|
Problems with Preterism |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Preterism means past fulfillment. The opposite of the preterist view is generally the futurist view. Various prophetic passages are debated as to whether they are already fulfilled, or whether they are to be fulfilled in the future. Passages that are often debated along these lines are Daniel 9, Zechariah 14, Matthew 24, Luke 21, and the book of Revelation. Some people take the preterist view on some of these passages, and the futurist view on other passages. Many people consider Matthew 24 and Luke 21 to be partially fulfilled, but to still have future aspects to their fulfillment. Generally, the preterist view of a passage is that it was fulfilled on or prior to 70 AD, when Rome conquered Jerusalem and scattered the Jews. With regard to Revelation itself, however, some preterists consider fulfillment to be as late as 400 AD. Various aspects of the preteristism have been around for most of church history. But with regard to the preterist interpretation of Revelation itself, it dates back to the Catholic Church’s Council of Trent, which was held to condemn the Protestant Reformation. The Spanish Jesuit Luis De Alcazar (AD 1554-1613) published a 900-page book on Revelation that introduced the preterist interpretation of Revelation. The preterist views of Matthew 24 and Daniel 9, however, have been around since the early church fathers. Right after Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple, the disciples asked, “When will all this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and the end of the age?” (Matthew 24:3). Does Scripture give us signs, or events that must happen just prior to Christ’s second coming? Will there be a time of a literal antichrist, when a man rules the world and when he literally “sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God?” (2nd Thessalonians 2:1-4) Will Christ return at the literal battle of Armageddon? Are the events that are happening today in Israel a part of what the Bible prophesied? Is there anything in unfulfilled Bible prophecy that must happen before Christ returns? Or does all unfulfilled prophecy speak only about the actual second coming, the judgment, and the eternal state thereafter? To one degree or another, preterism believes there is no prophecy after 70 AD, other than the actual second coming, the judgment, and the eternal state thereafter. In recent years, there has been a growing belief system called full-preterism. Full-preterism takes past-fulfillment one-step further by saying that all Bible prophecy was fulfilled by 70 AD. This includes the second coming, the judgment, the new heavens and new earth, and the eternal state. Full preterists refer to the prior preterist belief system as partial preterism. Perhaps this is done because full preterists believe that their system is the logical conclusion to the preterist hermeneutical system and arguments. With this I agree. If I were to adopt the preterist hermeneutical system and arguments, I would probably be a full-preterist myself. But I’m not a preterist. I do believe in future unfulfilled signs of Christ’s return. While it’s certainly descriptive, I consider the term “partial preterism” a somewhat condescending term. Preterism was around long before full-preterism. Therefore, in this article I will refer to the prior belief system as historical preteristism. | (NIV Revelation 1:3) Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
“Signs of the Times” is the subject that’s hated by full preterists more than any other possible subject. Historical preterists tend to have distaste for this subject as well. The full-preterist view is that Christ has already come, so there won't be any signs of the times. Every generation has been taught to expect Christ to return in their lifetimes. Some generations have had very specific reasons why Christ might have come in their generation. Some of these generations had specific date calculations based on a day being a year. For example, Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah Witnesses grew out of two such date calculations. Other generations have had "apocalyptic fever" because of their interpretation of Revelation, and how the events of that day were being seen in Revelation. For example, the generation of Martin Luther had a lot of apocalyptic speculation based on the historic view of Revelation. And people from that time did a few day-as-a-year calculations as well. But our generation is the first generation since Christ’s that can point to very specific verses, whose natural interpretations point exclusively to our generation today. There are four very specific verses that can be applied only to our generation. They will be discussed below. In addition to the four very specific verses, there are quite a few other sign-of-the-time verses, of a more general nature, that can arguably be applied to other generations as well as ours. These include wars, plagues, earthquakes, false christs, and a falling away from God (Matthew 24:6-7, 24, Revelation 6:8, Romans 1:26-27, 2 Timothy 3:1-9). All of these verses seem to be happening with great intensity in this generation. But since they can be argued to apply to other generations as well, our focus will be on the four verses that are specific only to our generation. First, we will do a survey of these very specific verses, and then we will take a look at the emotional backlash that these verses have had on some people. This emotional backlash has caused them to go way out on the limb in Bible interpretation, even into clear heresy, in order to eliminate any possible truth to these verses. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(1) Matthew 24:14 – This generation is the first generation since Christ’s generation that can see the possibly of this being fulfilled in our lifetimes. Depending on how you measure it, you could say that this has already been fulfilled in today’s generation. You could even argue that Mel Gibson’s film has preached the gospel to every nation. But even with a strict requirement of a church planted in every people-group of the world, we are very close to preaching the gospel to every nation. | (NIV Matthew 24:14) And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(2) Luke 21:24 – This is the first generation that has seen a reversal of what happened in 70 AD. Full preterists argue that everything in Scripture was fulfilled by 70 AD. But the fulfillment of this verse must take place after 70 AD, because it was in 70 AD that they were taken as prisoners to all the nations. The time of the Gentiles must be fulfilled after 70 AD. Some have argued that today’s events in Jerusalem do not apply to this verse because the Jews today in Jerusalem are not Christian. But they were not Christian in 70 AD either. In context of times after Pentecost, the word Gentile has nothing to do with one’s status as being chosen of God. After Pentecost, Gentiles were grafted into the vine of Israel. The word Gentile simply means non-Jewish. Likewise, this verse says nothing about the salvation status of the people in Jerusalem. It simply says that non-Jewish people (Gentiles) will control (trample on) Jerusalem until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. This baby-boom generation, born after World War II, is the first generation to see Jerusalem no longer being trampled on by Gentiles. When that generation became adult, we saw Old Jerusalem come under the control of Non-Gentiles in 1967. | (NIV Luke 21:24) They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(3) Daniel 12:4 - This generation, since World War II, is the first generation in history that can be marked by such a huge explosion in knowledge and travel. And Daniel is told to seal up the words of the scroll until the “time of the end” when there would be such a huge explosion of knowledge and travel. Daniel is also told in verse 13 that the time of the end would be when he would rise to receive his inheritance. There was no explosion of knowledge and travel in 70 AD. Daniel will rise in this baby-boom generation. These types of verses make full preterists, as well as many historical preterists, quite angry. In the past, dispensationalists such as Hal Lindsey have interpreted Bible prophecy in light of current events, which have turned out to be false. Some people over the years have gotten very frustrated with the ongoing spread of these interpretations. It has caused many people to shift from Dispensationalism all the way to Amillennialism. The hermeneutic shift that is necessary to make this change, however, is extreme. There has to be a lot of motivation to shift from one extreme to the other. In other words, many have been motivated by their hatred of people relating Bible prophecy to current events. The middle ground between these two views would be along the lines of premillennialism with the post-tribulation rapture (historic premillennialism). But the middle ground requires the Church to go through a future Great Tribulation. And those who have hated the signs of the times have tended to hate a future interpretation of Revelation even more. They just don’t want to hear about the possibility of themselves going through Great Tribulation before Christ returns. It’s a hatred of watching the signs for Christ to return, such as the abomination of desolation, as is taught in Matthew 24. Various aspects of the preterist views have been around for most of church history. Full-preterism, on the other hand, is really something that’s grown into more than just a few followers during in this generation. Full-preterism says that everything in the Bible was fulfilled by 70 AD. That includes the return of Christ, the great white throne of judgment, the new heavens and new earth, and the conquering of the last enemy, which is death. In other words, full preterists believe that this world of sin is the eternal state. When God destroyed the world by water, he spared Noah, even though he knew that sin would continue and would eventually get as bad as it was before the flood. But God set forth a plan to rid his creation of sin. Full preterists basically want us to believe that God’s plan is finished, even though sin today is probably worse than it was before the Great Flood. Full preterists do this by changing the definitions of a few terms and by taking historical preterism to its logical conclusion. The fact that the logical conclusion of historical preterism winds up being such a heresy is a strong indicator that the basic premises of historical preterism are incorrect. But any true Christian knows down deep that God’s plan, instigated at the Great Flood, was not to allow sin to remain in the world. God’s plan is not finished until the eternal state of a new heaven and a new earth, where sin and death have been completely overcome. Full-preterism mostly originates with James Stuart Russell and his anonymous publication of ‘The Parousia’ in 1878. In 1887 he published a second edition under his own name. But it has not had a strong following until this generation. Because of this new demand, the 1887 edition was reprinted in 1983. No other generation in history has had a significant number of Christians who held anything like the full-preterist view, that denied the literal second coming of Christ. With this in mind, here is one last sign of the time that no other generation has had. | (NIV Daniel 12:4) But you, Daniel, close up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(4) 2nd Peter 3:3-7 - Full preterists are the scoffers of the end times. They not only say, “Where is this coming.” They deny that the coming will ever happen. To a small degree, there have been scoffers that are not in the Church. But they have been few. Most people outside the church pay little attention to the Hal Lindsey’s of today. The real scoffers are the full preterists within the Church of this generation. As Peter prophesied, the full preterists of this generation deliberately forget that the heavens and the earth is a term that’s defined in Genesis 1:1, and that the meaning of that term should remain consistent. They say the old heavens and earth is the old covenant, and that the new heavens and new earth the new covenant. They deliberately forget that when God gave the word for the destruction of his creation in Noah’s day, that this exact same word will destroy the creation by fire. The destruction by water was literal. But they say the literal creation of Genesis will never be literally destroyed by fire, even though it’s the exact same word. The full preterists want everything to go on as it has since the beginning of creation. In other words, they say the Bible is completely fulfilled, so that nothing the Bible says will happen in the future. They deny the end of sin. They deny God’s plan at the Flood. And they deny that the Last Enemy, which is Death, will ever be conquered. The full preterists are the scoffers of this generation. The full preterists have become their own worst nightmare. They themselves have become a “sign of the times,” that in this generation Christ will return. | (NIV 2nd Peter 3:3-7) First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, ‘Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.’ But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Right after Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple, the disciples asked, “When will all this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming an the end of the age?” (Matthew 24:3). One of the most debated parts of Jesus’ answer is, “So when you see standing in the holy place, ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel” (Matthew 24:15). To study this answer, we must turn to Daniel and see what he said about the abomination of desolation. We must also find something that would be “standing in the holy place.” There are three references to the abomination of desolation in Daniel (Daniel 9:27, 11:31, 12:11). But preterists like to focus on Daniel 9 with respect to this sign. Preterists view the stopping of the sacrifice (Daniel 9:27) as the crucifixion. The literal animal sacrifice didn’t stop. But the need for the sacrifice stopped at the crucifixion. Then preterists view the abomination of desolation (Daniel 9:27) as being forty years later, when the Roman ruler entered the temple, “standing in the holy place,” just before the Romans destroyed the temple. When we see the abomination of desolation, those in Judea are told to “flee to the mountains” (Matthew 24:16). Of course by the time the Roman ruler entered the temple, it was too late to flee to the mountains. But preterists are quick to point to Luke’s account that says when we see Jerusalem surrounded by armies those in Judea should flee to the mountains (Luke 21:20-21). The big question of debate then becomes, “Is Luke’s account talking about the same time as Matthew’s account?” This question will be examined below under the topic sub-heading of “Two Generations.” But for now, let’s focus on the issue of the abomination of desolation. The preterists say the abomination of desolation happened in 70 AD. If the Roman ruler standing in the holy place was an abomination, then certainly the destruction of the temple itself was also an abomination. Non-Christian Jews were sacrificing animals in 70 AD. The temple was destroyed. This, according to preterists, was an abomination. But if today it were to go back exactly the way it was, again with non-Christian Jews building the temple and sacrificing animals, these same preterists argue this reversal of 70 AD would also be an abomination. How could both events, one a complete reversal of the other, both be an abomination? All three references to the abomination of desolation (Daniel 9:27, 11:31, 12:11) also refer to the stopping of the sacrifice. In Daniel 9:27, the stopping of the sacrifice is in the middle of the seven years. It just so happens that in Daniel 9 it’s possible to interpret the abomination as happening sometime after the seven years. And the preterists depends on this interpretation because the preterist must separate the stopping of the sacrifice (crucifixion) from the abomination (70 AD) by forty years. But in the other two references, the two events happen on the same day, or at least within 1290 days of each other. Looking at the context of Daniel as a whole, the abomination of desolation seems to be something that happens on the same day as the stopping of the sacrifice. |
(NIV Matthew 24:15) So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that
causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel — let the reader understand.
(NIV Daniel 9:27) He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him. (NIV Daniel 11:31) His armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation. (NIV Daniel 12:11) From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Let’s take a closer look at the abomination of desolation in chapter 12. We are told about the abomination in verses 11 and 12. We need to pay special attention to the context of verses just prior (verses 8-12) and just after, which is verse 13. What is the “time of the end” in these verses? When one is convinced of a specific theology or eschatology, there is a tendency to take verses out of context when they don't fit your thinking. Verse 13 clearly establishes the "time of the end" as the time when Daniel himself will be resurrected. Verses 8-10 also speak of the time of the end. By context, therefore, they must also be talking about the time of the resurrection. Verse 13 also speaks of the "end of the days." So the "end of the days" is the "time of the end." By context, verses 11 and 12 would also be referring to the time of the end, since the verses both before and after speak of the time of the end. And verses 11 and 12 speak about a number of days. So by context, it's the same days as verse 13 speaks of when it says, "at the end of the days." Therefore, from the abomination of desolation, there is 1290 (or 1335) days. After these 1290 (or 1335), at end of these specific days, is the time of the end. And the time of the end is the time of Daniel's resurrection. Therefore, there is in fact an abomination of desolation 3 1/2 years before the resurrection. (The resurrection is when Christ returns.) Daniel 9, of course, speaks of the 7 years with the stopping of sacrifice in the middle. And Daniel 9 also mentions the "end". So that's the 7-year Great Tribulation. Even if you don't believe Daniel 9 is at the time of the same "end" as in Daniel 12, we still have a 3 1/2 year period from the abomination of desolation until the resurrection and Christ's return, solely from Daniel 12. Preterism cannot accept the idea that the abomination of desolation is 1290 days before the resurrection. This would destroy their basic belief that Matthew 24 was fulfilled in 70 AD. Preterists will quote commentaries, like Matthew Henry, who think the 1290 days was in the time of the Maccabees (168 BC). Yet there is nothing in the history of the Maccabees that takes 1290 days. Commentaries like Matthew Henry equate the 1290 days with the three years during which the statue of Zeus stood on the temple mount. But the book of first Maccabees makes it clear that it was exactly three years to the very day. It was not 1290 days. Also, commentaries like Matthew Henry tend to say nothing about the time of the end given in verses 8-10, and then in 13. Verse 13 proves it's talking about the time of the resurrection. But preterists don't like to equate the abomination with the resurrection. |
(NIV Daniel 12:8-13) I heard, but I did not understand. So I asked, “My lord, what will the outcome
of all this be?” [9] He replied, “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are closed up and sealed
until the time of the end. [10] Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but
the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand.
[11] “From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. [12] Blessed is the one who waits for and reaches the end of the 1,335 days. [13] “As for you, go your way till the end. You will rest, and then at the end of the days you will rise to receive your allotted inheritance.” |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
We also need to look earlier in the chapter, at verses 1-4. The time is clearly established in verse 2 as the time of the resurrection. Those who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake. That's the resurrection. And here we see the Great Tribulation (Distress), at the time of the resurrection. Also, here we see Daniel being told to seal the words so they may not be understood until the time of the end. And this is repeated in verses 8-10. Again, the context keeps proving the same thing. The time of the end is at the resurrection. The Great Tribulation is just prior to the resurrection. The words are sealed until the time of the end. The 1290 days are at the time of the end. The abomination of desolation is 3 1/2 years before the resurrection. The whole chapter is about the time of the end, which is the time of the resurrection. It makes no sense to pluck out two verses and place them in 168 BC. When you do that, you are taking them out of the context of the whole chapter. Some preterists, in order to get around their contextual problem will try to equate the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 with the spiritual resurrection of the believer. This places the abomination of verse 11 as being fulfilled in 70 AD. The preterist might quote John 5:25 which says, “I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live.” This is in line with the amillennial interpretation of Revelation 20. But look at Daniel 12:2 closer. Did the wicked dead also rise at the time of the cross? Daniel 12:2 clearly includes both the righteous and the wicked. You can't take make the abomination in verse 11 fit the time of Christ because there was 40 years between the cross and 70 AD, not 1290 days. Some preterists will even flip-flop between these two views. It really doesn’t matter to them if the abomination of desolation happens in 168 BC, or in 70 AD, as long as it doesn’t happen 1290 days before Christ returns. But the natural reading of Daniel 12:2 puts the chapter in the context of the resurrection, when both the wise and the wicked are resurrected. And the natural reading of Daniel 12:13 requires the time of the end to be the time of Daniel’s resurrection. So the abomination of desolation is 1290 days before the resurrection. | (NIV Daniel 12:1-4) At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered. [2] Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. [3] Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever. [4] But you, Daniel, close up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge.” | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
We have just looked at the abomination of desolation in Daniel 12. It’s clearly to be fulfilled about 3 ½ years before the resurrection. Now let’s take a look at the abomination of desolation in Daniel 11:31. This verse was, in fact, fulfilled at the time of the Maccabees (168 BC). The prophecies of Daniel 11:1-31 are fulfilled by very precise and detailed events in history. And those events of history lead us from Alexander the Great right up to the statue of Zeus on the temple mount, at the time of the Maccabees. Antiochus Epiphanes conquered Jerusalem, put and end to the sacrifice and offering, and set up an abomination that causes desolation. The abomination was a statue of Zeus on the temple mount. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
These precise events in history are so accurate that the liberals try to claim that Daniel was written at the time of the Maccabees. Why do they say the time of the Maccabees? It’s because everything up to the abomination of 168 BC was extremely accurate. And the liberals don't believe in precisely accurate fulfilled prophecy. But the verses from 40-43 have nothing that liberals would worry about. You can always find vague parallels between prophecy and any time-period you like. But the verses before from 1-31 are not vague fulfillments. So we would expect verses 40-43 to have the same level of detail and accuracy in its fulfillment. When the prophecy mentions a battle, for example, you should be able to point to that exact battle in history. This is detailed prophecy that commentators such as Matthew Henry cannot find in history. He wants to believe these verses are still about the time of the Maccabees. But he just makes vague comments. He does not show when this battle (verse 40) took place. Here is Matthew Henry's vague commentary on verse 40 (Underline mine; Italics his):
You see, he is not identifying the specific battle in history. He just says this "seems to be another expedition into Egypt, or at least, a struggle with Egypt." He can't find it in history. So he just assumed that it happened and that we don't know about the event. But God was very careful to give us all the historical details about the fulfillment of verses 1-31. We even know specifics about wives of kings and their cunnings. We know how all the details of this prophecy were fulfilled. But verses 36-45 have not been fulfilled. It will take place in the future. | (NIV Daniel 11:40-43) At the time of the end the king of the South will engage him in battle, and the king of the North will storm out against him with chariots and cavalry and a great fleet of ships. He will invade many countries and sweep through them like a flood. [41] He will also invade the Beautiful Land. Many countries will fall, but Edom, Moab and the leaders of Ammon will be delivered from his hand. [42] He will extend his power over many countries; Egypt will not escape. [43] He will gain control of the treasures of gold and silver and all the riches of Egypt, with the Libyans and Nubians in submission. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
So is there a verse that would indicate a transition from the time of the Maccabees to the time of the end? Yes there is:
Daniel 11:1-31 are the verses leading up to the abomination of desolation, at the time of the Maccabees. This verse makes it clear that the time of the Maccabees is not the time of the end. This verse indicates a transition from the time of the Maccabees to the time of the end. And Daniel 11:40-45 remains as unfulfilled prophecy before the return of Christ, which is something that preterists claim does not exist. Jesus said, “So when you see standing in the holy place, ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel” (Matthew 24:15). Daniel 11:31 is the real key to just what is the abomination that we will see. Daniel 11:31 was already fulfilled when Jesus spoke these words on the Mount of Olives. Therefore, Jesus is saying that what happened in 168 BC will happen again. Daniel 11:35 is a transition from the time of the Maccabees to the time of the end. It’s also a transition from the abomination at the time of the Maccabees (Daniel 11:31) to the abomination at the time of the end (Daniel 12:11). Daniel’s prophecy goes from Alexander to the first abomination. Antiochus Epiphanes was a type of anti-christ. And Daniel 11:40-45 picks up with prophesy about the anti-christ at the time of the end. So Daniel’s prophecy jumps from the anti-christ at the time of the Maccabees to the anti-christ at the time of the end. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Here is a quote from the book of first Maccabees about that first abomination. I'm not Catholic, so I don't consider Maccabees to be Scripture. But whether it's Scripture or not is not important here. It is considered an accurate historical reference. A Greek translation of the book of Maccabees was around at the time of Jesus. The disciples would have known about the book. Maccabees is where the Jews get Hanukkah. It's a Jewish festival in celebration of the victory after this event. Jesus and the disciples were Jews, so they most likely celebrated Hanukkah (John 10:22). Since they knew about Hanukkah, and they knew about Daniel, they most likely knew the term "abomination of desolation" and associated it with Hanukkah. This is quoted from the New American [Catholic] Bible: | (NIV John 10:22-23) Then came the Feast of Dedication [that is, Hanaukkh] at Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon’s Colonnade. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Antiochus Epiphanes conquered Jerusalem, put and end to the sacrifice and offering, and set up an abomination that causes desolation. The abomination was a statue of Zeus on the temple mount. This happened in Jesus' past. He is saying it will happen again. The disciples would have recognized the term: "abomination of desolation." They would have recognized the term, so Jesus is saying to look for what previously happened to happen again. King Nebuchadnezzar made an image of gold and required that "peoples, nations and men of every language" (Daniel 3:4) worship the image. In Revelation, anti-christ is “given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast — all whose names have not been written in the book of life” (Revelation 13:7b-8a). The false prophet sets up an image and requires all the "inhabitants of the earth" to worship the image (Revelation 13:14-15). I believe the abomination of desolation is this image in Rev 13. I believe it will be erected on the “wing (edge or extremity) of the temple” (Daniel 9:27). Perhaps, it will be erected on the rock that is under the Dome of the Rock. If the temple were built to face east, as it must, and were built to line up with the eastern gate, the Dome of the Rock would be on the south side Gentile courtyard (Revelation 11:2). The Gentile courtyard is like a wing of the temple. It's on the "edge or extremity," (north and south sides,) of the temple. The Temple Mount is recognized as holy by thee major world religions. (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) The anti-christ proclaims himself to be God, to the entire world, in the temple (2nd Thessalonians 2:4). How can the statue be anywhere else? When we read Matthew 24, Jesus tells us to watch for the abomination of desolation, spoken of by the prophet Daniel. Our study of Daniel points to a future time when the anti-christ will erect a statue for the entire world to worship. But when we look at the account in Luke 21, we get the preterist perspective. Instead of the abomination of desolation, it speaks of Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, and it’s desolation being near. Obviously this was fulfilled in 70 AD. The key to the problem is found in the original question that was asked by the disciples. All of Matthew 24 and 25 was in answer to this question. The disciples were wandering through the temple, looking at the buildings. Jesus had just left the temple. The disciples caught up with him and called his attention to the buildings. Jesus said, "Do you see all these things?" He asked, "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down" (verse 2, NIV). The disciples were in culture shock. The temple was the greatest and most important thing they had ever known. Its construction had started before they were born and was still under way. The construction of this temple was not finished until 64 AD, just six years before it was destroyed. From the disciple’s point of view, its destruction must be the end times. They were speechless as the group went up the Mount of Olives, which is just outside the eastern gate leading from the temple mount. It probably took about fifteen minutes to walk. "As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. "Tell us," they said, "when will all this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" (verse 3, NIV). "All this happening" was the destruction of the temple. "Not one stone here will be left on another." This is one question. Another question is, "what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" There are two fulfillments to the prophecy. One is when the temple was destroyed in 70 AD. The other is when Jesus returns. The prophecy is true about both times. I don't believe the disciples actually understood that they were asking more than one question. But prophecy is prophecy. God's word is God's word. You ask the question, you get the answer to the question(s) you ask. When we read Luke's account, we notice some differences. Matthew's account reads, "So when you see standing in the holy place the abomination that causes desolation, spoken of through the prophet Daniel..." (Matthew 24:15 NIV) Luke's account instead reads, "When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies you will know that its desolation is near" (Luke 21:20 NIV). Luke's account is primarily in answer to the first question. Matthew's account is primarily in answer to the second question. Matthew's account reads, "For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now - and never to be equaled again. If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect, those days will be shortened" (Matthew 24:21-22 NIV). Luke's account instead reads, "There will be a great distress in the land and wrath against this people. They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled" (Luke 21:23-24 NIV). Matthew's account ends in victory. Luke's account ends in defeat, but jumps in time to the point of victory. The greatest distress of all time is at the end times, at the time of the resurrection. It's a greater distress than in 70 AD. Depending on how you measure distress, there has since been wars of much greater distress and scope than in 70 AD. Consider the Holocaust of World War II. 70 AD was not the greatest distress of all time. Christ will return and save Jerusalem and his people. This is Matthew's account. A great distress, but not the greatest of all time, was in 70 AD. That is when the Gentiles (Rome) conquered Jerusalem and the Jews were taken as prisoners to all the nations. This is Luke's account. Gentiles have trampled on Jerusalem from 70 AD until 1967, when Israel regained Jerusalem. In Matthew’s account, Jesus gives this speech in private to the disciples, up on the Mount of Olives. If you read Luke’s account, without letting Matthew’s account influence what you read, the speech is given in the temple. Luke’s account was a warning to the people in Jerusalem. Matthew’s account is a private warning to the disciples and the Church. In Matthew’s account, we are told to watch for the abomination of desolation. In Luke’s account, we are told to watch for the surrounding of Jerusalem by armies. Well which one did Jesus say? If both accounts are of the same speech, then we have a problem of Scriptural accuracy. The text does not say, “the abomination of desolation which is the surrounding of Jerusalem by armies.” That’s not what the text says. One text says one thing, and the other text says the other thing. There are other examples of multiple accounts of the same event, as seen by different disciples. But the question of whether he said to watch for the abomination or for the surrounding of Jerusalem is a more than just different perspective of the same event. On the argument of Scriptural inerrancy alone, it must have been two different speeches. So Matthew’s account must be more about the end time generation. And Luke’s account must be more about the generation of Jesus. In Luke’s account, the statement "Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled" is our clue that the prophecy skips over time. It skips over the times of the Gentiles. From Luke's perspective, everything before this statement is about the generation of Jesus, and everything after this statement is about the end time generation. The statement, "this generation shall not pass away," is given to the adult generation, both to the adult generation of Jesus, and to our adult generation today. The baby boom generation that was born right after World War II had just reached adult age when Israel regained Jerusalem in 1967. Israel became a nation again right after World War II. Basically, what we have here is a timeline as follows:
The statement, "This generation shall certainly not pass away until all these things have happened," is applied to both generations! And the time in between both generations is the time of the Gentiles. If you were born after World War II, the baby boom generation, you should live long enough to see the return of Christ Jesus. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
When Jesus said, "no man knows the day or the hour", I believe it was a reference back to Daniel 12. Daniel asked, "How long will it be before all these astonishing things are fulfilled?" These astonishing things included the resurrection. So it was a question as to how long it would be until the resurrection. Daniel was told that not even the wise would understand (or know) until the time of the end. That's what Jesus was talking about when he said, "No man knows the day or the hour." The disciples were not to know, or to understand (Acts 1:7). Yet all generations are taught to expect Christ to return in their generation. Daniel, Zechariah 14, Matthew 24, 2nd Thessalonians 2, and Revelation all teach that tribulation comes first. So all generations should be taught to expect Christ to return in their generation. All generations should be taught to be ready for the martyrdom that will come before Christ returns. That's the blessing of reading Revelation, according to Revelation 1:1-3. The blessing is because "the time is near." It must be near for all generations in order to receive this blessing. Yet there is only one generation that is really the generation in which Christ returns. Daniel was told that the words are sealed to our understanding. That is, until the actual end-time generation. That generation can understand the meaning of Daniel 12. That’s the generation for which the seals of the scroll are opened (Revelation 6). So Jesus was saying, "no man knows," but here are signs for which we must watch. When we see the signs we will know. When we see the abomination of desolation, we will know (understand) the day and hour. The disciples were not a generation that was to know the times or the seasons (Acts 1:7). Therefore, with regard to some of the things that Jesus said, they didn't understand any more than Daniel, even after receiving the Holy Spirit. Not even Jesus (the Son) understood the scroll of Daniel 12. I think the disciples really did believe that he would return in that generation. So they probably understood Matthew’s account and Luke’s account to be talking about the same thing. They probably thought that Jesus was saying the same thing in the temple and up on the Mount of Olives. But they were mistaken. They didn’t understand because 70 AD had not yet come. And they didn’t understand because the seals of Daniel 12 had not yet been opened. So the angel replied, “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are closed up and sealed until the time of the end. Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand" (NIV Daniel 12:9-10). The understanding of when the resurrection will happen is closed up and sealed. Daniel is also told that none of the wicked will understand, but the wise will understand. This lack of understanding for the wise includes the disciples. Jesus seems to even have included himself, saying the even he didn’t know they day or hour. Likewise Jesus gives a parable about the thief in the night (Matthew 24:42-51). In this parable the wicked will not know the day or the hour. The wicked do not understand. When the seals of Daniel 12 are broken, the wise will understand. The thief-in-the-night symbolism is continued in 1st Thessalonians 5:1-4. Verse 3 says that while the wicked people are saying "peace and safety", sudden destruction will come on them. But verse 4 says the wise will not be surprised like a thief. We also find the same thing about the thief in the night in Revelation 3:3. So the thief-in-the-night symbolism parallels this verse in Daniel 12:9-10. The wicked will not understand. But the wise will understand as the time of the end approaches. The words are still sealed until the time of the end. None of the wicked will understand. But those who are wise will understand. When Jesus made reference back to the prophet Daniel, he said, “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel - Let the reader understand” (Matthew 24:15). He was speaking about the readers of the book of Daniel. The statement, “No man knows” (Matthew 24:26), and the thief-in-the-night symbolism, are both in reference to what Daniel was told. Only the wise will understand, and then only when the time of the end comes. So when Jesus said, “Let the reader understand,” it was a prayer for the fulfillment of Daniel’s prophesies. It was a prayer for the time of the end to come. By the time the abomination of desolation is set up, all of the wise will understand. They will understand the “day and the hour” simply by adding 1290 days to the date (Daniel 12:11). Both Matthew’s account and Luke’s account said, “This generation will not pass away before all these things take place.” “All these things” includes the return of Christ. Full preterists argue that Jesus did in fact return in 70 AD because he said he would. But most historical preterists don’t go that far. Many, if not most, historical preterists would agree that to say Christ will not return in the future is heresy. (The problems with full preterism are discussed in detail in the next section.) But the question asked by the disciples is clearly a question of when Christ will return. And “all these things” includes the return of Christ. In Matthew’s account “all these things” is just three verses after the return of Christ. In Luke’s account’ it four verses after the return of Christ. Context is king. To say that “all these things” does not include the return of Christ is to violate its immediate context. So we must accept the fact that the disciples didn’t understand, and that they recorded these two accounts, Mathew 24 and Luke 21, thinking that both speeches are about the return of Christ in their lifetimes. Yet the disciples didn’t understand that it was really two different speeches about two different generations. One was at the temple, and the other was privately up on the Mount of Olives. We can pick out the truth of what Jesus was saying by seeing the time gap in Luke 21:24, and by allowing Matthew 24 to be entirely future. The “abomination of desolation, spoken of by the prophet Daniel,” must be in the future. |
(NIV Daniel 12:6-10) One of them said to the man clothed in linen, who was above the
waters of the river, “How long will it be before these astonishing things are fulfilled?” The
man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, lifted his right hand and his
left hand toward heaven, and I heard him swear by him who lives forever, saying, “It will
be for a time, times and half a time. When the power of the holy people has been finally
broken, all these things will be completed.” I heard, but I did not understand. So I
asked, “My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?” He replied, “Go your way, Daniel, because
>u>the words are closed up and sealed until the time of the end. Many will be purified, made
spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will
understand, but those who are wise will understand.
(NIV Matthew 24:3) “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen? (NIV Matthew 24:36) No one [currently] knows [or understands] about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. (NIV Matthew 24:43, 48, 51) But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. ... But suppose that servant is wicked, ... The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. (NIV 1 Thessalonians 5:2b-3a, 4) the Lord will come like a thief in the night. While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly. ... But you, brothers, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief. (KJV Revelation 3:3b) If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know [or understand] what hour I will come upon thee. (NIV Acts 1:7) He said to them [the disciples]: “It is not for you to know [or understand] the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. (NIV Matthew 24:15) So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel — let the reader understand. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The only alternative for historical preterist is to say “all these things” doesn’t include the return of Christ, even though the disciples were asking for signs of his coming. Sometimes historical preterists try to stretch the coming of Christ in the clouds, and the gathering of the elect, to be something that happened over time after 70 AD. But again, the disciples were asking, “What are the signs of your coming?” There is no way for historical preterists to avoid stretching some part Christ’s speech. Full preterism and it’s origins were discussed somewhat in the previous section, titled “Signs of the Times.” That section shows why the full preterists are the “scoffers” of 2nd Peter 3, who say that Christ will not return. Thus, full preterists are themselves a sign of the times – a sign indicating that Christ will return in today’s generation. Full preterism says that everything in the Bible was fulfilled by 70 AD. That includes the return of Christ, the great white throne of judgment, and the conquering of the last enemy, which is death. In other words, full preterists believe that this world of sin is the eternal state. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Let’s examine 2nd Peter 3, to see how terminology is redefined to make Scripture say that this world of sin is the eternal state. Let’s also take a look a the methods of interpretation that full preterists use to “deliberately forget” about the Creation, and wind up concluding that the present heavens and earth will not be destroyed by fire. Peter starts out describing the scoffers as being people who deliberately forget the Creation. Today, the theory of evolution denies the Creation. But does the denial of the Creation mean that you “deliberately forget” the Creation? I think it depends on whether or not you profess to believe in the Bible. It depends on whether or not you profess Christianity. If you are not a Christian, if you don’t profess to believe the Bible, then you are not “deliberately forgetting” Scripture. If you never believed in the Bible, then you are not forgetting the Bible. Those who “deliberately forget” Scripture are those who think they believe in the Scripture, but who find ways to deny certain aspects of the Scripture. They are not simply letting Scripture speak with authority. They impose their belief systems upon Scripture. Many Christians today try to reconcile their belief in evolution with their belief in the Bible. Yet they also want to believe that the Bible is God’s infallible Word. Now please don’t misunderstand me on this point. There is nothing wrong with studying God’s Word in an honest attempt to understand what it says. For example, I’m not a six-day creationist. I don’t believe the six days of the Creation are 24-hour days. I believe they are thousand year days. And I believe that Genesis 1:1 teaches that the earth existed prior to the first day. Many six-day creationists would claim that I am instrument of Satan for having such beliefs. A day being a thousand years, however, comes nowhere close to the millions of years that scientists say evolution requires. And I don’t believe that one species can evolve into another species. My belief that the six days of Creation are thousand-year days comes from the study of Scripture, and not from the study of science. | (NIV 2nd Peter 3:3-7) First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If your motive is to reconcile the theory of evolution with God’s Word, then you place the theory of evolution on equal par with the Scripture. This, I think, is what Peter refers to as an “evil desire.” It’s the desire to make Scripture say what you want it to say. It’s not honestly and humbly seeking to find what God says. The “evil desire” is a desire to place our will, our beliefs, and our desires above that of God’s Word. When it becomes obvious that you are going to great lengths to make an author of Scripture say something that it’s very doubtful the author intended to say, then it’s the “evil desire” at work. And like most sins, it’s a sin that shrouds itself with denial. In order to deny the natural and obvious meaning of 2 Peter 3:3-7, as well as the latter chapters of Revelation, full preterists redefine the “new heavens and the new earth” as being the new covenant. Let’s take a look at how this is accomplished. Genesis 1:1 speaks about the creation of the heavens and the earth. So the heavens and the earth is God’s Creation. Isaiah 65:17, and 66:22 speak of the “new heavens and the new earth.” The entire book of Isaiah is poetry. It’s quite possible that Isaiah was using this term in a figurative or poetic way to describe a new age, and not literally a new creation. It’s also quite possible that Isaiah was referring to the millennium, the age when the Messiah will reign as king in an earthly government. Thus the millennium would be figuratively the “new heavens and new earth.” After the millennium, this figurative term will be fulfilled as a literal new heavens and new earth. A similar thing happens with terms like salvation, and “born again.” We are saved from sin. Yet we still sin. True salvation will come when we no longer sin. We are “born again” spiritually. But when Christ returns, we will be literally “born again” into spiritual bodies. In a similar way, the millennial reign of Christ is a precursor to the new heavens and the new earth. Thus the millennium is figuratively the new heavens and the new earth. Historical preterists generally take the amillennial view of Isaiah 65 and 66 being about the eternal state after Christ returns. Full preterists, however, force everything in Scripture to be fulfilled by 70 AD. They leave no opportunity for a future eternal state that has no sin. Thus they also force Isaiah 65 and 66 to be fulfilled by 70 AD. A reasonable reading of Isaiah 65 and 66 does not allow for it to be fulfilled in 70 AD. However, since Isaiah is poetry, preterists seem to get by with saying it means whatever they like. Thus the “new heavens and new earth” becomes the “new covenant.” They argue that the new covenant was not completely established until 70 AD. This is done using Hebrews 8:13, which says the old covenant was obsolete, aging, and would soon disappear. They will argue that the destruction of the present heavens and earth, in 2nd Peter 3, would be the destruction of the present covenant. Thus, they argue that Peter referred to the old covenant as the present covenant, saying that the present covenant would be destroyed by fire. Then they argue the fire is figurative, or literally fire that destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD. But Peter would never call the old covenant the “present covenant.” All this just shows how you can make Scripture say anything you want it to say. It’s the “evil desire” to impose what one wants to believe on Scripture. You just redefine some terms, and the meaning is changed. Genesis 1:1 clearly establishes the heavens and the earth as being God’s Creation. Just because Isaiah may have used it figuratively in poetry, does not mean that Peter was using it figuratively. Peter was going out of his way make his words be literal. Peter was not writing poetry like Isaiah. He is comparing the destruction of the heavens and earth with the literal destruction of the earth by water at the Great Flood. The destruction by water was literal. And thus the destruction by fire is also literal. Peter even says that the destruction of the heavens and earth by fire is with the “same word” as the destruction earth by water. Full preterists “deliberately forget” by saying that while the destruction by water may have been literal, the destruction by fire is only a new age. Anyone who is truly honest with Scripture knows that this is not what Peter was saying. Peter was taking about “scoffers” who would come in the last days and claim that Christ will not return. That is exactly what the full preterists are doing today. The full preterists have become their own worst nightmare. They themselves have become a “sign of the times,” that in this generation Christ will return. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Full preterists must also change the obvious meaning is Acts 1:9-11. Prior to this, Jesus had
been appearing to the disciples for a period of forty days (Acts 1:3). He would eat with
them, and they could touch him (John 20:27). He make a point of telling them that he had flesh and
bones, and was not a ghost (Luke 24:37-39). After forty days, after teaching the disciples on the
Mount of Olives, Jesus ascended up into the sky. The Greek (and Hebrew) word for sky and
heaven is the same word. But the text clearly teaches that they were looking upward into the sky
as Jesus left. Then two angels appeared and told the disciples that Jesus would return “in like
manner.” Any reasonable reading of this passage shows that Jesus will return physically and that we
will literally see him when he returns. But that didn’t happen in 70 AD. Full
preterists, therefore, use various arguments to deny the obvious truth of this Scripture. The
following preterist arguments against the traditional meaning of Acts 1:9-11 comes
from Keith A. Matheson’s article titled, “Acts 1:9-11 and the Hyper-Preterist Debate.”
J. Stuart Russell was the original author of full preterism. He says that “in like manner” should not be pressed to far. He then points out differences between the ascension and the return as with the angels. H e thus denies that the return will actually be all they way to the ground. But that’s not the obvious meaning that Luke intended, based on the words of the two angels. Max King, of Presence Ministries International, says that “in like manner” simply means that it’s the same Jesus who will return. He says it’s not a physical appearance. He denies that we will actually see him. Randall E. Otto is an author that is cited regularly by full preterists. He denies that Christ’s resurrected body was actually physical. So, he argues, the return of Christ is spiritual and invisible in nature. He describes the ascension as not something physical that they were actually seeing, but that Christ was spiritually lifted up in their understanding of his statue or dignity. Edward E. Stevens, president of the International Preterists Association, equates the ascension with the high priest ascending into the holy of holies in heaven. Thus it’s not to be interpreted as a literal ascension. The coming in 70 AD is suppose to be when Christ returned from the holy of holies to announce that his blood had been accepted. “In the same way” meant that Jesus came in the clouds in 70 AD, but not back to earth. John Noe is the founder of the Prophecy Reformation Institute. He believes that “in like manner” means that people would not see Christ when he returned because he would remain hidden in the clouds. So full preterists are not all that consistent among themselves as to why Acts 1:9-11 doesn’t mean what it obviously says. But they themselves are fully convinced Christ will not return back to this earth in a body so that every eye will see him (Revelation 1:7). These are ways of “deliberately forgetting” the clear teaching of Acts 1:9-11. | (NIV Acts 1:9-11) After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.” | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The basic premise of full preterism is that Jesus taught that he would return in their generation. They argue that since Jesus taught this, that he must have returned in 70 AD. Here are the three primary verses that full preterists use to make this claim:
Can we conclude from these verses that Jesus did in fact return in 70 AD? They argue that since Jesus taught these verses, that he must have returned in 70 AD. The early church didn't recognize that Christ returned in 70 AD. How could the early church, only 40 years after Christ, have been so mistaken? The destruction of Jerusalem was not seen as a "blessed hope" (Titus 2:13). Yet Christ taught that his return would not be mistaken by anyone (Matthew 24:26-27, 2 Thess 2:1-3). The disciples were not a generation that was to know the times or the seasons of Christ’s return (Acts 1:7). In the last section, titled “Two Generations,” we saw how Daniel 12:6-9 teaches that not even the wise will understand about the timing of Christ’s return until the time of the end actually comes. As we saw in that section, Christ’s teaching of “no man knows the day or the hour” (Matthew 24:36) comes from Daniel 12:6-9. So the angels didn’t understand. Not even the Son, when Christ was teaching the disciples, completely understood. Only the Father completely understood about the timing of Christ’s return. We also saw how the thief-in-the-night symbolism teaches the exact same thing. The wicked will never understand. Only the wise in the time of the end will understand about the timing of Christ’s return. Yet all generations should expect the return of Christ in their lifetimes. So according to Daniel 12:6-9, the disciples were not supposed to understand. The verse in Matthew 24:34 has already been discussed in the section titled “Two Generations.” Matthew 24 and Luke 21 must be viewed as two different generations that will not pass away until all this take place. See that section for the reasons why the text supports this view, even though the disciples themselves at the time would not have understood it that way. Today we can see things more clearly. But not as clearly as when Christ will return. As the end approaches, the seals of Revelation 6 are broken. As the end approaches, the wise will understand. In many respects Jesus was speaking to both generations. The disciples understood what they needed in order to have the hope that Christ would return in their generation. And for the first time since that generation, we have clear signs, based on specific verses of Scripture, which point to today’s generation. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Matthew 24:30 says that when Christ does return, that all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven. Now I don't believe the wise, those who know Jesus, would mourn at His coming! It's the wicked of the world that mourn. They will mourn because they will realize that they have been wrong, and that their continued sin remains to be judged. So, the second coming will be something that no one mistakes (Matthew 24:26-27). Not even the wicked of the world will mistake or fail to see the second coming once it happens. Every tribe of the world, according to this verse, will mourn! This didn’t happen in 70 AD. | (NIV Acts 1:9-11) (NIV Revelation 1:7) Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The second verse that Preterists initially quote is Matthew 16:27-28. I would like to extend the number of verses quoted to be from verses 16:27 to 17:3. Remember that the original Greek did not have chapter and verse numbers. So we should not necessarily use them to separate topics. Perhaps the disciples did not equate these two events. They were not to understand. But the Holy Spirit clearly lead them into equating the two events by telling us the Transfiguration was six days after Jesus made this statement. "Some who are standing here" who would not taste death until they see Jesus in his kingdom, were Peter, James, and John. They saw Jesus in his glorified body state just six days after He made this promise. Today, "the wise" can see the significance of the six days. If Christ comes in the timeframe as indicated by this generation being the “generation [that] shall not pass away," then the millennial reign of Christ is the seventh millennium. It's the millennium where Christ is "Lord of the Sabbath" millennium. So, after six millennial days, there will be those among our generation who will not taste death before we also see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom. Again, Jesus was speaking to two different generations. And you have to interpret what He said about His second coming from that perspective. The first verse that Preterists quote is Matthew 10:23, which says, "You will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." Notice the parallels between Matthew 10:21-23 and Matthew 24:9-14: Verse 10:21 says, "Now brother will deliver up brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death." In chapter 24, verse 10 says, "And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another. And Luke's account, in Luke 21:16 says, "You will be betrayed by parents and brothers, relatives and friends; and they will put some of you to death." Verse 10:22 says, "And you will be hated by all for My name's sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved." In chapter 24, verse 9 says, "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation by all nations for My name's sake." Verse 13 says, "But he who endures to the end shall be saved." | (NIV Matthew 16:27 - 17:3) For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. [28] I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” [1] After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. [2] There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light. [3] Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Verse 10:23 says, "You will not have gone though the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." In chapter 24, verse 14 says, "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached to all the nations, and then the end will come." Jesus has a different message about His second coming for two different generations. To the generation of Jesus' day, He was saying you should preach the gospel with urgency to all the cities of Judah. To the end-time generation, Jesus is saying that the gospel should be preached with urgency to all the nations of the world. Notice that Jesus did not say, "the cities of Judah." He said, "the cities of Israel." Is there a difference? The cities of Judah would be cities of Jews. But cities of Israel can be cities wherever there are Christians. There is no difference been Israel and the Church. So the cities of Israel can be interpreted as cities all over the world. To sum it up, there are big parallels between Matthew 10:21-23 and Matthew 24:9-14. It's Jesus message to both generations. And Jesus said, "You will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." Since Israel is scattered to the four quarters of the earth, all the cities of Israel would be all the cities of the world! So to our generation, Jesus is saying that the gospel should be preached with urgency to all the nations of the world. To His generation, He was saying to preach with urgency to the cities of Judah. And I suspect that they didn't finish going through all the cities of Judah before 70 AD. After 70 AD, they could no longer go through the cities of Judah. So, they would not have gone though all the cities of Judah before the Son of Man comes. That's simply the precise truth of the statement. It's not a twisting of the words. Remember that the disciples did not have the authority to fully understand the season of the second coming. The scroll was still sealed. The basic meaning of Matthew 10:21-23 is the sense of urgency for both generations to preach the gospel before Christ returns. It's my belief that Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written before 70 AD. And that John was written after 70 AD. In John we find the end-times as being referred to the "last day", which from a Chiliast perspective would be 1000 years. You don't find the "last day" in Matthew, Mark, or Luke. Matthew, Mark and Luke contain the verses that preterists use. The gospel of John has no preterist verses. I think John was written after 70 AD when it was realized that some of the things Jesus said were not to be interpreted they way they understood them. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
When preterists want to interpret the abomination of desolation in Matthew 24, they generally turn to Daniel 9. Earlier on, I showed how the abominations of Daniel 11 and 12 require that the abomination of Matthew 24 be a future event. But it’s also prudent to examine the issues of Daniel 9. In order for the abomination of Matthew 24 to be 70 AD, preterists must argue that the seventy weeks of Daniel 9 was completely fulfilled with the crucifixion, or at least by 70 AD. Futurists see a two-stage fulfillment. The first fulfillment is in Christ’s first coming, and the second is in Christ’s second coming. Most futurists, and especially Dispensationalists, tend to split the seventy weeks between the 69th and the 70th. As preterists rightly point out, there is nothing in the text to warrant a time-jump between the 69th and the 70th week. This theory uses the letters of King Artaxerxes in 445 BC (Nehemiah 2) as the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. The timeline of sixty-nine weeks beginning in 445 BC requires that each week be based on 360-day years, with no correction for the solar cycle. Those who advocate the use of these letters as the decree are convinced of its correctness by the accuracy of the math. I don't think we should decide the decree based on the accuracy of the math. The dates themselves require information outside of Scripture. You have to go to the footnotes in study Bibles to get these dates. Unlike Scripture itself, they are subject to error. I like the idea of first examining Scripture to see what the decree should be. Use Scriptural precedent. If we don't then the math can deceive us. Many Dispensationalists, I believe, are deceived by the math of the 360-day year. Many Preterists, I believe, are deceived by the math of the decree in Ezra 7. Neither really qualifies as the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, from a purely Scriptural standpoint. I reject the letters of 445 BC for the following two reasons. The first reason is that the seventy weeks are obviously weeks of years. The Scriptural precedent for weeks of years is Leviticus 25. Here, the growing seasons and Jewish festivals are very important in establishment of these weeks of years. In Leviticus 25, the weeks of years are based on the growing seasons, in which is a year corrected to the solar cycle. 360-day years will get way off in the growing seasons. With the 360-day year, it only takes 70 years for summer to be winter and winter to be summer - a full half-year out of sync with the solar cycle. Also in Leviticus 25 we have the jubilee defined. The seventy weeks is ten jubilees. There has never been a calendar that was not corrected to the solar cycle. The Jewish calendar has 354 days in a year, and is corrected to the solar cycle approximately every third year. The second reason for rejecting the letters of Nehemiah 2 is that they are not a public law-making decree. It's only some letters that were written to the governors of Trans-Euphrates for safe conduct, and to Asaph, keeper of the king’s forest, so that he would give Nehemiah timber. The public law-making decree to release the Jews and rebuild Jerusalem had already been given by Cyrus. No further decree was necessary. On the other hand, Preterists often use the decree of King Artaxerxes in 458 BC (Ezra 7) as the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. Preterists do not split off any of the seventy weeks. All 490 years continues without a break. The math of this date works quite well. Sixty-nine weeks brings us to 26 AD, the start of Christ’s ministry. Thus the crucifixion would be in the middle of the seventh week. The problem, however, is that the decree given in Ezra 7 is not for the rebuilding of Jerusalem. It was not for the rebuilding of anything. It was simply for supplies for the temple. Verses 16, 17, and 20 of Ezra 7 specifically say it's for the temple. (The KJV says the "house of their God which is in Jerusalem." The NIV says the "temple of their God in Jerusalem.") I could find no mention of building anything in Ezra 7. And, the temple was already completed at the time of this decree. The BC dates that we have in our study Bibles are not in Scripture itself. They are computed from ancient lists of kings. There is very little disagreement among scholars on these dates. Nevertheless, they are based on ancient texts outside of Scripture, and can have errors. All the arguments of Scripture itself, without data from outside of Scripture, point to the decree of Cyrus. If we didn't have those lists of kings that are not in Scripture, then nobody would suggest Nehemiah 2. And nobody would suggest Ezra 7. Everyone would be in agreement that it's the decree of Cyrus, because Scripture itself suggests no other decree. Some have argued that the decree of Cyrus was not a decree to rebuild Jerusalem, but was instead a decree to rebuild the temple. But is not rebuilding the temple the first step of rebuilding Jerusalem? Is not the temple in Jerusalem? Isaiah lays this argument to rest. Isaiah prophesied the decree to rebuild Jerusalem in Isaiah 44:28, even naming Cyrus' name, hundreds of years before Cyrus was born. Isaiah said that Cyrus would rebuild the temple and Jerusalem. So from a perspective of letting Scripture interpret Scripture, the decree of Cyrus is the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. Daniel's prayer was given after Babylon had been conquered. And Daniel's prayer (Daniel 9:2) mentions the 70 years that Jeremiah said the captivity would last. This prophecy (Jeremiah 25:11-12) also said that the king of Babylon would be punished. Daniel had obviously recognized this punishment and was thus prompted to pray for Israel. Ezra 1:1 also mentions Jeremiah's 70 years and says that the decree of Cyrus was in its fulfillment. Daniel's prayer was given the first year of Darius the Mede. The decree of Cyrus was given the first year of Cyrus, which would be first year of his rule over Babylon. Cyrus was ruler over the entire Persian Empire. Thus Darius was probably a governor of Babylon starting in the year that Babylon was conquered. For Darius' rule to have started later would not make sense. Why would Daniel pray for something that had already been given? So Daniel's prayer must have been given in the same year that Babylon was conquered. Daniel's prayer specifically asks for the fulfillment of Jeremiah's 70 years (Daniel 9:2). And Scripture itself tells us that the decree of Cyrus was in fulfillment of Jeremiah's 70 years (Ezra 1:1). So the decree of Cyrus was in direct answer to Daniel's prayer. Daniel prayed for the forgiveness of Israel's sins. Daniel confessed that Jerusalem had been desolate for 70 years, because of Israel's sins. Is not the 70 weeks of years in Daniel 9 related to the 70 years of Jeremiah 25:11-12? Would not one begin when the other ends? God is saying that He would put an end to the desolation of Jerusalem. But God gives a reason for doing so. God says that "your people, and your holy city" have 70 weeks of years to put an end to sin. It all adds up together. God immediately brought the desolation of Jerusalem to an end. The prophecy of Jeremiah 29:10 even says that after the 70 years the people of Israel would be brought back to Jerusalem. Jerusalem would no longer be desolate. So the 70 weeks Israel was given to put an end to sin would logically start right then, when God brought the desolation of Jerusalem to an end. The 70 weeks of non-desolation immediately followed the 70 years of desolation. Daniel was praying for forgiveness of sin. The 70 weeks of non-desolation of Jerusalem are given for us to stop sinning. This will be completed when Christ returns. The 70 weeks of non-desolation of Jerusalem are given for us to put an end to sin. But God does the greater work. It's like in Philippians 2:12-13 which says, "Continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose." We must continue to overcome sin. But it's it is God who works in us and does the greater work. So were the seventy weeks of Daniel 9 completely fulfilled in Christ’s first coming? Or is it a two-stage prophecy that covers both of Christ’s comings? To better answer this question, perhaps we should ignore the starting date and concentrate more on the purpose of the seventy weeks, and on the wording of the text with regard to whether the timeline can be split between Christ’s two comings. |
(NIV Daniel 9:24-27) “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to
finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting
righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy.
“Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Preterists will argue that Christ fulfilled this purpose entirely. It’s true that Christ’s crucifixion paid for our sins. So in a way, transgression was finished. In a way, sin was put to an end. And the cross did atone for wickedness. Sin is still with us. But since the sins are paid for, you could argue that we have everlasting righteousness. So certainly the cross has a lot to do with the fulfillment of Daniel 9. But is this something that we ourselves did? Or is this something that Christ did? Yet the text says these are things that “your people and your holy city” must do. Israel was punished 70 years for sin. Now God is saying that we must stop sinning during these 70 weeks of years. Saying that Christ fulfilled this vision is to avoid the responsibility that we have to work out our salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12.) This is sanctification. God does the greatest work in us (Philippians 2:13.) But it’s a task that we must undertake, with God doing the greater work. And it’s a work that has not yet been fulfilled. Daniel’s 70 weeks have not yet been finished. If you are Baptist, you might believe that vision and prophecy were sealed with Christ’s first coming. Other Christians believe that vision and prophecy are still with us today. But even if vision and prophecy were sealed with Christ’s first coming, it would not have been sealed at the time of the crucifixion. For example, the book of Revelation was written years later, and it’s certainly a vision and a prophecy. The entire New Testament was written after Preterists say that the seventy weeks were finished. The 70 weeks were given for “your people and your holy city” to anoint the most holy. Messiah means the anointed one. In Old Testament times, this meant to literally pour oil over the head of a person, saying that he is king. The Church today considers Christ to be our king. He reigns in heaven. But he reigned in heaven from the creation of the world. Everything that was made was made by Him and through Him (Colossians 1:16). But during the ministry of Christ, he avoided being made king by the people (John 6:15). Someday, however, when Christ returns, “your people and your holy city” will anoint him King. This has not yet happened. Preterists claim that Christ completely fulfilled all these things at the cross. But look at what the text says. It’s not the Messiah that was to do these things. It’s “your people and your holy city” which must finish transgression and put an end to sin. The seventy weeks are given for us to “to put an end to sin,” and to “bring in everlasting righteousness.” While the first coming of Christ is an essential part of the fulfillment of Daniel’s vision, it’s not the complete fulfillment. This leads us to believe that the seventy weeks are decreed for Christ’s second coming, as well as for His first coming. The decree is for "your people and your holy city." All true believers are included in "your people" because the true Israel and the true Church are the same. But are we included in "your holy city?" Sure you could say there is a spiritual Jerusalem. But in the context of the vision, Daniel was praying for the restoration of the natural city of old Jerusalem. Context is king. The decree of Cyrus was for the restoration of that natural city, not for the restoration of a spiritual Jerusalem. So "your holy city" must be talking about the natural old city of Jerusalem. | (NIV Daniel 9:24) “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Matthew 23:37-39 makes it clear that Jesus will not return until those who “sit on the seat of Moses” (verse 2) say about Jesus, “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.” The people of Jerusalem had already said these exact words (Matthew 21:9) when Jesus rode in on a donkey. So this is not a requirement for Christians, or Jewish people in general, or even for Jews in Jerusalem. The Jewish leaders in Jerusalem, who “sit on the seat of Moses,” must fulfill this prophecy. Romans 11:25 also talks about the fact that the Jews must turn to Christ before Christ returns. Thus, it fits that Daniels’ vision says that “your holy city”, which is the Jewish leaders in old Jerusalem, must acknowledge that Jesus is the Messiah before the 70 weeks are fulfilled. With this in mind, the 70 weeks cannot be finished. There must be a gap between Christ’s first coming and his second coming. It’s true that the text does not suggest a gap between the 69th and the 70th week. But the text does allow for a gap between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks. Both time periods are decreed. Nothing in the text requires them to be added or to occur concurrently. Forcing them to be contiguous is forcing a requirement on the timeline that the text itself does not indicate. It's only an assumption to say that the two allotments of time are contiguous. Making them as two separate allotments of time in two separate comings of Christ makes a lot more sense than trying to find some significant event that might have occurred at the point where they would be joined contiguously. Since the 70 weeks are not yet fulfilled, and since the 62 weeks were fulfilled when the Messiah was “cut off”, then the 7 weeks must fulfilled in the end times, just prior to Christ’s second coming. As a matter of fact, the time when “the end shall come” (Matthew 24:14) is probably the “end” of the seventy weeks. It fits the context because Jesus is referring back to the abomination of desolation, spoken of in the prophet Daniel. The next section, titled “The Last Trumpet,” has more discussion about the 7 weeks being fulfilled in the end. | (NIV Matthew 23:37-39) O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. Look, your house is left to you desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Since the 70 weeks is not yet fulfilled, it would hold that the abomination of desolation is still in the future. It will be 1290 days (Daniel 12:11) before the end, which is the time of the resurrection (Daniel 12:13), when Christ returns. This makes Matthew 24 also be future, while Luke 21 deals with the surrounding of Jerusalem in 70 AD. In the last section, titled “The Seventy Weeks,” we saw that purpose for the allocation of seventy weeks has not yet been fulfilled. Therefore, the seventy weeks themselves has not yet been fulfilled. Furthermore, we saw that Scripture highly supports the decree of Cyrus as the time when the seventy weeks began. As soon as the seventy years of Jeremiah were finished, God used Cyrus to bring Israel back to Jerusalem. In answer to Daniel’s prayer, Jerusalem became no longer desolate. Thus the seventy weeks of years began as soon as the seventy years were ended. We also saw that the text does not support the idea of a contiguous 69 weeks followed by a gap between the 69th and the 70th week. The text does, however, allow for the seven weeks to be non-contiguous. The 69 weeks are given until the first coming of the Messiah. The 7 weeks are given until the second coming of Christ. The full seventy weeks are about both of Christ’s comings. The full seventy weeks of Daniel are given for “your people and your holy city” to “stop sinning”, to “seal up vision and prophecy”, and to anoint the most holy. These are all things that will be fulfilled when Christ comes again. It's my belief that the 62 weeks goes from the decree of Cyrus to the birth of Christ. Christ is "cut off" at his birth, not his death. Most people interpret this verse to mean the Messiah is crucified after the sixty-two 'sevens.' The Hebrew word that is translated 'cut off' is karath. The first five books of the Bible use the word 66 times. Only 8 of these references actually mean to be killed or destroyed. And there are other Hebrew words that always mean to kill or destroy. This word usually is used when a covenant is cut (or made). Originally, a covenant was made by cutting an animal in half. The two parties of the covenant would walk between the pieces of flesh to seal the agreement (Genesis 15:9-10, 17-18). In the following passage, we see that the 'cutting off' of flesh in circumcision is the same. The word karath is used here as well. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Moses is on the way to Egypt to tell Pharaoh to let God's people go. Israel is God's firstborn son. Israel went down into Egypt and became a slave. Just as Israel was freed from the bonds of slavery to Pharaoh, Christ came to free us from the bonds of slavery to sin and Satan. Satan is the prince of this world (John 12:31, 14:30, 16:11). Christ came to free us from the Pharaoh of this world. As Moses went down into Egypt, his son's circumcision [karath] had to be performed. When God sent his Son into this world, to free us from Pharaoh, he too was circumcised (Luke 2:21-23) and then went down into Egypt (Matthew 2:14). Christ was born to be a "bridegroom of blood," (as the verse above says) which refers to karath or circumcision. To 'cut off' is to separate. Circumcision is the cutting of skin or flesh. It is symbolic of the cutting off of ourselves that must be done. Our sinful nature, our desires of the flesh, must be cut off (Romans 2:29, Philippians 3:2). We must be separated from the evil part of ourselves that we inherited from Adam. When Israel crossed the Jordan into the Promised Land, the waters of the Jordan River were 'cut off' [karath] from the city of Adam to the Dead Sea (Joshua 3:16). This allowed Israel to cross the Jordan on dry ground. If our inheritance that flows from Adam, which leads to death, is not 'cut off' we cannot enter the Promised Land. We enter God's Rest (Hebrews 3-4), which is the Promised Land, when sin - our fleshly desires, are 'cut off.' In obedience to the Law, and as an example for us, Christ was circumcised at his birth. The purpose of the seventy 'sevens' of time is stated to be time for overcoming sin. To overcome sin, we must be crucified with Christ. The word 'karath,' meaning 'cut off,' has four basic uses or meanings. All four meanings can be applied to Christ's birth. The first five books of the Bible use the word 29 times in reference to being separated from Israel. At Christ's birth, God was 'cut off' from Himself. God became Man. It is used 20 times in these same books in reference to cutting a covenant. When Christ came at his birth, God was cutting a new covenant with Man. A simple act of cutting something occurs 9 times. (OK, at Christ's birth the umbilical cord was 'cut off'.) It is used 8 times to mean killed or destroyed. Jesus is the Word, the Word is God, and the "Word became flesh" (John 1:14). At the end of the sixty-two 'sevens,' the Word became flesh so that the flesh could be 'cut off.' God was 'cut off' (separated) from God so that God as flesh could be 'cut off' (killed/destroyed) in our place. This is the new covenant given by Jesus at the Last Supper. In acceptance of this covenant we must 'cut off' (separate and kill/destroy) sin from ourselves. "If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away" (Matthew 5:30). At the end of the sixty-two 'sevens,' the "Word became flesh" and Jesus was circumcised. This sums up the meaning of the word 'karath,' or 'cut off.' The birth of Christ marks the end of the sixty-two 'sevens.' Most of the modern translations say that after the Messiah is "cut-off", he will have nothing. This includes the NAS, NIV, RSV, NASB, ASV, Darby, and the NRSV. If "cut-off" means to be killed, then "will have nothing" doesn't really flow very well. On the other hand, if "cut-off" means the birth, then it makes a lot of sense. Christ came from heaven where he was rich. He was born into a poor family. He had nothing. You could say that Christ also died poor. But to say that would distract from the purpose of his coming. His real sacrifice of poverty was at his birth. | (NIV Exodus 4:24-26) At a lodging place on the way, the Lord met Moses and was about to kill him. But Zipporah, [Moses' wife, (2:22)] took a flint knife, cut off [karath] her son's foreskin and touched Moses' feet with it. "Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me," she said. So the Lord let him alone. (At that time she said "bridegroom of blood," referring to circumcision). | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I believe that after Christ came, the desolation of Jerusalem began again because of the rejection of Christ by Jewish leadership (Matthew 23:37-39). This began with Herod the Great, who purposely killed all the babies knowing that he was trying to kill the coming Messiah. So with Herod's death, Jerusalem was effectively desolate. I believe that God condemned Herod as king of Israel. Thus the "time of the Gentiles" had begun. The actual desolation, of course, was fulfilled in 70 AD. The "time of the Gentiles" continued until the Six Day War when Gentiles no controlled old Jerusalem. (It matters not that Jews in Jerusalem today are not Christian. They weren't Christian in 70 AD either.) So, Jerusalem was effectively desolate after Herod the Great. But during Christ's ministry, Jerusalem really did have a king. Jesus said that Pilate did not have the power to crucify him if it had not been given from above. Christ was effectively the king of old Jerusalem during his ministry. So during his ministry, the 70 weeks were underway. Also, since the 70 weeks are fulfilled with both of Christ's comings, it's only right that his 3 1/2 years of ministry are included. The timeline, therefore, is 62 weeks from Cyrus to the birth of Christ. Then there is half a week from the birth of Christ to Herod's death. The other half a week was during the ministry of Christ. The final 7 weeks is in the future, just prior to Christ’s second coming. Christ “comes” at his birth, not his death. Both the 62 weeks and the 7 weeks end when Christ comes. The seventy weeks are about both comings. Each marks the coming of the Messiah. Another reason for the futurist view of Daniel’s vision, is that the futurist view is much more chronological. The preterists view must jump back and forth between 30 AD and 70 AD. It goes from 30 AD to 70 AD, then back to 30 AD, and then back again to 70 AD. The preterist view makes a very poor timeline. This chart shows the differences.
Seventy weeks is ten jubilees. Thus, after Christ's ministry, nine jubilees were finished. The seven weeks is the last (tenth) jubilee. It's take place just before the return of Christ. On the Day of Atonement, in the 50th year of the jubilee, the slaves are set free (Leviticus 25:39-42). And those who have sold their land get it back (Leviticus 25:28). I believe the seven festivals given to Moses are all anniversaries of events that were given before the events. The first three festivals given to Moses were fulfilled in Christ’s crucifixion (Passover) and resurrection (Firstfruits). The fourth festival was fulfilled when the Holy Spirit came at Pentecost. The system of jubilees is a part of those seven festivals given to Moses. They prophesy what is to happen. It would seem that the jubilees prophecy about our freedom that we will have when Christ returns. We will be free from sin. And we will be home with the Lord. So in the 50th year we will be set free from the slavery of sin. And we will be home. We can also see this in the fourth festival, which tells us about the seven weeks between the resurrection and Pentecost. The resurrection was on the Feast of Firstfruits. Christ's resurrection was the firstfruits (1 Cor 15). The day of Pentecost is seven weeks after the Feast of Firstfruits. Pentecost means 50. On the 50th day after the resurrection, the Holy Spirit came. Likewise, in the 50th year, on the Day of Atonement, in the year of Jubilees, the Holy Spirit will come and we will be "born again" into spiritual bodies. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The week of the covenant (Daniel 9:27) is the 70th week of the prophecy. But it's not the 70th week in the traditional way that that's interpreted. The week of the covenant is the Sabbath week of the last jubilee. It's the last of the 70th weeks. But the missing week is not included in the 7 and the 62. It’s really the 63rd week. The missing week is 3 1/2 years from Christ's birth to Herod, and another 3 1/2 years during the ministry of Christ. Paul said that we get spiritual bodies at the "last trumpet" (1 Corinthians 15:52). In the Hebrew, Jubilee means "trumpet" or the "blowing of trumpets." So, the last jubilee is the “last trumpet.” It’s the last seven weeks of Daniel 9. It's the fulfillment of the prophecy. It's the time when "your people and your holy city" will put an end to sin, bring in everlasting righteousness, seal up vision and prophecy, and anoint the most holy. | (NIV 1 Corinthians 15:51-52) Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed — in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Philip B. Brown |