaks of the coming destruction of   Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

1. In 18:7, Christ assures His listeners that God will not delay long in bringing about justice for his elect.  It could reasonably be argued that two thousand years is a long delay.
2. In verse 8, Christ assures us that God will bring about justice speedily.  Again, this would seem to indicate a fulfillment within a short amount of time.”[4]

Once again it becomes obvious that Jesus has been teaching a first century second coming event in Matthew 10:17-23, 16:27-28, and now here in Luke 17-18 which will form his more detailed teaching on the subject in the Olivet Discourse:

Matthew 10:17–23 / 16:27–28 / Luke 17:20-37	Olivet Discourse Matthew 24 / Luke 21 / Mark 13
(1) Delivered up to councils and synagogues (Matt. 10:17)	(1) Delivered up to local councilsand synagogues (Mark 13:9)
(2) Brought before governors and kings to be witnesses to the Gentiles(Matt. 10:18)	(2) Brought before governors and kings to be witnesses to the Gentiles(Mark 13:9)
(3) Holy Spirit would speak through them (Matt. 10:19–20)	(3) Holy Spirit would speak through them (Mark 13:11)
(4) Betrayal and persecution; stand firm to the end (Matt. 10:22)	(4) Betrayal and persecution; stand firm to the end (Mark 13:12–13)
(5) Disciples would not exhaust cities of refuge before the Son of Man’s coming (Matt. 10:23)	(5) Disciples (and later Paul) would preach the gospel to the then known world before “the end” (of the OC age) and the coming of the Son of Man(Matt. 24:14; Mark 13:10)
(6) Christ comes in glory (Luke 9:26)	(6) Christ comes in glory (Matt. 24:30)
(7) Christ comes with angels (Matt. 16:27)	(7) Christ comes with angels (Matt. 24:31)
(8) Christ comes in judgment  (Matt. 16:27)	(8) Christ comes in judgment (Matt. 24:28–31; 25:31–34)
(9) Christ and the kingdom come in power (Mark 8:38)	(9) Christ and the kingdom come in power (Luke 21:27–32)
(10) Some in the crowd would live to witness the second coming  (Matt. 16:28)	(10) Some in the crowd would livetowitness the second coming (Luke 21:16–18)
(11) Some in the crowd would diebefore the second coming (Matt. 16:28)	(11) Some in the crowd would diebefore the second coming (Luke 21:16)
(12) Christ would come soon and be ashamed of His generation (Matt. 16:27, YLT; Mark 8:38)	(12) All fulfilled in His “this generation” (Matt. 24:33–34; Luke 21:27–32)
Luke 17:20–37	Matthew 24:1–41
(13) Fleeing from housetops & fields (17:31-33)	(13) Fleeing from housetops & fields (24:17ff.)
(14) Son of Man comes as Light of Day shining from East to West (17:24)	(14) Son of Man comes as Light of Day shining from East to West (24:27)
(15) Vultures gathered at corpse (17:37)	(15) Vultures gathered at corpse (24:28)
(16) Days of Son of Man as Days of Noah (17:26-30)	(16) Days of Son of Man as Days of Noah (24:37ff.)
(17) One taken / one left (17:34-36)	(17) One taken / one left (24:41ff.)

Once we get into Matthew 24-25 it will become clear that there is no exegetical evidence to support the idea that Matthew 24–25 is addressing two comings of Christ, as some dispensational Zionists have taught (e.g. Darby) and as some partial preterists (e.g. Gentry) teach.

When we compare Jesus’ teaching of His coming in Matthew 24 and Luke 17, it becomes even more obvious that He was not addressing two different comings. Nor does Matthew present “two sections” referring to two comings. Both chapters speak of one eschatological event.

Partial preterist Gary DeMar (rightly) rejects the view held by dispensationalists and some partial preterists who split Matthew 24. We disagree with Kenneth Gentry, who argues that verses 27–30 refer to Christ’s coming in  AD 70, while verses 36–51 refer to a future second coming. Dispensationalists flip this; they see vv. 27–30 as a future second coming and vv. 36–42 as a pre-trib rapture.

Gary addresses this directly:

Many futurists claim that the phrase “took them all away” (Matt. 24:39) refers to a rapture that is still in our future. On the contrary. “In the context of 24:37–39, ‘taken’ presumably means ‘taken to judgment’ (cf. Jer. 6:11 NASB, NRSV)” (Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 115.) The phrase ties the judgment of the world in Noah’s day with the judgment of the Jews’ world in Israel’s day that took place with the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple.^[5]

The comparison with Noah’s day is critical: those “taken” were not the righteous, but the wicked. As John Gill affirms, those left behind—like Noah and his family—were spared, while the others were taken in judgment. Gill connects this directly to Luke 17:27–29, where “taken” also implies destruction, not rapture.

Gary also addresses another major issue for futurists: the order of events in Luke 17 compared to Matthew 24. Some commentators (e.g., J Marcellus Kik, Kenneth Gentry) argue that Matthew 24:35 marks a transition to a future coming. But this fails to explain why Luke 17 rearranges five key Olivet Discourse elements found in Matthew 24—suggesting both accounts refer to the same AD 70 fulfillment. As Ray Summers notes: “This is a most difficult passage… Some small parts of it, however, are repeated in Luke 21 in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70)… The entire complex cautions one against dogmatism in interpreting.”^[6]

DeMar concludes that the “two comings” theory collapses when Matthew 24 and Luke 17 are compared. Both accounts cover identical prophetic events, just in different orders. As he illustrates, if the five major events of Matthew 24 are numbered 1–2–3–4–5, Luke presents them as 2–4–1–5–3—a clear sign of recapitulation, not a separate timeline:

Matthew 24:1–41	Luke 17:20–37
#1  Fleeing from housetops & fields	#2  Son of Man comes as sunshine
#2  Son of Man comes as sunshine	#4  Days of Son of Man as Days of Noah
#3  Vultures gathered at corpse	#1  Fleeing from housetops & fields
#4  Days of Son of Man as Days of Noah—Gentry claims different judgment in Future	#5  One taken / one left
#5  One taken / one left—Gentryclaims different judgment in Future	#3  Vultures gathered at corpse

Was Luke so confused and forgetful, that when Christ taught on His second coming in Luke 17 and Luke 21, Luke only addressed ONE coming while Matthew pointed out that there are really TWO comings?  If Luke understood Christ teaching two comings in the Olivet Discourse, then why does he mix up the order of those events in Luke 17 to be one and the same event?

When we compare Jesus’ teaching on His second coming and the arrival of His kingdom in Luke 17:20–37 with Luke 21:27–32, we realize that both His kingdom and second coming would be fulfilled within Jesus’ contemporary “this generation” and His kingdom and Parousia presence would not be physically seen, because it would be revealed “within the hearts” of His people.  He would come as “The Sun of Righteousness…shining from the east to the west,” “healing” and bringing resurrection life “within the hearts” of His people, while the old covenant kingdom would be desolated and never remembered.

Christ comes as the Light of Day not “Lightning”

Having dealt with the fact that at Christ’s coming He would establish His kingdom “within” the heart of His followers, we need to unpack the OT source of Jesus coming like the “light of day” in both Matthew 24:27 and Luke 17:24 and that being Malachi 3-4:2.

For as the light of day, whose light shines from one end under heaven to the other end under heaven, so also shall the Son of man be in His day (Luke 17:24 A Faithful Version).

“For as the sunshine comes out from the east and is seen even in the west, thus will be the coming of the Son of man” (Matt. 24:27, Aramaic English New Testament).

Many futurists, partial preterists, and even some full preterists interpret this verse as describing lightning—sudden, powerful, and destructive. Some connect this to Christ’s coming through the Roman armies in AD 70, which has merit.^[7]However, others, including myself, believe Jesus is describing His second coming (Greek parousia) as the rising sun, whose light spreads from east to west.

For this reason, I prefer the Aramaic English New Testament rendering of astrape as “sunshine” rather than “lightning.” Partial preterist Steve Gregg raises the same concern:

The word “lightning” is the Greek astrape. This word is in fact, the correct term for lightning, but this is not always its meaning.  When defined in the lexicons, astrape is said to mean either “lightning” or, more generally, “bright shining.”  It is in this latter sense that the word is used in Luke 11:36… Interestingly, the same translators who rendered astrape as “lightning,” in Matthew 24:27, quite reasonably chose to translate the same word as “bright shining,” in Luke 11:36… Would it not present a very different image if Jesus were to have said, “For as the bright shining comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be”?  Instead of a lightning bolt, this would clearly be comparing His coming to a glorious sunrise!

Greg continues:

If one should arise before the dawn and watch the eastern horizon, the sky will be observed to change from nearly black to a lighter blue… a ribbon of red-orange will gradually appear, and the whole sky will become progressively lighter… Within seconds, the sun will fully present itself, and the dawning of the day is complete … the Kingdom’s glory will increase more and more until the moment Jesus appears.^[8]

This sunrise imagery better matches the nature of the parousia as the progressive, internal unveiling of Christ’s kingdom “within” His people (cf. Luke 17:20–21; Col. 1:27).

It also contrasts sharply with the “secret inner rooms” in the previous verse (Matt. 24:26), where false prophets claim hidden revelation. Christ, by contrast, is revealed like the sun—openly, unmistakably, from east to west.

The events of AD 67–70 confirmed this: Christ judged the old covenant world and revealed Himself as the true Messiah—His presence shining forth like the dawning of a new day.

This interpretation also harmonizes with biblical themes that describe both Christ’s first and second coming as manifestations of light, sunrise, or daybreak:

• Malachi 4:2 – “But for you who fear my name, the Sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings.”
• Luke 1:78–79 – “And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High; or you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways, to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins, because of the tender mercy of our God, whereby the sunrise shall visit us from on high to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace”
• Romans 13:11–12 – “Besides this you know the time, that the hour has come for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed. The night is far gone; the day is at hand.”
• 2 Peter 1:19 – “…as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.”
• Revelation 2:28 – “…I will give Him the morning star.”
• Revelation 22:16 – “I am the bright and morning star.”

Taken together, these passages suggest Christ’s parousia was not merely an act of judgment but also a revelation of light—the dawn of a new covenant day and the end of the old covenant night.

“Behold, I send my messenger [John the Baptist as Elijah], and he will prepare the way before me [Christ]. And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple [in judgment – at His second coming]; and the messenger of the [New] covenant [Christ] in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire…” (Mal. 3:1–2).

“For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble. The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the Lord of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch. But for you who fear my name, the SUN of Righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings. You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall … Behold, I will send you Elijah [John the Baptist] the prophet before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes. And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction” (Mal. 4:1–2, 5–6).

Malachi 3–4 predicts two messengers:

1. John the Baptist—the eschatological Elijah who prepares the way, and
2. Christ— who comes suddenly to His temple in judgment, fulfilling and bringing to maturity the new covenant promises.

“The day” that is “coming” is the second coming, portrayed as both a fiery judgment for the wicked and a sunrise of healing for the righteous. This dual imagery captures the essence of the Day of the Lord: retribution for the unrepentant, restoration for the faithful.

Ellicott’s Commentary offers this helpful insight: “The fathers and early commentators have understood Christ by the Sun of Righteousness… As the rising sun diffuses light and heat… the advent of the reign of righteousness, which will reward the good and the wicked, each according to his deserts…”^[9]

John Gill similarly affirms a messianic reading of Malachi 4:2, citing ancient Jewish sources: “They say… until the Messiah comes, as it is said, ‘unto you that fear my name shall the sun of righteousness arise.’” Philo also connects the “Sun” to the divine Logos, who brings “refuge and salvation.” Though some interpreted it literally—as the sun burning and the wicked healing the righteous—Gill notes this symbolic dual outcome at the end of the age.^[10]

John Lightfoot connects John the Baptist’s ministry and the “wrath to come” (Matt. 3:7) to Malachi 4’s prophecy, seeing it in the AD 70 judgment:

“These words respect the very last words of the Old Testament… and denote the most miserable destruction of the nation, and now almost ready to fall upon them.”^[11]

Adam Clarke offers one of the clearest preterist interpretations of Malachi 4:1–2, seeing Christ’s coming as spiritual and fulfilled in AD 67–70:

Verse 1 – The burning day is the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, leaving “neither root nor branch,” a phrase denoting total judgment.

Verse 2 – The “Sun of Righteousness” is Christ, whose gospel and Spirit bring healing and life to all who believe. Clarke emphasizes that Jesus’ influence is “universally diffused” like the sun. “Ye shall go forth…” refers to Christians who, recognizing the sign of Jerusalem surrounded by armies, obeyed Christ’s command to flee and escaped to Pella—preserving every Christian life.^[12]

Ancient Jewish and Christian commentators alike have seen Malachi 4:2 as:

1. A messianic prophecy referring to Christ;
2. A reference to His second coming, not His first.
3. A spiritual and covenantal coming in AD 70—bringing salvation to believers (spiritually through imputed righteousness and physically through the flight to Pella) and judgment to the wicked.

These three themes align with the central thesis of this work. Likewise, New Testament references to Christ as the Morning Star (Rev. 2:28; 22:16) support a spiritual fulfillment at His second coming. While many debate whether these refer to AD 70 or a future event, full preterism resolves the tension—not as either/or, but as a fulfilled already/not-yet paradigm.

In Malachi 4:2, the “Sun of Righteousness” arises to inaugurate the new covenant world of righteousness, bringing salvation to the soul (cf. 1 Pet. 1:4–12; 4:5–7; 2 Pet. 1:19; 3:13). Paul echoes this in Romans 13:11–12, the “day” is at hand, bringing salvation to believers and marking the end of the “night” of the old covenant age—not physical transformation at the end of world history, but spiritual renewal in AD 70 (cf. Rom. 11:26–27).

In Matthew 24:27, Jesus’ coming is likened to light shining from east to west. The Greek word astrapē can mean “lightning” or also “bright shining.”^[13] This suggests Christ’s parousia is not a brief event but a sustained and illuminating presence. The related verb phainō (used for “shine”) can even describe vegetation emerging, reinforcing the image of a sunrise—not a lightning strike—as the symbol of His coming. 

Jesus would not appear in some dark inner chamber, like the false Messiahs of His day. His presence would be as open and unmistakable as the dawn itself:

“…from the rising of the sun and from the west, that there is none beside me.  I am the LORD…” (Isa. 45:6; 19–25; cf. Mal.1:1, 4:1–2, 5–6).

Perhaps Joshua 10:12–14 foreshadows eternal life in the new covenant age, when God caused the sun to stand still as a sign that He was fighting for Israel. In the new creation, every day is likewise a day without darkness or reproach (Isa. 60:19–20; Rev. 21:23–26). Then, the sun stood still in the heavens; now, the “Sun of Righteousness” never sets.

Christ’s enduring presence—His eternal Day within the Church—is proof that nothing can prevail against her. Just as the miracle in Joshua’s day testified to divine victory, so too does the radiance of Christ’s light in the lives of His people testify to His reign. Those still outside, walking in darkness, are often stirred to longing when they witness the warmth and joy of God’s presence in His people. Yet this same light also hardens the reprobate—just as the sun melts wax but hardens clay.

As plants receive life from the sun through photosynthesis, the Church draws eternal life from Christ alone. In union with Him, the Church becomes the leaves on the Tree of Life, and the Light of the new Jerusalem brings healing to the nations (Rev. 22:2). The gospel—God’s living water and light—goes forth as special revelation to awaken the thirsty soul. No physical luminary can declare the righteousness of God! Only Christ and His Church, as the true heavenly kingdom, can bring the light that saves.

Without the “Sun of Righteousness,” without the glory of God’s imputed righteousness shining into the heart and mind of man, all is lost. The world truly does revolve around the “Sun [Son] of Righteousness.”

Conclusion

Luke 17:20–37 is not a riddle to be unpacked by modern prophecy speculation—it is a divine proclamation of how Christ’s kingdom would arrive and be revealed. Jesus’ coming was not to be observed in the skies like a comet or hidden in secret rooms like a conspiracy—it would be a dawning presence, shining from east to west, exposing and ending the darkness of the old covenant world while bringing healing, righteousness, and resurrection life and light to those who feared His name.

This crucial passage offers one of the clearest teachings on the nature and timing of Christ’s kingdom and Parousia. Contrary to both futurist speculation and overly materialistic expectations—even among some partial preterists—Jesus declares that His kingdom would not be externally visible or politically manifest, but rather internal, spiritual, and already present within His faithful ones.

In this passage, Jesus unites several key prophetic themes:

• the spiritual nature of the kingdom (v. 21),
• the imminent character of His coming (v. 24; 18:7-8),
• the judgment upon unbelieving Israel like that in Noah and Lot’s day (vv. 26–30),
• the urgent command to flee when the signs appear (v. 31–33), and
• the decisive separation between the righteous and the wicked (vv. 34–37).

Moreover, the striking parallels between Luke 17 and Matthew 24 expose the untenable division many modern interpreters attempt to impose on the Olivet Discourse. The very same language—about the days of Noah, the lightning-like Parousia, the one taken and the one left, and the vultures over the corpse—is found in both accounts. To argue that Luke 17 refers to AD 70 while Matthew 24 refers to a future second coming ignores these textual and thematic overlaps. Luke 17 is not only contextually prior to Matthew 24, but also foundational to it—demonstrating that Jesus’ eschatology remained consistent throughout His ministry.

This demands a consistent interpretation: If Luke 17—where all of these apocalyptic elements are present—refers to Christ’s coming in AD 70, then Matthew 24–25, which uses the exact same language, refers to the same event. Jesus did not teach two different comings of the Son of Man separated by thousands of years coming as the light of day; He taught one Parousia, one judgment, one consummation, one kingdom transition—fulfilled in the lifetime of His hearers.

Major Premise: If the coming of Christ in Luke 17:20–37 refers to the same coming of the Son of Man described in Matthew 24–25 [as most futurists correctly see it]

Minor Premise: and yet the coming of Christ in Luke 17:20-37 was fulfilled in the judgment of Jerusalem in AD 70 [as many partial preterists see it]

Conclusion: —then the coming in Matthew 24–25 must also have been fulfilled in AD 70.

If “A=B” and yet “A” was fulfilled in AD 70, then so was “B.” Pretty basic stuff – A = Luke 17 and B = Mathew 24-25

The coming of the Son of Man is not future to us but was imminent to His first-century audience. It was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, when the corrupt religious system was judged and the kingdom was revealed to be fully “within” those united to Christ. Just as in the days of Noah and Lot, the judgment was swift and unexpected—bringing deliverance to the righteous and wrath to the wicked. The vultures gathering over Jerusalem’s corpse signal not a future end of the world, but the end of a covenantal world—the world of Torah, temple, and tribal exclusivity.

The internal kingdom Jesus proclaimed has been inaugurated and established. His light continues to shine, not from a rebuilt temple or geopolitical Israel, but from the hearts of those who live in the power of the new covenant. The Church, indwelt by the King and empowered by His Spirit, is the true Israel of God—vindicated in history and called to walk in the light of His already-fulfilled Parousia. The kingdom is here. The King has come. The light of day is shining, and it will never go out.

Today’s Application: 

We have explored Malachi 3–4 in connection with Christ’s coming in judgment and salvation in Luke 17:20–37, depicted as the “Sun of Righteousness” or “Light of Day.” In AD 70, Christ fulfilled these prophecies, dismantling the Zealots’ vision of a militaristic Messianic kingdom and establishing the spiritual, eternal kingdom prophesied by Daniel and Jesus—a kingdom that exists “within” believers.

In contrast, modern Khazarian “Zionist zealots” hold misguided beliefs about Benjamin Netanyahu, viewing him as a potential forerunner to the Messiah, or even the Messiah himself.  Their vision of the kingdom is rooted in warfare and territorial conquest. According to certain Orthodox Jewish circles:

“It would seem that these proposals as well as other ‘signs’ have led some in the Orthodox community to believe that Bibi Netanyahu is Masiach ben Yosef (Messiah, son of Joseph) the military leader that will precede the coming of the Messiah. [He will die in battle, but will make the way for the Messiah to come.] They claim that Netanyahu will be the last leader of Israel until the Messiah comes. Because Netanyahu has a military background and the fact that [they believe] he has taken on the spiritual mantle of Mordechai as is demonstrated in his speech to the U.S. Congress noted above, they are calling him Mashiach ben Yosef.  Their website enumerates the many ways Bibi fulfills the requirements of this forerunner.”^[14]

These modern zealots seek to establish a “Jewish” Messianic kingdom through war, with propaganda—funded by figures like the Rothschilds [who own MSM]—portraying Israel as merely “defending itself.” However, those familiar with the Talmud and the extreme political views of Benjamin Netanyahu recognize its violent undertones and flawed attempts to usher in a kingdom through war. Evangelical Zionists support the violence and carnal earthly kingdom expectations of Talmudic Zionism.  Both Daniel and Jesus prophesied the definitive end of Old Covenant national Israel in AD 70 and the establishment of the true, spiritual, and eternal kingdom within those who follow the real Messiah in the New Covenant age.  Both Talmudic Zionism and Evangelical Zionism embrace a view and hope of the Messianic Kingdom that Christ Himself rejected and judged in AD 70.  This is not a trivial matter.  

Study Questions:

1. What does Jesus mean when He says the kingdom of God does not come with observation but is “within you” (Luke 17:21)? Is Jesus exegeting both the time and nature of fulfillment of Daniel’s kingdom in Daniel? What are the connections between Dan. 2; 7:13-27 and Luke 17:20-37?  Is it when Christ would be revealed as the light of day that the kingdom would be “within”?
2. How does the chiastic structure of Luke 17:20–37 help clarify its meaning?
3. In what ways does Jesus contrast external, visible expectations of the kingdom with its true spiritual reality here in Luke 17 and Matthew 23?
4. How do the “days of Noah” and “days of Lot” illustrate the nature and timing of Christ’s coming?
5. What parallels can be drawn between Luke 17 and Matthew 24 that support a unified, single fulfillment in AD 70?
6. Why is it significant that Jesus said His coming would be “as the light of day shining from one part of the sky to the other”?What OT passage depicts Messiah as coming as the sun and within that context is the destruction of the Second Temple mentioned?
7. What is the significance of the imagery of vultures gathering around the corpse in both Luke 17 and Matthew 24?
8. How does Jesus’ answer to “Where, Lord?” in Luke 17:37 point to the destruction of Jerusalem?
9. Why do some translators avoid rendering entos as “within you,” and what are the implications of this choice?
10. How does this passage challenge the common modern assumption that Jesus’ second coming is still in our future?
11. When read alongside Luke 21:27–32, and in light of the chiastic structure of Luke 17:20–37, is it clear to you that the promise of Christ establishing His kingdom “within” the hearts of His people was to be fulfilled at His coming in AD 70? While many argue that this inward and spiritual aspect of the kingdom was realized in his first coming, does the context of Luke 17 support that conclusion—or does it instead point to the judgment and kingdom consummation associated with his coming in AD 70?
12. In Luke 17:34–36, Jesus speaks of one person being “taken” and another “left.” According to the article, who is taken and who is left, and how does this differ from popular rapture interpretations?
13. How does the article’s interpretation of Luke 17:20–37 challenge futurist views that expect a physical, visible return of Christ in the future?
14. How does the Talmud and many Kazarian “Jews” like Banjamin Netanyahu think the messianic kingdom is going to come and are they trying to accomplish that now?Is this Zealotism 2.0?  Has Evangelical Zionsim also embraced the carnal kingdom expectations of first century apostate Judaism?  How is Christ’s kingdom different?

 

[1] Liddell, Henry George, and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, rev. Henry Stuart Jones, 9th ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 577. Liddell-Scott specifically translates entos in Luke 17:21 as “in your hearts.”

[2] William Hendriksen, Gospel of Luke, (Grand Rapids, MI: 1978), 805.

[3] A.J. Mattill, Jr., Luke and the Last Things: A Perspective for the Understanding of Lukan Thought (Dillsboro, NC: Western North Carolina Press, 1979), 89.

[4] Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism Aan Eschatology of Hope (Phillipsburg, PA: P&R Publishing, 1999), 213

[5] Gary DeMar, “Is the Rapture Found in Matthew 24?”, Christian Family Study Centre, December 7, 2020, accessed Mar 31, 2025, https://christianfamilystudycentre.home.blog/2020/12/07/is-the-rapture-found-in-matthew-24/.

[6] Ray Summers, Commentary on Luke: Jesus, the Universal Savior (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1972), 202.

[7] Bray, Matthew 24 Fulfilled, 120–128.

[8] Steve Gregg, Empire of the Risen Son: A Treatise on the Kingdom of God—What It Is and Why It Matters, Book One: There Is Another King (Maitland, FL: Steve Gregg, 2020), 388–389.

[9] Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers, Malachi 4, StudyLight.org, https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ebc/malachi-4.html

[10] John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible, Malachi 4, BibleHub, https://biblehub.com/commentaries/gill/malachi/4.htm.

[11] Lightfoot, J. (2010). A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica, Matthew-1 Corinthians, Matthew-Mark(Vol. 2, p. 78). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

[12] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton & Porter, 1831; repr., Bible Hub, accessed April 18, 2025),https://biblehub.com/commentaries/clarke/.

[13] James Strong, Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2001), s.v. “astrapē.”

[14] Victoria Radin, Who is Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu?

 

.