Introduction

Matthew 24:40 and 41 has been the subject of various approaches and interpretations. Apart from being used by those who advocate the so-called "secret rapture," it has also been subject to conflicting interpretations even within the Seventh Day Adventist Church. After performing their interpretive studies, some (which will be referred later) have concluded that the "taken" are the condemned, and the "left" are saved. Others have assumed that the "taken" are the saved and the "left" the condemned, but they have not really made an exegetical process that corroborate this perspective. Others due to ignorance or negligence, have derived conclusions of the connections made in modern languages, which is not safe nor the best from the exegetical point of view.

The importance of doing a correct exegetical work in this passage, as in every biblical text, is that as a church committed to Scripture, it has the responsibility to: 1. Extract and identify the true meaning of every text in the Holy Scriptures; 2. Point out what is not true and be suspicious about possible connections that can be derived from wrong doctrines; 3. Implement the exegetical and interpretative methodology that does hermeneutic justice to each biblical text; 4. Clarify ununderstood passages that generate doubt or interpretative oscillation.

Academics and specialists manifest conflicting interpretations, so it can be expected that those who are not experts, also go through a similar experience. The exegetical Christian sources show some uncertainty, reducing the importance of the topic or pronouncing themselves in favor of one position or another. For example, The Expositor's Bible Commentary states that: "It is neither clear nor particularly important whether the "taken" means "taken in judgment "... or "taken to be gathered with the elect” (v. 31)”.¹ Others like Talbert, believe that, based on Witherington in Matthew 13: 41-42, “the ones taken are those snatched away by judgment".² In the same line, but with another argument, Mitch and Sri express themselves: "More likely Jesus speaks in the idiom of the prophets, where those who are taken are those captured or killed in judgment (Ez 8:13; Jer 6 : 11 and Zac 14: 2) and those who are left constitute the surviving remnant that is spared(Es 1: 9; 4: 3; Jer 40:11; Ez 14:22)”.³ Others like Montgomery seem to vacillate between one option and another: "It does seem clear that the idea of being taken to be with Christ at his return best fits the chapter, since Jesus had earlier spoken of sending his angels to “gather his elect from the four winds ...".⁴ The same perspective, Hagner,⁵ Hendricksen⁶ and Hare,⁷ manifests among others. In this way it can be verified that there are different conclusions among scholars and exegetes. This requires a more profound study, far beyond a paragraph, which is usually what the biblical commentaries refer to.

This exegetical work will be limited to present what the text really means. For reasons of space and concision, it will not be possible to refute the arguments that the opposing interpretations present about. But the most important is that it proposes an approach that includes contextual analysis (both historical and literary), syntactic and grammatical analysis and exegetical analysis verse by verse of the paragraph. This technical contribution, starting from the original language, will demonstrate the importance of the epistemological in the hermeneutic scriptural process, since if the exegetical work is not done, the eisegesis will take its place. The contribution of this analysis is that most of the sources offers only a small and limited approach to this paragraph, but this study, because it is concentrated, it offers a greater amount of information and detailed interpretation.

Contextual Analysis

The texts that surround a passage in study are the key for its correct interpretation. In its consideration both historical and literary aspects should be included with the purpose to have a concrete perspective of the circumstances and themes that were behind the passage under study. The literary context will be considered from its most immediate sphere to the largest in the book, including some intertextual relationships that can be established.

Historic context

Matthew, the former tax collector, was the author of the first gospel. Internal evidence suggests that this book was written by a converted Jew.⁸ It is known that "it was written in Palestine before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD".⁹ A good reason to believe this argument is what Carson and Moo point out: "According to some of Jesus' sayings, we could understand that the temple was still standing when Matthew wrote his Gospel (Matt. 5: 23-24; 12: 5-7; 23:16-22; cf. 26: 60-61)".¹⁰ The Church fathers left a record that Matthew served at an early date, that is, in the middle of the first century.

Matthew proposed himself to communicate the life, mission and teachings of Jesus, and those things in consonance with the Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament. Matthew then wrote when Jewish people longed for liberation from the Roman yoke, overwhelmed by the occupation of their troops, devastated by taxes and the lack of political sovereignty. The church, on the other hand, was confronting the Jewish rejection and after 64 AD., confronted the persecution of the implacable Nero. Then Matthew wrote to a Christian community of Jewish origin who wanted to know exactly who Jesus was, his genuineness as the Messiah prefigured in the Old Testament and thus confront with full conviction, all opposition caused by his Name.

One of the purposes that motivated Matthew was to reproduce the discourses and sermons of Jesus. As can be seen in his Gospel, he recorded half a dozen discourses and didactic sermons, being one of the most exalted, the prophetic sermon of chapters 24 and 25. In this message, Christ set out to answer the concerns of his disciples and with total determination, he told them that Jerusalem would be destroyed and at once weaved and put in perspective the signs of the end of the world, that is, of his second coming. In Matthew 24 and 25, as Platt says: "Jesus is in the middle of a conversation with his disciples just days before He was crucified ... And before He died and rose from the grave, He prepared his disciples for his departure, promising them that He would return. How his disciples, both then and now, live in the light of that reality is the main point that Jesus emphasizes in verses 36 - 42".¹¹

Literary Context

The larger context of the book refers to the Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ in the context of Jewish messianic expectations and his life as the fulfillment of these. Matthew arranges his material more in thematic than chronological order, so we must be aware of establishing literary connections between episodes. Throughout his work, Matthew refers to the childhood of Jesus, the initiation in his ministry and his ministry in Galilee, Perea and finally Jerusalem. Just before reporting his arrest and trial, Matthew recorded the sermon of Jesus on the end of Jerusalem and the world in general.

The context of the section is constituted by the set of prophetic statements leading to the climax of his second coming interwoven with the destruction of Jerusalem. Adjacent to this, he refers to a series of analogies in which Christ insists about the diligent and careful preparation of those who wish to be found blameless in that day. To this section belongs the passage under study, that is, Matthew 24: 36-42. It is part of the wide response that Jesus gave to his disciples, who asked him about the destruction of Jerusalem and, at the same time, about his second coming. Jesus answered by skillfully mixing both events. In fact, the destruction of that city constitutes a representation of the future destruction of this world, inflicted by the second coming of Christ.

The immediate previous context is constituted by a series of warnings that Jesus makes about his second coming. After warning about deceptions, wars, natural disasters, tribulation and signs in the stars (vv 4-29), Jesus goes on to describe what will happen in the end of the world (vv 30-41). He ends his speech by referring to two groups: one being the faithful servants and the other unfaithful servants, remembering in both cases, what will be their respective reward. Of course, this encourages them to prepare spiritually to be among the saved on that glorious day (vv 42-51). Throughout this paragraph are found various analogies or parables as some call them, referring to vigilance, the sense of alertness and preparation for the second coming of Christ, as the contrastive attitude in relation to the attitude of the antediluvians.

The passage under study appears in the section where Jesus: 1. Ensures that no one knows the day or time of his coming. 2. Compares the careless, secularized and indifferent attitude of humanity in the time of Noah, with the attitude of most people in the future time when Christ comes a second time. 3. Describes that, during his coming, there will be only two groups of people, some will be taken and others will be left, it will not happen before or after that day. 4. Ends by emphasizing the importance of being permanently aware of his coming, especially because nobody knows when He will come again.

The beginning of this passage can be established from verse 36 since right there begins the inclusio structure that ends in the verse 42, which reliably establishes the limits of this passage. Verses 32 through 35 constitutes a digression aimed at alerting his listeners about the previous signs and the certainty of his coming. Instead, the v. 36 takes up the theme of the day and time, which then follows the comparison with the days of Noah. Talbert¹² Platt,¹³ Mitch and Sri,¹⁴ and Montgomery,¹⁵ agrees that the paragraph begins in this verse. To conclude, “Matthew 24:37 – 25:46 (which really begins with 24:36, as noted above) consists of parabolic material that is used to exhort vigilance in light of the last judgment”.¹⁶

The immediate context is the space in which Jesus refers three analogies that are directly related to the passage under study: The analogy of the loyal and disloyal servants (24: 45-51), in which the master rewards the loyal slave, whom he finds working when he arrives, but destroys the disloyal slave when he finds him celebrating instead of working. The analogy of the ten virgins (25: 1-13), five who were wise and prepared and five who were foolish and unprepared. The analogy of the talents (25: 14-30), in which the master praises the slaves who used their property wisely, but condemns the slave who did not.

This section which also is an apocalyptic genre, concludes with the representation of Jesus in the judgment of the nations (25:31-46) in which the Son of Man separates people into two categories, the sheep that helped "one of these little ones", therefore serving Christ, and the goats, who failed to provide this type of service. The sheep are welcome in the kingdom, but the goats are condemned to the eternal fire prepared for Satan and his angels (25:41). Throughout these two chapters, the constant warning is to be prepared for the coming of the Lord. Those who hear the warning will receive great blessings; those who do not, will be condemned. Some will be saved and others will be lost, the dilemma in this study refers to know to whom is the "taken" and those who are "left".

Sketch of the book

C. H. Lohr found that the Gospel of Matthew is arranged in a chiastic structure. So, the main parts of this book would be outlined in the following way:

1. Narrative: Birth of Jesus and beginnings (chapters 1 - 4) A

2. Sermon: Blessings, enter the kingdom (5 - 7) B

3. Narrative: Authority and Invitation (8 - 9) C

4. Sermon: Mission (10) D

5. Narrative: Rejection by this generation (11 - 12) E

6. Sermon: Parables of the kingdom (13) F

7. Narrative: Recognition of disciples (14 - 17) E'

8. Sermon: Discourse of the community (18) D'

9. Narrative: Authority and Invitation (19 - 22) C'

10. Sermon: Woes and the coming of the kingdom (23 - 25) B'

11. Narrative: Death and Resurrection (26-28) A'¹⁷

Sketch of the section of the passage

Within Jesus' eschatological sermon (24: 1-25: 46), there are subsections that help to identify the parts that make up this historic discourse:

1. Destruction of Jerusalem and events of the end of the world (24: 1-35).

2. Analogies on preparation (24:36 - 25:30):

   1. The need for preparation for the unexpected coming of the Lord (24: 36-44)

   2. The analogy of faithful servants and unfaithful, emphasizing being faithful in Christian duties until the end (24: 45-51).

   3. The parable of the 10 virgins, emphasizing again the preparation for the unexpected coming of the Lord (25: 1-13).

   4. The parable on the gold coins, emphasizing again thefaithfulness in the Christian duties until the coming of the Lord (25: 14-30).

   5. Description of the final judgment (25: 31-46)

This study will focus just on the initial part of the analogies that address the theme of the permanently pious and pending life of the coming of Christ. The analogies that follow them repeat, expand and complement the cent idea previously mentioned and that crosses them all.

Syntactic and Grammatical Analysis

After being aware of the elements surrounding the author and the passage under study it’s time to get into the passage, explore its syntactic and grammatical elements, through a schematization of the passage found in Bibleworks.¹⁸ It will be presented with the purpose of show its graphic form, its flow and the interaction between their grammatical and syntactical parts.

Observations: 1. This text begins with the coordinating conjunction δὲ, which will contrast one clause with another. In the previous clause they (his listeners) can know the nearness of his coming, but the subsequent clause implies that they cannot know the day and time.
2. The multiple nominatives next to the adjective μόνος, intend to reinforce the idea of Jesus.
3. The conjunction γὰρ will introduce two ideas: First, the people in Noah’s time didn’t know either the day and the time of their punishment. Second, next to Ὥσπερ, will compare “the days of Noah” with “the coming” of Jesus Christ. There is a parallel between those phrases. Just as people lived in the days of Noah, so people will be living in the day when Jesus comes.

Observations: 1. The conjunction γὰρ once again will introduce the same idea, but this time it will use the principle of repetition and expansion, by which Jesus will move from the general to specific.
2. There is a comparative parallel between the description of the days of Noah and the coming of Christ. Those days are compared with the day of final judgment.
3. There is a periphrastic formula in the verbal elements. There are four adverbial participles describing the main verb, that is ἦσαν.
4. Two antediluvian actions appear in parallel form: ἦσαν (they were), that is, the way they lived, and οὐκ ἔγνωσαν, (they did not know) or did not "realize" their mistake, until it was too late.
5. The particles ἄχρι and ἕως are time markers that indicate that the actions were carried out up to the limits referred to in the verses 38 and 39.
5. The cataclysm has two actions: "came" and "took" them all.

Observations: 1. Two kinds of parallels are observed. The biggest one is a synonymic parallelism and therefore shows the same idea: two types of people facing two different destinations. The smallest parallels are contrastive because they present some taken and others left. 2. Τότε is a temporary adverb and it is a time indicator that locates the action in the time of the previous sentence.

Critical - textual note

At this point it’s important to verify the certainty of each word recorded in this passage, that is in the Greek text. According to The Greek New Testament, this passage contains a few textual variants which are the following: 1. οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός (nor the Son, v. 36), certainty B; 2. [ἐκείναις] (those, v. 38), certainty C and ἡμέρᾳ (day, v. 42), certainty B.¹⁹ These textual variants do not represent a serious problem in the interpretation of the passage. Metzger explains the most important of the three: οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός saying that "it’s more probable that these words have been omitted because of the doctrinal difficulty they present, and not that they have been added ...".²⁰ Despite their absence in some MSS, these words are a sure text in Mark 13:32. It’s not necessary to say more about it, since this variable doesn’t have direct relation with terms under study.

Interpretative Analysis Verse by Verse

Next, an exegetical analysis is offered that will closely follow each phrase and relevant word of the passage under study. As it is known, the methodology that includes the Greek language of the author’s time and the immediate context determining the meaning of the words of a biblical passage. This is exactly what will be done in this exegetical work. Indicators such as the personal elements involved, time, transitional and verbal indicators will be identified to show its role in this interpretation.

24:36 But about day and hour, no one knows, nor the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. (Περὶ δὲ τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης καὶ ὥρας οὐδεὶς οἶδεν, οὐδὲ οἱ ἄγγελοι τῶν οὐρανῶν οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός, εἰ μὴ ὁ πατὴρ μόνος).

As Mitch and Sri declare, "at this point Jesus makes a transition from prophesying future events to urging us to prepare for them. So far, we have heard about the days of the tribulation leading up to Christ’s return (vv. 19, 22, 29); now the focus narrows to the "day" and the "hour" of his coming (vv. 36, 42 and 44)".²¹ In this way Jesus begins this part with the conjunction "but," with which he was making a contrast between what he is about to say with what he previously said. Previously, Christ had referred to "those days" (Matt 24:19, 22, 29), but from verse 36 onwards, He referred to "one day" (Matt 24:36, 42, 44), 50; 25:13). There was knowledge and security of the closeness and of general events that would take place before the coming of Christ but not of the day nor the hour of his return.

Jesus' emphasis is on "no one knows" (οὐδεὶς οἶδεν), literally "no one has known" (that is, before or until that moment) when the day of his coming will be. It is said to be "a perfect root used as a present to emphasize, at any time",²² which is why it is translated into the present. These expression echoes an affirmation of Zechariah: "It will be a unique day—a day known only to the LORD... " (14: 7, NVI). This data is also part of the secret matters that only God knows (Deut 29:29). Human ignorance of that date is reiterated by Jesus several times in the literary context of the passage. The following texts confirm this idea:

1. "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only" (Matt 24:36 NKJV).

2. "Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming" (Matt 24:42 NKJV).

3. "Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect" (Matt 24:44 NKJV)

4. "the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him and at an hour that he is not aware of" (Matt 24:50 NKJV).

5. "Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming" (Matt 25:13 NKJV).

Not only does mankind ignore the exact date of the coming of Christ, but the will of God is that humanity does not know it. In view of this, the sons of God should be prepared all the time, along the centuries, which could be called a "permanent imminence". Adjacent to this, is the fact that no one knows the day of his death, therefore, everyone must be ready every day until the end of the world. This is the main idea in the paragraph under study.

24:37 For as the days of Noah were, so shall the coming of the Son of man be. " (ὥσπερ γὰρ αἱ ἡμέραι τοῦ Νῶε, οὕτως ἔσται ἡ παρουσία τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου).

The conjunction γὰρ connects mankind’s ignorance regarding the date of the coming of Christ, with images of the flood and the day of the coming of Christ itself. In this context, "the days of Noah" will be used to show a parallel with the day of the coming of Christ. Other sources agree with this assessment. For example, the Comentario Bíblico Mundo Hispano states: "To illustrate the fact that no one can know the day and hour (v. 36), Jesus cites Noah's case when, suddenly, the flood unexpectedly fell on the people when they fulfilled their daily routines (vv. 37-39)".²³ Blomberg also refers to why Jesus uses the illustration about Noah: "Jesus now illustrates the unexpectedness and unpredictability of his return by comparing it with the arrival of the flood in Noah’s days (vv. 37 - 39)".²⁴ Similarly Montgomery states: "The first story Jesus uses to emphasize the suddenness of his coming and the need to be ready for it, is the destruction of the earth by the flood in the days of Noah".²⁵ Then it is clear that Jesus did not use that illustration to refer to who will be "taken" and who will be "left". There is no other objective in Jesus’ mind when he remembers those scenes.

This historical antecedent was used among Jews as a warning, as Osborne points out: "In Jewish literature the people of Noah’s day exemplified sinners who did not foresee the coming of divine wrath (Sir 16: 7; Jub. 20: 5-6; 1 En 67:10, 2 Mac 2: 4…)".²⁶ Christ used an historical event of divine judgment that was well known and instructive in the Jewish community. As Mitch and Sri say: "Here we have a contrast between the days leading up to judgment and the day when it strikes".²⁷ But in this part of the sermon, it is not specified in what aspect exactly is the point of contact between both events.

The “days" of the antediluvians were characterized by a total indifference and repulsion towards the warnings of Noah. This caused lack of vigilance and preparation for the "day" of flood. That is the essence and the point of contact of both scenes. The focus is on the days not on " the day". About "the day" it was said that nobody knows when it will come, so now it passes to the days, which will be characterized by an absolute absence of preparation, an absolute lack of concern for the divine judgment. In the same way the wicked will say in the end of the world: "Peace and security then the destruction will come upon them suddenly ... "(1 Thess 5: 3 NIV). Jesus did not intend to speak of people "taken" or "left" because he is no longer talking about "the day", but about the days before the flood and his second coming. At that moment Jesus is focused on the secular way of life of the impious of those "days". That is the common idea, both events put in parallel. It is until later that Jesus will talk about the "day".

The antediluvian generation has constituted for the Jewish and Cristian people, a serious warning directed not to ignore God or his message of salvation (1 Pe 3:20, ² Pe 2: 5, 3: 6-7). Then Jesus meant that "the day" of his coming will occur in the days of unconcern for the things of God, of indifference to divine judgment and a total lack of preparation. Next, Jesus goes on to detail exactly what he is referring to. It will go from the general to the specific. He will repeat and expand.

24:38 "For as they were in the days before the flood, eating, drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until that day when Noah entered into the ark" (ὡς γὰρ ἦσαν ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ταῖς πρὸ τοῦ κατακλυσμοῦ τρώγοντες καὶ πίνοντες, γαμοῦντες καὶ γαμίζοντες, ἄχρι ἧς ἡμέρας εἰσῆλθεν Νῶε εἰς τὴν κιβωτόν).

The phraseology of this verse works as a repetition and extension of the earlier brief expression. Then Jesus goes deeper into the topic and presents a representative list of the hedonistic activities that characterized the "days before the flood", that is, party, fun, self-indulgence and the debauchery. These are just some examples to show what Christians should not do. Of course, eating, drinking or marrying are not bad actions by themselves, but they are when God is considered in second place.

The morphology of the finite verb ἦσαν (which are Greek participles), implies the continuous occurrence (Imperfect Indicative Active), that is, they "were" living in that way indefinitely. This contrasts with the permanent "preparation" in which Christians should live. Both in the days before the flood, and before the coming of Christ, society lived and will live having fun, pleasure and busy in their business.

That antediluvian lifestyle was maintained "until” (ἄχρι) the day Noah entered the ark. These time markers establish that Jesus is trying to emphasize the time in which the antediluvians had the opportunity to prepare for the flood. In this way, Jesus referred to the fact that those impious reached with that reluctance, until the "day" when the door was closed and every opportunity was finished. They lived the same way when the flood surprised them. Then, in that way the "days" are connected to the "day" of "his coming".

In a collateral way, it’s also useful to refer to the morphosyntactic implications that are derived from the original terms used. The text literally says: "Because as they were in the days before the flood..." which is highlighted here to show the presence of the main verb in this sentence and, therefore, establish their respective relationship with the adverbial participles that revolve around it. There are some Castilian biblical versions that omit referring the verb "were" (NIV, DHH, NBD, NTV), nevertheless, its inclusion is pertinent to perceive the verbal structure that Matthew left in the original language.

Adjacent to this, because this is an imperfect periphrastic verb, it’s necessary to clarify the syntactic relation between the verb ἦσαν and the participles that complement the verbal idea. These participles are: τρώγοντες καὶ πίνοντες, γαμοῦντες καὶ γαμίζοντες (v. 38 BNT), which were placed there to complement, expand and provide additional information that more precisely specifies the way in which the action of the main verb was done. In other words, as Hagner says: "The periphrastic construction (ειµι+ present participle) stresses the ongoing activity mentioned in the four participles (all with the euphony of the same endings)”.²⁸ By placing the verb next to its participles, it would read: "they were ... eating, drinking, marrying and giving in marriage". It can be verified that the objective of Jesus is to show the activities of complacency and personal satisfaction in which the antediluvians were involved, to the detriment, prejudice and impairment of God’s pleasure towards them.

To conclude, it can be said that Jesus' emphasis on bringing back this antecedent is not to indicate the "taken" or "left", but to show that "the coming" of Christ will happen when a large part of humanity will be immersed in indifference, nonchalance, unconsciousness and lack of preparation. It will be repeated.

24:39 and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all. In this way will be the coming of the Son of man. (καὶ οὐκ ἔγνωσαν ἕως ἦλθεν ὁ κατακλυσμὸς καὶ ἦρεν ἅπαντας.) Oὕτως ἔσται [καὶ] ἡ παρουσία τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου).

The phrase οὐκ ἔγνωσαν is trying to say that the antediluvians did not "understand", did not pay attention, did not realize the importance of preparing for the divine judgment of that time. They did not perceive the need to watch, to take Noah's message seriously, so they continued with their hedonistic and contumacious life until the day of judgment. Abruptly and suddenly, the day announced by Noah finally arrived and they could not escape. This phrase οὐκ ἔγνωσαν does not imply a lack of knowledge but rejection of the knowledge imparted by Noah. They actually "did not recognize" deliberately that Noah was right, until they first saw the rain and the subsequent storm that destroyed them.

When Jesus comes again, He will see the same indifference, rejection and contempt toward God's warnings. The same attitudes will be present in that "day". In the same way that no one knew the day or the hour of the flood, so neither (in the final day) will they know the day or the hour of the second coming of Christ. Paul adds that on that day they will think that they will be living in "peace and security" but "destruction will come upon them suddenly" (1 Thess. 5: 2). So, then the unexpected nature of these divine judgments is emphasized here.

The word "until" is also important here. This element complements, reinforces and confirms the mentioned idea, that Jesus has in mind to refer to the way in which the wicked people lived during the time that preceded the flood. That is the true point of contact that Jesus establishes between "the days before the flood" and the “day” when He comes again.

Evidence of this is what the immediate after context says in verses 42 and 44: "Therefore, stay awake ..." and "Because of this, you must also be prepared, because the Son of man will come when you least expect it”. The antediluvians were not "awake", since they were numbed in their material and sinful tasks, which prevented them from being "prepared" on the day of the catastrophe. The inferential conjunction οὖν ("Therefore", v. 42), and the accusative preposition διὰ ("For the sake of", vv. 44), establish that this is what Christ wants to achieve, that during those "days" of waiting, they do not commit the same error as the antediluvians.

Thus, Christ concludes by saying that the generalized human indifference will last until the very coming of Christ. They will understand the truthfulness of the Gospel too late, so the judgment of God will come to them in a sudden, surprising, irrevocable, urgent and inevitable way. In this way Jesus ends a mental paragraph and moves to another. Now Jesus, having put in parallel those two cataclysmic scenes, to highlight "the days before" the divine judgment, goes to the subject of the rewards: one will be "taken" and another will be "left".

24:40 Two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other will be left. (τότε δύο ἔσονται ἐν τῷ ἀγρῷ, εἷς παραλαμβάνεται καὶ εἷς ἀφίεται).

The first word: τότε, that is, "then" is a temporary indicator that points to the coming of the Son of Man (v. 39), not before, not after. The role of Noah's illustration is over. The topic of preparation also ended. Now Jesus moves towards the theme of the coming of Christ and what will happen that day. Jesus has moved from the theme of "the days before" his coming, to the "day" itself. In that day, humanity will be divided into two opposing groups that will receive two different rewards: salvation and condemnation, respectively. Some will receive what they have desired while others will live their worst nightmare.

In this verse Jesus illustrates with images of his environment and in a representative way, what will happen in the final day, which nobody knows. Jesus begins referring to a rural scene constituted by two people, perhaps of the same family, of the same race, same religion, of the same socioeconomic status and work environment. In that equality of conditions, different rewards may occur. The difference was not outside, but inside.

Once again Revelation shows that there will be only two types of people when He comes, and only two verdicts, as it is confirmed by the immediate subsequent context. Firstly, Jesus refers to the faithful servant who receives a nice reward, whereas the unfaithful servant is punished (vv. 45-51). Secondly, place, Jesus talks about the prudent virgins (those who were accepted in the wedding), on the other hand, the foolish virgins who were not recognized by the husband (25: 1-13). Third, Jesus relates the parable of the talents, and shows two types of servants, those who are engaged in work and prepared themselves for the return of their lord, but in the opposite case, another servant appears unconcerned about it (25: 14-30). The same idea is present in the next passage, where two groups appear again: the sheep are located to the right side, but the goats are located to the left side. Different rewards are assigned to each group (25:31-46).

After locating this passage in its orbital context, it is necessary to move on to an important procedure within the exegesis of a New Testament passage: track down and analyze the use of the key terms used by Matthew. Like the term translated "taken", both Matthew (24:40 and 41) and Luke (17:35 and 36) use the Greek verb παραλαμβάνω (BNT). The only one difference is that Matthew conjugates it in present tense, while Luke in future. Now at this point it’s necessary to ask a primordial question: The "taken" ... Are they who will be taken to heaven or are to be destroyed? The "left" ... Are those who will be left behind o will be left alive? In this case what proceeds is a word study.

The meaning of παραλαμβάνω

Regarding its definition, the Diccionario del Griego Bíblico: Setenta y Nuevo Testamento, affirms that in the LXX this verb is used 43 times and 49 in the New Testament and it adds a list of uses and meanings. Specifically, 1. Take with it, carry it or with it, as companion (Gn 22: 3, when Abraham consecrated him with two servants and Isaac); 2. Receive blessing (Nm 23:20); 3. Receive by inheritance (Jer 49:1), accept something.²⁹ On the other hand, the Friberg’s Lexicon offers the following meanings for this term in its basic form παραλαμβάνω: "(1) with a person as the object, (a) denoting accompaniment take, take along or with, bring along (Matt 2.13), lead aside, take aside (Matt 20.17); (b) denoting close fellowship and agreement accept, receive to oneself (Jn 14.3)".³⁰ In Danker words: “receive to one’s side”.³¹ Because the terms under study refer to an strictly personal idea in the context of the passage, the study of the impersonal use of these terms will be omitted.

There are other sources that coincide with this assessment. The New International Dictionary of Theology and Exegesis of the New Testament states that: "In the Gospels and in Acts it is almost always used in the sense of carrying out."³² The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament states that: "1. With a personal object (only Gospels and Acts), to take to (or with) oneself (in close fellowship)".³³ On the other hand, as stated in the SDABC this term was "used in the papyri of receiving to oneself articles that belong to him",³⁴ so this is an extrabiblical example that refers what does this term really means. This is a verb that implies association and not dissociation. Never anywhere in the New Testament does, this term denote "taking by surprise", or "taking" in the sense of conquering a city, as Bohr does,³⁵ for example. It is unacceptable to look for the meaning of "taken" and "left" in Genesis, only by reference to the flood. It is a serious error within the exegetical process of the New Testament. Duvall and Hays, both specialists in exegesis of the New Testament, state that: "Context determines the meaning of words.

When we speak of context we refer to everything that surrounds the word we are studying, that is, the paragraph that contains the term ...".³⁶

Then, this study presents a considerable amount of texts in which this term appears. It is true that each passage has its respective context, but it is necessary to see how these terms are used in Matthew or the rest of the New Testament. Duvall and Hays advise that "before we can decide what the word under study means, we must determine what it could mean".³⁷ The following list of texts will show all the semantic possibilities of the terms under study, which will help determine what is the meaning that applies to each one of them. Different versions will be used with the purpose of showing neutrality and objectivity.

• Matt 1:20, 24 “Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife” ... “And Joseph arose from his sleep… and took unto him his wife”; (ASV)

• Matt 2:13 “Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt (KJV)

• Matt 2:14 “So he got up, took the child and his mother (NIV)

• Matt 2:21 “And he arose, and took the young child and his mother (NKJV)

• Matt 4:5 “Then the devil took him to the holy city… (ESV)

• Matt 4:8 “the devil taketh him unto an exceeding high mountain (ASV)

• Matt 12:45 “Then it goes and takes along with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself”, (NASB)

• Matt 17:1 “And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart” (KJV)

• Matt 18:16 “But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you” (ESV)

• Matt 20:17 “On the way, he took the Twelve aside and said to them (NIV)

• Matt 26:37 “And He took with Him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee”, (NASB)

• Matt 27:27 “Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Praetorium” (NKJV)

• Mk 4:36 “they took him even as he was in the ship” (KJV).

• Mk 5:40 “But he… taketh the father of the child and her mother and them that were with him” (ASV).

• Mk 7:4 “And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups” (KJV).

• Mk 9:2 “Jesus took with Him Peter and [a]James and John, and *brought them up on a high mountain” (NASB)

• Mk 10:32 “…Again he took the Twelve aside…” (NIV)

• Mk 14:33 “And He took with Him Peter and James and John” (NASB)

• Lk 9:10 “And he took them, and went aside privately into a desert place” (KJV)

• Lk 9:28 “He took Peter, John, and James and went up on the mountain” (NKJV)

• Lk 11:26 “Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits…” (KJV)

• Lk 18:31 “And he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them…” (ASV)

• Jn 1:11 “His own did not receive Him” (NKJV)

• Jn 14:3 “I will come again, and receive you unto myself…” (KJV)

• Jn 19:16 “And they took Jesus, and led him away” (KJV).

There are other texts besides the Gospels that use this term, but despite their nuances, all the times basically means "to receive", "to take someone as a companion" and to place someone next to oneself to go to another place. After reviewing the use of this term in the New Testament and especially the Gospels, it can be noted that it is the favorite verb of the evangelists to talk about the action of Jesus to approach his disciples, to invite them to accompany him and go somewhere else to stay in private and more intimacy. This idea is the one that seems to fit the most with the context of the passage under study.

On the other hand, it can be shown that never, in any New Testament text, παραλαμβάνω means: take to appear in a trial, take to condemn, take for destruction, or take by surprise someone in flagrante delicto. It is not a semantic option. It simply does not exist with that meaning throughout the New Testament. It would be unprecedented in a serious exegetical procedure that a term is imposed on a meaning that did not have in its time and that the author never used with that connotation.

The meaning of ἀφίημι

The time has come to determine what is the meaning of ἀφίεται (left). First of all, it is necessary to review, according to the Diccionario del Griego Bíblico, in order to know which are the semantic options that there are for this term in the Septuagint: 1. Letting go, throwing (Lv 16:10); 2. Let go, let go (Pr 4:13); 3. Let go, go, absolve, forgive (Gen 4:13), cancel a debt (Deut 15: 2), leave a city without punishment (Gen 18:26), let someone go free (2 Chr 10: 4); 4. Leave behind, leave - as when one leaves and does not take someone with them - (Gen. 42:33, when Joseph's brothers had to leave one of their brothers).³⁸

In case of its use in New Testament, there is no much difference. According to the Friberg Lexicon, this verb has several semantic options, according to its respective context: "(1) send out or out, let go (Matt 27:50); (2) as a technical legal term of divorce (1 Co 7.11); (3) abandon, leave behind (Mtt 26.56); (4) of duty and obligation to reject, annul, neglect (Mk 7.8); (5) tolerance, let go, leave it alone, allow (Mk 11.6); (6) of sins or debts, forgiveness, cancellation (Lk 7.47); (7) Give or shout loudly (Mk 15.37).³⁹ Regarding the frequency or recurrence of the verb ἀφίηµι, it is possible to count 137 times in the LXX and 143 times in the Greek New Testament. In the latter the recurrences are distributed in the following way: 47 in Matthew, 2 in Romans, 3 in Revelation, 34 in Mark, 3 in 1 Corinthians, 32 in Luke, 2 in Hebrews, 15 in the Gospel of John, 1 in James, 3 in Acts and 2 in 1 John.

Following are some texts of its use in Matthew to present what he understood about this word in his time. Duvall and Hays say: “It will rarely be necessary to go beyond the circle of the same author to find the meaning of the word”.⁴⁰ It is impossible present more texts with the purpose to be brief. Once again, it is necessary to know which are the semantic options that this term has.

• Matt 3:15 “But Jesus answering said to him “Permit it at this time” (NASB)

• Matt 4:11 “So the Devil left him, and angels came…” (ISV)

• Matt 4:20 “And they straightway left their nets, and followed him” (KJV)

• Matt 4:22 “and immediately they left the boat and their father…” (NIV)

• Matt 5:24 “leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way” (NKJV)

• Matt 5:40 “And if any man … and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also” (KJV)

• Matt 6:12 “and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors” (NABR)

• Matt 8:15 “But when Jesus touched her hand, the fever left her” (NLT)

• Matt 8:22 “Jesus said unto him: Follow me and let the dead bury their dead” KJV.

• Matt 9:2 “Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven” (RSV)

• Matt 9:5 “For which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’” (RSV)

• Matt 9:6 “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (NASB)

• Matt 12:31 “All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men” (KJV)

• Matt 12.32 “And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him” (KJV)

• Matt 13:30 “Let both grow together until the harvest” (ASV)

• Matt 13:36 “Then he left the crowds and went into the house” (ESV)

• Matt 15:14 “Let them alone; they are blind leaders of the blind” (KJ21)

• Matt 18:12 “will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? (NIV)

• Matt 18: 21 ““Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him?” (NASB)

• Matt 18:35 “if ye from your hearts forgive not everyone his brother their trespasses” (KJV)

• Matt 18:27 “Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion… and forgave him the debt” (KJV)

• Matt 23:38 “And now, look, your house is abandoned and desolate” (NLT)

• Matt 26:56 “At that point, all the disciples deserted him and fled”. (NLT)

• Matt 27:50 “And Jesus cried again with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit”.

These are just some examples of how the semantics of this term, behaves in the first gospel to know what semantic options Matthew could have in mind. It would be suspect that only in this text would it mean something else not recognized in any serious source. As can be seen, in these recurrences there is a concept that goes through most of the cases: an idea of separation, dissociation, withdrawal, abandonment and similar nuances. Even when the term appears in the context of the "sins" of human beings, the fact that they are "forgiven" implies an idea that these accusations are separate and removed from those who have received this divine favor. Another semantic option that is observed is that of "allowing" "not to intervene with", which means, that this verb is used to refer to people or things that should not be intervened. Finally, the meaning of "forgive" only applies in those cases when the immediate context is connecting with the "sins" of people.

As can be seen, none of these recurrences means "left alive" or any such idea. That semantic option simply does not exist in the Gospel of Matthew or in the rest of the New Testament. It is inappropriate to affirm that αφιεται has a meaning that at the time of Matthew did not have. So, Bohr's argument⁴¹ is unacceptable according to this study. This is valuable evidence in favor of what the Bible is really saying, that the "left" is the abandoned one and is a representative figure of the thousands and millions who will be left behind that day, those of whom the Son of God will go away and will say: "Depart from me ..." (Matt 25:41). In addition, the immediate context contains a contrastive device that helps to determine the meaning of “left”. If the "taken" is the one who is taken as a companion, by contrast the "left" is the abandoned, the left behind. Finally, based on the textual evidence provided by the original language of Matthew 24:40 and 41, this study concludes that the "left" is a representation of all those who will be condemned to eternal death when Jesus Christ returns for the second time.

On the other hand, another evidence that is useful is that no other version translates these words in this way: “taken for trial”, “taken to be destroyed” (for παραλαµβανω) o “left alive” (for αφιεται). Below are some biblical versions, both in English and Spanish, for example, to show how different translation committees have determined about these terms in Matthew 24:40.

• NKJV: “Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left”.

• KJV: “Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left”.

• ASV: “Then shall two men be in the field; one is taken, and one is left”.

• ESV: “Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left”.

• NIV: “Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left”.

• NASB: “Then there will be two men in the field; one will be taken and one will be left”.

• NLT: “Two men will be working together in the field; one will be taken, the other left”.

• LBLA: “Entonces estarán dos en el campo; uno será llevado y el otro será dejado”.

• DHH: “En aquel momento, de dos hombres que estén en el campo, uno será llevado y el otro será dejado.

• NBD: “Estarán dos hombres en el campo: uno será llevado y el otro será dejado”.

• NTV: “Dos hombres estarán trabajando juntos en el campo; uno será llevado, el otro será dejado”.

• NVI: “Estarán dos hombres en el campo: uno será llevado y el otro será dejado”.

• PDT: “En esos días, dos hombres estarán trabajando en un terreno. Uno de ellos será llevado y el otro será dejado”.

• RVR1960: “Entonces estarán dos en el campo; el uno será tomado, y el otro será dejado”.

As it is notorious, none of these versions dares to translate: taken to be destroyed or left alive. To obtain those meanings, it is necessary to attribute them to παραλαµβανω and αφιεται because they do not have them by themselves. Then these meanings are within the sphere of interpretation, not within the sphere of translation. In that case, these meanings are not at all safe and rather, they are inadmissible because those meanings do not exist in the New Testament for those verbs. On the other hand, it should be added that none of the verbs under study is mentioned either in the Flood story or in the history of Sodom. Therefore, there is also no connection with the Greek of the LXX. It has been shown that this is not believed simply because it is assumed, but because there are evidences, verifiable and observable that prove it.

24:41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left (δύο ἀλήθουσαι ἐν τῷ μύλῳ, μία παραλαμβάνεται καὶ μία ἀφίεται).

The scene Jesus offers here shows two women who could come from the same family, face to face and turning a mill, each moving her hand in a 180-degree radius to grind grain. This verse, together with the previous one, constitutes a classic case of synonymous parallelism, in which the same idea is repeated, but some differences are notorious as well. As this text is a repetition of the previous one, also παραλαμβάνεται implies approach here, company, leaving with someone, or as James Strong says, is "to associate with oneself (in any familiar or intimate act or relation)".⁴²

On the other hand, ἀφίεται, means, as part of its contrastive parallelism, an opposing idea of distance, abandonment and taking different paths between people. The first is an acceptance term, the other a rejection term. Therefore, what Jesus wanted to teach with these parallel phrases is that, through the representative figure of a "taken", it is said that at his second coming He will come for a multitude of saved ones, which will be collected by the angels that will be sent to bring them to take them to another place, a better one, the kingdom of heaven.

24:42 Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming (Γρηγορεῖτε οὖν, ὅτι οὐκ οἴδατε ποίᾳ ἡμέρᾳ ὁ κύριος ὑμῶν ἔρχεται).

This text closes the inclusio device that began in verse 36: "the day and the hour nobody knows and "they do not know what day their Lord will come", which contains the emphasis of this section of Jesus's discourse. The idea that is wanted to increase is that the listeners should be vigilant, alert, awake, awaiting the eventual coming of Christ. The inferential conjunction οὖν indicates conclusion and everything that has been said previously within the inclusio, has the purpose of making people aware and decide to live permanently prepared for the second coming of Christ.

The relationship with Luke 17: 26-36

This passage is the other version of the section under study in Matthew 24. Its contributions repeat and amplify what Matthew recorded. Luke 17:26 establishes the point of contact between both stories, that is, "the days of Noah" with the form in which most of mankind will be living "when the Son of Man comes". As it has been said, Jesus Christ did not use the story of the flood to say who would be "taken" and who would be "left", but to put in parallel the careless and sinful way in which the wicked lived in the days before the flood and when it came, with the way that the wicked will be surprised during the second coming of Christ, because they did not watch or pray.

Vv. 28, 29 and 32 show a contribution that Matthew 24 does not record: "the days of Lot", as well as a list of verbs describing the mercantile, agrarian and architectural activities (ἠγόραζον, ἐπώλουν, ἐφύτευον, ᾠκοδόμουν) and that, all of them don’t appear in the Matthew’s description. As Matthew did, Luke shows that Jesus brings these images of the Old Testament to show impenitence, occupation in the daily affairs, lack of preparation and indifference in the "days" before the divine judgments. In parallel, both scenes present a remnant that is safe from destruction and in its counterpart, the wicked are annihilated. Verses 31 and 32 also add certain warnings for the great "day" of the Son of Man. Verse 34 adds the "bed" scenario, in which also "one will be taken and another will be left".

An interesting observation is that Jesus, every time He mentions both groups - saved and condemned - does it in the same order: He presents saved in the first place and then, He refers condemned group. Verse 27 mentions Noah in first place being saved and later mentions wicked being destroyed all of them. Verse 29 He mentions Lot in first place coming out of Sodom and then He mentions Sodomites being destroyed all of them. Verse 34 mentions in first place the one who is going to be "taken" and then the one who is going to be "left"; then vv. 35 presents the same order and vv. 36 as well. Therefore, the order in which both rewards appear, seem indicating once again, that the "taken" will be saved (Like Noah and Lot with their family), and the "left" will be condemned.

Theological and Pastoral Analysis

Before ending this exegetical study, it is opportune to add some brief theological reflections and some applications to the church today, which are derived from this passage.

Theological implications

In the Theological area, God has reserved the exclusive right to be the One in knowing the day and hour of the coming of Christ. God is righteous because, before a destruction, He gives opportunity by the example and/or the preaching of his servants.

In the Christological area, this passage mentions that the Son of Man, in his human stage, abstained from his omniscience and that’s why he did not know at that moment, the day and time of his second coming. This indicates that He is human as everybody and had no advantage over his congeners.

In the anthropological area, this passage infers that human being is not able to know the day and hour of the coming of Christ. Furthermore, the human being has free will and therefore, everyone can choose to believe in God like Noah and Lot, or choosing to be an unbeliever like their opponents. Finally, infers the equal treatment from God toward the human being. The possibility of saving or being condemned is the same for men as women. None of them will be discriminated. God has no favoritism.

In the soteriological area, this passage completely rules out universalism, since it categorically expresses salvation for some, but condemnation for others.

In the ecclesiastical area, this passage suggests that two people may be members of the same church, but one of them could be saved and the other not. If somebody is a member of the church, that is not a guarantee. If the member is "wheat" he will be saved but if someone is "tares", he will be condemned. The central advice of Jesus to His church is that every member needs to be permanently prepared, watching and praying, so that his coming doesn’t surprise him.

In the eschatological area, this passage says that nobody knows the day of the coming of Christ. Any attempt to establish dates for this event is useless. On the other hand, this passage discards the secret rapture theory, since it shows that God will send his angels to look for His sons when Jesus comes, and not before. In addition, the modus vivendi of humanity in the days of the flood and in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah is comparable to the lifestyle that will precede and be present when Jesus comes again. Both in past cases and the final day, humanity will be immersed in the indifference, sin, daily occupations, business, pleasure, etc., and Christ will surprise the ungodly without having prepared. Finally, Paul's advice is useful here: “But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief” (1 Tess. 5:4).

Pastoral applications

Thanks to passages like these, the church today can see the importance that each member lives permanently prepared for the second coming of Christ, since no one knows the day or the hour.

This passage teaches the Church that it is impossible to know the date of the coming of Christ, so any speculation on this issue should be discouraged and detract from all credibility.

Everybody as members of the church need to avoid getting involved in the hedonism, materialism, immorality and other tendencies that will characterize the life of the unbelievers before the coming of Christ. This attitude is a natural result that derives from "watch" and "pray".

Church members need to learn to apply an interpretative methodology that empowers them not only for personal study, but also for not believing in alarmist preachers or speculative theologians that can lead them to wrong conclusions about any passage of Scripture. This passage is a sample of how its original meaning can be distorted. The importance of exegesis as opposed to eiségesis here is highlighted.

Conclusions

1. Jesus attached to Matthew 24 the illustration of Noah, not to refer who will be taken and left, but to show how the antediluvian race became completely unconcerned with the exhortations of God expounded through Noah. This illustration exhorts Christians to watch and be prepared permanently so that the same thing does not happen to them. Noah's illustration was originally related to the preparation factor.

2. The relation of the verb with the participles of vv. 38 confirm that Jesus objective is to point out the negligent and sinful way in which the antediluvians lived. Time markers also confirm this perspective.

3. The verb παραλαμβάνεται, after doing a word study, can be concluded that it is a verb of reception, company and association. This is true both in the LXX and in the New Testament. It is the favorite verb of the evangelists to refer the act of approaching someone, take him as a companion and go elsewhere. This is especially so when Christ takes his disciples to take them apart. That is what Christ will do through his angels (24; 31) at his second coming.

4. The verb ἀφίεται, after doing a word study, it can be concluded that, although it is true it has other semantic options, the context and the implicit contrast favor what in this passage means is: "abandoned", "left (behind)". The meaning that some give to this verb: "left alive" doesn’t exist in the Greek of Matthew, nor in any of the uses in the New Testament.

Bibliography

Aland, Kurt, Matthew Black, Carlo M. Martini, Bruce Metzger and Allen Wikgren, eds. The Greek New Testament, 4th, ed. Edmonds, WA: United Bible Societies, 1983.

Bauer, Walter, W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2nd ed. Chicago, 1979.

Bibleworks 10, Friberg Lexicon.
Biblia de Estudio de Andrews; Ilumina, profundiza clarifica. Miami, FL: IADPA, 2014.

Blomberg, Craig L. The New American Commentary: An exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 1992.

Bohr, Stephen, Uno será tomado y otro será dejado (parte 1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHPRW-l69ZE

Bohr, Stephen. Uno será tomado y otro será dejado (parte 2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo6qbHMozbY

Carro, Daniel, José Tomás Poe y Rubén O. Zorzoli, eds. Comentario Bíblico Mundo Hispano, 4ª. Ed. El Paso, TX: Editorial Mundo Hispano, 2013.

Carson, D.A. y Douglas J. Moo. Una introducción al Nuevo Testamento. Barcelona: Editorial CLIE, 2008. Duvall, J. Scott and J. Daniel Hays, Hermenéutica: Entendiendo la Palabra de Dios Barcelona: Editorial CLIE, 2001.

Gaebelein, Frank E., ed. The Expositor´s Bible Commentary: with the International Version Matthew, Mark, Luke. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984.

García Santos, Amador Ángel. Diccionario del Griego Bíblico: Setenta y Nuevo Testamento, Editorial Verbo Divino.

Green, Joel, B. Scot McKnight, I. Howard Marshall, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels: A Compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992.

Hagner, Donald A. Word Biblical Commentary: Matthew 14-28. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1995.

Hare, Douglas R. A. Interpretation, A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching:Matthew Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1993.

Hendricksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1973.

Kittel, Gerhard ed. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1967.

Kittel, Gerhard, Gerhard Friedrich, y Geoffrey William Bromiley. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1985.

Metzger Bruce. Un Comentario Textual al Nuevo Testamento Griego (NY: Sociedades Bíblicas Unidas, 2006.

Mitch, Curtis y Edward Sri. The Gospel of Matthew. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group, 2010.

Montgomery Boice, James. The Gospel of Matthew: The Triumph of the King Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2006.

Nichol, Francis D. y Humberto M. Rasi, eds., Mateo a Juan, trans. Victor E. Ampuero Matta y Nancy W. de Vyhmeister, vol. 5, Comentario Bíblico Adventista del Séptimo Día. Buenos Aires: Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1995.

Osborne, Grant R. Matthew, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010.

Phillips, John. Exploring the Gospel of Matthew: An Expository Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1999.

Platt, David. Christ – centered Exposition: Exalting Jesus in Matthew. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2013.

Silva, Moisés ed. New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014.

Talbert, Charles H. Commentaries on the New Testament: Matthew. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010.