The Most Abused & Misused Verses in The Bible (Pt. 2)

Welcome to Truology, where we study Christian theology, philosophy, and apologetics. We do critiques on scholars, politics. We look into events in both classical and modern-day issues. We do interviews, debates, and much more.

Our goal is providing a Christian resource to edify the saints and to engage the community. But most of all, we want to glorify the Lord through our hearts, minds, souls, and strength. So, stay with us as we open up the Word of God and look into everything pertaining to life and godliness.

My name is Belushi Prevalon, coming to you from the Boston area, and right now, you are listening to Truology, the study of the truth, as it is in Jesus. Welcome back to Truology. On this episode, we will be continuing with part two of the most abused and misused verses of the Bible.

But before we get into that, I'd like to remind you that on YouTube, you can find me at DrBlueTheTruologist. On Instagram, I'm available through StudyOfTheTruth and on Spotify, Truology. The good thing about Spotify is I always put a poll there where you could vote for the next episode, and once this series is over, you'll be able again to participate.

But right now, what I've actually done on Spotify is I've made a poll asking whether you agree or disagree with the interpretation that I have been given on the most abused and misused verses of the Bible.

On X or Twitter, I am available at Bprevalon. And just like last episode, I want to start with the same quote that I opened with from N .T. Wright. And once again, I am not endorsing everything that N .T. Wright says, but I do think that this quote embodies and expresses exactly what we are dealing with in terms of hermeneutics and exegesis.

Well, I'm actually going to quote part of the quote here, where he says,. Now, this was N .T. Wright commenting on Doug Moo's consistent grappling with the text, and he admires him for the fact that instead of allowing his tradition to guide the meaning of the text, Doug Moo commits himself to what the exegesis compels him to believe.

And that's what I intend to do here on this episode. I want to compel you to believe what the text is actually saying in its context. Remember, once again, what I am not saying is that a verse cannot have multiple applications.

What I am saying is that exegesis must precede interpretation. Knowing that there is a science to Bible interpretation, and that this is not some esoteric thing that only trained professionals do, but something that I believe inherently that the middle schooler, the high schooler, the soccer mom, and as I said last time, even some of the PhDs among us can do.

The only difference is the difference of degrees, how much tools you have, the resources available to you, and what general culture has basically encouraged you to do so. Now, remember, we are addressing each verse that we're going to deal with on even part two of this episode based on its common abuse or misuse.

And before we actually start and get into some of the recap from last episode, I remember that I did define exegesis, but I didn't actually define hermeneutics. And I found a basic definition on the Internet.

I think that would be helpful for us. Hermeneutics being defined this way, hermeneutics and exegesis are sometimes used interchangeably, but hermeneutics is a wider discipline, which includes written, verbal, and nonverbal communication.

Exegesis, on the other hand, focuses primarily upon the word and grammar of the text. So you can think of it this way, hermeneutics are the broader principles that encompass and cause us to use the primary discipline of exegesis to bring out the meaning of a particular text.

On the last episode, we looked at Colossians 2 .8, and we concluded that the common meaning was usually stay away from philosophy. It's secular and pagan and dangerous for Christians to do. Don't bother.

All you need is the Bible, not philosophy. And we contrasted that with what I believe is the biblical meaning, which was Christians are to beware of a certain kind of philosophy, one that is not grounded in Jesus Christ, but born through men and their traditions.

In other words, one that is rooted in worldly understanding and the traditions of men and not after Christ. We need to do philosophy was basically my argument point, because philosophy encompasses putting together a worldview, and everyone has a worldview.

As a matter of fact, the common meaning that says stay away from philosophy is itself a worldview and a philosophy. Philosophy is inescapable. You either do it well or you do it really badly. Philosophy is transient to apologetics.

In the Bible, in 1 Peter 3 .15, we are called to give an answer and be ready always for the hope that lies within us. We cannot give an apologetic without a proper theology that necessarily brings about a thorough philosophy.

We also looked at Matthew 7 .13 -14, and the common meaning that we viewed through that was most people are going to hell, but only a very small amount actually make it to heaven. And contrasting with that was the biblical view from my studies, which was if you follow the unrighteous teachings of the Pharisees, you will live contrary to God's precepts and purposes in the law.

This, of course, will ultimately result in maybe a surprise at the judgment where Jesus will say, I never knew you. You've been living this whole time thinking you have been pleasing and living by God's ways, but in actuality, your heart was far from him.

And for some proof to that, in terms of what the sermon of Jesus was about, we went all the way back to Matthew 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7, and we looked a little deeper into what the purpose of the sermon was, which was that it was prophetic, where we see Jesus coming on the scene after the intertestamental period, after his forerunner, John the Baptist, preaching the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

We then see that the content of his sermon was around correcting falsehood, the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, which also had various elements of divine wisdom, which he would preach to his audience, calling them to follow the true shepherd, which he was, and giving them this kind of wisdom that would allow them to be able to discern false teachers, saying, by their fruits ye shall know them, speaking of the Jewish leaders and their corruption.

We ultimately concluded that the application of that verse in Matthew 7, 13 -14 was that it was about true righteousness in the Christian life. In other words, it was more about sanctification rather than salvation, right?

The most people are going to hell interpretation is ultimately not supported unless you want to cut that Bible verse out and leave it hanging on its own. What is supported in that text is that tradition kills.

The very next verse that we are going to deal with is one that is even more controversial than the two prior. It's going to be Matthew 24 -34. Now, before I get into it exactly, I want to ask a question.

What do you want? Do you want exegesis and hermeneutics to guide your interpretation? Or do you just want to believe what you're commonly taught or what the church atmosphere has always taken for granted?

We must understand that most people do not do exegesis. As a matter of fact, I am clear proof of that. Three years into my salvation and walk with the Lord, I never even heard of the word exegesis. The very first time I heard it, I thought the guy was talking about breakfast or something.

Ex in Jesus? What does that have to do with doing devotions in the morning? Exegesis is a primary Christian teaching and method of interpreting what the Word of God has said. Many, many, many people before us, Christians, believers, have done this and applied these tools and methods to get to the conclusions they have defended and articulated over the generations.

Most church culture today is really about inspiration and a sense of personal revival and not education. In other words, feeding the mind. There is a prominent Christian culture today that is still looming over us and its perspective is more of a pessimistic kind that sees, as we get closer to the end of history, that we will experience eventual defeat and a decline in Christian influence in society in total.

We must also understand that, before we get into this verse, that there is this typical assumption and application and method of what is called newspaper exegesis. Newspaper exegesis defined by me would be the use of current events to interpret or dictate whether we're getting closer to Bible prophecies.

I personally think this is very idolatrous and skews interpretation to a great degree. So, I must ask again, what do you want? Do you want a grammatical, historical context to guide us to the meaning of what Bible passages teach?

Or are we going to apply newspaper exegesis? When Jesus is saying a specific thing, do we close our Bibles, go look outside to see if those things have yet come to pass in our day? Or are we going to allow the context and the writer to bring out to us what is being said there?

Remember, my motto is, whatever you believe, defend it. And when it is brought under scrutiny, defend it in light of scrutiny. And if it stands, believe it. But if it falls, keep studying. My invitation to you is to comment and to respond to this podcast, maybe.

If you find something interesting, if you've learned something, if this has helped you in any way, comment, express yourself a little bit. But I am open to the discussion. I am not here saying that I am better than anyone or I know better.

I don't want to be that arrogant. I don't want to seem as if I know it all, but I am committed to expounding the Bible as I have studied it. And my intent is to call you to be responsible with the Word of God and what it says.

So, with that being said, let us start Matthew 24, 34. And it says, Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled. The common meaning is usually Jesus prophesies that things will go from bad to worse as we get closer to the time of the rapture, the great tribulation, and the second coming, which are events still yet in our future.

Opposed to that is what I believe to be the biblical meaning, which is that the destruction of the Jewish temple, the tribulation, and the coming of the Son of Man will take place during the lifetime of the present disciples.

Now, before you throw rocks at me, let's just consider a few things. First, the literature. There's a difference between interpreting things literally and literarily. What do I mean by that? If we interpret things uncompromisingly in a literal fashion, then we must conclude that when Jesus says, I am the door, that he is really made out of wood.

Now, that sounds ridiculous because it is. Instead, we should interpret things literarily, which means that we interpret things based on their respected genre. There's various kinds of genres in the Bible, and we must recognize them.

The Bible consists of wisdom, literature, poetry, laws, prose, historical records, and prophecy, which brings me to my second point, an important note here, that Matthew 24 is primarily prophetic, which means that we are going to run into things like hyperbolic language and the creation language, and we are going to run into quotes from previous prophecies.

For example, in verse 15 in the same chapter, Jesus mentions the abomination of desolation from Daniel. So, we must understand what Daniel was talking about and see the correlation and the relevancy to why Jesus is quoting it.

Third, Jesus is answering the disciples' questions. Now, obviously, this isn't too profound, but what I want you to understand here is that each answer flows from the other. The apostles, the then-disciples, are asking Jesus about the destruction of the temple and the coming of the end of the world, and each of the answers that Jesus gives flows from the other, and it is very instructive to the disciples and their experience, which brings me to this next point.

Matthew 24 is part of a greater chain of events beginning first in Matthew 21, beginning at the triumphal entry into Jerusalem and ending, finally, at the crucifixion. If you want to take a pair of scissors and cut out Matthew 24, I guess you could make it say whatever you want, but if you really want to commit to the greater context of Matthew 24, you're going to leave it in the Bible and realize that there is a succession of events that lead up to the Olivet Discourse, which is very relevant to the disciples' lives, which Jesus seems to disclose here.

Fifth, this isn't the first time that Jesus said that the coming of the Son of Man will be seen by those who are present. Now, what do you mean by that? Well, let's consider what happened at the assembling of the disciples in Matthew 10, verse 23.

Jesus assembles the disciples and then he says this, but when they persecute you in this city, talking to the disciples, who he just called to go two by two, he says, flee ye into another, for verily I say unto you, ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of Man be come.

Well, it is very obvious from this text that Jesus is saying that the apostles or then disciples were not going to finish evangelizing or going throughout the cities of Israel until before the coming of the Son of Man.

So this already puts some brackets around what the definition of the coming of the Son of Man must mean. Because here is Jesus saying that in your present time, while you're still doing this evangelistic work that I've called you to do, before you finish it, the coming of the Son of Man will take place.

That's very hard to deal with if we are going to project this and give it a different definition into the future. Secondly, to the Jewish prosecutors. In Matthew 26, when at Jesus' false trial, before he is sent to Pilate to be crucified, the high priest asks him about who he is, and Jesus says unto him, Thou hast said, nevertheless I say unto you, the high priest, or whoever is questioning him there, hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven.

So very obvious, once again, Jesus is saying to his present audience that very soon you are going to see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven. That's very interesting, isn't it?

Because we know that the high priest and those who had falsely tried Jesus have been dead for some 2 ,000 years now, and yet he is saying to them that they are going to see this event. And usually a common objection here is, oh, of course they're going to see him.

The book of Revelation says, every eye shall see him at the very end, but you see, Jesus' own words here give us the correct time frame upon which these events in regards to the sitting on the right hand of power and the coming in the clouds are going to happen.

He says, hereafter shall ye see. So that's the time frame to which we need to put these statements in regards to what the audience would have understood by his exact words. And of course we know exactly what their reaction was.

The high priest tears his garments and calls him a blasphemer because he is referencing what is said in Daniel that he is going to be the son of man who is anointed and worship is given to him. And with that being said, I just want to lead into the last thing we should consider before we dive into Matthew 24, and that's the reason why this is so controversial is really because of eschatological debates.

And there have been three eschatological views that have contributed to that debate over Matthew 24. And the first one is premillennialism, which sees the things that are happening in Matthew 24 as having more of a future fulfillment to us today.

And some proponents of this have been John Nelson Darby, who seems to have been the first systematizer of dispensational premillennialism. Other contributors to that same viewpoint have been D .L. Moody and Louis Barry Schaeffer.

The second eschatological viewpoint that seems to contend for Matthew 24 here is amillennialism, which sees the things being described by Jesus in Matthew 24 are things that have already happened in regards to us today in 2024.

So some proponents of this have been, you know, most particular Reformed Baptists like Adoniram Judson. One of the first articulators of this preterist approach has been St. Augustine in the Middle Ages.

And therefore, when they see Jesus prophesying of the great tribulation and the coming of the son of man, they see that as something that had taken place in the first century leading up to the destruction of the Jewish temple.

The third eschatological viewpoint that has contributed and contended for the interpretation of Matthew 24 is the one advocated for in this podcast, and that's postmillennialism, which also takes a preterist approach to the book of Matthew and the whole Bible, may I say, specifically the book of Revelation.

And some proponents of this have been Charles Hodge and Jonathan Edwards. Now, you might have some questions. You might be asking, how can the great tribulation have taken place in the disciples' time period?

The coming of the son of man is the final coming of Christ. Are you saying that that happened already? And what I would like to say is we have no authority to project what Jesus has said to other than what he has already stated.

Jesus has already defined and given us a time bracket for the great tribulation and the coming of the son of man. And by definition, if Jesus has said it, that's what we should attain to. What about the days of Noah and the rumors of wars statements?

Are you suggesting that that already took place? Well, you know, in 2024, if you say there's going to be wars and rumors of wars, people are literally going to roll their eyes at you because there's literally two of them going on right now.

As a matter of fact, in the last two generations, three generations, we have known nothing but war. But, you know, in the first century, during the Pax Romana, the Roman peace, where the Roman Empire is enforcing peace throughout its regions and constituents, to say there's going to be wars and rumors of wars was quite weighty and significant.

You might also be asking, oh, how could this possibly not be speaking of the rapture when it says two will be grinding at the mill and one will be taken and the other left? Didn't Jesus say that the gospel will reach the world before the end come?

All these questions, I believe, are specifically addressed in Matthew 24. And by going through the contextual proof and doing exegesis and applying a hermeneutic, I believe that we can come to the proper interpretation opposed to the common meaning that has been abused and misused.

So, let's get into Matthew 24. All right, so Jesus goes to the Mount of Olives and his disciples come to him privately and they ask him this question. Tell us, when shall these things be and what shall be the sign of thy coming and of the end of the world?

Now, why are they asking this? Well, in Matthew chapter 23, Jesus had just finished casting out woes and judgment towards the Jewish leaders because of their hypocrisy. And as they're leaving the scene, the disciples notice the beauty of the temple and they decide to ask what Jesus thinks of it.

And Jesus responds by saying not a single stone of this temple is going to be left upon the other. And you could probably imagine the draw-drop moment there. I can imagine Peter going, wait, what? You mean this temple, which has stood for our culture and our religion and God's covenant to us is no longer going to exist?

And I can imagine Jesus probably going, yes, it's not going to exist. And then, you know, kind of leading the way in a certain direction, which we are told that he went to the Mount of Olives. And, you know, in my head, this is just imagination here.

I can imagine the disciples probably holding back a little bit, talking amongst themselves. And then they finally go to Jesus, as it says here. They come unto him privately and they ask him these questions after kind of discussing it amongst themselves, kind of confused as they typically are.

And they ask him, you know, when shall these things be? What things? The destruction of the temple. And what shall be the sign of thy coming? And the reason why, you know, they might be asking the sign of thy coming is because, you know, Jesus had just basically pronounced judgment upon the Jewish leaders inside the temple moments prior.

So they clearly heard what he said and they seem to have correlated that with the destruction of the temple, which merits this question. And attached to that, the end of that question about his coming is also this question, and of the end of the world.

Now, many people would probably go, ah, see? Here, in the very opening of Matthew 24, we are being told that what the disciples are asking for in the questions and the answers that Jesus is going to give have to do with the end of the world.

Well, it's very interesting because the word for world in this particular sentence is not the word cosmos in the Greek. It's the word aeon, from which we get our English word eon, which is talking about a time period.

So, in other words, when the disciples ask about the end of the world, they're not talking about the literal physical cosmos or cosmos, the creation order. They're asking about the end of this time period, which is oriented around the significance of the Jewish temple and the Old Testament orders that are involved in it.

And Jesus' answers are then very relevant to the lives of the disciples in that same period. In verse 4, Jesus says, Take heed that no man deceive you. In verse 9, he says, Then shall they deliver you to be afflicted, and shall kill you, and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

Furthermore, in verse 15, he says, When ye, therefore, shall see the abomination of desolation. Whoa. When who? Christians 2 ,000 years later in 2024? When Christians who are present at the moment of the abomination of desolation?

No. Jesus is talking to his audience right now, which is Peter, John, James, and the rest of the disciples, most likely. And he's saying, When ye, therefore, shall see the abomination of desolation. And I'm going to stop here and ask one more time.

What do you want? Do you want exegesis, or do you want your traditions? Because very clearly from the flow of this text, the answers that Jesus is giving is very relevant to the lives of his current disciples.

And he here clearly states that they are going to be the ones that are going to be in the presence, or they're going to be the ones that are going to witness and see the abomination of desolation. At this point, if you are applying a preterist hermeneutic, you're probably going, uh-huh, okay, all right, go on.

But if you're seeing, in Matthew 24, in more of a futurist lens, then this is a little bit problematic, because usually we're thinking that, you know, those who are going to be in the presence of the abomination of desolation are typically those that are going to be the generation that is present during the Great Tribulational Period, while maybe the Church is absent from the world at this time.

And once again, I want to restate, you know, what do you want? Do you want to let the text tell you what it's talking about? And is it important enough for us to understand that Jesus is saying this to his disciples in front of him?

Or are we supposed to ignore that and actually project it past the very brackets that have already been established? As we go on here, in verse 16, Jesus says, Then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains.

Now notice, it doesn't say let them that be in the Boston area flee to Worcester County. No, it says, them that which be in Judea flee into the mountains. So this is very relevant to the region and location from which the disciples would clearly recognize, and it makes sense, because they're asking about what's going to happen in their very lifetime.

In verse 20, Jesus goes on and says, But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day. Now, another reference to something that they would have clearly understood and been very significant to their particular experiences.

The Sabbath day. In verse 25, Jesus says, Behold, I have told you before. So, you know, this is a true test of a prophet. You know, the book of Deuteronomy tells us that if a prophet has a failed prophecy, then, you know, if a prophet comes along and makes prophecies and they do not come to pass, that's a false prophet.

And Jesus here is basically putting himself in that same, you know, is not allowing himself to be below that standard which was already established by Moses who spake the word of God to the people. And he says, Look, I'm telling you right now, pay attention, realize and acknowledge that I'm telling you about this before it comes to pass so that when it does, you will ascribe to me the testimony of a true prophet.

So, whatever interpretation we want to give to this text, whatever hermeneutic principle that we want to apply, it must help us conclude that Jesus indeed was a true prophet because here he is telling his disciples this is how they will know.

Because he says, Behold, I have told you before. Now, let's go on. Verse 33, Jesus says, So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near even at the door. So, likewise ye, the disciples, when ye shall see all these things, what things?

The collapse of the physical cosmos or the end of the time period relevant to the temple and the destruction that Jesus has already annunciated towards the Pharisees. I think the latter for sure because, remember, this is part of a whole discourse being given to those disciples at this moment.

And verse 34, which is the text that we wanted to look at in the first place and to make some sense out of it, Jesus says, Verily I say unto who? The disciples. You, this generation shall not pass away until all these things be fulfilled.

So, we have gone from verse 4 to verse 34 now, and we have seen that whatever Jesus has said in this text has to do with a specific audience. We've now seen that this audience is not an audience that is disconnected by thousands of years later into our timeline in 2024, but it is rather the disciples standing before Jesus, hearing him disclose the events that will soon happen within a time frame relevant to their lifespan.

Now, at the end of all this, Jesus says this. He says, Watch therefore, for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. Very interesting. So, he gives them the general context of the events and what's going to happen to them leading up to those events, but he doesn't say precisely the day and the hour.

As a matter of fact, he calls them to pay attention and stay awake. Watch therefore, for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. And what does the coming of the Lord actually mean? Well, first of all, it doesn't mean, you know, like coming back to take me with you.

It means more of being near in terms of Advent. It implies this consequential presence. For example, ancient kings like Caesar would go into a certain region and he would be bearing a consequential presence upon that region.

You know, it's kind of like when you're at work and you're not really doing anything and then your manager comes in and all of a sudden you get kind of fearful and you start looking busy, right? There's a consequential presence there that kind of invokes you to make it look like you're doing something because you know that there are consequences because the one that is above you has come to bear witness to your actual actions.

Likewise, when Jesus says, when Jesus is talking about his coming here, he's talking about not just a coming to take you and go home with him, but rather a coming to stay and bring upon a certain judgment.

And it makes sense because in the prior chapter, Jesus did disclose those exact judgments. And those judgments came upon the covenant-breaking Jews, which were primarily represented through the Jewish leaders, the scribes and Pharisees.

In Matthew 23, verse 2, Jesus addresses their sins and he says, the scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. In other words, they've become proud and they've exalted themselves to a stature that is actually not God-given.

Furthermore, Jesus condemns them publicly. He says, Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men, for ye neither go in yourselves. For ye come past sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

Now remember, folks, this is not the happy-go-lucky Jesus that is seen on television and on paintings. This is the real Jesus, which was full of grace and truth, and he denounced unrighteousness to its face.

Kind of like what we are called to do, but we are supposed to do it in the spirit of meekness, but sometimes when breathing fire is necessary, we should feel morally indignant and unrighteous in bold sense so that we can decry those things that are in error, like Jesus did here.

He condemned the Pharisees publicly. Jesus then says that it will be them that will be guilty of judgment for his prophets. In Matthew 23, verse 34 and 35, we see this. He says, Wherefore, behold, I sent unto you prophets and wise men and scribes, and some of them ye shall kill and crucify.

So here is Jesus saying that the scribes and Pharisees, also represented through the covenant-breaking Jews throughout the land at this time, they're going to persecute those that Jesus is going to send.

I think the book of Acts clearly attests to the fulfillment of this. And he continues to go on. He says that upon you, scribes and Pharisees, may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth. Talking about all the prophets from old time up until this point are going to culminate in this final generation of scribes and Pharisees who are going to likewise do what their earlier fathers did in killing the prophets, and they are going to now kill Jesus' prophets and scribes and wise men, which are going to be the disciples who will later be the apostles persecuted by this same group.

Jesus then concludes the coming judgment that he is talking about in regards to his coming here. He says, Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. Whose house? The scribes and Pharisees, the covenant-breaking Jews.

Their house is left to them desolate. And their house would most likely at this time be in reference to the old covenant orders also represented through the temple. It's going to be desolate, which is an important note because in Matthew 24, that's exactly what Jesus describes.

And that's what the apostles, or back then disciples, asked about. When's the brick upon brick of the destruction of this temple going to actually happen? And Jesus here is saying that the scribes and Pharisees, their judgment, the judgment that is coming upon them is going to leave their house desolate, which means devastated, empty, with nothing standing.

It's going to be completely taken away from them. Absolute and utter destruction. For I say unto you, ye shall not see me henceforth, this is Jesus talking, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

And I believe we talked about that one earlier. Alright, and furthermore, this leads us into now, you know, Matthew 24. We were just going through Matthew 23 in regard in trying to define what Jesus is talking about when he's talking about his coming here.

And his coming is the coming judgment upon the scribes and Pharisees, which now leads us into the Olivet discourse disclosed in Matthew 24. And it's important also to note that, you know, sometimes we think that anything that Jesus did was kind of a brand new kind of thing.

You know, like when people, like, one great example of this is what I think we talked about in the last episode in regards to the Sermon on the Mount. Some people think just because Jesus says, oh, you have heard it say, but now I say unto you, Christians have defended the fact that, you know, the Old Testament was just about rules and external things, but Jesus came preaching spiritual love.

You know, that's not really, you know, in continuity with what the Old Testament laws actually meant because we disclosed last time, in last episode, that in the Shema is already stated the fact that God wants his words, his laws, to be in the people's hearts.

You know, if there was ever a source of spirituality, you know, it definitely is the heart or mind of man. And I say all that to basically say this, that all that Jesus did from Matthew 21 to 24 was essentially a rehearsal of the Old Testament.

Many things in the Old Testament were essentially pictures of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. For example, Leviticus 14, verses 33 to 45. You can go read it some other time. But in that passage, we find the high priest having to go into a house to examine it for the disease of leprosy, ridding all the walls and causing disease inside the home for the people therein and causing death.

And what the high priest was supposed to do was he was supposed to go into the house, examine the disease, have it evacuated and cleansed, and had it left for a while, and then after some time had passed, he was supposed to come back to see if the disease had fled and been exterminated, and then if it was, the people could now take up residence again.