The Doctrine Of Last Things

Posted by & filed under Theology.

We come finally to the confusing and perplexing subject of the Doctrine of Last Things?  What are the events associated with the 2nd Coming of Jesus Christ?  When will the rapture take place? When does the millennium take place?  In these notes the strengths and weaknesses of 4 major millennial views are given. We hope these notes bring clarity of thought and help to you as you seek to understand the Last Things more clearly.

Leadership Training and Development

Systematic Theology

The Doctrine Of Last Things

 

1.      Introduction:

 

A.     Eschatology Is Not An Issue To Divide Over:  Over the history of the church age there have been 4 broad ways that Christians have understood the 2nd Coming of Christ:  Historic Premillennialism, Amillennialism, Postmillennialism, and Dispensational Premillennialism.  Until about 100 years ago, none of these 4 views were made a test of fellowship for believers.  The creeds and confessions were framed in such a way that a man could hold any one of the four views and be accepted in a church in good standing.  It was held that the most essential matter was the Gospel — the church must be united on that.  But it was held that a person’s brand of eschatology was not nearly so important and much more freedom and latitude was given in this area.  In our studies of eschatology, this will be very important to remember.  You can find strengths and weaknesses in each of the 4 major views.  There is not a single view which has no problems.  Therefore, it behooves us to step softly when approaching this subject!

 

2.   4 Major Views of Eschatology:  below is a rough outline of the 4 major views of eschatology.  It should be noted that are many variations within each school of thought.

 

A)     Dispensational Premillennialism:

 

1.      History of View:  this is the view that we are probably most familiar with.  It originated in the mid 1800’s in the teachings of John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth Brethren.  It did not gain widespread  popularity until the turn of the 20th century and the printing of the Scofield Reference Bible first published in 1909.  In the 20th century several Bible Colleges and Seminaries have embraced dispensational thought such as Moody Bible Instititue and Dallas Theological Seminary.  Additionally, many popular writers and teachers have written from this perspective including Hal Lindsay, Chuck Smith, John MacArthur, Charles Ryrie, and John Walvoord.  Seen in this light, this particular view is the most novel of all the four views, having only been embraced by Christians for less than 150 years.

 

2.      Basic Beliefs:

 

1)   Dispensations:  the history of man is divided into 7 dispensations — Innocence (Gen.1-2), Conscience (Gen.3-8), Human Government (Gen.9-11), Promise (Gen.12 – Exodus 19), Law (Sainai to Resurrection of Christ),  Grace (Pentecost – Rapture), and the Kingdom (millennium).  They believe that during each of these dispensations man is tested with respect to obedience to some definite revelation of God’s will.

 

2)   Israel and the Church:  They believe that the church is a “parenthesis” in God’s plan; an afterthought.  God’s primary concern is with Israel.  When Christ came He offered the kingdom to Israel.  Because they rejected the offer and crucified God’s Son, the establishment of the kingdom of God is delayed until after God is finished with the Church.  The earthly millennium after Christ returns is essential in order to fulfill the promises of the kingdom which God made to Israel.  There are 2 completely separate purposes of God — an earthly purpose for Israel and a heavenly purpose for the Church.  The church was not predicted in the Old Testament.   In the millennium Christ rules over a kingdom which is primarily Jewish, though Gentiles also share its blessings.  Animal sacrifices are reinstated, the temple rebuilt, and the priesthood reinstituted.

 

3)   2-Stage Coming of Christ:  dispensationalists believe that Christ will secretly rapture the Church, return with the saints to heaven for seven years while the earth is undergoing the “Great Tribulation” and then return with the saints to usher in the millennial kingdom.

 

4)   Multiple Resurrections and Judgments:  dispensationalists believe there will be a resurrection and judgment of church age saints at the rapture, of Old Testament and Tribulation saints at the 2nd Coming, of millennial saints and the wicked at the end of the millennium at the Great White Throne Judgment (Rev.20:11-15).  Thus, this system necessitates at least 3 different resurrections and judgments.

 

3.      Strengths of Dispensational Premillennialism:

 

1)   Harmonizes Prophetic Texts:  it has an answer as to how all of the prophetic texts should be understood.

 

2)   Pride Themselves On Literal Interpretation Of Prophecy:  their rule is that you take the prophecy literally wherever it can be.

 

3)   Sees Revelation 4-19 in Future:  they say it’s obvious why we can’t figure out what these chapters mean — they haven’t happened yet!

 

4)   Preserves The Idea of Imminency:  they are quick to tell others that any other view other than their view destroys the notion that Christ could come back at any time.

 

5)   Appealing View for Saints to Believe:  it tells you that you will not go through the Great Tribulation.  Saints will be raptured out before it begins.

 

6)   Their View is Realistic Assessment of Wickedness in World:  they say it’s easy to see that the world is getting worse and worse, and that it’s clear that wickedness will dominate the world in the Tribulation period.

 

4.      Weaknesses of Dispensational Premillennialism:

 

1)     It  Must Hold To At Least 3 Different Resurrections and Judgments:  the natural, plain interpretation of the vast number of NT texts would indicate there will be a single resurrection and judgment of all men (Jn. 5:28-29; Jn. 6:39 cf. 12:48; Acts 24:15; Dan.12:2; Mt.16:27; 2 Thess. 1:7-10; Mt. 13:36-43, 47-50; Mt. 25:31-46; Rom. 2:5-16; Acts 17:30-31; 2 Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15-18; Rev. 20:11-15).

 

 

2)     It May Be Too Literal:  it is obvious that many portions of the Bible demand a figurative interpretation (Gen.3:15; Ps. 22; Is. 40:3-4; Acts 15:14-18).  Sometimes Christ’s disciples made a mistake by taking His teaching too literally (Jn. 3:4; Mt.16:6-7).  Surely if there is ANY book in the Bible that would lend itself to a spiritual interpretation it would be the Book of Revelation!

 

3)     It Makes An Unnecessary Separation Between The Church and Israel:  it re-estabalishes the middle wall of partition that Christ abolished in His death (Gal.6:15-16; 1Pet.2:9; Gal.3:28-29; Heb.12:22-24; Eph.2:14-19; Rom. 11:17-24; Rom.4:11-12, 16-18)

 

4)     It Flourishes In Arminian Churches Which Hold To Easy Believism:  if the test in this “dispensation” is just to accept Christ by making a decision, you can see why it would flourish in these circles.  However, usually when a man  comes to understand salvation in light of the doctrines of sovereign grace, he will reject this understanding of eschatology as being inconsistent with his overall understanding of God and His plan of salvation.

 

5)     It Requires Absurd Interpretations of OT Prophecy:  this view requires us to believe in the restoration of the temple, priesthood, sacrificial system, distinction between clean and unclean animals, the circumcision of all who enter the sanctuary (Ezek.44:9), the necessity of all nations visiting Jerusalem from year to year (Zech.14:16) and even from week to week (Is.66:23), the reappearance of the ancient extinct nations like the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Phillistines (Is.11:14; Amos 9:12; Joel 3:19; Mic. 5:5-6), sons of Zadok serving as priests (Ezek. 44:15-41; 48:11-14), Jesus Himself offering animal sacrifices (Ezek. 46:2), and animal sacrifices offered to atone for sins (Ezek. 45:17).  The theme of Hebrews is that all these are abolished and done away in Christ.  He warns his readers against returning to this system which has been done away.  He nowhere hints there will be a time when these will be restored and its observances required of all Hebrews.

 

6)     It Requires The Exalted, Glorified, Risen Christ to Subject Himself to Humiliation Again:  according to this view, at the end of the 1,000 years, the ungodly on the earth will be led by Satan to openly rebel against Christ and fight against Him, and only fire from heaven can save Christ and His Church.  But the thrust of Scripture is that Jesus humbled Himself in His 1st Coming, but rose victorious forever in His resurrection.  He would have to humble Himself again to be scorned, rejected, and fought against by His enemies.

 

7)     It Requires The Presence Of Sin and Death in the Millennium:  this view holds that many of the children of believers who enter the millennium will not be saved, and that the great host who rebel against Christ at the end of the millennium will be formed from this group.  They believe that those who are openly rebellious are put to death as Christ rules with a rod of iron.  But does this sound like the Golden Age of the Old Testament?  It is not a pleasing picture to think of our Messianic King sitting enthroned on a smouldering volcano!  Will Jesus reign upon a peaceful earth which inwardly seethes with hatred and rebellion?  Will people yield outward obedience because the inevitable consequence of disobedience and opposition is to be cut off?

 

8)     It Fails To See That The Church Was The Focus Of OT Prophesy:  instead of being a parenthesis in God’s dealings with Israel, it would appear that the church is the fulfillment of everything that God had been leading up to (Acts 3:24; 1Pet.1:10-12; Acts 26:23; Is.65:1; Rom.9:24-26; Rom.10:19‑20).

 

9)     There Is No Passage in the NT Which Unmistakeably Teaches an Earthly Millennium:  all of our data for this “golden age” is found in OT writings of the prophets.  This is shaky ground to build doctrine on.

 

10)   It Does Violence to One of the Primary Rules of Hermeneutics:  we must interpret obscure passages in light of clear passages.  But this view interprets the clear passages througout the rest of the NT in light of the obscure passage of Revelation 20 instead of interpreting Revelation 20 in light of the rest of the clear passages in the NT.

 

11)   It Requires Us To Believe That Men In Natural Bodies Will Dwell With Men in Glorified Bodies:  How can glorified saints live in this sin-laden atmosphere amid scenes of death and decay?  How will sinners and saints in the flesh be able to stand in the presence of our glorified Savior when even Paul and John were completely overwhelmed by just a vision of Him?  When He comes, the very brightness of His coming will destroy the man of sin.  Can any mere mortal endure His presence?

 

12)   It Requires Us To Insert 1,000 Years Between Christ’s Coming and His Creating of the New Heavens and Earth:  2Pet.3:10-13 seems to indicate that these events will happen simultaneously.

 

13)   It Is A Pessimistic View Of Prophecy:  they don’t believe there will be any great success of the gospel in the Church Age.

 

14)   It Is A Relatively Novel View:  it didn’t originate until the mid 1800’s.  If this was the truth of the Word of God, why did it take 1850 years for the church to discover it?

 

B.   Historic Premillennialism:

 

1.      History Of View:  this view is referred to as “historical” because it was the predominant view of the early church (100 – 400 A.D.).  It has been held by others throughout the history of the church including Charles Spurgeon, Andrew Bonar, John Gill, and George Eldon Ladd.

 

2.      Basic Beliefs:

 

1)   Israel and the Church:  historical dispensationalists do not believe God has separate and distinct plans for Israel and the Church.  They believe that the Church is the “spiritual Israel”; the true seed of Abraham.  They do not believe the Church is a parenthesis between God’s dealings with Israel.  They believe God is done dealing with Israel except perhaps for the conversion of a great many at the end of earthly history, but in that case they would be added to the Church.

 

2)   The 2nd Coming of Christ:  historic premillennialists understand the 2nd Coming as a single event, the rapture happening simultaneously with Christ’s 2nd coming.

 

3)   The Millennium:  the millennium will be an earthly rule of Jesus Christ for approximately 1,000 years after His 2nd Coming.

 

4)   Resurrections and Judgments:  there will be at least 2 different resurrections and judgments (believers at 2nd coming, and believers and wicked at end of millennium at the Great White Throne).

 

3.      Strengths of Historic Premillennialism:

 

1)   It Was The View of the Early Church for About the First 400 Years:

 

2)   It Follows The Natural Reading Of The Book Of Revelation:  Rev. 20:1 begins with the word “and.”  The natural reading of the book lends itself nicely to understanding Rev.20:1 as occurring after Rev.19:21.

 

3)   It Preserves the Unity Of God’s People:  this view does not present a dichotomy between Israel and the Church as the Dispensational view does.

 

4)   It Applies Old Testament Prophecies To A Future Kingdom:  it at least gives an answer as to how to interpret OT prophecies such as Is.2:1-4; 11:6-9, etc.

 

5)   It Gives A Realistic Assessment of Evil In The World:

 

4.      Weaknesses of Historic Premillennialism:

 

1)   It May Give Too Much Weight To The Testimony Of The Early Church:  the early church had a lot of heretical views.  They were still working through many foundational issues at this period of time, including the nature and identity of Jesus Christ.  Just because the early church believed something does not necessarily make it true!

 

2)   It Ignores the Cyclical Nature of the Book of Revelation:  there are recapitulations in the book of Revelation (compare Rev.11:18 with 12:1‑2).

 

3)   It Requires 2 Resurrections and Judgments:  this would appear to contradict the natural interpretation of the plain texts in the New Testament.  No where else in Scripture do we read of a 1,000 year period of time between the judgment of the just and the unjust.  (Mt.25:31-46)

 

4)   It Does Not Explain Conditions In The Millennium:  there are many passages in the OT which refer to a reinauguration of the Mosaic Covenant, replete with animal sacrifices, priesthood, and temple.  Do we really believe that the types and shadows once taken out of the way will be put back in place again?  If not, what do these passages refer to?

 

5)   It Gives Too Much Weight To Revelation 20:  if it were not for this one chapter in the Bible, there would probably be much less controversy on eschatology!  This chapter is the ONLY chapter which speaks of 1,000 years.  Therefore, perhaps our interpretation of Rev. 20 is wrong.

 

C.            Postmillennialism:

 

1.      History Of View:  the first influential exponent of postmillennialism was Thomas Brightman (1562-1607).  It first flourished in the 17th century among the Puritans.  The 18th century was the great age of postmillennialism.  It played a key role in the development of missionary thinking.  The great revivals under Whitefield and Edwards were seen as the first ripples of a movement of conversion which would engulf the world.  In the 20th century it largely declined and almost died out, but there has been a resurgence of interest in postmillennialism recently and it is again gaining ground under the branch of postmillennialism known as “Reconstructionism.”  Some great theologians have been postmillennialists including John Owen, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Hodge, R.L. Dabney, B.B. Warfield, and Lorraine Boettner.

 

2.      Basic Beliefs:

 

1)   Millennium:  they believe that the millennium is a long, indefinite period of time BEFORE the 2nd coming of Christ in which a great portion of the world will be converted, and the rest of the world Christianized.  They believe this Golden Age will be brought about by the preaching of the gospel accompanied by the power of the Holy Spirit.  It is this period of time that is predicted so often in the OT (Is.2:2-4; 11:6-9).  Christ will exercise a spiritual reign over the world from heaven.

 

2)   Israel and the Church:  postmillennialists do not make a sharp distinction between Israel and the Church, believing as the historic postmillennialists that the Church is “spiritual Israel”, the true seed of Abraham.  They do, however, believe that according to Rom.11:12,15,25-26 there will a great conversion of Jews before the 2nd Coming of Christ.  These Jews, though, will become part of the Christian Church (the same olive tree) and not remain a separate and distinct people from the Church.

 

3)   The 2nd Coming of Christ:  like historic premillennialists, they believe in a single coming of Christ, the rapture happening simultaneously with it.

 

4)   Resurrection and Judgment:  they believe in a single, general judgment of all men who have ever lived at Christ’s second coming.

 

5)   3 Different Kinds of Postmillennialism:

A.      Social Postmillennialism:  those who held this view were in large numbers around the turn of the 20th century.  They believed that they were entering a new age which would be unparalleled in terms of learning, prosperity, and moral advancement.  This was the age of the great modern missionary movements.  They believed that the gospel was about to conquer the world.  But with the rise of both world wars, this brand of postmillennialism has all but been discarded.  Lorraine Boettner holds to a form of this postmillennialism.

B.      Dominion Postmillennialism:  (also called Christian Reconstructionism or Theonomy)  those who hold this view believe that the institution of the church will take over the institutions of government and society and use the Law of God in both old and new testaments as the rule for this government.  This brand of postmillennialism is growing and expanding in our day.  Advocates of this kind of postmillennial thought would be Gary North and Rushdooney.

C.      Catastrophic Postmillennialism:  those who hold this view do not hold to a gradual evolution from a day of darkness to light as the social brand does, or a takeover of governmental instutions like the dominion people, but a “latter day glory of the church” which will be brought on by catastrophies by the hand of God.  They believe that Christ will bring a judgment upon the antichrist, which will lead to worldwide influence of the gospel.  This is the type of postmillennialism which Jonathan Edwards believed in.

 

3.      Strengths Of Postmillennialism:

 

1)   It Is An Optomistic View Of Prophecy:  it teaches that the church wins!  It teaches that the gospel is going to triumph in the earth!  An age is coming in which the gospel will hold sway & conquer!

 

2)   It Is Able To Give A Good Explanation Of OT Prophecy:  see Is.2:2-4; 11:6-9; Ps.72; Hab.2:14.

 

3)   It Holds to A Single General Judgment & Resurrection Of All Men At The Second Coming Of Christ:  the bible seems to indicate that this will be the case (Mt.25:31-46; John 5:28-29; 2Thess.1:6-10)

 

4)   It Takes Seriously The Fact That Christ Reigns NOW From Heaven:  see 1Cor.15:24-28; Ps.110:1-3.

 

5)   It Sees the Rapture As Taking Place at the 2nd Coming of Christ:  we read in 1Thess.4:13-18 that the rapture takes place when men are raised from the dead.  If it is true that all men are raised at the same time, then the rapture must take place upon the 2nd coming of Christ, as the postmillennial view says it will.

 

4.      Weaknesses of the Postmillennialism:

 

1)   It Is Not A Realistic View of Prophecy:  yes, it is optimistic, but is it true to the biblical facts?  We would all love to believe that the majority of people on the world will be converted, but is this taught in Scripture?  Mt.7:13-14; 22:14; Luke 18:8.

 

2)   It Tends To Be Far More At Home in the OT than in the NT:  if the OT prophets were in a day of relatively dim light compared to the NT saint, why is it that when we go from the day of types and shadows into the day of bright light of NT truth, there was not more light shone upon this whole matter?  Where are the NT passages which CLEARLY teach a “latter day glory” of the church?  The NT passages that are brought forward as proof of a “latter day glory” can be interpreted in other ways than a postmillennial interpretation (Rom.11:11-15, 25-26).

 

3)   It De-Emphasizes Revelation 19:  postmillennialists interpret Revelation 19 as a spiritual coming of Christ to destroy antichristian forces and introduce the “latter day glory.”  But if Revelation 19 is not presenting the visible, personal return of Christ in glory, where is that to be found in the Book of Revelation!?  Is the one event that all the ages have been pointing toward mysteriously missing from the only NT book dealing exclusively with prophecy?

 

4)   It Does Not Seem To Line Up With Revelation 20:7-10:  if the majority of the world has been converted to Christ, how is Satan able to gather people in number as the sand on the seashore together to fight against Christ and His church?  The picture is that Christ and His church are the great minority, being surrounded by a great majoritiy of antichristian forces.  How can this be so?

 

D.      Amillennialism:

 

1.      History Of View:  the early church by and large held to a historic premillennial view until the early 300’s A.D. when Augustine popularized the amillennial position in his book, City Of God.  This was the prevalent position held by the Christian Church until the 1600’s when postmillennialism grew in influence.  This was the view held by Luther, Calvin, and Knox.  Louis Berkhof in his book, Systematic Theology has made this observation: “Amillennialism had at least as many advocates as Premillennialism among the church fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, supposed to be the heyday of Premillenialism.  It has ever been the most widely accepted view and is the only view that is either expressed or implied in the great historical confessions of the Church, and has always been the p revalent view in Reformed circles.”  This view was held by Louis Berkhof, William Hendriksen, & Martyn Lloyd-Jones.  It is the official view of the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church, the Christian Reformed Church, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and the Reformed Presbyterian Church.  It is taught in Calvin Seminary and Westminister Theological Seminary.

 

2.      Basic Beliefs:

 

1)   The Millennium:  advocates of this view believe that the Church Age is the 1,000 years of Revelation 20.  They believe that the 1,000 years is to be interpreted figuratively as a long, indefinite period of time.  They believe that Satan was bound (as far as his ability to deceive the Gentile nations) by the work of Christ at calvary (Mt.12:28-29; Luke 10:17-18; Jn.12:31-32).  Some amillennialists believe that those in Rev.20:4-6 who rule and reign with Christ refer to believers who have died and now rule with Christ from heaven.  Others believe that this language pictures believers on earth who are made alive spiritually in regeneration, and then rule & reign with Christ in this life over sin, the world, and the devil.  (Jn.5:25-26; Eph.2:4-7).

 

2)   The 2nd Coming of Christ:  those who hold the amillennial view believe that the rapture will occur simultaneously with Christ’s 2nd coming.  At His 2nd coming, all men will be raised and judged, the present heavens and earth will be destroyed, and God will create a new heavens and earth in which righteousness will dwell.  The 2nd coming of Christ will introduce the eternal state.

 

3)   The Resurrection and the Judgment:  with postmillennialists, amillennialists believe that there will be only 1 resurrection and judgment of all men to occur at the 2nd coming of Christ.

 

4)   Israel and the Church:  with historic premillennialists and postmillennialists, the amillennialists do not believe that God has a separate and distinct plan for national Israel and the Church.  They believe that the Church is “spiritual Israel”, and that in the judgment of 70 A.D. God set aside Israel and is working to draw out from all nations an elect Bride (which will consist of some Jews as well as Gentiles).

 

3.      Strengths Of Amillennialism:

 

1)   It Gives A Spiritual Interpretation to the Book of Revelation:  if we would ever expect to interpret scripture figuratively, we would expect to do so in the book of Revelation.  We are told in Rev.1:1 that Jesus Christ revealed the things of this book by signs.  Therefore, it would be in keeping with this fact that the details of a dragon, serpent, chain, and 1,000 years would be symbolically interpreted.

 

2)   It Is Consistent With the Clear Teaching In The Rest Of The NT:  one of the principles of hermeneutics is to interpret the obscure in the light of the clear.  If we regard Revelation 20 as obscure, we ought to go to the rest of the NT teaching on the 2nd coming of Christ, the resurrection and judgment to see what they teach.  When we do so, we never read of an earthly millennium to follow Christ’s 2nd Coming.  Instead, we read that He raises and judges all men, and assigns them to their eternal destinations, as well as destroying the present heavens and earth and creating new heavens and earth.  There is no teaching of an earthly millennium in the parables of the wheat and the tares or the dragnet of Matthew 13, or the parables of the 10 virgins or the talents in Matthew 25.

 

3)   It Greatly Reduces the Complexity Of Prophecy:  in contrast to the dispensational premillennial view, it is a very simple and clear view.  It teaches that Christ will come, raise & judge all men, and assign them to their respective destinies.  That’s it!  The 2nd coming is not divided into 2 stages, and there are not 3 or 4 different judgments and resurrections.

 

4)   It Synchronizes The 2nd Coming of Christ with the Ending of the Temporal State and the Beginning of the Eternal State:  this appears to be the clear teaching of Scripture in many places (Mt.25:31-46; Mt.13:36-43, 47-50; 2Thess.1:6-10; Jn.6:40 & 12:48

 

4.      Weaknesses of Amillennialism:

 

1)   A Common Criticism is That It Overly Spiritualizes Passages That Do Not Lend Themselves To Being Spiritualized:  the dispensational premillennialist prides himself on taking prophecy in the most literal way possible and believes that the amillennialist is just spiritualizing away prophecy, and that he has lost all objectivity in interpreting it.  The amillennialist must interpret many OT prophecies as either referring to the Church Age or to the Eternal State (Is.2:2-4; 11:6-9).

 

2)   It Does Not Give A Good Answer To The Cessation of the Binding of Satan:  amillennialists believe that the binding of Satan in Revelation 20 is a result of Christ’s work on the cross.  But how does he explain that Satan is loosed later on for a “little season?”  Does the power of the cross cease to be effective at that point?

 

 

3)   It Tends To Ignore The Flow Of The Narrative In Revelation 19 & 20:  if it were not for the chapter division, would we come to the conclusion that chapter 20 begins a recapitulation and jumps back to the beginning of the Church Age?  Furthermore, the beast and the false prophet are cast into the lake of fire in Rev.19:20.  But in Rev.20:10 the devil is cast into the lake of fire “where the beast and the false prophet are also.”  If the amillennial view is correct, we would expect that all three would be cast in at the same time — at the 2nd Coming of Christ.  But the text seems to indicate that the beast and the false prophet are already there.  That gives strength to the view of the premillennialist, that Revelation 20 should be seen as chronologically subsequent to Revelation 19.

 

E.            Personal Evaluation Of All 4 Views:  As you can readily see, no single view of eschatology is without problems.  But at this point in my understanding of Biblical truth, it seems to me that the amillennial view harmonizes best with the rest of clear teaching on the subject of eschatology in Scripture.  Although it presents its own set of difficulties, none are insuperable.  Therefore, I find myself leaning toward an amillennial return of Christ.  However, we may find out in the end that our Lord will return in a way that none of us quite expected, involving various aspects of all 4 views!  Until we receive further light, let’s fervently serve Him until He comes, and resolve that we will not allow differences of eschatology to separate us from other true believers in the Lord Jesus Christ!

 

3.   Matthew 24-25:

 

A.   Futuristic View:  this view believes that although some of the details of this chapter were fulfilled in the lifetime of those who heard this sermon, its primary purpose is to outline events immediately preceding the 2nd Coming of Christ (24:5-31).

 

B.    Preteristic View:  this view believes that 24:5-34 were fulfilled in the generation from the Cross to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

 

1)     Context:  the immediately preceding context has to do with a great judgment to fall upon the Jewish leaders (23:35-39).

 

2)      Time Text:  Mt.24:34 informs us that this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.  Jesus’ disciples had asked Him, “when will these things be, and what will be the sign of Your coming and the end of the age?”  Jesus was answering their question.  He was telling them what the things that would precipate God’s judgment upon the Jewish nation would be.  He says that all of them would take place within the generation of those alive at that time.  If a generation is 40 years, Jesus’ statement was literally fulfilled.  If these things were not fulfilled before 70 A.D., then either Jesus was mistaken, or we have to find another explanation for “this generation.”

 

3)      Local Expressions:  throughout 24:5-34 we find words of local expression (temple, sabbath, Palestine, Judea).  In addition throughout we find reference to “those days” (24:19, 22, 29).  But the 2nd Coming of Christ is referred to as “that  day”, or “the great day” or the like.

 

4)      Outline:  24:1-35 refer to the Destruction of Jerusalem.  24:36 – 25:46 refer to the 2nd Coming of Christ.  Jesus had been very definite about the time and circumstances of 24:1-35.  Now He disclaims knowledge of the time of His coming or the events to precede it (24:42, 44, 50, 25:13).  The 1st section is identified with observable signs (famines, pestilences, wars) – but this section is noticeable by an absence of signs.  As the flood came without signs, even so would be the coming of the Son of Man.  He compares His coming to a thief in the night.  A thief gives no warning.  The parable of the thief and the parable of the fig tree are in direct contrast.  The fig tree gives warning of approach of summer, whereas the thief gives no warning.  The emphasis in the second section is on delay (24:48, 25:5,19), whereas the emphasis of the first section is that it will happen within a generation.  For a fuller exposition from this approach see J. Marcelus Kik’s book An Eschatology Of Victory.

 

4.   Daniel 9:24-27:

 

A.   Gap View:  this view (usually held by dispensationalists) holds that there is a gap between the 69th and the 70th week.  They believe this is the Church Age, where God’s prophetic timeclock has ceased ticking.  They believe the prince who is to come (26) refers to the Antichrist who will make a covenant of peace with the Jews, but after 3 1/2 years will violate the covenant, set himself up as God in a rebuilt Jewish temple, and require men to worship him.  They believe this is the abomination of desolation referred to by Jesus in Mt.24:15 & Luke 21:20.

 

B.     Historical View:  these believe that all 70 weeks of years occurred from beginning to end without a gap.  They do not believe that any of this passage refers to the Antichrist immediately preceding Christ’s 2nd Coming.  Below are their reasons:

 

1)   No Mention Of Gap In Text:  there is not the slightest indication in the text that a gap of time is intended between the 69th & 70th weeks.  If the purpose of Daniel was to inform his readers that certain things would transpire within 70 weeks (24) and then neglect to tell them that there would be a 2,000+ year gap in between the 69th & 70th week, I think that he would have brought them much more confusion than clarity!  Furthermore, the weeks of years are split up as 7+ 62+1.  Well, no one believes there is a gap between the 7th and the next 62 weeks of years.  Why then, do we believe there will be a gap between the 69th & 70th week?  Additionally, vs.26 says, “then AFTER the 62 weeks, the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing.”  Well, if Jesus is crucified after the 62 weeks, that means he must be crucified during the 70th week.  But the gap view holds that the 70th week does not even begin until the last 7 years of human history.

 

2)      Prince Refers To Jesus, not the Antichrist:  vs.25 refers to Messiah the Prince.  Thus when we read in vs.26 of “the people of the prince who is to come” shouldn’t we assume that this is the same prince referred to in the preceding verse?  If so, then it is simply saying that in the 70th week of years, Jesus will be crucified, followed by the Romans coming in and destroying Jerusalem and the Jewish temple through war.  The firm covenant made with the many refers to the “new covenant” Jesus made on behalf of God’s elect (Mt.26:28).  His death put a stop to sacrifice and grain offerings, because now that the Perfect Sacrifice has been offered, all other animal or grain offerings are useless and obsolete.

 

3)   The Abomination of Desolation Refers to The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple:  compare the account in Luke 21 with Matthew 24.

Comments are closed.