Category Archives: Uncategorized

Daniel 7: Past and Future?

Leave a reply

Unless otherwise noted, Scriptural quotations are from the New Revised Standard Version

Earlier in this series of posts, we looked at Daniel Chapter 9, and examined the prophecies of “70 weeks,” the temple’s rebuilding, the Messiah’s ministry, and the eventual destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. I made the case that all of those prophecies were fulfilled by 70 A.D.

Daniel Chapter 7 is a place where similar events are described, and many commentators believe that Chapter 7 depicts the same time period as Chapter 9, although there is disagreement as to whether the fulfillment is past or future.

I believe there is sufficient evidence to say that most of Daniel 7 had a literal fulfillment in the first century. There is a thorough explanation of the first-century interpretation on the Revelation Revolution website, in their article “Daniel 7: A Preterist Commentary.” In this post, I will bring out some key points of that article, but I would recommend reading the whole commentary if you are interested in this subject.

If you want to jump to the section where I discuss a possible future fulfillment, skip down to the section with the heading “Potential Future Fulfillment.”

 

First Century Perspective

Daniel 7:24-27 – Ten kings shall arise, and another shall arise after them. This one shall be different from the former ones, and shall put down three kings. He shall speak words against the Most High, shall wear out the holy ones of the Most High, and shall attempt to change the sacred seasons and the law; and they shall be given into his power for a time, two times, and half a time. Then the court shall sit in judgment, and his dominion shall be taken away, to be consumed and totally destroyed. The kingship and dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the holy ones of the Most High; their kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey them.

The Ten Kings in the prophecy could be the leaders of the ten cohorts operating under General Titus and Emperor Vespasian in the destruction of Jerusalem. Alternatively, the Ten Kings could be ten Caesars of the Roman Empire. The king who arose after them in the prophecy could be General Titus, the son of the tenth Caesar, Vespasian. The prophecy says that the new king would put down three other kings.

After the death of Emperor Nero, there was a battle for the emperor’s throne, and Titus and Vespasian defeated three other contenders (Galba, Otho and Vitellius), each of whom briefly ruled in 69 A.D. After that victory, Titus and Vespasian co-ruled the empire, with both of them having the title Caesar. Titus committed blasphemous acts in the temple and sought to alter Jewish customs as described in the prophecy.

Thus far, the first century interpretation makes sense. However, at the end of the passage quoted above, we encounter the same “problem” that we had with 2nd Thessalonians in the last post. Daniel describes the coming of the Messiah and the new Kingdom Age in the same context as the aforementioned war – “the court shall sit in judgment, and his dominion shall be taken away, to be consumed and totally destroyed. The kingship and dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the holy ones of the Most High.”

Obviously, this did not happen in a literal sense during the first century. In my post on the Olivet Discourse of the Gospels, I described a way in which the Bible allows us to infer a prolonged gap of time between the first century events and the future return of Christ. The big question is whether the Bible prophecies a specific recurrence of conflict between the Jews and surrounding kingdoms that will take place right before Christ returns.

 

Potential Future Fulfillment

In Daniel 7:1-8, four animals are described (a lion, a bear, a leopard, and an ambiguous creature). Those four animals could represent four religious-backed alliances (a Buddhist alliance, a Hindu alliance, an Islamic alliance, and a Christian alliance). This was the view held by A.E. Knoch, the founder of the Concordant Publishing Concern. His views are outlined in the book Concordant Studies in the Book of Daniel. Key points and quotes from his commentary on Daniel 7 can be found in the article “The Four Great Beasts” by Lorraine Day, M.D.

Also, on the website of the Concordant Publishing Concern, there is an article by A.E. Knoch titled “The Three Eastern Beasts” from his series “The Mystery of Babylon,” which addresses describes Daniel 7 in conjunction with Revelation.

The first animal, the Lion, could represent a Buddhist alliance. The Concordant Literal New Testament describes the Lion as an “eastern animal.” Of the four major religions in the world, Buddhism is the easternmost religion. The Lion was described as having “eagle’s wings,” implying an ability to spread across regions. This may represent the spread of Buddhism from its origin in India to East and Southeast Asia. The Lion was also given a “human mind.” This may symbolize Buddhism’s focus on humaneness and ethics (Concordant Studies in the Book of Daniel, p. 222, quoted in “The Four Great Beasts” by Lorraine Day, M.D.).

Looking to the future, it is very conceivable that an Asian alliance of nations could form with China as its head, given China’s dramatic rise in economic and political power. If this relates to Daniel’s prophecy, the alliance is likely to have the backing of Buddhist leaders in Asia.

The second animal described is a bear. Given that the Lion was the “eastern animal,” it makes sense that the Bear would be slightly west of the Lion. If you start in East Asia and travel west, the next major religion you will encounter is Hinduism in India.

Daniel wrote that the Bear “was raised up on one side” and “had three tusks in its mouth” (v. 5). A.E. Knoch believed that this passage depicts the Caste System. In this interpretation, the part of the bear “raised up” is the Brahman priestly caste. The three tusks in the Bear’s mouth are the three castes beneath the priests. Note that unlike the Lion, there is no mention of wings on the Bear. This could symbolize the fact that Hinduism’s spread beyond India has been very limited (Concordant Studies in the Book of Daniel, p. 222, quoted in “The Four Great Beasts” by Lorraine Day, M.D.).

Today, India is another country that is rapidly growing economically. With a population of 1.3 billion, more than one sixth of the world’s population, I could imagine India as a stand-alone, Hindu-backed empire to compete with the other three in the prophecy.

Continuing westward, the next religion we encounter is Islam, in the Middle East. Islam may be represented by the Leopard in Daniel’s prophecy. The Leopard had “four wings” (v. 6). If wings symbolize spread of a religion, Islam’s rapid spread, both historically and in the present day, is noteworthy. Islam is the fastest-growing religion in the world today, according to a 2015 Pew Research study. The world’s Muslim population is projected to have a 70% increase by 2050, and Muslims are expected to comprise 10% of Europe’s population by then.

Daniel wrote that dominion was given to the Leopard (v. 6). We know that the Middle Eastern nations play a major role in global politics and economics. The “four heads” of the Leopard (v. 6) could represent four Islamic nations that will form an alliance near the end of this age.

Continuing westward, we encounter the parts of the world that A.E. Knoch refers to as “Christendom,” Europe and the Americas (Knoch, “The Three Eastern Beasts”).  Now, the obvious question would be, if we believe that Christianity is the one true religion, why does the prophecy group Christianity in with other religions, and why does it describe the fourth animal as evil and violent?

First, I believe this prophecy is NOT talking about individual practitioners of any of these religions. Knoch describes the relationship of religions to kingdoms in Daniel 7 as follows:

“The fourth beast is repeatedly called a kingdom and it includes ten kings. If then, these are kingdoms, what relation do they sustain to the temple and to Israel as the priest nation? In ancient times religion was a matter of state. Nebuchadnezzar was neither the first nor the last to demand religious as well as political submission. As the wild beast, or its head, the anti-christ of the future will demand more than political fealty. He will have the worship of all mankind. His image will be the object of divine honors far above that accorded the most exalted potentate. The clash between Israel and the nations at the time of the end will arise out of their refusal to worship the image, rather than a breach of political faith. All of this leads us to the conclusion that the beasts of Daniel and the composite beast of Revelation are kingdoms in which religion is directly or indirectly a matter of state (“The Three Eastern Beasts”).

Thus, the prophecy deals with characteristics of nations that claim a particular religion as their basis, not the spiritual status of the religions at their core. Note that, what we see from European history is that church-run governments have the potential to turn violent and oppressive. The problem is not the true Christian religion, which is founded upon Scripture, but rather, faulty ideas about God and man’s role that corrupted the church. Similar corruption of the Christian faith could occur in a future Christian confederation.

What Daniel’s prophecy seems to indicate is that a Christian alliance of nations will eventually form in the Western world. The current European Union is a secular union. This is why I believe that if this future interpretation of Daniel comes to pass, the current European Union will be dissolved. The United Kingdom’s recent exit could be the start of this. What would eventually form is a new, religious European Union, that could very well include the Americas too. In the prophecy, the fourth animal had “ten horns” (v. 6). This could represent leaders of ten nations forming the new union.

The prophecy later says that a new horn rose up in place of three that fell off, and that the new horn had defeated those three. This could symbolize some sort of new leader arising and exposing political scandals involving three other leaders of the new union, forcing them to step down. However, as the prophecy will later reveal, this new leader himself is far from righteous.

With this political conflict in mind, it is worthwhile to consider the increasing tendency for countries to meddle with each other’s political processes. Organizations like Wikileaks are creating new platforms for such interference.

The new, Western leader depicted in the prophecy, and its supportive organizations, could be privately affiliated with any religion, or no religion at all. However, if this future scenario comes to pass, I think the leader will be guised as Christian in some way or another.

Once this leader gets into power, he or she will likely get the world’s other three alliances (East Asia/Buddhist, India/Hindu, Middle East/Islam) to cooperate with the Western alliance on common objectives for the world. This persuasion is likely to be made by finding common ground across the world on issues of both politics and religion. This absorption of the other alliances is implied by Revelation Chapter 13, which depicts a beast resembling that of Daniel 7, but with all four animals combined into a single creature (Knoch, “The Three Eastern Beasts”).

It is likely that the Western leader would act supportive of Israel at first, and may even support Israel in reconstructing the Jerusalem temple. However, the Western leader will eventually turn on Israel and go to war against them (Dan. 7:24-25). This leader may also persecute Christians who do not support his or her agenda, or whatever form of Christianity is favored by the government. If the “time, two-times, and half-a-time” of Daniel 7:25 is to be literal, this war would last for 3.5 years.

However, the prophecy continues to say that this leader’s reign will be stopped (v. 26). It is not said exactly how this will happen. It is possible that it will occur through the actual return of Christ, or perhaps, shortly before Christ returns, there will be a political revolution that removes the leader from power.

I do not necessarily believe that the aforementioned war will involve global destruction. Using the period of 66-70 A.D. as a precedent for fulfillment, there was some sporadic violence throughout the ancient Roman empire as well as natural disasters, but the only severely affected areas were Jerusalem and surrounding regions. The Apostle Paul wrote to the church at Thessalonica that the Rapture would come at a time when people are saying “peace and security” (1 Thess. 5:1-2). The Thessalonians were within what is modern-day Greece. Thus, while there could be some elevated violence and other crises throughout the world in the final years of this age, most people will likely, for the most part, be carrying on as usual in the years right before the Rapture.

It is after the Rapture, during a brief period before Christ’s arrival on earth, that it appears disasters will severely affect the entire world (1 Thess. 5:1-3, 2 Thess. 1:5-10). However, if you look at the passage from 2 Thess. 1, note that the destruction is directed toward those who are rebellious against God. Even though the Rapture only includes believers who are in the Body of Christ, there are people outside of the Christian faith who are striving to do what is right in accord with their conscience, are resisting their selfish passions, and live according to the principles which Jesus taught. I feel that there is good reason to think that these people will be protected on earth during the period right before Christ’s arrival on earth. In Jesus’ many parables about His coming kingdom, those granted access are those who do good works in accord with love for others.

On the other hand, the significance of being a believer, as described in Paul’s writing, is about entering into a special kind of relationship with the Lord based on justification (Rom. 3 – 8), being made a new creation spiritually (2 Cor. 5:17), and having a special role in the coming ages (Eph. 2:7). However, I do not believe this is the baseline message of salvation in Scripture. Rather, it is a special salvation for believers in this age.

The advantage of being a believer is that, through the Rapture, there is absolute assurance of protection from the calamities that will occur right before Christ arrives on earth to establish a new eon for the world.

 

Concluding Thoughts

As I mentioned earlier, this entire future fulfillment of Daniel 7 is not something that I am absolutely sure will happen. However, in light of the fact that prophecy is not confined to a particular era, but instead, is being continually fulfilled throughout human history, I found it worthwhile to consider possible clues in Daniel about a future fulfillment to take place shortly before Christ returns and the present age comes to a close. The interpretation of Daniel 7 described in this article makes sense to me based on the spiritual perspectives on the world and religions that I have arrived at through thematic analysis of Scripture in general.

I want to close this article by saying that, I am not encouraging people to completely separate themselves from institutional Christianity due to anything I have written. Furthermore, I am not saying that it is wrong for religion to play a role in politics. Rather, what I am writing against is enslavement to religious systems. This enslavement can manifest itself in forms such as, feeling guilty to differ on points of doctrine, feeling obligated to pledge support to various missions or political agendas, or feeling obligated to stay with a church even when that fellowship is not yielding anything beneficial to one’s life. If you can be a member of a church without being chained to the system in this way, then that is perfectly fine, and you are not at risk of religious deception.

Having looked at prophecies contained within the Bible itself in recent posts, the next matter to discuss would be, what to think of prophecies that Christians claim to receive from God today. I believe that our examination of Biblical prophecy will provide a helpful framework for thinking about modern-day claims of supernatural revelation.

 

Works Cited

Knoch, A.E. Concordant Studies in the Book of Daniel. Concordant Publishing Concern, 1968.  qtd in Day, Lorraine, M.D. “The Four Great Beasts: What or Who Are They?” The Good News About God. Spencer Publishing. 2006.     http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com/studies/current_news/home_study/daniel7.htm

Knoch, A.E. “The Three Eastern Beasts.” Concordant Publishing Concern, n.d., Web.                 http://concordant.org/expositions/the-mystery-of-babylon/13-three-eastern-beasts/

Morais, Daniel. “Daniel 7: A Preterist Commentary.” Revelation Revolution. n.p., n.d., Web. http://revelationrevolution.org/daniel-7-a-preterist-commentary/

“The Future of World Religions: Population Growth Projections, 2010-2050.” Pew Research Center, 2 April 2015, Web. http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/

2nd Thessalonians and the Future of this Age

Leave a reply

As I have written in preceding posts, I believe the prophecies of Daniel and Jesus had a fulfillment during 0 – 70 A.D. But, as I showed in the most recent post, prophecy is not confined to a particular period of time. The spiritual factors at play in the first century are still at play today, and will continue to be so throughout this age. So, the question becomes, in addition to the first century fulfillment, are there any other fulfillments prior to Christ’s return that are specifically addressed in Scripture? Although I am not really dogmatic about this matter, I do find some evidence for a future fulfillment.

First, let’s revisit 2nd Thessalonians.

“As to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we beg you, brothers and sisters, not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as though from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord is already here. Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come unless the rebellion comes first and the lawless one is revealed, the one destined for destruction. He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, declaring himself to be God. Do you not remember that I told you these things when I was still with you? And you know what is now restraining him, so that he may be revealed when his time comes. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work, but only until the one who now restrains it is removed. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy with the breath of his mouth, annihilating him by the manifestation of his coming (2 Thess. 2:1-8).”

There are several things important to note here. The first is that Paul opens the chapter by mentioning the “coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” and then tells the church not to worry about rumors that the “day of the Lord” had already come. Thus, the context seems to indicate that the “day of the Lord” is synonymous with the Rapture and associated events,  described in Chapters Four and Five of First Thessalonians.

Paul writes that two events must precede the Day of the Lord. The first is “the rebellion.” I consider this rebellion to have been fulfilled in the first century. Many of the late-New Testament writings describe a serious departure from the Gospel taking place in their day. For example, in 2nd Timothy Paul writes,

“You are aware that all who are in Asia have turned away from me (1:15).”

“Alexander the coppersmith did me great harm; the Lord will pay him back for his deeds. You also must beware of him, for he strongly opposed our message. At my first defense no one came to my support, but all deserted me. May it not be counted against them! (4:14-16)”

Also note some passages from the epistle of Jude:

Jude 4: “For certain intruders have stolen in among you, people who long ago were designated for this condemnation as ungodly, who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.”

16-19: “These are grumblers and malcontents; they indulge their own lusts; they are bombastic in speech, flattering people to their own advantage. But you, beloved, must remember the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; for they said to you, ‘In the last time there will be scoffers, indulging their own ungodly lusts.’ It is these worldly people, devoid of the Spirit, who are causing divisions.”

But now, what about the “man of lawlessness” that Paul describes, who “takes his seat in the temple of God, declaring himself to be God.” In light of all the other prophecies we have looked at, and the events of 66-70, it is tempting to say that the man of lawlessness was the Roman General Titus, who led the destruction of Jerusalem and was worshipped in the temple by other Roman officers. However, a “problem” for this interpretation comes in Paul’s statement that the man of lawlessness would be destroyed at the time of Christ’s return. Since Titus did not die in 70 A.D., and Christ did not physically return, could these prophecies be awaiting a future fulfillment?

First, keeping in mind that Bible prophecy is not strictly confined to certain eras, I consider it a valid interpretation to say that, while the physical person known as the man of lawlessness lived and died in the past, the spirit which drove that person to do the things he did is still alive today, and has infected various individuals throughout history. That spirit will not be destroyed until Christ returns and establishes a new spiritual order.

I also find Scriptural evidence for this interpretation. For example, the Apostle John wrote,

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming; and now it is already in the world (1st John 4:1-4).”

John depicts the antichrist as a spirit that was alive in his own day, inspiring false prophets. This suggests that the concept of antichrist in Scripture is not limited to a single, physical individual. Undoubtedly, this spirit will find its way into some evil individuals at the time Christ returns, just as it has throughout history. Now, the big question is, does the Bible say anything about a specific person who will be possessed by this spirit at the time Christ returns? I believe that evidence of such a person may be hidden in the text of Daniel 7. In the next post, we will examine that in detail.

What We Can Learn from the First Century Fulfillment of Prophecy

Leave a reply

In the last two posts, I discussed prophecies of Daniel and Jesus, and explained how I believe they were fulfilled in the first century, through the death and resurrection of Christ, the coming of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost, and the Jewish-Roman War. However, I want to emphasize now is that prophecies are not confined to a particular era. The spiritual factors at play during the first century fulfillment are still at play today. But I believe that recognizing the first century fulfillment enables us to gain insights into what is going on spiritually in the world today.

In the “Daniel 9” part of this series, I mentioned how, in the early church, many Christians, including genuine, spirit-filled believers, were trying to continue following the Mosaic Law of the Old Testament. Paul denounced the mixing of the law with the gospel of grace (Gal. 2:12, 3:1-5), but the controversy never ended. The proof that the outward ordinances of the Law were no longer binding on the world came when the temple was destroyed. The temple was meant to be a physical symbol of righteousness, and a place through which people would come to God. However, the fall of the temple symbolized the end of the flesh trying to do Law. It symbolized the end of outward reforms and ordinances to produce inward righteousness.

When this is realized, it provides insights into the social and spiritual conflict going on in the world today. I want to share my insights on what is happening today with moral condition of the United States. Many Christians believe that we are living in a time of moral decline. However, what I believe is happening, is that many people, especially young people, are realizing that they cannot make their flesh cannot obey what their church is telling them, or even what the Bible is telling them. And there are various forces in the media systems who are telling these people that they should just live in whatever way feels natural to them.

I believe that the spirit behind the Romans’ destruction of the temple is the same spirit that is in the media systems who are telling people they can live however they are inclined. I am not denying that it is a spirit of animosity toward God. However, in both cases, I believe that God allows that spirit to run its course in order to vindicate the gospel of grace. God is not panicking about this generation turning away from conservative morality. There is a method to the madness. We need to understand this in order to properly react to the things going on today.

First, I believe our starting point should be the realization that, were it not for the grace of God shown to us, we would be like the people who are disregarding Biblical morality. The fact that you are different – the fact that you are still seeking to live according to the Scriptures despite being told through the media to live as you please – indicates that God has chosen you for a special purpose and set you apart. None of us were wise enough to choose God on our own initiative.

Once that is understood, we can realize what the gospel of grace produces, or rather, what it fails to produce. A key element in the paradigm of grace is “no confidence in the flesh” (Philippians 3:3). Thus, we can understand the real problem with the liberal agenda that is turning people away from Biblical morality. The problem is not their denial that everybody can make themselves live a certain way. Instead, the problem is that, instead of believing in the true gospel of grace, they try to redefine morality. They are trying to modify Biblical commandments to fit the 21st century and redefine what it means to be a responsible person.

However, I believe that God is allowing this to happen in order to demonstrate His grace. I believe that God is calling out certain people who are in this situation and leading them to writings and ministries that acknowledge the struggle with the flesh they are dealing with, but also reveal the truth of justification and show how faith in the gospel can bring them into a new way of life, empowered by the Holy Spirit, instead of the flesh trying to reform itself. (Rom. 8:1-11).

Lastly, I want to address the commonly held belief that God allows disasters to happen in order to bring nations to repentance. The war and political unrest of 60-70 A.D. did not make Rome a godly empire. Although there was some unrest throughout the empire, the intense destruction only took place in Jerusalem and surrounding areas. Many worldly, immoral people in other parts of the empire carried on as usual. After the conflict period of 60 – 70 A.D., Rome resumed its peak era for at least another century, despite continued persecution of Christians and Jews, and other kinds of immorality.

I bring this up because many Christians today are directing the “end-times” prophecies at worldly sinners everywhere. But when these prophecies came to a literal fulfillment in the first century, outside of Jerusalem and surrounding regions, life more or less carried on as usual despite some elevated conflict. When Jesus was on earth, he told when to flee Judea, and where to go. Anybody could have left, and been safe through the war, even if they were living in sin. We cannot truly say that this war was a judgment upon the world for its sins.

Yet in current times, I hear many Christians on the internet declaring that any day now, God is going to allow all kinds of calamities to come upon the United States as judgment upon sinners, and that through these crises, God will bring about a great revival. But is that really how God’s judgments work? I have not found historical evidence of a great revival during 66-70 A.D. And the same could be said about times of crises today.

Regarding God’s judgments, J. Preston Eby writes,

“Often they [Christians] quote the scripture . . . “When Thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness” . . .   But have any of these [disasters], even one of them, in the history of the world, ever caused the world to LEARN RIGHTEOUSNESS?  That is the question . . .  Do you suppose the people who died in the twin towers were greater sinners than the rest of the people in America?  . . . When God “judged” southeast Asia with the tsunami, do you suppose it was only the people in the coastal areas that were wicked, and deserving of God’s wrath? . . . [Was God] really out to “teach them righteousness” through these terrible events?  Is Thailand now a righteous nation?  Have they abandoned their false gods and stopped the filthy sex industry?  Is Sri Lanka now a godly country?  Has Indonesia ceased to harass and persecute believers, and now become a sweet Christian nation?  Has anything changed in India since the disaster?  DID EVEN ONE OF THOSE NATIONS, OR EVEN ONE CITY IN ONE OF THOSE NATIONS, LEARN RIGHTEOUSNESS BY THE “JUDGMENT”?  Answer that question correctly and you will know a great mystery concerning the ways and purposes of God!”

 

I believe it is not during this age that the nations of the world will undergo judgment and learn righteousness. It is during the future age of the Messianic Kingdom that a new spiritual order will be established on the earth, and then, judgments upon the nations will bring them to a state of righteousness.

So, then, what is happening with the things going on in the world today? I believe that God can work through crises to bring about redemptive outcomes for those predestined for salvation in this age. Ephesians 1:11 says that believers are “destined according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to his counsel and will.” Romans 8:28 says that “all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose.” The details of how predestination works, or how God is involved or uninvolved with various events in the world, are matters which I am generally not dogmatic about. But I do not believe that God causes or allows disasters to happen as a judgment upon nations for their sins.

When the first-century fulfillment of prophecy is understood, it sheds much light on what is going on in the present day. My next post in this series will examine whether the prophecies from Daniel, and also the New Testament, reveal any things that are to happen in the future before the return of Christ.

 

Works Cited

Eby, Preston J. “From the Candlestick to the Throne Part 95.” Kingdom Bible Studies. Kingdom Bible Studies, n.d., Web. 9 August 2016.

Prophecies of the Olivet Discourse

Leave a reply

Scriptural Quotations are from the New Revised Standard Version

The Olivet Discourse is a name which Biblical commentators often give to the prophecy that Jesus spoke to his disciples on the Mount of Olives. The prophecy is recorded in Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, and Luke 21, and it discusses the future of the world as it was known to Jews of that era. We will look at Matthew’s account first.

Jesus’ prophesy starts at the beginning of Matthew 24.

Matthew 24:1-3 – “As Jesus came out of the temple and was going away, his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. Then he asked them, ‘You see all these, do you not? Truly I tell you, not one stone will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down.’ When he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, ‘Tell us, when will this be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?’”

There are several important things to note. The disciples were admiring the temple that was standing in their own day. Jesus then warned them not to get too attached to it by predicting that it would be destroyed. That must have worried the disciples, because they privately asked Jesus for more information about three things:

  1. When would the temple be destroyed?
  2. What is the sign of Christ’s return?
  3. How would they know when the end of the age was near?

If the disciples asked these questions, obviously they were familiar with the passages of Daniel that we looked at earlier. Daniel indicated that the destruction of the temple would happen near the end of the “seventy weeks,” which also meant the end of the Biblical age in which they were living. The tricky part is Christ’s return. Daniel’s writing appeared to say that the Messiah would come around the same time that the temple was destroyed and the seventy weeks concluded (Dan. 7:25-27, 12:9-12). That is why the disciples also asked about Christ’s second coming.

The critical points are that the disciples were staring at the temple of their own day and asking about it, and Jesus’ prophecy was given as a 2nd person narrative, indicating that the events prophesied were events that the disciples themselves would live to see (if they were not martyred first).

In Matthew 24:6-8, Jesus said,

“You will hear of wars and rumors of wars; see that you are not alarmed; for this must take place, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places: all this is but the beginning of the birth pangs.”

The Roman Empire went into a state of unrest when Nero became emperor as described in the following commentary from Revelation Revolution,

“During Nero’s reign Rome went to war with the Parthians, there was a war in Britain and there were various other rebellious disturbances across the empire. All these uprisings and wars immediately preceded the Jewish War in fulfillment of vs. 6-7. Then in A.D. 66, toward the end of Nero’s reign, the province of Israel revolted against Rome. While the Israelites fought the Romans, they also turned their weapons against each other; and civil war broke out all over Israel between those wanting peace and those seeking sovereignty. Then in A.D. 69, the disease of civil war spread to the rest of the Roman Empire” (quoted from Matthew 24 Fulfilled)

The commentary also describes earthquakes and famines taking place in that era,

“During the reign of Claudius Caesar, the emperor immediately preceding Nero, a colossal famine struck the Roman world. Concerning this famine, James Stuart Russell writes, ‘In the fourth year of his [Claudius] reign, the famine in Judea was so severe, that the price of food became enormous and great numbers perished.’ One example of the earthquakes mentioned in v. 7 is the earthquake that struck Laodicea sometime between A.D. 60 and A.D. 64 during the reign of Nero. It is interesting to note that one of the churches addressed by John in the Book of Revelation was a church in this city (Revelation 3:14-22). Prior to A.D. 70 there were also earthquakes in Crete, Smyrna, Miletus, Chios, Samos, Hierapolis, Colossae, Campania, Rome and Judea” (quoted from Matthew 24 Fulfilled).

So far, everything seems to fit the first-century interpretation. However, the next part of the discourse creates a little difficulty. Consider verses 15-18:

“When you see the desolating sacrilege standing in the holy place, as was spoken of by the prophet Daniel (let the reader understand), then those in Judea must flee to the mountains; the one on the housetop must not go down to take what is in the house; the one in the field must not turn back to get a coat.”

The reason this is a bit difficult for the first-century interpretation is that, if this refers to Roman officials committing an abomination in the temple, such occurrences are not known to have happened until shortly before the temple’s destruction in 70 A.D., at which point the war was already near peak intensity. For many people, it would have been too late to evacuate as Jesus said to do. However, Luke’s account of the prophecy is a bit different and seems to resolve this issue.

Many Biblical historians think that Mark’s Gospel was written first, and that Matthew and Luke’s incorporated Mark’s writing in addition to other sources (Mark Introduction, Harper Collins Study Bible, p. 1724). In Luke’s introduction to his Gospel, he wrote that many accounts of Jesus’ life had been written and that his writing was a compilation of recorded events in Jesus’ life, based on Luke’s personal examination of many sources and discussion with eye-witnesses (Luke 1:1-4).

I bring things matters up because the stories of Jesus’ life circulated in oral tradition long before the Gospels were actually written. When a story is perpetuated via oral communication, it is natural for some variations of the same story to emerge. As a result, there is some variation in the accounts of certain events among the Gospels. If Luke’s Gospel was one of the later Gospels, then he would probably have selected versions of prophesies that best aligned with actual events that occurred. My theory, based on comparison of the Olivet Discourse among the Gospels, is that Matthew and Mark were written pre-70 or else very shortly after, whereas Luke was written well beyond 70.

Luke’s account of the Olivet Discourse in Chapter 21 starts out like Matthew and Mark, but there are a couple of key differences later on:

Luke 21: 21-24, “When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then those in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those inside the city must leave it, and those out in the country must not enter it; for these are days of vengeance, as a fulfillment of all that is written. Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing infants in those days! For there will be great distress on the earth and wrath against this people; they will fall by the edge of the sword and be taken away as captives among all nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.”

In Luke’s Gospel, Jewish Christians were told to flee Jerusalem when they saw the city “surrounded by armies.” If they followed this instruction, they would have left in 66-67, before the worst of the violence. Historical records show that beginning in 66, many Christians who knew Jesus’ prophecy left Jerusalem.

A commentary from John Denton of PreteristArchive says that Roman armies appeared in Jerusalem around 66-70 A.D., but then largely withdrew. However, after the Roman withdrawal, different Jewish factions in Jerusalem broke out into civil war. Denton wrote,

“After the withdrawal of the Roman armies and for the following three years, those listening to ‘Jesus voice’ by means of his disciples, separated themselves from the inhabitants of Jerusalem and fled the city. According to Josephus’ historical account, during this time, internal anarchy within the city of Jerusalem was continually churning away. Civil war was continuing without let up within the walls of Jerusalem . . . Living in the city of Jerusalem had become a nightmare, it was so full of violence and misery, the citizens desperately wanted to get rid of these fanatics. Famine and food shortages had become an everyday problem, there seemed no let up or end to these factions burning hatred for each other. Daily the fighting continued and the casualties mounted.”

Several other prophecies of Jesus in the Olivet Discourse are reflected in the events just described, including famines, hatred of people toward each other, and anarchy.

Note that Jesus said that after the Jews saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies, those in the city must leave, and those in surrounding Judea must flee to the mountains. Even though, after an initial approach, Roman armies had withdrawn from Jerusalem during 67-70, historical records indicate that during this 3.5-year interval, Roman armies were still attacking surrounding regions, as described in the following commentary from Revelation Revolution,

“‘A time, times and half a time’ [Dan. 7:25] is three and a half years.  This is the interval between the arrival of Titus and Vespasian in Israel to lead the Roman army during the Jewish War in March of A.D. 67 to the fall of Jerusalem in September of A.D. 70.  Rabbinic tradition confirms the fact that Titus and Vespasian assaulted Israel for three and a half years.  According to the Midrash Rabbah Lamantations 1:12, Vespasian was expected to be punished in Gehenna for three and a half years because that was the length of time in which he besieged Israel” (quoted from Daniel 7 Fulfilled).

Thus, it appears that the only way to be completely safe would be to hide in the mountains during this 3.5 year period.

Also, recall that Jesus said that during the Tribulation, false messiahs would arise (Luke 21:8). An example of such a false messiah was John Levi, an apostate Jew who claimed to be sent by God to help the Jews fight off the Romans. Larry T. Smith wrote that John Levi “took over the control of the Temple, set himself up in the Temple as the Jewish savior, looted the vessels of the Temple for their Gold, and caused the daily animal sacrifices to cease” (quoted from The 70th Week of Daniel).

Having considered all of the evidence for the first-century fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecies, we still need to address the “problem” of Jesus not returning to earth in 70 A.D.

Matthew wrote that Jesus would return “immediately after the suffering of those days” (Matt. 24:29). Luke, however, does not use the word “immediately.” This is what makes me think that Luke was written after 70. We do not know exactly what Jesus said, given that historians have not found any transcripts known to be written during His earthly lifetime. Early Christians who believed Christ would return in their lifetimes may have shaped their oral communications of Jesus’ prophecy in light of that expectation, and Matthew and Mark may have picked up those versions which conveyed a greater degree of imminence.

I think that Luke’s Gospel, on the other hand, conveys a hint of an extended interval before Christ’s return. Luke writes,

“For there will be great distress on the earth and wrath against this people; they will fall by the edge of the sword and be taken away as captives among all nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.”

This passage about the “times of the Gentiles” may be significant. Luke was a disciple of the Apostle Paul, and the era of the Gentiles is a theme in Paul’s epistle to the Romans.

Romans 11:25-27: “So that you may not claim to be wiser than you are, brothers and sisters, I want you to understand this mystery: a hardening has come upon part of Israel, until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved; as it is written, ‘Out of Zion will come the Deliverer; he will banish ungodliness from Jacob.’ ‘And this is my covenant with them, when I take away their sins.’”

In the Old Testament era, God’s working with humanity was centered on Israel. However, what Paul describes in Romans and Galatians is God’s new way of working with humanity in which “there is no distinction between Jew and Greek” (Romans 10:12). In the passage above, Paul wrote that Israel has been “hardened” during this era, but that when all the Gentiles called to salvation in this era are brought into the faith, Christ will return, and then Israel as a nation will be brought to faith in Him as the Messiah.

Paul writes in Ephesians 3:5-6, “In former generations this mystery was not made known to        humankind, as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit: that is, the Gentiles have become fellow heirs, members of the same body, and sharers in the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.”

Paul writes that the mystery of this age was not made known to previous generations, which could explain why the prophecies of Daniel (such as Dan. 7:23-27), and even Jesus’ prophecies during his earthly lifetime, seemed to skip over it. So, even though specific Tribulational prophecies were fulfilled in the first century, the era of the Gentiles has continued up to the present day, and in a general sense, the Tribulation has as well, if you consider the persecution of Jews which has been a grave problem throughout the past two millennia.

Before I close this article, I want to mention one more passage from the Olivet Discourse that has generated much debate. In Matthew 24:34 and Mark 13:30, Jesus said, “This generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.”

However, Luke once again generalizes the statement: “Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all things have taken place” (Lk. 21:32).

In Luke’s account, the NRSV translation omits the word “these” from the phrase “all these things have taken place.” “These things” would specifically include the physical return of Christ to the earth, something that did not happen in the generation Jesus spoke to. The difference in wording is also reflected in the underlying Greek. Luke’s account does not have the Greek word “tauta” that was translated “these” in Matthew and Mark.

By saying that “this generation will not pass away until all things have taken place,” it is obvious that we cannot interpret the passage literally. Even if Christ had returned in 70, that would not have been the last thing that ever happened in the world!

So, I believe what the prophecy really means is that, in principle, all things would be fulfilled in that generation. In the case of Christ’s return, He returned on the day of Pentecost through the Holy Spirit’s indwelling of believers (Acts 2). Paul wrote in Ephesians 2:6 that God “made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved – and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.”

Being made alive in Christ and seated with Him in the heavens is a spiritual fulfillment of the Rapture, and this came upon believers in the same generation that Jesus spoke about.

I want to tie this idea into the overarching theme of this series of posts, which is that, we should not approach Bible prophecy by getting fixated on events of the future (or the past, for that matter). All prophecy is, in some sense, true of the present. Thus, the goal of prophecy is not to predict the future, but rather, to understand the present. Seeing how certain prophecies were fulfilled in the past can help us understand what the same prophecies say about the present. If we live in light of what is true now, we will be prepared should prophecies that were fulfilled in the past play out again. The next post will examine how the prophecies we have been discussing apply to the present, and I will share some views on what implications these prophecies may hold for the future.

 

Works Cited

“Matthew 24 Fulfilled.” Revelation Revolution. n.p., n.d., Web. 18 July 2016.

“Daniel 7: A Preterist Commentary.” Revelation Revolution. n.p., n.d., Web. 18 July 2016.

Adela Yarbro Collins, Ph.D. The Gospel According to Mark Introduction. The Harper Collins Study Bible. Ed. Harold W. Attridge. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2006. 1722-1724. Print.

John Denton. “Prophetic Day or Year: Jerusalem’s Destruction and the Seventy Weeks.” The Preterist Archive. The Preterist Archive, n.d., Web. 26 July 2016.

Smith, Larry T. “The Seventieth Week of Daniel.” Rightly Dividing The Word. Rightly Dividing The Word, 2002. Web. 17 July 2016

Prophecies of Daniel 9

Leave a reply

Scriptural Quotations are from the New Revised Standard Version

The book of Daniel is one of the most analyzed books of the Bible on the subject of prophecy. It can be a confusing book of the Bible given that it has prophecies that seem to have already been fulfilled, and prophecies that have not been clearly fulfilled, presented in very close textual proximity. Furthermore, prophetic writings are mixed in with depictions of events going on in Daniel’s own lifetime.

This style of writing is typical of Bible prophecy in general, and I think it is the reason why there is so much debate and disagreement among scholars as to the meaning of prophecies. I personally have reached a point where I do not try to untangle cryptic prophetic writings and arrange a precise, chronological prediction of world events. Instead, I try to step back and consider broader, overarching themes of Scripture that are reflected not only in these prophetic writings, but the Bible in general, and to understand how these themes are playing out in my own life.

That said, specific prophetic writings are still important to talk about, and I am not opposed to discussing them in relation to historical or current events as long as there is some room for uncertainty. So, in this article, I want to discuss some prophecies of Daniel that are often used to predict future events.

The book of Daniel is where the idea of a seven year period preceding the end of this age comes from. A critical passage is in Chapter 9, Verses 24-27:

 

“Seventy weeks are decreed for your people and your holy city: to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place. Know therefore and understand: from the time that the word went out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the time of an anointed prince, there shall be seven weeks; and for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with streets and moat, but in a troubled time. After the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing, and the troops of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed. He shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall make sacrifice and offering cease; and in their place shall be an abomination that desolates, until the decreed end is poured out upon the desolator.”

 

There is general agreement among Biblical scholars that if a “week” refers to a quantifiable period of time, it means seven years. Thus, the “seventy weeks” in Verse 24 probably refer to seventy periods of seven years, which equals 490 years. When Daniel wrote this, the Jews were still in Babylonian captivity. Verse 25 says that the seventy weeks would begin once Israel was released and began rebuilding the temple. Daniel wrote in Verse 26 that after sixty-two weeks (483 years), an “anointed one” would be cut off. Biblical historians have noted that Jesus’ ministry began about 483 years after the Jews were released from captivity. Thus, the “anointed one” being “cut off” after 483 years probably refers to the crucifixion of Christ around 27-33 A.D. Most Christians are in agreement up to this point; it’s what comes next that starts a debate.

Verse 26 mentions troops of a future prince destroying Jerusalem and the temple in association with wars and desolations. There is general agreement that the destruction of the temple was fulfilled in 70 A.D. The controversial part is, who is the prince?

The traditional Evangelical view of prophesy, known as the Futurist view, says that since it was the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D., there will be a new Roman empire created sometime in the future, and the leader of that empire is the prince Daniel referenced. Despite the fact that the temple was destroyed in 70 A.D., Verse 27 mentions the temple again by referencing “sacrifices and offerings.” Thus, Futurists contend that the temple will be rebuilt in the future so that this prophesy can take place. The prince is identified as the Antichrist. Since Verse 27 says that the prince will make a covenant for seven years, Futurists teach that the antichrist will make a seven-year covenant with Israel and allow them to rebuild the temple. They identify this seven year period as the Tribulation. Verse 27 says that the prince will eventually cause the sacrifices to stop, and desecrate the temple. Futurists believe this will occur at the midpoint of the Tribulation.

Although this interpretation can make sense, the problem is that the Bible never explicitly says a temple will be rebuilt before the coming Messianic age. Furthermore, I believe there is very substantial evidence that the prophecies of Daniel 9:24-27 had a fulfillment in the first century.

First, let’s consider the part about someone making a covenant with the Jews. That word translated “make” could also be translated “confirm,” and the New King James Bible does so. Note that in Daniel’s prophecy, there are two men mentioned: the “anointed one” (the Messiah) and an apparently evil figure that is often called the Antichrist. Many commentators with a first-century perspective say that it is the Messiah, not the Antichrist, who confirms a covenant with the Jews.

Espousing this view, Larry T. Smith wrote,

“He shall ‘CONFIRM THE COVENANT WITH MANY FOR ONE WEEK.’ This does not mean that the covenant was just seven years long, but it is dealing with the one week that is left of the 70 weeks in which the Messiah will confirm the covenant with many.  This week had to begin with Messiah the prince being anointed at His baptism. This was verse 24’s anointing of the most holy. This fulfilled one of the 6 requirements of the 70th week” (quoted from “The 70th Week of Daniel”).

Also, keep in mind what Jesus Himself said in Matthew 5:17, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.”

Through this statement, Jesus was confirming the covenant with the Jews which God established through the Law of Moses in the Old Testament.

What I want to examine now is the concept of spiritual-physical parallels in the events of Christ’s life and death on earth, and the war of 66-70 A.D. in Jerusalem. Here are interpretations from Duncan McKenzie of PlanetPreterist.com:

“Daniel 9:26 and 27 parallel each other; that is, they each address the same two topics. The first part of each verse contains a reference to the killing of Messiah and the resulting end of the legitimacy of the sacrificial system. The death of Jesus brought an end to the legitimacy of the sacrificial system (cf. Matt. 27:50-51; Heb. 10:11-18); it happened after seven and sixty-two    weeks [483 years], Dan. 9:25 (i.e. it happened during the seventieth week)

. . .

The second part of verses 26 and 27 contain a reference to the coming of the one who would destroy Jerusalem and the Temple” (quoted from “The Last Half of Daniel’s 70th Week”).

The idea here is that the spiritual fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecies occurred through the death of Christ, circa 30 A.D., which ended the validity of animal sacrifices. However, in the physical, earthly realm, the end of animal sacrifices came to an end in 70 A.D. via the Romans’ destruction of the temple.

McKenzie’s view is that Daniel’s 70th week could be interpreted either literally or symbolically. In a literal interpretation, the seven years take place in two 3.5 year segments, separated by a gap of 37-40 years. The first half took place during Jesus’ earthly ministry of 3.5 years. At the end of this period, the spiritual validity of animal sacrifices came to an end. The 2nd half took place during the war of 66-70 A.D. At the end of this half, sacrifices and offerings as prescribed by the Law of Moses became logistically impossible, as they had to be performed at the temple. Thus, if you add the two halves together, it equals seven years (i.e. one week). On the other hand, in a symbolic interpretation, McKenzie says that the period between Christ’s resurrection and the temple’s destruction could be viewed as the latter half of the 70th week. Under that interpretation, the two segments are not quantifiable time periods, but rather, the two halves are two phases of prophecy.

I think that McKenzie’s interpretations of the 70th week are reasonable ways to approach the prophecy. I also want to bring out a point that Gary Amirault of Tentmaker Ministries raised in his audio series “The Rapture You Missed.” Although I do not agree with his view that the Rapture took place in 70 A.D., I believe his series contains a lot of very important information regarding the events of 30 – 70 A.D. in relation to Bible prophecy. Amirault believes that the destruction of the temple was a necessary event in order to end a conflict that was dividing the Christian church and obscuring the gospel of grace.

The conflict involved whether believers in Christ were still required to follow the Mosaic laws. Prior to the ministry of Paul, who taught salvation apart from works of the Law, many believers in Christ were still preaching the ordinances of the Mosaic Law, including James, a half-brother of Jesus who was head of the Jerusalem Church about 10 years after Jesus’ ascension. Thus, even though believers were already free from the Law through Christ, the physical destruction of the temple was a necessary event in order to bring this realization to the Church on a practical level (“The Rapture You Missed,” Gary Amirault, Part 2, 5:00-7:00).

I believe there is very substantial Scriptural and historical evidence that the prophecies of Daniel 9 had a fulfillment during 30 – 70 A.D. My upcoming installments of this series will look at Jesus’ prophecies in the Synoptic Gospels, where I find more evidence of a first-century fulfillment. The reason I am highlighting first-century fulfillments is because it is important to understand the spiritual, political, and moral factors that were at play in that fulfillment, in case these prophecies are to have another fulfillment at some point in the future, a scenario that I consider possible, and I will show where and why at the end of this series.

 

Works Cited

 

Smith, Larry T. “The Seventieth Week of Daniel.” Rightly Dividing The Word. Rightly Dividing The Word, 2002. Web. 17 July 2016

“Daniel 7: A Preterist Commentary.” Revelation Revolution. n.p., n.d., Web. 18 July 2016.

McKenzie, Duncan. “The Last Half of Daniel’s 70th Week.”PlanetPreterist. n.p., 05 November 2007. Web. 17 July 2016.

Gary Amirault. “The Rapture You Missed (Part 2 of 6).” Tentmaker Ministries. Tentmaker Ministries, 27 January 2010. Web. 17 July 2016

The Rapture and the Coming Age

Leave a reply

Scriptural Quotations are from the New Revised Standard Version

The Rapture is a subject that I have not written a lot about before, but it is nevertheless an important topic because it can play a significant role in the way that people look at their own lives and the world around them. The books of the Bible with the clearest writing on the Rapture are 1st and 2nd Thessalonians. The Rapture is an event associated with Christ’s return as described in 1 Thess. 4:16-17:

“For the Lord himself, with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call and with the sound of God’s trumpet, will descend from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air.”

I agree with the majority of Evangelicals that the Rapture is a physical, future event, in which all believers are given immortal bodies and caught up into the air to meet the Lord. However, Evangelicals have differing views on whether the Rapture will happen before, during, or after a seven-year crisis period known as the Tribulation. My view is different in that I do not believe the Bible necessarily prophesies a future, seven-year tribulation. I understand why many believe in a future seven-year period, given that there is a seven-year period prophesied in Daniel. However, I think that period has already had a fulfillment. Although it is possible that those prophecies could have a dual-fulfillment in the future, I do not think the whole world would be necessarily impacted (I intend to write more on that subject this summer).

However, both Thessalonian epistles depict a period of cataclysmic events associated with the Rapture. Immediately after the depiction of the Rapture, Paul writes,

“Now concerning the times and the seasons, brothers and sisters, you do not need to have anything written to you. For you yourselves know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. When they say, ‘There is peace and security,’ then sudden destruction will come upon them, as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and there will be no escape!”

Considering the context, I think it is reasonable to assume that the phrase “day of the Lord” refers to the time of the Rapture. Notice that Paul says the day of the Lord will come when people are saying “peace and security.” This leads me to believe that the Rapture will occur at a seemingly ordinary time, for most of the world.

The passage goes on to depict disasters on earth in connection with the Rapture. I believe these disasters occur immediately after the Rapture takes place, and I think 2nd Thessalonians indicates this:

2 Thess. 1:6-10 – “For it is indeed just of God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to give relief to the afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. These will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, separated from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he comes to be glorified by his saints.”

Notice that the punishment of the unrighteous is depicted to occur simultaneously with Christ coming for His saints. This leads me to believe that cataclysmic events will begin on the earth right after the Rapture happens.

I believe the purpose of these disasters is to destroy the systems of government that have existed throughout the current age, which began after the flood in Genesis. This is to clear the way for Christ to rule the Earth through Israel in the coming age, as many prophecies from the Old Testament and the Four Gospels describe.

The events to take place right after the Rapture will be extremely severe. Natural disasters could erupt and destroy entire cities. But I think that all of this will take place very quickly (possibly just a few days, but that is only speculation), and afterwards, Christ will arrive on earth.

The reason I think the destruction period will be very short period is that, the Bible never depicts the Rapture of believers, and the return of Christ to the earth, as being separated by a period of time. Thus, I believe the Rapture and Christ’s return to the earth will occur in such close proximity that they are described as the same event. Matthew 24:31 – 25:33 also describes a Rapture-like event in the same context of Christ’s return to the earth.

After the post-Rapture destruction takes place, I believe that Christ will return to the earth and judge the nations based on how they treated believers in the years leading up to His return. Nations that treated believers favorably will be granted access to Christ’s new kingdom, and they will experience the blessings associated with it (Matthew 25). Nations that persecuted believers will face adverse conditions in the early phases of the new age. However, many Old Testament writings prophecy that eventually, all nations of the earth will worship Christ and become part of His kingdom (Psalm 86:9, 22:27, Isaiah 2:2).

Believers who were part of the Rapture will have immortal bodies, and should be able to quickly travel between Earth and the celestial realms. There is not a lot said in the Bible about exactly what we will be doing during the new Kingdom age, but Paul mentions judging angels (1 Cor. 6:3). I also expect that we may be assisting with the kingdom’s administration, and evangelizing to nations outside the kingdom.

So, to summarize my views on the Rapture, I believe that the Rapture is an event that could happen any time. Believers (both alive and deceased) will be caught up in the air to meet the Lord, and all believers will be converted to immortality. After the Rapture, there will be a brief period of widespread disasters on the earth, after which Christ will return to the earth to establish the new kingdom age.

The Bible is an End-Times Book

Leave a reply

It often seems that Christians are heavily focused on the end-times. For example, virtually every generation has thought that they were living in the end-times. Why is that the case? I believe it is because the Bible is thematically an end-times book. So, the focus on the end-times is quite understandable. However, I feel that the end-times theme is sometimes interpreted too narrowly.

If you ask people what books of the Bible talk about the end-times, the books you’ll probably hear most are Daniel and Revelation. But in reality, such writings are just a few instances of an overarching theme that encompasses everything from Genesis to Revelation.

So, what is the Biblical end-times theme? I believe the end-times theme is about transitioning into a new order. The old, corrupt ways entangled with sin are dissolved, and God works to bring in a new order of righteousness in the world, or in the lives of individuals.

The flood in Genesis was an instance of the end-times theme. That was one type of instance that God said would not happen again (Gen 8:21). The Israelites’ exodus from Egypt was another instance. In the New Testament, the theme of being born again (John 3:1-10) or being made a new creation are examples of the end-times theme in relation to individuals.

2 Cor. 5:17 – “If anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new!”

The “renewing of one’s mind” (Rom. 12:2) is yet another example of the end-times theme.

A lot of the writings that are conventionally viewed as “end-times” writings today (such as Daniel) come from periods when the Jews were under oppression, such as the Babylonian captivity, and later Rome. These writings were connected to day-to-day, practical concerns and struggles for the Jews. These writings prophesied of a war between the Jews and their enemies, and promised that the Messiah would come to judge the nations persecuting the Jews, and establish a new order of righteousness in which Israel would rule the world.

But I want to relate this to an aforementioned point, which is that these writings are part of the broader end-times theme of freedom from oppression, and the transition from an old, corrupt order to a new, righteous order.

These writings were not simply written to inform us about events at a future time. Instead, these writings are instances of a much broader, sweeping theme across the Bible.

The end-times message is a transitional message rather than a doomsday message. Now, I am sure many of you know from your own experiences that transitions are not easy. Transitions causes tensions and conflicts, as there is resistance that has to be overcome. Thus, when nations, or individuals, go through “end-times” experiences, there is often upheaval and anxiousness along the way, as I am sure many of you have experienced.

However, the Biblical end-times theme is not about punishment, in the absolute sense. Everything that is involved with “end-times” scenarios, ultimately works toward a redemptive goal, either for individuals or the world. But something has to get the processes started. And the factors that God employs to drive the processes can seem like punishment even though ultimately they are of a transitional, corrective nature, designed to stimulate change.

I plan to make more posts this summer on the prophecies that are often looked at as end-times writings. Specific events which these writings point to is a subject where my own understanding is not conclusive in certain aspects, so that is why, instead of focusing on prophecies of specific world events, I wanted to make this current post to focus on the broader end-times theme in the Bible.

Lack of Cohesion in Modern Evangelicalism

Leave a reply

Many people today are talking about why many Christians seem to lack devotion to their faith. It has been said that a lot of Christians are “Christian in name only,” in the sense that they claim to be Christian but, other than that, Christianity does not seem to have a big presence in their lives. It has also been noted that people of other religions seem to be more devoted to their faith than many Christians are.

Obviously, there is not a single answer to this dilemma, given that everyone has their own personal circumstances affecting their devotion or lack thereof. But from my consideration of the testimonies, experiences, and teachings of Christians, both in past eras and the present, I would like to share my thoughts on why we are seeing some of the reported characteristics within the church today.

Many Evangelicals believe Christians are overall less devout today than in past eras. In some sense, I can accept that assessment (I say “in some sense” because I’m not sure that claim is absolutely true, for reasons I’ll discuss later). So, if it appears that Christians are less devout today, to explain why, a reasonable approach would be to compare what modern Christianity teaches to what Christianity taught in past eras.

In terms of what Christianity teaches today, there is not much difference since the Protestant Reformation in the 16th Century. However, regarding the presentation and delivery of the message, there is a major difference.

Modern Evangelicals are really trying to emphasize God as a God of Love. They emphasize that God desires the best for everybody, and that what God wants from us is not religious devotion, but rather, a relationship with Him. They seek to make their message more inclusive and less judgmental.

However, while modern Evangelicals present their message of God’s benevolence, there are other issues they have to deal with, such as, how to talk about sin, judgment, or hell. And this is where the modern Evangelical gospel faces some tensions. For instance, Evangelicals are usually adamant that they are not promoting religious regulations, but rather, relationship with God. But then they are confronted with Scriptures that condemn certain things which conventional, secular morality does not necessarily believe to be immoral. This creates a tension because blanket prohibition of those activities very much appears to be religious regulation, something that many Evangelicals supposedly do not believe in.

So, on one hand, Evangelicals feel bound to condemning those activities because they see them as a real danger, morally and spiritually, and they believe that those who live in sin are going to face judgment in some form or another. However, at the same time, they do not want to talk about these issues too much; otherwise, Christianity would become about rules and regulations, which they do not want to happen. So, they try to minimize the tension by talking about these hot button issues just enough to get the point across, but keeping the main focus on love, forgiveness, and relationship with God.

Topics such as judgment and hell are also recast in modern Evangelicalism. Judgment is viewed as what happens when people separate themselves from God, thus separating themselves from His protection, and facing the consequences of their sins. God is not portrayed as actively causing harm to anybody, but rather, allowing them to face the consequences of their actions so that they may be led to repentance. On the issue of hell, modern Evangelicals still preach eternal punishment in the afterlife, but instead of fire and brimstone, they tend to portray hell as isolation from God.

However, I sense that in the minds of the audiences, these concepts create tensions. If God is loving and benevolent, and Christianity is not about rules and regulations, then it does not seem to naturally follow to say that people will face judgment or isolation from God if they don’t believe in Him, or if they live certain lifestyles that do not seem to be immoral apart from Christian teaching. These tensions prevent a lot of Christians from really connecting with their faith. And since the teachings against sin and warnings of judgment are given a comparatively small share of teaching material, many Christians tend to resolve the tensions by just focusing on the positive aspects of the teachings and very much disregarding the more “serious” parts.

But concepts like sin and judgment have to be regarded in some way or another in order for salvation to be meaningful in one’s mind and one’s life. We learn a lot of things by contrast. Thus, modern Evangelicalism’s tendency to deemphasize the “negative” aspects has the consequence of reducing the power of the redemptive aspects in the lives of the audience.

Prior to the past couple centuries, God was often viewed as a righteous judge who actively punished sinners. If the Bible condemned a certain activity, you were going to obey because God said so, and if you didn’t obey, He would be coming after you!

Some of you may know about Jonathan Edwards, a famous preacher during the Great Awakening revival of the early-mid 1700s. His sermons (most famously “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”) had graphic depictions of hell that frightened many people into repentance. The Great Awakening era, which Edward’s preaching came to symbolize, was a time in which there did appear to be a surge in real devotion to the Christian faith.

I believe that what made the Great Awakening preaching effective was its inward cohesion. Hell was terrifying, sin was gravely serious, and God was just as intimidating to sinners. The whole package worked together. Preachers were not trying to juggle a lovey-dovely message with warnings about sin. Furthermore, for those who were saved, there was an extra degree of appreciation to Christ for one’s salvation, which I believe led to the apparent changes in the lives of Christians in that era.

Now, I’m not saying that I personally recommend that kind of preaching. However, it had a kind of inward cohesion that got apparent results. However, it is hard to know what was really going on in people’s hearts long after their conversion experiences. If people have the conception of God in their minds that was prominent in that era, they will try to live right. They will put on an appearance of morality (especially in public). They will acknowledge God in their lives. But their deeper attitudes or secret thoughts inside, and what they do behind closed doors, could be a very different story. After all, sin is stimulated by Law (Rom. 7:11).

Nevertheless, if we look at the kind of preaching that got results in the past, it seems apparent to me why modern Evangelicalism is not getting the kind of results that its proponents desire. So, what should we say?

Well, first, I should say that God can work through many types of preaching, including that of the Great Awakening and that of modern Evangelicalism. I am not trying to say that there is a definitively “right” or “wrong” way to present the Gospel message. However, when we’re on the subject of why many Christians seem to lack devotion in their faith today, I believe that the lack of cohesion in modern Evangelicalism is a problem.

I believe that Christians should seek a way to present the Gospel in which various themes are integrated together, such that to talk about one subject is to talk about another. As an example of this paradigm, the truth of redemption is revealed by talking about sin and judgment, and the truth of judgment is revealed by talking about redemption. Under this paradigm, you are no longer trying to balance various themes. You cannot talk about one subject more than the other, because to talk about one theme is to talk about another.

There is more than one way that this can be done. As long as the message is Christ-centered, the specific teachings being presented are not my main concerns here. For example, there is a lot of debate between Christians over whether people can lose their salvation. The doctrine of Eternal Security (“once saved always saved”) is viewed by some as a cause of the lack of devotion today, but it is viewed by others as the way to teach a consistent message of grace. However, I do not believe that Eternal Security necessarily resolves the tensions discussed earlier. In many cases, I feel that the doctrine of Eternal Security is just a screen to hide the incoherence under the surface. In fact, some of the most bewildering websites I have EVER encountered are teaching Eternal Security.

So, my main concern here does not involve the specific doctrines being preached. Instead, what I encourage is that, regardless of what doctrines are being taught, the principles of the teaching have internal cohesion and are not creating the need for awkward attempts to balance various themes.

The Eventual Salvation of All is Not the Gospel (Rather, it is an Inference From the Gospel)

Leave a reply

In early 2014, I posted a detailed article explaining my belief in the ultimate reconciliation of all mankind to God in the fullness of time. I continue to believe in the principles laid out in that article, and you can read it by clicking the “Ultimate Reconciliation” link on the blog’s menu. However, over the past year, I have had a change in attitude toward the subject, which I want to discuss here.

The concept of everybody being saved in the fullness of time used to be a central aspect to my faith and understanding of the Gospel message. However, many proponents of this message get accused of taking Scriptures out of context. As I described in my recent post on interpretive methodology with the Bible, I often feel that “context” is intertwined with personal interpretation, so I didn’t worry too much about the “out of context” accusations. However, over the past year I have come to think that, regarding the doctrine of the salvation of all, the “out of context” accusations have some valid points that we should acknowledge.

First, I will be honest and acknowledge that there is no particular passage of Scripture which sequentially lays out the concepts of afterlife judgment for unbelievers followed by salvation. Furthermore, many of the Scriptures which speak of salvation, with all humanity in scope, do not necessarily have the future in view.

For example, Romans 5:18-19 depicts the justification for all mankind through Christ’s obedience as an antitype of the condemnation upon all through Adam’s disobedience:

“Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all. For just as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous (NRSV).”

However, the context of Romans 5 does not speak of the future, and I admit that it feels like a bit of a stretch to say that Paul wrote that passage to depict everybody being saved eventually.

So, what are we to make of this? Well, the prominent Evangelical reasoning today is that, even though justification is “for” everyone, those who do not choose to receive it in this life will still be lost forever. However, this reasoning assumes a degree of free will, and a limitation on God’s sovereignty, that I personally do not believe to be Biblical (see this post for more discussion on the matter).  Furthermore, I do not know of any passage in the Bible that specifically describes Christ’s finished work as an offer of forgiveness for humans to accept or reject.

There are some Christians who follow a Calvinistic school of thought, and their explanation for Rom. 5:18-19 and related passages is that, God has not chosen everybody to be saved. Traditional Calvinism teaches that Jesus only died for those who were predestined to salvation, and that everyone for whom Christ died will be saved and brought into a new humanity, but that does not encompass every individual person who has ever lived.

However, this concept of a limited atonement is not directly described in the Bible, and it seems to conflict with passages such as 1st John 2:2, which says that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. Calvinists espousing limited atonement say that the “whole world” does not mean every individual, but rather, people from all types (Jews, Gentiles, rich, poor, etc.). I suppose this is a reasonable way to address the issue, but it still seems like a “strained” interpretation. It’s just a bit difficult for me to conclude that John wrote that passage with this interpretation in mind.

So, getting back to Romans 5:18-19,

“Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all. For just as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.”

I feel that, to interpret this passage to mean that Christ’s finished work does not, in itself, have the power to save all mankind, requires us to import concepts that are difficult to support Biblically. Granted, this passage is not talking about something God is going to do in the future. But I view the passage as saying that Christ’s obedience actually has the power to save people by turning humanity from antagonism toward God to righteousness. Another way to look at it is that, Christ’s death and resurrection secured our salvation. Our time to enter into this deliverance and transformation was when we believed the Gospel.

Following what I consider to be the natural reading of Rom. 5:18 and related passages (such as 1 Cor. 15:22-28 and Col. 1:19-21), I believe that the most natural inference to be drawn is that, everyone will be saved eventually. It seems that any attempts to deny that outcome involve heavy theologizing and the introduction of “problematic” concepts. But if it is realized that the Scriptures which speak of “eternal punishment” have semantic complications, I do not see a need to go through all of that theologizing to avoid the inference of everybody being saved in the fullness of time.

Thus, while I cannot absolutely rule out the possibility that there could be another outcome, I consider the eventual salvation of all to be the most reasonable inference from the relevant Scriptures.

The Bible as a Divinely Approved Message Pertaining to God

1 Reply

The Bible is often described as the Word of God.  In this article I want to describe the implications of this teaching for our lives and beliefs, and explain why I personally consider most of the Bible to be a “divinely approved message pertaining to God” as opposed to the “Word of God.” My view is not constructed to cast doubt on the validity of the Bible. The only differences from the conventional Evangelical view of the Bible are some subtle matters involving interpretive methodology. However, I feel that the differences bring out some points that are important to discuss.

If we say that the Bible is the Word of God, that implies that we have to treat the Bible as if it is something that God Himself is saying to us. While it is acknowledged that the Bible was written by humans in ancient languages, using the writers’ own word choice and writing style to some degree, it is simultaneously assumed that the Bible should be seen as absolute, authoritative revelation from God Himself, that should be the basis for our beliefs and lifestyles.

If we are dealing with the parts of the Bible that record actual sayings from God or Jesus, I consider those parts of the Bible to the Word of God (translation and manuscript issues aside). But what about the rest of the Bible, such as narrative sections and epistles? These are the parts that I consider to be “a divinely approved message pertaining to God.”

What do I mean by a “divinely approved message pertaining to God”? When I use that phrase, I am conveying the idea that God has approved the Bible as a way for people to learn about Him and His plan for mankind. By placing their faith in the writings of the Bible, people move toward the truth rather than away from it.

I believe that the writers of the Bible were enlightened by God as to His nature, His plan for mankind, and the ways in which we should orient our lives. The authors of the Bible used their writing abilities to communicate the principles that God revealed to them, framing the knowledge they were given with their unique writing styles, experiences, and priorities in teaching. God approved their writings as a way for people to learn about Him, and through His sovereign design, influenced the early church leaders to include certain books in the Biblical canon.

In light of these beliefs, why do I not consider the whole Bible to be “the Word of God,” as the phrase is often understood? It primarily involves the issue of “context.” When the Bible is considered the Word of God, there seem to be competing methodologies at play. On one hand, specific verses are quoted as absolute, authoritative truth that everybody must subject themselves to in the way presented. But on the other hand, there is a continual emphasis on the need for context when interpreting the Bible. It is often said that you cannot latch on to a single passage in isolation.

But here is the issue I see. If the entire Bible is the Word of God, it seems that you generally should not need “context” in order to understand it. The reason we need context when interpreting human writing is because, often times, humans do not communicate clearly. For example, people get passionate and over-generalize matters, or they forget to mention certain details to qualify statements, or they use ambiguous wording because they know what they are trying to say, but are not thinking from a reader’s perspective. Thus, to understand what a person is trying to say, you have to look beyond any particular statement in search of the overarching theme of a person’s writing.

However, if the Bible is the Word of God, I would not expect it to have those communication issues that necessitate context. If the Bible is to be looked at as writing commanded by God Himself, it seems He would have made sure that each passage is perfectly clear on its own.

Obviously, in some cases, context is only a matter of looking at the immediately-surrounding passages to find straightforward information to dictate interpretation of a key passage. However, many Biblical commentaries deal with context much more broadly, referencing passages from different parts of the Bible altogether in attempt to explain a passage under consideration. In many cases, this seems like the only way to understand certain passages. But it is impossible to engage in such far-reaching synthesis of passages without bringing in subjectivity.

People’s own intellectual tendencies and experiences will shape the context that they perceive. Just consider all of the arguments over the “context” of politicians’ statements. But when the entire Bible is seen as the Word of God, it is often said that we cannot interpret the Bible subjectively; rather, we must submit to it as absolute Truth. But I find this to be a problematic approach, because I believe we cannot separate context from subjectivity.

So, then, what is the difference between my view of the Bible as a “divinely approved message pertaining to God,” and the traditional view of the Bible as the “Word of God?” All things said, the differences are relatively minor. However, there are some subtle differences involving interpretive methodology that do have implications for how I relate my personal life to the Bible’s teachings, and how I communicate my beliefs.

The first difference is that I am more open to the idea that seemingly contradictory passages are actually different perspectives on the same truth. Because of differences in psychology and personal experiences, different people relate to the same truth by believing (or maybe even acting) in seemingly contradictory ways. But underlying the differences on the surface, people’s lives move the same direction as they are living according to the same underlying principles.

I think that my view of the Bible reduces the need to always make contrasting passages convey the same idea. It is often assumed that, when passages seem to contradict each other, the conflict is only due to a failure to regard context, and that, if context is respected, all passages should straightforwardly express the same doctrine.

But I am more inclined to let differences be differences, but talk about how both ideas ultimately point in the same direction. Also, I am more inclined toward thematic interpretation. When deciding whether an idea is “Biblical” or “unbiblical,” I try to assess how well the idea lines up with recurring themes of the Bible.

The second impact that my view of the Bible has on interpretive methodology involves scientific literalism. Ultimately, I am open to the idea that certain parts of Scripture may not be scientifically or physically literal. However, I believe that we should build our doctrines on a literal interpretation. I said earlier that I believe God has approved the Bible as a way for people to learn about Him and His ways. I believe that God has approved the literal meaning. In other words, if people base their beliefs on a literal interpretation, their understanding will grow in the direction of Truth.

I said “direction of Truth” because the absolute Truth on certain (if not many) matters is beyond what we can comprehend in this life. But if, when we leave this life, we discover that certain things we believed from the Bible are contrasting to ultimate realities in some aspects, I believe we will nevertheless conclude that the literal meaning of the Bible led us in the right direction.

I do not feel threatened by findings of scientists that seem to contradict the Bible. I would not use the Bible to tell them that their research is wrong.  We will find out, eventually, whether certain aspects of their theories are reflected in the ultimate realities, or whether they are altogether wrong.

My disagreements with liberal Christianity come from the fact that liberal Christianity presupposes the Bible to be non-literal, and then it builds teachings from a non-literal base. Of course, if there is substantial cultural or linguistic evidence that certain parts of the Bible are allegorical or symbolic, I give that due consideration. But in many cases, my concern is that a non-literal starting point leads to unbounded imagination, and you can miss the intended message entirely.

The writers of the Bible obviously took their beliefs very seriously, and it is my goal to approach their writings with the same regard. I know that this article has discussed controversial and challenging subjects, but I felt that it was important to talk about these matters in order to set the stage for some other material that I plan to post on the blog this summer. So, let me know what you think about all of this, and feel free to critique anything I’ve written or share your own views.