Uncertainty of the Second Coming and Prophetic Contingency
Question: Dear Dr. White, Matthew 25:13 regarding the parable of the 10 virgins. Of course, you all remember that particular parable. Five were ready, five were not. And Matthew 25:13 specifically says, "Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour wherein the son of man cometh." Jesus is addressing the Jews. I completely agree. I think this is not about the rapture because the body of Christ, the mystery, has not yet happened. I completely agree. I think that there's the possibility that there's a similarity about the rapture, but things that are similar are not the same. So this must be the second coming. Yes, Matthew 25:13 must be the second coming. But we know that at the end of the tribulation, it will be easy for those left on earth who bother to read the Bible, especially Daniel and Revelation, that the second coming is nigh. So why is Jesus telling them to be alert, for they do not know when the son of man is coming? I hope this makes sense. Thank you once again.
You are right to locate Matthew 25 within Israel’s program and to distinguish it from the rapture. The parable of the ten virgins is works-oriented within a kingdom context, whereas the rapture concerns a body of people saved by grace through faith apart from works. Further, the mystery of the body of Christ had not yet been revealed, so this passage cannot be direct instruction about the rapture.
Your specific concern is how Matthew 25:13 can say that they do not know the day or the hour of the Son of Man’s coming if Daniel and Revelation lay out precise time periods, such as 1,260 days, 1,290 days, and 42 months, apparently allowing one to count to the second coming from clear “trigger points” like the abomination of desolation.
If those time periods were a rigid, non–contingent schedule, one might think that, once the abomination of desolation occurs, people could simply mark a date on the calendar. That raises the tension you see with "ye know neither the day nor the hour" Matt 25:13.
I do not believe that tension is resolved adequately by saying, “They did not yet know when the trigger points would occur.” The text does not say, “Watch for the trigger events so you will know the day,” but rather emphasizes that they do not know the day or hour of the Son of Man’s coming and calls them simply to watch.
Future Subscription: In the future a subscription may be required to read the full answer. But for now it is free!
This leads into the issue of prophetic contingency. Scripture repeatedly shows that God may announce time frames or threatened judgments and yet leave room within those declarations for human response to affect the outworking within certain bounds. Nineveh’s 40 days in Jonah is the classic case: God announced a fixed deadline, yet repentance altered the outcome, though not God’s character or ultimate purposes.
Similarly, the time periods in Daniel and Revelation set outer limits and structure, but they do not necessarily remove all contingency about the actual calendar day of the second coming. God has obligated Himself to a framework—He has given Israel a defined period for Jacob’s trouble and for repentance, for mourning “him whom they have pierced”—but He has not necessarily obligated Himself to a rigidly mechanical timetable in which every intermediate detail is fixed regardless of Israel’s response.
Under this view, the “42 months,” “1,260 days,” and “time, times, and half a time” mark the maximum bounds of a period within which God is pressing Israel toward repentance, not a mere countdown clock that lets human beings know the exact date, once a particular sign appears. They define the outer edge of what can happen, without revealing the inner dynamics of what might happen if Israel responds earlier or later within the period.
This is akin to a ruler who announces, “You have until this date,” and who genuinely uses the period to seek a desired response. He can be utterly faithful to His word and character and yet reserve to Himself the right to handle contingencies within that window. The timing of the enthronement of the Son of Man, then, is in God’s sovereign hand and connected to Israel’s response in a way that is not fully laid bare in the prophetic charts we often draw.
Watching as the Role of the Faithful
This understanding also alters our posture toward prophecy. If all is fixed in a rigid chronological sense, teachers function mostly as decoders of a set schedule, and believers might be tempted to treat prophecy as a detailed timeline to be mastered. But if much of prophecy is contingent within God-decreed limits, teachers function more as watchmen: pointing out what God has warned, what could unfold, and how repentance or rebellion might affect developments.
That is precisely the tone of Matthew 25:13. "Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh." The call is not to compute but to remain spiritually alert, faithful, and ready in the midst of uncertainty about the precise moment when God will bring the Son to His throne.
Thus, even in the tribulation with its revealed time frames, the people addressed cannot simply convert those numbers into an exact calendar date. The contingencies tied to Israel’s response and to God’s sovereign management of the period mean that “ye know neither the day nor the hour” remains literally true. Their duty is to watch, to be prepared, and to respond as God instructs, rather than to rest in a charted calculation.
Under this framework, Matthew 25:13 fits with Daniel and Revelation, because those books give the outer shape of the tribulation and its limits, while Matthew emphasizes that the precise day and hour of the Son of Man’s coming remain in the Father’s hands and are not a matter of human calculation, even for those who live through that time with Scripture in hand.
questiontransition