return of christ | business-strategy-bl

SETTING THE DATE – WHEN WILL CHRIST RETURN

My dad was absolutely convinced that Christ would return before the year 2000, as that year would, in his understanding, mark the beginning of “the millennium” – the physical and literal reign of Christ on the earth for a thousand years. In more recent times we have seen dates for such a time predicted (i.e. the return of Christ and the start of “the millennium”) based on all sorts of criteria – the Jubilee of Jubilees, blood moons, planetary alignments, Israel’s Feasts and so on. The great scientist Sir Isaac Newton (who actually wrote more about theology than science – a fact that we don’t often hear!) calculated it not to be before 2060, whereas William Shakespeare set the date at 1792 – so we know that he was wrong! 2017 during Yom Kippur was a popular date for a while – but not after October 2017. Mark 13:32 tells us that the angels don’t know the time and that Jesus Himself doesn’t know the time (He’s still under submission to the Father) so really, we should be careful before we make any pronouncements along this line.

Those making these predictions have, on the whole, been well meaning people with a sincere faith. Many have some knowledge of theology, perhaps some knowledge of astronomy and of history. However they all have one thing absolutely in common – an unhesitating and absolute belief in a Pre- Millennial view of eschatology – in other words, a theological disposition that asserts that Christ will return to physically reign on the earth for 1,000 years – His literal earthly Kingdom being based in Jerusalem. The final judgment of humanity and the angelic and demonic hosts will occur at the end of this period and then, with the Devil and his hosts together with the unrighteous (i.e. unregenerate or “unsaved” human beings) sent to their eternal judgment, the righteous (born again) Body of Christ (the Church) will step into their eternal reward and live forever with God. I accept that this is an extraordinarily crude and basic definition and outline of the Premillennial view of eschatology but it does roughly outline the order of events portrayed in this view of the end of time as we know it.

Within this group or “school” of eschatology, we find several more minor groups – these centre primarily around a period that is described as the Great Tribulation, and the question that divides people into separate groups here, centres around this tribulation period. Most Premillennialists today seem to accept that this Tribulation period will last for the 7 years, immediately preceding Christ’s return. During this period of time, a single world government will form under “the antichrist” and will require everyone to wear some form of mark on their forehead (or, some suggest, a computer chip embedded in their hand or forehead). At the end of this seven year period, Christ will return and establish His millennial Kingdom. Some decree that the Church will be caught up into heaven (“The Rapture”) at the start of this seven year period, some suggest that this “rapture” will occur midway through the seven years, whilst some suggest that it will happen at the end of the tribulation period. Still other Premillennialists do not believe that the tribulation will be a 7 year period, rather it represents the persecution of the Church from the beginning of Church history. Much of their ideas centre around the 70th week of Daniel’s prophecy and all but the first 3 chapters of the book of Revelation. Those Premillennialists who see these events as happening in the future are known as futurists, those who see much of these passages as having been fulfilled in the past are known as historicists. There is also another school of thought in which Christ returns to take the church to heaven, with the rest of the world dying and left in the grave, leaving the earth uninhabited for this 1,000 year period with Satan limited to this formless void. This view is NOT very commonly found.

The vast majority of those who adopt the Premillennial view today, are found in the “non-conformist”, evangelical, either in the Western world or those who have been strongly influenced by this branch of the church. The more traditional churches (such as Anglican, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Reformed churches etc.) reject the Premillennial position and adopt a Post Millennial or Amillennial view of eschatology (end times/future state). Please do not confuse the terms “pre millennial” and “pre tribulation” – I will give more definition to each later in this essay but they are not interchangeable terms as some seem to think!

It is also worthy of note here that those who set a date for Christ’s return are invariably Premillennial futurists. For those who are Amillennial, a belief in an imminent return of Christ (i.e. an expectation that He could return at any time – even today or tomorrow) is both consistent with the Amillennial view and not at all uncommon among its proponents, but the idea of setting a specific time or date is overwhelmingly foreign to the Amillennialist. I suggest that it is difficult to accommodate a concept of imminence with a Post Millennial view of theology. It is probably also reasonable to suggest that those who set dates (regardless of whether it a specific day, week, month or even year) often have to rely on their particular (and sometimes, many would suggest, peculiar) interpretation of Scripture, history and world events.

Before proceeding, I would like to briefly address 2 important words that appear as central themes in most discussion about end times. I will address these issues in more detail later, but I’ll at least lay some sort of base for later references to these words.

First, the “Millennium”

The word "millennium" comes from the Latin words "mille" which means a thousand and "annum" which means a year, thus a millennium is a one thousand year period. So we must ask if this word is used in any different context in Scripture that may alter its meaning. Actually, the word "millennium" does not appear in the Bible, the only reference to such a period is found in Revelation chapter 20. In Biblical context, we must understand that the word “thousand” does not always refer to the next number after 999. In Jewish culture (certainly so in Biblical times) the number one thousand (1,000) symbolizes “immensity”, “fullness of” or simply “indefinite quantity” or “multitude”. The number can represent a large number (even infinity) or an extended period of time. Many early Church fathers saw in the number 1,000, “the totality of the generations and the perfection of the life.” So when we see God declaring that the cattle on a THOUSAND hills belong to Him (see Hag 2:8, Ps 50:10), one does not check to see who owns the cattle on hill number 1,001 for we interpret the word “thousand” to mean an infinite number. When we read in Deut 7:9 that God keeps His covenant for a thousand generations, we don’t have to worry if we calculate that we are generation 1,001 or 1,002 – this verse is simply saying that He keeps His covenant for an infinite time. So the word “thousand” in Biblical context is often a figurative word and is not meant to be taken literally. When we come to the book of Revelation, we find that it is generally accepted that most of the Book is written figuratively and should not be simply taken as literal statements or descriptions. So we have to understand that the concept of a “thousand years” (the most figurative number in the writer’s culture) in the most figurative book of the Bible may have a meaning other than the next number after 999. The question is, do we take a figurative number in a figurative book literally or do we accept it as a figurative number (meaning a long or an infinite period of time). The Premillennialist MUST take it literally, whereas the Amillennialist (along with the Post Millennialist) accepts it as a figurative term that simply refers to a very long time. That’s just the way that the Hebrew people spoke. Another expression that Jesus used was “70 times 7” in relation to forgiveness – I’ve always wondered what I’m allowed to do the 491st time that someone offends or hurts me in some way, but obviously Jesus didn’t expect us to keep count, rather to accept our call to forgive applies to an infinite number of acts of forgiveness.

I note again that the only time the concept of Christ reigning for one thousand years is found, is in the book of Revelation – a book filled with figurative language (and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand and thousands of thousands – who on earth counted that many and got the right number!!!)

So, is “The Millennium” (the reign of Christ) limited to a literal 1,000 years? No, I don’t think so – for He shall reign forever and ever…. that’s eternal and we cannot measure time in eternity, nor eternity in periods of time – the two concepts are totally incompatible.

The second word or concept that I want to touch at this point, is the “Rapture”.

Like the word Millennium, the word “rapture” does not actually appear in the Bible. The Latin word raptus is where this word originates and that Latin word is a translation of the Greek word harpadzo which means “caught up” and that’s the word used in 1Thes 4:17, where we are told that we will be “caught up (harpadzo) together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air”. This word is used here to describe a rising or catching up (into the air is implied) and that is the Biblical concept of the “rapture”. There can be no doubt or debate that Christians will be “caught up” (i.e. there will be a “rapture” of the church), but the question is WHY will we be “caught up” and exactly what happens when we are “caught up”.

The passage in 1Thes 4 (which I note is the only biblical reference to this event) actually gives the reason – and that reason is to “meet” The Lord in the air.

As in most events that we encounter in life, the real key lies not in the event but in the purpose. The Greek word that is used here is apantésis (translated as “meet”) which describes “the act of meeting, to meet (a phrase seemingly almost technical for the reception of a newly arrived official)” – Strongs dictionary definition.

This word appears in only 3 other places in the Bible. In Matthew 25 when Jesus told the story of the virgins waiting for the bridegroom. In this parable, Jesus tells us that the virgins "took their lamps, and went out to meet [apantésis] the bridegroom" (25:1) and "And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom comes; go out to meet [apantésis] him". So, what happened when the virgins (the bridesmaids) met the bridegroom? Did these bridesmaids go away with the bridegroom for 7 or maybe 3½ years leaving the bride waiting alone? I think not – the bride I’m sure would have objected to that! No, the obvious understanding is that they met him and escorted him to the wedding. The bridegroom did not return in the direction from which he had come, only the bridesmaids did that.

The other time this word appears (other than the Thessalonians reference) is in Acts 28:15 where it tells of Paul being brought, under arrest, to Rome by the Roman soldiers and we are told that the elders of the church in Rome heard that Paul was on the way and so “they came to meet [apantésis] us”. So, did the elders take Paul away from the soldiers and go off somewhere for 7 or 3½ years? No, the soldiers would never have allowed that to happen; the elders simply met Paul and escorted him back to Rome (it was a way of honouring him). Once again we see the principle - the one being met did not return in the direction from which he had come, only those who came to meet him did that.

So the only times that this word is mentioned in the Bible other than in 1Thes 4, it carries a meaning of going out to greet someone and escort them to their destination. Note the Strongs definition that I mentioned above, where it points out that this word is used in general language to describe the “reception of a newly arrived official”. When a new important official (e.g. a new magistrate or a new governor) is about to arrive, the people would go out to meet him and escort him into the city – once again, the purpose was to honour him. The word was also used to describe a victorious Roman general’s “triumph” on his return to Rome. When the victorious general, at the head of his conquering army, neared Rome, the citizens of the city would flock out and line the road, cheering as he passed, hailing him as a conquering hero and they would escort him “in triumph” into the city of Rome – once again, the purpose was to honour him. This was a single, one stage event. The welcoming crowd never stayed out of the city with the incoming general for a period of time before coming with him into the city, nor did the general return in the direction from which he came – only the crowd that met him turned back towards the place from which their journey “to meet him” began.

I note a couple of respected commentaries on this issue

“When a dignitary paid an official visit or parousia to a city in Hellenistic times, the action of the leading citizens in going out to meet him and escorting him on the final stage of his journey was called the apentesis…” (F. F. Bruce, New Bible Commentary, p. 1159)

Apantēsis (Strongs Greek 529) Is a technical term that refers specifically to the practice of sending a delegation outside the city walls and gates to receive a dignitary who was coming. This was the practice when a king and his army were returning from war. All the people would pour out of the city gates and welcome them with pomp and circumstance. The people would meet them outside and then usher them back into the city with shouts of joy and acclamation.

Vines Dictionary of New Testament Words says “It is used in the papyri of a newly arriving magistrate. It seems that the special idea of the word was the official welcome of a newly arrived dignitary."

So the word “apantésis” is always used to describe a crowd going to honour someone by escorting that person back to the place from which the crowd had come. The person arriving never goes back (i.e. away from their intended destination), it is those who meet him that return with him. So the question is, is it reasonable to change the definition of the word in 1Thes 4 into something that is contrary to every other use of the word in the Bible and in language in general?

If we are to understand this word as meaning the same in Thessalonians as it does in Matthew and Acts, then we find that it does not say anything about the Lord returning, then reversing direction and heading back to Heaven for a period of time, it implies that, as He comes to the heavens, the church goes out (caught up) to greet, welcome Him and escort Him as He continues His journey to the earth.

In none of the three uses of the word (i.e. in Matthew and Acts) does the one being met reverse direction and return the way he came. On the contrary, it is the people meeting the one who is coming who change direction – one must expect that the use of this word carries with it the same meaning.

Changing the meaning of the word is actually very poor exegetics, it is not acceptable to simply change the meaning of a word in order to make it fit your theological idea. However, those who adopt a Premillennial, futurist view (i.e. they have a 7 year tribulation period) MUST read this verse in Thes 4 with a changed and unique definition of this word “meet” and thus have a purpose for the “rapture” (the catching up) of the church that is different from the literal meaning of the verse.

So, what is that literal meaning? Simply that the trumpet sounds, the Lord descends to the clouds, the church is caught up (rapture) to “meet” Him – that is to honour Him and escort Him to the earth as the conquering King, to acknowledge Him as the King of kings and Lord of lords and to see Him take His rightful place as Ruler and Judge of all mankind. To allow for a either a 7 year or 3½ year gap, one must change the meaning of the word as, in its literal reading, this is a single event – The Lord comes, we meet Him “on the way” in the air and escort Him to His throne. Premillennial Futurist theology must change this Biblical meaning to match their theology, rather than changing their theology to match what the Bible says here.

Based upon this (among other things I’ve mentioned previously), I am persuaded to believe that the return of Christ and the rapture of the church take place simultaneously.

Consider for a moment, the historical context of Premillennial futurist doctrine.

The early church fathers (i.e. those who lived closest to the time of Christ) certainly never wrote of anything like the modern Premillennial/ futurist doctrine that is popular with many today. The vast majority of early church writing portrayed a clear Amillennial view. There was a small number who presented a form of historicist Premillennialism, but the only major difference between the two models was the concept of a literal thousand year reign of Christ on the earth. Augustine (circ A.D. 400) clearly set out what we now know as Amillennial eschatology, but Origen (circ 3rd century), Dionysius (circ AD 260) and Eusebius (AD 263 -339) certainly annunciated Amillennial teaching – although one must note that the term Amillennial was not used, as this was simply the primary teaching of the church about end times. Justin Martyr was one of the few who suggested the concept of a literal millennium in which Christ physically reigned on the earth, but his writings were nothing like that which we know today as Futurist Premillennialism.

Eschatology played only a very small role in the teaching of the church for many hundreds of years, however that which was written was clearly what we now call Amillennial theology with a small smattering of teaching that resembles post millennialism and historicist Premillennialism.

In 1517, that which we know today as “The Reformation” commenced. The reformers (Luther et al), identified the Pope (and the Papacy as a system) as prime example of the spirit of antichrist to which John had referred in his epistles. One must understand that the term “antichrist” is a Greek (not Latin) term and does not mean “against Christ” (as it would if it were a Latin phrase) but means “to replace or substitute Christ” (Latin equiv is ficario Christus). It was clear to the reformers that the Pope had established himself in such a place and was deemed to be a substitute for Christ on Earth (one title of the Pope is ficarius Filii Dei – ficarius translate to Greek as “anti” and “Filii Dei”, the Son of God is obviously Christ, thus it was suggested that the title ficarius Filii Dei is the same as “antichrist”

This was not something that pleased Rome, as you could guess. The Society of Jesus (Jesuits) were established fundamentally, to counter the Reformation and this concept of an antichrist papacy was clearly one of their prime targets.

Francisco Ribera was a Jesuit priest and scholar born in Spain in 1537, he began writing a lengthy commentary in 1585 on the book of Revelation titled In Sacrum Beati Ioannis Apostoli, & Evangelistiae Apocalypsin Commentari (“Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed Saint John the Apostle and Evangelist”). The book was never translated into any other language. In order to remove the Catholic Church from consideration as an antichrist system, Ribera proposed that the first few chapters of the Apocalypse applied to ancient pagan Rome, but the rest was limited to a yet future period of two 3½ year periods (the last “week” of the 70-week prophecy of Daniel 9:25). Ribera proposed a future antichrist who would be a single individual (not a papal system as proposed by the Reformers), who would persecute and blaspheme the saints of God, rebuild the temple in Jerusalem, abolish the Christian religion, deny Jesus Christ, kill the two witnesses of God and conquer the world. At the end of this seven year period, Christ would return, the judgement would occur and the eternal state would commence. So, according to Ribera, the final 7 years of earth’s history were when the antichrist would appear so none of the book of Revelation had any application to the middle ages or the papacy, but to the future, to a period immediately prior to the second coming. Ribera died in 1591.

Ribera’s views would probably have fallen away quickly if not for Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542 - 1621), who promoted Ribera’s ideas. His lectures were published as Polemic Lectures Concerning the Disputed Points of the Christian Belief Against Heretics of This Time and included much of Ribera’s assertions regarding the Book of Revelation. As the Reformation faded, so did this eschatological model.

In the mid 1800’s, Ribera’s doctrine was “rediscovered” by Edward Irving, who began to teach this eschatological model but added the concept of a Secret Rapture of believers before the appearance of the Antichrist. Irving spoke of his new eschatological model at a conference of around 40 Anglican clergy in Dublin, Ireland in 1830 at Powerscourt Castle, a meeting attended by John Nelson Darby.

Born in London into a prominent Anglo-Irish family, Darby attended London's Westminster School until he moved to Ireland. He graduated from Dublin's Trinity College as a Classical Gold Medalist and continued his studies in law, being admitted to the Bar in 1822. However within four years of his law career starting, he was made a priest as a curate of the Church of Ireland. He became disillusioned by the state of the Anglican Church. After just a couple of years as a priest, he resigned his position and joined a group of similarly disillusioned Christians who called themselves simply "Brethren." Darby accepted the Premillennial doctrine that he encountered at Powerscourt and then developed a new model within Premillennialism, which he called "dispensationalism" – a division of history into eras or dispensations. Darby is today generally credited as the father of futurist/dispensational eschatology.

Initially, Darby’s new doctrine did not find easy acceptance, caused divisions and bred confusion during the years he worked on it. Ultimately, Darby moved to the USA where he began to promote his new eschatological view and his model of the “Brethren” church structure. His theological views were not generally well received until he met Cyrus Ingerson Schofield (1843-1921).

Schofield was a Confederate soldier in the American Civil War, but deserted the Confederate army. Eventually he settled in Missouri, married, became a lawyer and then a State politician. Schofield was appointed as Attorney General but later had to resign due to some questionable financial dealings which involved bribery, theft of political donations and forgery. Schofield, a heavy drinker, ultimately left his wife and two daughters and was divorced in 1883. He married again and had a son. In 1879 Schofield was converted and within 5 years was ordained as a Congregationalist minister although there are no records of Schofield ever receiving any theological qualification. Darby’s dispensational Premillennial theology appealed to Schofield, and he included this view of eschatology in the Bible notes that he wrote and published in 1909.

Schofield’s notes (notes attached to each verse or passage in the Bible) were a great hit among laymen of the time and remained very popular for almost a century and, in fact, can still be found in Christian bookstores today. Schofield’s annotated Bible was the first time that the ordinary Christian was able to access a Bible that provided a cross referencing system that tied together related Bible passages and allowed a reader to follow biblical themes from one chapter and book to another and, in addition, contained notes on each passage aimed at helping the non-theologically trained to understand what the Bible passages actually meant – well, at least what Cyrus Schofield thought they meant. The “non-conformist” churches, with their greater emphasis on the role of the layman in the church and lower standards of theological education within leaders of these churches, proved to be a great source of sales for Schofield – and these churches, fueled with evangelical and missionary zeal saw many missionaries across the globe and laymen in general purchase a Schofield Bible (KJV plus Schofield notes) and adopt Schofield’s theology as absolute truth. It was largely through this that dispensationalism grew rapidly among fundamentalist Christians across the globe. Writers such as Hal Lindsey (Late Great Planet Earth) and Tim LaHaye (Left Behind series) based much of their writing on Schofield's notes and the theology that it espoused and helped to form the basis of the theological view of many evangelicals today, especially concerning end times (likewise, it promoted the “gap” model in Genesis 1, a model that also was freely adopted by many of these churches).

The Schofield reference Bible became THE Bible of evangelicals throughout the Western World and was instrumental in firmly establishing the Futurist interpretation in the Protestant Bible schools of the United States in the 20th century. (It must be true because Mr Schofield says....). Its establishment in evangelical schools and its earlier spread by the great missionary movement of the 19th and early 20th centuries, largely spearheaded by Brethren and others similarly influenced by Futurist doctrine (mainly via Schofield’s notes and Darby’s writings), saw the doctrine spread and become accepted as truth across the world. Today, this view, originated by a Jesuit priest in order to protect the Papacy, has become the darling of Western evangelicals.

As noted, Premillennial Futurism is so called primarily because it regards Revelation 4 onwards as prophecy to be fulfilled in the future. Its basic tenets of belief go like this:

The world is currently living in a period or dispensation of grace – a gap of unknown length between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel’s prophecy. The church will experience a great falling away, but a small remnant will remain faithful. At a time known only to God, Christ will return to a place in the heavens and all post Pentecost Christians who constitute the Bride of Christ (they do NOT regard the O T saints as part of that bride) will be caught up to meet the Lord and will remain with Him there and will celebrate the Marriage Supper of The Lamb. The Holy Spirit will also leave the world, and the world will descend into an ungodly chaos led by the Anti-Christ (defined as one opposed to Christ) and this will culminate in the nations rising together to destroy Israel. During this time the Beast will rise to rule, and without his mark, you will not be able to buy or sell. There will be a false prophet who will lead a false religion during this time also. A great battle will be fought in the Armageddon valley (northern Israel near Kibbutz Megiddo, about 30 km south-east of Haifa) and just as Israel is about to be destroyed, Christ, accompanied by the raptured church, will return. He will stand on the Mount of Olives which will divide in two, allowing water to rush in and make Jerusalem a sea port. Satan will be bound and the victorious Christ will then establish a perfect reign of peace on the earth for 1,000 years after which Satan will be loosed, lead an attempted coup, be defeated and cast into the bottomless pit. Christ will then judge the world – those who rejected Christ will stand before the Great White Throne and be cast into hell “where the Beast and the False Prophet are”. Believers will stand before the Bema seat to be judged according to their works and will receive rewards for their deeds. Then there will be a new heaven, in which the Triune God along with all post Pentecost believers will dwell and there will be a new earth on which Israel will live eternally.

There are many problems with this model – I’ll note a couple here.

In John’s revelation, he saw a group of people dressed in white in heaven and asked who they were; the answer was given that they were people saved during the great tribulation. This creates two problems – first the tribulation was supposedly happening at the time, so how did they get to be in heaven? Was there more than one rapture? If so, how many? Of course their salvation during the great tribulation in itself is an issue, for how could they be saved (regenerated) if the Holy Spirit had been removed from the earth?

A favorite Biblical quote of Futurists (often based on the LaHaye novels) is from Matt. 24:40: "Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left." LaHaye’s series of “Left Behind” books are based on this passage and the assertion that this is a reference to the rapture of the church, those taken were the righteous who are taken to be with The Lord, those left behind are left to face the great tribulation. However, the important question is, who was taken and what happens then? Look at the context by reading the two preceding verses: " v37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. Marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be" (24:37-39). The flood took away the wicked! Righteous Noah and his family were left behind! "So also will the coming of the Son of Man be."

Jesus’ parable of the wheat and the tares confirms this concept – the tares were to be left growing with the wheat until the harvest (the end of the age) and then they were to be harvested separately – which was taken and what happened? The tares were taken to be thrown in the fire and the good wheat was left.

The principle through Scripture is fairly consistent – when people were taken away, it was not for blessing but for judgment.

It should be noted that Jesus prophesied and promised, "In the world you will have tribulation" not that you would escape from it (John 16:33). Why do evangelicals in the 21st century western church – probably one of the least godly, compromised and evangelically lazy since the church at Corinth, think that it will escape tribulation, when for centuries, the church has faced tribulation. It should be noted that, when the apostle John wrote the book of Revelation, he spoke of himself and said "I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation" (1:9) John also declared in his epistles, the presence of many antichrists in his day.

The only Bible author to mention the concept of “antichrist” is John in his epistles and in these, John refers to antichrist in plural terms (i.e. not an individual) and as a spirit not a person – i.e. the spirit of antichrist.

It’s also interesting that, in order to make the Bible fit into Futurist doctrine, those taking this view have to add in an indefinite period of time between the 69th week of Daniel’s vision and the 70th week. This of course, is a very significant change to Daniel’s vision, yet neither Jesus, Paul or John make any mention of it and there is, likewise, no mention of this gap in the writings of the early church fathers. One would imagine that if a gap was to be added, some mention of such a significant matter would have been made. I’ve always wondered why Daniel himself didn’t note the gap between week 69 and 70 – he seemed to understand the rest of the vision, how could he make such a big mistake (a mistake of more than 2,000 years)?

Let’s look briefly at Daniel’s prophecy.

In Daniel chapter 9, Daniel has a supernatural dream and vision. This was the message – 70 x 7’s have been decreed for your people divided up like this 7 then 62, then Messiah will come. In 454 BC Artaxerxes issued the decree (in Neh 2) allowing Nehemiah to rebuild the city of Jerusalem. If we add 483 years to that we get to 28AD which is the time when Jesus declared His Messiahship in the reading of Isaiah 61 (...He has anointed me...) and declaring that the Scripture was now fulfilled before them. There is little argument between futurists and amillennials (not to mention historicists, post millennialists etc.) about these time periods. 69 of the 7’s will pass between the decree to rebuild Jerusalem and then Messiah will come.

So that’s 69 weeks and we arrive at the 70th.

In order to make the Bible fit their theology, futurists claim that a time gap started at the end of the 69th week and they put the whole of this week (i.e. 7 years) into a future time – the final 7 years, that they generally call “the great tribulation”. They say that the antichrist (an individual) will make a covenant with Israel, break it after 31/2 years and then Israel and any remaining followers of Christ will be persecuted until Jesus returns at the end of the “week” i.e. the end of the 7th year. This is where all the “Left Behind” books happen.

It should be noted that in Daniel’s prophecy, the “cutting off” of Messiah occurs after the 69th week, it doesn’t say how long after at this point (Dan 9:26 After the sixty-two 'sevens,' the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing). It also says that, at some point after the 69th week “the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary”.

The people of the prince which is to come (Dan 9:26), who would destroy the city and the sanctuary are almost certainly the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem and its temple in AD 70 under the leadership of Titus, Prince of Rome, son of Vespasian. It’s interesting to note that Daniel referred to a prince that shall come, not a king or emperor. That was the case in 70AD – the people (Roman army) were led by a prince.

The wording used by Josephus is also very interesting. “The Romans surrounded a Jerusalem besieged by civil war, and a holy temple occupied by a generation of villains so mad, that had the Romans made a longer delay the city would have been swallowed up by the earth, or destroyed as Sodom”(Josephus. Wars of the Jews 5:13:566).

This was a time when false prophets abounded, (Wars 6:5:285) the daily sacrifice failed (Wars 6:2:94) when famine affected the estimated 3,000,000 people in the city, (Wars 5:12) a measure of wheat was sold for a talent of money (Wars 5:13:571), when men sought by death [by sword over death by starvation], but found it not, (Wars 5:12:517) a context when fire and blood mingled together, the blood in the lanes in such quantities that the whole city ran with blood, to such a degree indeed that the fire of many of the houses was quenched with these men’s blood (Wars 6:8:406ff) earthquakes (Wars 1:19:370 ) and signs in the heavens: (Antiquities 17:6:167 Eclipse, comet) a time when the sounds of trumpets (Wars 6:1:68) and the noise of horses (Wars 3:2:33) were sounds to inspire dread and torment, when the great plain in front of Jerusalem (Wars 5:2:67, 5:3:106ff) was levelled even wider by the four legions of the Roman army as numerous as locusts to make a greater plain for battle.

If we come back to Daniel 9, we see that verse 27 commences with the word “he”. The question that must be asked is “Who is the “he”?” There are only two logical, contextual possibilities of who the “he” is. Futurists claim it to be a time distant antichrist (i.e. distant in time from the rest of the passage) but that is simply not contextually possible. The 2 contextual possibilities are the Messiah or the Prince.

Futurists try to bypass context by making the future antichrist “the prince”, but the problem with even doing this is that no-one else claims the “he” to be the prince – the “he” that confirms the covenant is defined in the writings of the church fathers as the Messiah and contextually, this makes the most sense in terms of both context and history.

At the beginning of His ministry, Jesus declares the Kingdom to Israel, re-enforcing the covenant that God has made with them, but His ministry lasted just 31/2 years, at which time “Messiah was cut off” – He was taken and crucified – which is clearly a “cutting off”. However, His crucifixion did something important. If we look at Heb 10:11 we find this statement: Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins(that’s the old covenant, a sacrificial system).12 But this priest offered one sacrifice for sins for all time (thus fulfilling Dan 9:27 he will put an end to sacrifice and offering) then he sat down at the right hand of God. By destroying the temple, the Romans put an end to sacrifice in a very permanent and undeniable way.

The gospel was preached to Israel alone for the next 31/2 years (despite the fact that the command given by Jesus was to go to ALL the world), until the stoning of Steven and the conversion of Saul/Paul saw the time appointed to Daniel’s people, Israel, end and the gospel was taken to the gentiles (Acts 13:46).

Jesus had told the disciples to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature (Mk. 16:15; Mt.28:19; Acts 1:8), YET after Christ ascended, the disciples still at first preached only to Israel! There’s really only one prophecy which would indicate that this was to be the course followed. It is the prophecy of the 70 weeks which implied that after the death of Messiah there would still be three and a half years that belonged to Israel! This is at least one reason why the gospel went "to the Jew first" and then later to the Gentiles (Rom. 1:16). Peter preached shortly after Pentecost: "You are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant... to you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities" (Acts 3:25, 26). "It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you" (Acts 13:46).

Christ came in person to Israel during the first half of the "week" of three and a half years. Through the disciples, for the three and a half years that remained, His message still went to Israel, "the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following" (Mk. 16:20). In a very real sense of the word, the ministry of the disciples was a continuation of the ministry of Christ.

Then came the conversion of Cornelius which completely changed the missionary outreach, outlook, and ministry of the church. Though the New Testament does not give an exact date when this happened, the time for special exclusive blessing upon Daniel's people (the Jews) had clearly drawn to a close.

The gospel which had gone first to the Jews, was now to take its full mission to be preached to all people of all nations!

This time of changeover was marked by a number of supernatural events. Cornelius received a heavenly visitation. An angel appeared to him and told him to call for Peter "who will tell you words whereby you and all of your household will be saved" (Acts 11:14). God showed Peter a vision which caused him to know that the gospel was now to go to the Gentiles and not to Israel only. All of these things were timed perfectly showing that God's hand was accomplishing a definite purpose.

Returning to Jerusalem, Peter explained what had happened. "When they heard these things, they... glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life" (Acts 11:18). From this very point, more and more, there was a turning to the Gentiles with the gospel message. God's measurement of 490 years pertaining in a special way to Israel had obviously been completed.

There is simply no reason for a gap in Daniel’s 70th week, it has all been fulfilled and was done so in the 490 years prophesied by Daniel!

Matthew Henry’s commentary on Daniel 9:27 states, “By offering himself a sacrifice once and for all, he [Jesus], shall put an end to all the Levitical sacrifices.”

British Methodist Adam Clarke’s commentary says that during Daniel 9:27’s “term of seven years,” Jesus Himself would “confirm or ratify the new covenant with mankind.”

The Jamieson, Fausset and Brown commentary also says: “He shall confirm the covenant—Christ. The confirmation of the covenant is assigned to Him.”

The prophecy of “seventy weeks” means seventy straight sequential weeks. There is no example in Scripture (or anywhere else!) of a time period starting, stopping, and then starting again. All biblical references to time are consecutive: 40 days and 40 nights (Genesis 7:4), 400 years in Egypt (Genesis 15:13), etc. The 70th week follows immediately after the 69th week. If it doesn’t, then it cannot properly be called the 70th week!

I find it strange that some expect me to take the number 1,000 literally in relation to an end of time millennial period, but I’m not to take the number 70 literally when I read it in Daniel’s prophecy – it is especially ironic when one considers that the number one thousand is a very figurative number and it appears in the most figurative book in the Bible!

It is illogical to insert a 2,000-year gap between the 69th and 70th week. There is no gap between the first seven weeks and the sixty-two weeks that follow. Why insert one between the 69th and 70th week? Daniel 9:27 says nothing about any “rebuilt” Jewish temple, or “antichrist” nor any gap in time before it would happen.

Jesus warned that “this generation” (the generation of Daniel’s 70th week) would see the city surrounded by an army Mat.24:15-16 "When you see the abomination of desolation that Daniel spoke about ........ then let them which be in Judea flee unto the mountains." Using the same command for the people in Judea to flee, Christ says, in Luke 21:20 "And when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its destruction is near."

Another issue that divides the futurist from other theological viewpoints relates to the “mark of the beast”. There has been much speculation over what this mark would be – the futurist sees this mark as only making sense in the context of a great tribulation at the end of time. In early speculation, it was generally taken at face value from the book of Revelation, where we are told that the number is 666, the number of man, thus it was suggested, that people would literally have the number 666 tattooed to the forehead and hand. But as time went on, more sophisticated ideas were developed. There was, we were told, a huge computer in Brussels, so big that it filled a number of underground floors of a UN building that was to become the centre of a one world government. The computer would allocate each living human an 18 digit number (3 groups of 6 numbers, thus meeting the “666” requirement) and that unique identity number would be placed on the forehead and hand of every person on the planet. In 1974, the first step to a cashless society and one world government was taken (so we were told by those holding this view) when the Bankcard was introduced. The symbol of the Bankcard was 3 lower case “b” letters overlayed each upon the other, each one of a distinct colour. The 3 b’s could easily be seen to be three 6’s, thus Bankcard was the 666 mark of the beast and MANY Christians refused to have a card and Christians warned their fellow believers not to have a card either, as their eternal destiny was at stake.

Since that time, many opinions have been floated, mostly featuring some form of tattoo or an implanted silicone chip which would be required to be used in a cashless society.

Some have suggested that the tribulation has continued against the church since the stoning of Stephen and suggested that the Roman Catholic Church was actually the antichrist (i.e. it is a system rather than a person, although some did narrow this down to just the Pope of the day). At certain times in history, it was illegal to trade with anyone who was not a Catholic and, in order to become a Catholic, you received Catholic baptism (the priest marked your forehead with water) and later received confirmation (in which the Bishop kissed the back of your hand) so the forehead and hand were in play, thus it fitted the model. Given that the Greek word translated as “antichrist” in the English Bible, does not mean against Christ, but means to substitute, or to replace Christ; the Latin equivalent would be ficario Christus and, given that Christ is the Son of God (Latin: filii dei), and given that one title of the Pope is ficarrio filii dei, some identify the Pope as an or the antichrist. Further to this idea, we find in Daniel 7, that Daniel had a vision of animals representing 4 kingdoms – Babylon, Medo-Persian, Greek and Roman, each represented by an animal – a lion, a bear and a leopard, but the 4th animal, representing the Roman empire, is described only as a beast. There are many who suggest that the “beast” was the Roman Empire and the mark was the face of Caesar on each coin, without which you could neither buy nor sell. Some suggest that the Roman Catholic church is a continuation of the Roman Empire and suggest that baptism and confirmation are its marks.

I’ll briefly address the tattoo or technology issue.

Just suppose for a minute, that you were one who refused the mark and were thus destined for heaven.

Let’s suppose that you are involved in an accident in which you lose consciousness. You are rushed to hospital, where they cannot find “the mark” (i.e. your tattoo or chip) to identify you. So they check you out, identify you and whilst you are still unconscious, give you the “mark” (tattoo or chip). Does this mean that God will now send you to hell? Is your eternal destiny in the hands of a doctor in an A and E ward at the local hospital? Hardly, that doesn’t sound at all right – however if you agree that receiving the “mark” in this way wouldn’t negate your salvation, then you must agree that, whatever the mark is, it cannot be something physical because we have just shown how someone with this “mark” could still go to heaven.

I suggest that to understand what the book of Revelation is saying (and remember it is a book written intentionally in figurative language – i.e. it’s not meant to be taken literally) we need to find not just WHAT it says but WHY.

To understand the New Testament, we often need to understand the Old – especially when a book is written in figurative language to people who have only the Old Testament scriptures to read and only these OT Scriptures by which to interpret this book that records John’s vision. So is there anything in the Old Testament that may sound vaguely like this.

In Deut 6 and again in chapter 11, the Hebrew people had been given the law and were told to do something with it. They were to bind it to their hand and forehead. So the question is, why the forehead and the hand?

The prefrontal cortex (that part of the brain located behind your forehead) is where you make decisions to take action on a thought, it considers and determines your behaviour! Reasoning and moral judgment is carried out by the frontal lobe.

A thought originates in the frontal lobe and then goes through a process that is unique to your brain following a specific order and time duration in the different parts of the brain. The frontal lobe determines how to interpret the thought according to the training the frontal lobe has received (this is the way you have “trained” you frontal lobe to operate – it is affected by things such as your world view, moral disposition all of which you have adopted and trained your frontal lobe to use as a “filter” in the thought process). The thought "goes around" through the brain and is then "bound" by the frontal lobe into what it believes the thought to be.

Before man had even begun to understand the processes of the brain, God told man to keep His words "on your forehead". Keeping His word there keeps us from processing and acting on things that are not pleasing to God. If we keep God's word in our prefrontal cortex, we are less likely to commit sin because His Word becomes part of the “training” that our frontal lobe uses as a filter in our thought process.

But, if the brain has made a decision to sin, how are we likely to actually commit such sin? With our hands! A thief does not steal with his ear. An angry man does not strike another with his hair. A man does not kill another with his nose. A forger does not fake a signature with his foot. Keeping God's word "on our hands" would mean that we proceed through life not allowing our hands to commit a sin, rather to be subject to God’s Law. So God instructed the Hebrew people to apply His Word to the two greatest sources of sin – our mind and hands – symbolically referring to our thoughts and actions. Some Jews take God’s word on this literally and bind a small box (called a “phylactery”) containing a miniature copy of The Law to their forehead and arm, but they really miss the point. Even if they wore a phylactery all of their life, they can still very easily break that very law by their private thoughts and actions.

So, is the “Mark Of The Beast” a physical item or tattoo? I think that to be most unlikely – it’s improbable that we would be damned to a lost eternity because of a tattoo or piece of embedded technology. It is far more likely that this “mark” is a figurative mark, just as it was in the Old Testament.

The “mark” describes the choice that we make by thought and action to bow down to and serve another “god” i.e. to submit to an anti-Christ system (something that substitutes for Christ). We can choose to “trade” in the things of God or those of the world, to blindly follow the world’s system or to stand firm on God’s Word.

Col 2:8 tells us to ensure that no one takes us captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.

That verse draws the line simply, which line you follow in thought and deed, determines whose mark you bear. You show the mark of the beast (i.e. the world’s system) or the mark of God (see Eph 1:13: When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit).

So the issue has nothing to do with a physical item, it has everything to do with the allegiance that you have in life with one of two kingdoms – the Kingdom of God or the kingdom of darkness – God's way or the world's way. What you think and what you do shows where your allegiance is placed – if your trust, your eternal hope, your faith, is in anything outside of God's Kingdom and His way (that way being defined very clearly by Jesus when He said "I am the way, the truth and the life, no-one comes to The Father except through me) then you are "marked" for a lost eternity - i.e. an eternity separated from God.

The “mark” is not actually an “end times” issue, rather it is one for ALL time!

So how are Biblical passages such as Mat 24, Daniel 9 and the book of Revelation to be understood outside of the Futurist model?

First a general observation. The last book of the Bible is not a revelation OF John, rather a revelation TO John. This whole book is a revelation of Jesus – who He is, His authority, His majesty, His Kingdom etc. Let’s make sure that we never lose sight of that reality – its purpose was to identify Christ and His Kingdom. Likewise, much of the teaching of Jesus was about the Kingdom – introducing and identifying the Kingdom and inaugurating the Kingdom of God on earth.

The term inauguration essentially refers to an act that begins or introduces a system, policy, or period or where a given party officially inducts another newly designated party into a special position of authority. This practice typically alludes to a significant transition wherein the subject being inaugurated represents a new phase of leadership or service.

I submit that the end times (or latter days) were inaugurated at the life, death and (most notably) the resurrection of Jesus. With the Kingdom of God being inaugurated by Jesus, it has not only a present component, but also a future one. It is sometimes referred to as “already AND not yet,” and basically contends that the last days are already here, but there is still a consummation of these last days that is yet to come. So the Kingdom of God is not only an eschatological reality, but it is also a gift to be received in the present age.

For example, Christians await the final resurrection where they will receive new bodies, yet in a sense, believers are already “raised with Christ”. Or, as believers await the final judgment, in a sense they have already passed through it, for “there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” because believers are justified by faith in Christ already.

John 5:24 "whoever hears my word and believes Him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life". It is not necessary for the believer to wait until the last day to experience eternal life – we have it now, we have already experienced something of resurrection life. We are already living in the Kingdom NOW, but we will experience if more fully after Christ’s return.

What this tension means for Christians is that we faithfully wait for the future day of the Lord, when we will dwell with Him forever in the new heavens and the new earth, but in the meantime, we live in the victory and authority of Christ’s Kingdom on earth, which was established at the first coming of Jesus and is now here, but it is not yet fully consummated because that completion or consummation does not occur until His second coming.

Scripturally, we see this tension as well. With the coming of Christ, the Kingdom has come, and through the gospel of Christ we now receive the promised blessings. At the same time, the consummation of the Kingdom is still in the future awaiting those who follow Christ into heaven and all its glory. It’s only later, in the future, that the ultimate consummation will be fully realised.

So we today are living in the last days and experiencing The Kingdom of God! On Easter morning, God’s new creation invaded our present fallen world. And yet, we still await a day when Christ will return and this new eternal age will be consummated. So now we live with the tension between these two ages. We have experienced some of the age to come, but we still live in the midst of this present age. Our salvation is already, but not yet – that is, it has a present and a future part – we have been saved from sin’s penalty through the price paid on the cross, we are living in a world in which The Kingdom of God is operating and saving us from the POWER of sin but in the future, when the Kingdom is fully consummated, we will be saved from sin’s presence.

So, what is a kingdom? Obviously, the answer is that a Kingdom is a place where a King legitimately reigns. The kingdom is not lessened or in any way diminished if a subject fails to fully comply with the King’s directions, the kingdom remains the same, the authority and power of the Kingdom is not affected by the conduct of the King’s subjects (saints sin, but remain saints and the kingdom is not destroyed by their sin, in the same way that citizens of the United Kingdom may commit a crime against that Kingdom, but they remain citizens of the UK and the UK is not destroyed by their active rebellion against its laws).

When Jesus died and rose again, He established a new Kingdom. At that point, the age of God’s Kingdom being limited to Israel, with all of its sacrificial and its legal requirements ended (the end of the age), and a NEW Kingdom was established.

Luke 17:20 The Pharisees demanded to know when the kingdom of God would come and He answered “The kingdom of God is not a visible Kingdom: people cannot say it’s here or it’s there! For The Kingdom of God is in you.”

In writing to the Roman church, Paul said that “those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ” (Rom 5:17). They reign on the earth and in life.

Clearly then, the Kingdom within, was not meant to be something that would happen in the distant future, believers do not have to wait for a future state to reign with Christ, this reigning happens now in life. So, if the Kingdom of God is in you, and you are on the earth participating in that reign, then where is the Kingdom of God? Where are you? On earth – so is God’s kingdom on earth? Yes! It has not yet had its absolute fulfilment – there is an “age to come” where the Kingdom of God rules in an eternity free from sin, sickness and suffering. The fact that the entire kingdom is not subservient to the King at this moment in time, does not lessen the presence of the Kingdom on earth as we noted above.

In other words, Jesus ushered in the Kingdom of God, but we still suffer from the consequences of living in a fallen world with sin, sickness and disease as the tension between the King and the usurper plays out. So whilst the Kingdom of God is already here (in us) and Christ is already reigning on earth, the full benefits of the Kingdom have not yet been ushered in. Because the Kingdom of God is still “not yet” here in all of its glory and power, Christians still suffer sickness and death. Although we have eternal life, we still live in a world of sin with all the sickness, pain and suffering that sin produces. Until Christ returns, we will not experience the fullness of the kingdom of God in all aspects and areas. BUT, nonetheless, the Kingdom of God IS within you, and He reigns now!

For those who put the Kingdom into some future period of time, they may not have considered the consequence of such a view. If Jesus is not now king over His existing kingdom, there is no new birth. Jesus said, “Unless a man is born of water and the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (John 3:5). So, if he IS born of water and the spirit, he IS able to enter the kingdom. But if the kingdom is something waiting for an end of the world millennium, there is no kingdom now, thus no new birth now.

If the kingdom is waiting for the millennium, there is no deliverance from the power of darkness. Paul wrote to the Colossians telling them they had been delivered “from the power of darkness, and translated into the kingdom of his dear Son” (Col. 1:13). But if the kingdom is still waiting to be established in the future, then they are not yet translated into that kingdom and have not yet been delivered from darkness.

So is the kingdom something limited to a 1,000 year period at the end of time? I suggest that the 1,000 years is as figurative as the 1,000 hills on which He owns the cattle – it is indicative of an ageless kingdom that is here now, and will have perfect expression in the future. So will He reign for 1,000 years? No, He’ll reign for a lot longer than that!

So in this model, when did the “last days” or “end times” start and when was the Kingdom inaugurated?

This model suggests that all of this happened in Jesus’ generation. Note some of the expressions of Scripture:

The kingdom of God is at hand
This is… the last days (Acts 2:16-17).
The end of the ages (1 Cor. 10:11)
In later times, the last days, some will depart from the faith and there will come times of difficulty, just (1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:1)
In the last days, scoffers will come, (2 Pet. 3:3-5)
Treasure something eternal (James 5:3)
In these last days, God has spoken to us by His Son (Heb. 1:2)

So the Kingdom of God, was inaugurated at Christ's resurrection, at which point He gained victory over both Satan and the Curse and is currently active in the world today through the presence of the heavenly reign of Christ, the Bible, the Holy Spirit, and the activities of Christian faith groups – the church. Christ is now reigning at the right hand of the Father over His church. If Christ reigns in the church and we (the church) are on the earth, then Christ reigns on the earth (see Roman 5:17 – “those who receive the great grace and the gift of righteousness reign IN LIFE by the one man, Jesus Christ”). The Kingdom of God is a spiritual reality in which all Christians participate and that is seen presently by faith, but will be grasped by sight at the consummation of time.

Another thing to consider before moving on. There are two expressions used in the gospels – the end of the age and the end of the world. In Greek, these terms can be interchangeable, so some see them as having identical meaning, but I contend that this may not be the case. I suggest, for example, that an AGE ended at the cross and a new AGE began. Dispensationalists often say that we are living in the “day of grace” and I think that they are right in this description, however I would change the word “day” to “age” and for the “age” to start (the age of grace) the old had to end. Prior to the cross, people lived in a different age – they lived under the law, under the Old Covenant. But when Christ died, something happened – the curtain in the Temple was torn from top to bottom signifying that the basis of access to God had changed – the old age had finished. The old age and the new lived on together for a while – they repaired the curtain, with some not letting go of the old sacrificial system (how easy it is to hold on to old practices and habits and when God takes them away, we restore them, we repair the curtain because it’s something that we know, we’re familiar with, we’re comfortable with – even though God has moved on, we stay and hold our ground!). But the end of the AGE has come and we live in a new age, the age of God’s Kingdom being expressed on the earth. We do well not to mend curtains, rather we need, with unveiled faces, see the glory of The Lord and be being changed, moment by moment, into His likeness. However, we sometimes need to check the context of Scripture to see if it is speaking of the end of the AGE (viz. death, resurrection of Christ) or the end of the world as such. That’s something to bear in mind as you go on.

Having noted the place of the church in the present age, it might be worth noting at this point, a view of Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream about the great statue. It is commonly agreed that each portion of the statue (from the head down) represented a kingdom that would dominate the affairs of earth – right through to the feet of iron and clay which represented the Roman Empire. Daniel got all of this right as history shows us, however he said that a stone, not made with human hands, came and crushed the feet (Rome), bringing down the statue, and the stone grew and became a mountain that filled the whole earth. This stone represented a kingdom not of this world, not made of gold or silver or bronze or iron and clay. I submit that Jesus was the stone that impacted the Roman world and established a new Kingdom – a Kingdom that lasts forever. He preached the Kingdom and told His people that the Kingdom of God is in you! This stone has grown to be the church – the ongoing expression of the Kingdom that Jesus inaugurated. This stone came down from heaven and was not made by human design, however as we see it today, the church has become a mountain that covers the whole earth. Futurists tend to put this rock into the future – that it is yet to come to crush the feet of the great statue – the human led kingdoms on the earth. But I submit that, just as each part of the statue represented a kingdom, so the stone (the rock) that came from heaven represents a kingdom – the Kingdom that has come down from heaven and has grown to cover the earth.

OK, what is the scenario if Premillennial futurism is incorrect?

What happens when Jesus returns according to a non pre-millennialist? The response is simple – believers will receive a new eternal incorruptible body; believers will be judged and receive rewards for their faithfulness; the unbelievers will face judgment and eternal punishment; the devil and evil will be destroyed in hell and there will be a renewed earth and Christ will reign eternally.

I’ve noted above some of the reasoning based on Daniel, but how does that fit with one of the key passages claimed by futurists as proof text – Mat 24 and the Olivet discourse?

The broad view of non-futurists would be that, in Matthew 24, Jesus spoke of the end of the AGE – the end of the old covenant. He said of the Temple, that not one stone would be left on another and declared that this generation would not pass until this was done. When the Temple was destroyed, the age of sacrifice ended formally (Christ had already ended it in reality, but with the trashing of the Temple, sacrifice could no longer physically take place). All of this happened within 1 generation – the generation did not pass until all was fulfilled. The Temple was destroyed when Jerusalem was sacked in 70 AD.

When we look at Mat 24, one should ask how many questions the disciples actually asked – one, two or three? My suggestion would be that it was three questions – three separate questions requiring 3 distinct answers.

Think of the context here. The Temple that Herod built – and was, in fact, still building – was amazing; grand architecture, rich furnishings, the centre of the Jewish nation and faith – and Jesus said that the whole thing would be destroyed, shattered, turned to rubble within a generation. We shouldn’t underestimate the significance of this statement. Imagine in 1970 one of the architects of the Twin Towers in New York looking at these great towers, tallest in the world, being built and someone saying that within a generation these towers will be torn down, they’ll be rubble, not one brick will be left standing on another. We couldn’t imagine such a thing. Imagine what these Jewish disciples thought, imagine the things that would start to run around in their mind and totally mess with their heads.

They walked across the road to the Mount of Olives with all sorts of questions begging to be asked: when will it happen, what sign will there be, and what about the end of the age?

In reply, Jesus noted wars, famine, earthquakes etc., but then He went on to say that when you see these things happening, leave town, don’t stay around Jerusalem, leave! Imagine if you were in the Twin Towers and someone whose word and insight you trusted emphatically, told you that the building was about to be rammed by a plane and the whole thing was going to collapse into a pile of rubble; my guess is that you wouldn’t wait around, you’d get out!

In the Olivet discourse, Jesus was warning them of what was about to happen to Jerusalem. He wasn’t answering the question about the sign that the world was ending, He was answering three separate questions – when will these things happen (i.e. when would the Temple be destroyed), what will be the sign of your coming and your kingdom being established and what about the end of the age?

It is important to see Jesus’ answers in the context of the questions. I’ll explain in a moment, but if I can give you the bottom line, Jesus was saying to His disciples, when you see these things happening, get out of Jerusalem, the end of the age is at hand. And it happened, when Titus, Prince of Rome sacked Jerusalem in 70 AD – the Temple was utterly destroyed and the age of Temple sacrifice came to a bitter end.

So the disciples asked three distinct questions and it is important in understanding this passage that you don’t try and take the answer to the first question and apply that answer to the third question. “When will these things happen?”, “What will be the sign of your coming?”. You can’t use the answer to the FIRST question as an answer to the second.

It is poor exegetics to take the whole of Mat 24 and make it the answer to the question that you may have about the end of the world. We must take the time and care to see the context of the actual passage and the answers that Jesus was giving to the three questions posed by His disciples.

What’s the context of the passage and the discourse it contains? Jesus had been walking in the Temple with His disciples and they had been noting that it was good that the Temple was being rebuilt – that rebuilding had started in about 20BC and was a major ongoing work. I think that it is important to understand here, that the disciples were NOT thinking of Jesus’ second coming – they were still getting their head around the first coming – they still had the picture of a coming Messiah who would lead Israel out of bondage and establish a divine reign over the earth, probably from the Temple in Jerusalem itself – after all, it was the most logical place, it was where God’s presence dwelled.

Then we find Jesus saying that the Temple is going to be destroyed, and their hope, comfort zone and theology are messed with simultaneously. If that wasn’t enough, Jesus adds that THIS GENERATION would be around to see all of this happen.

Remember, Jesus had just been in a verbal altercation with the Pharisees and Sadducees telling them that the blood of the prophets who had been put to death in the past would be upon them, they would be the ones held accountable, it was THIS generation who were going to pay a price. One of the keys to understanding and interpreting Matthew 24, is understanding what Jesus was talking about when He used the phrase “this generation”; He was speaking of a present reality that would actually involve them, not some distant prophetic time. This was real stuff happening in real time.

So they wander off together over to the Mount of Olives, and there they sit overlooking the Temple and the disciples switch into question mode. When’s this going to happen, what is the sign of your kingdom coming, when will the age end? It’s a logical progression.

The disciples understood from the prophets that Messiah would come, they understood from Daniel that the other kingdoms would be overthrown until the final one would be crushed by a rock that was not made by man – Messiah would come and establish His kingdom and it would be an everlasting kingdom. So all the questions start and Jesus begins to answer them – false prophets, wars, famine, earthquakes, persecution would all come first.

And so it happened, just as Jesus had declared. Within 40 years, the siege and eventual destruction of Jerusalem occurred (AD70). We do well to remember that this siege by Rome on the Jewish capital was one of, if not THE world’s most horrific genocides. It destroyed the city, the Temple, it ended the age of the Temple Sacrificial system and dispersed the Jews throughout the world. The horrors that occurred were huge – if it wasn’t that Christ had warned His disciples to see the warning signs and know what was coming and knowing that they needed to respond by leaving when they saw the things starting, who knows how far the gospel may have spread – it may have even been snuffed out in the fall of Jerusalem. But was this tribulation, was it really THAT bad? Jesus had used some pretty descriptive language – it would be so bad, worse than ever before, greater than anything that had preceded it.

Flavius Josephus, the Jewish historian, is well known as the foremost authority on Jewish history, especially with regards to the reliable recording of the events of the time. Josephus was with the Roman invaders outside of the city –and was even sent by the Romans to try to negotiate a settlement. He records that 1.1 million people were killed during the siege.

He wrote: Now of those that perished by famine in the city, the number was prodigious, and the miseries they underwent were unspeakable; for if so much as the shadow of any kind of food did anywhere appear, a war was commenced presently, and the dearest friends fell a fighting one with another about it, snatching from each other the most miserable supports of life. Nor would men believe that those who were dying had no food, but the robbers would search them when they were expiring, lest anyone should have concealed food in their bosoms, and counterfeited dying; nay, these robbers gaped for want, and ran about stumbling and staggering along like mad dogs, and reeling against the doors of the houses like drunken men; they would also, in the great distress they were in, rush into the very same houses two or three times in one and the same day. Moreover, their hunger was so intolerable, that it obliged them to chew everything, while they gathered such things as the most sordid animals would not touch, and endured to eat them; nor did they at length abstain from girdles and shoes; and the very leather which belonged to their shields they pulled off and gnawed: the very wisps of old hay became food to some; and some gathered up fibres, and sold a very small weight of them for four drachmae.

He wrote of cannibalism and unfathomable horror.

NOW as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury, (for they would not have spared any, had there remained any other work to be done,) Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminency; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall as enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison, as were the towers also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valour had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind.

It is very interesting to note the language used by Josephus in describing this time of tribulation, sorrow and pain that the Jewish nation faced.

Jesus warned His disciples of what was to come, but only a few minutes earlier, He had told the religious leaders that they were about to pay a price for the killing of the prophets who had come before. He had wept over Jerusalem as the city that killed its prophets. Why did He weep? He knew what would soon befall the city! They had rejected the prophets, rejected the Messiah, the covenants and even, to a significant degree, God Himself, and they would soon pay a huge price.

This passage is complex because of the use of apocalyptic imagery which throughout scripture is highly symbolic and challenging to interpret. But the easy part here is the context: Jesus is talking about the destruction of the temple which would constitute the end of the age as people knew it. We know this is the context because it is plain, right there in the text starting at the end of Mat 23. Jesus is in the temple teaching that it will be destroyed. After leaving the temple, His disciples point out the massive structure as Jesus continues his conversation: “Do you see all these buildings? I tell you the truth, they will be completely demolished. Not one stone will be left on top of another!”

Jesus’ statement that the temple would be completely demolished prompted a new question from his disciples: “When will this happen? What will be the signs?”, they ask. This is what gives us the context of the passage: Jesus is talking about the destruction of the temple, He is talking to His disciples, and He is answering their question about how to know that the destruction of the temple is close.

As an exegetical principle when approaching a passage such as this, you should first ask the basic question: who is talking, what are they talking about, and who are they talking to?

Unfortunately, this passage is commonly claimed to be speaking about the end of the world because of poor translation. Many English translations mistranslate the phrase from verse 3, “What sign will signal your return and the end of the world?” Based on reading only a poorly translated English version, it’s certainly confusing and seems to point people in a futuristic direction. However, the Greek word here isn’t “world” (kosmos) at all, but the word αἰών, which means “a unit of time as a particular stage or period of history—age/era”. This poor translation makes it easier to ignore the context, and read into it our own relatively new ideas about the future end of the world. However, I note again that that’s not what the text is talking about.

Jesus is describing the events that will lead up to the destruction of the temple in verses 15-21. Yes, Jesus does describe a horrible period of tribulation, but not in the way futurists teach. Instead of a global tribulation in our future, Jesus warns of a localized tribulation in their future. He warns them by giving them signs that it’s coming, and then tells them to flee town and hide in the hills outside Judea– really bad advice if it were a global tribulation. Furthermore, Jesus goes out of his way to make sure they understand that He is talking about their time, and not thousands of years later, by using the time marker of “this generation”. The original audience would have known that he was speaking of events that were to come to pass in their lifetime, not ours.

There’s certainly a lot going on in Matthew 24 that I haven’t covered– I primarily want to point out that the entire context of this passage is Jesus answering the question, “how will we know the destruction of the temple is about to happen?” Everything that Jesus talks about in the Olivet Discourse must be interpreted in the light of the question that He is answering. Since we know Jesus was talking about the destruction of the temple, since we know this occurred in AD 70, and since Jesus himself says in verse 34 that “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened”, we know that Jesus was speaking of events that were to come to pass before the eyes of those to whom He was speaking.

That is the basic context of Matthew 24. Some have a problem in dividing Matthew 24 into these clear answers to questions about events at the time, but when you read it in context and without a pre-set view, it is simple and clear.

OK, so let’s take a look and see if the detail of Jesus’ prophecy was fulfilled.

When Jesus spoke of the signs of “these things happening” – the destruction of the Temple, He said that there’d be wars and rumours of wars – but this was surely unlikely at that time, because it was the Pax Romana – an era of relative peacefulness and minimal expansion by the Roman military force that was experienced by the Roman Empire at this time – there were no wars, Rome ruled in peace. But soon that changed. Within 20 years of Jesus’ death (well within the “this generation” time span), the Pax Romana began to fail – the Jews began to live in fear of the Romans and there were uprisings (wars) and all sorts of rumours of what Rome might do in retaliation. 50,000 Jews were slain in Seleucia; 20,000 in Caesarea; in AD56, 60,000 were slain in Alexandria; within 2 years prior to the siege of Jerusalem two Caesars were murdered and Rome experienced civil war – it was a time of great turmoil and there were constant rumours of new uprisings and rebellions. The disciples would have picked up on some of this and realized that the events of which Jesus had warned them were in process before their very eyes.

False Christs and deception – historians tell us that in the period leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem, there was a great increase in the number of people who rose up claiming to be Messiah. John Wesley in his notes, wrote that never before had there been so many imposters appear in the world as there were in the few years prior to the fall of Jerusalem. The early church Fathers also record that this was the case.

What about famine and earthquakes. Josephus reports a great famine in about 60AD, but nothing could compare to the famine experienced by those living in Jerusalem between 66 and 70 AD. Men ate sandals and leather shields and committed acts of cannibalism. We also see a rise in earthquakes prior to 70 AD. There was of course, the earthquake at Christ’s death, but in the AD60’s, there are records of earthquakes in Colossi, Smyrna, Miletus, Laodicea, Crete, Rome and Judea just to name a few. Not to forget AD63 and the destruction of Pompeii.

Remember that Jesus said all of this long before it happened, this is what would lead to the destruction of the Temple, these were the signs of these things happening. Note also how many times He said “this generation” needed to be ready and watch.

Some incredibly horrible things happened to Jerusalem in AD70 – things that Jesus had warned His disciples about – He said when you see these things start to happen, get out. Historians tell us that many Christians fled the city in AD66 when Florus, the Roman procurator, stole vast quantities of silver from the Temple and desecrated the High Priest’s vestments and the Temple itself by a number of vile acts that outraged Jewish masses, who rioted and wiped out the small Roman garrison stationed in Jerusalem. Cestius Gallus, the Roman ruler in neighbouring Syria, sent in a larger force of soldiers. But the Jewish insurgents routed them as well. Rome responded with a huge number of troops who massacred many Jews. Those who escaped at this time were spared from the great tribulation that those living in Jerusalem were to experience over the next few years. The phrase “abomination of desolation” spoken of by the prophet Daniel, means literally "an abomination that desolates" or "an abomination that appalls, standing in the holy place ". This was an abomination made by someone standing in the holy place, and this abomination would appall the people. The actions of Florus fulfilled this prophecy to the letter. The disciples were told that when they see this happen, then those who are in Judea should flee to the mountains. By fleeing as many Christians did, the lives of many were spared.

The Futurist claims these to be the signs of Christ’s return, but that is not consistent with either history or the context of Matthew 24. The signs of the Kingdom coming are not negative signs of destruction and ruin, but of positive happenings that bring hope and freedom.

A “sign” is not an end in itself – it simply points to something or warns of something. Jesus said (as a sign) that the sun and moon would be blackened and stars would fall out of the sky, so we consider this with our Western mindset, knowing what the sun and moon and stars are (i.e. those lights in the sky!) and when they fall it certainly will be a problem. So the Futurist says that just before Jesus comes, the universe will behave differently – lunar eclipses, blood moons, planetary collisions etc. The problem is context. Jesus is speaking in the context of an Eastern mindset where much reference is made to sun, moon and stars in representative or picture form of governing authorities. Remember Joseph’s vision? The moon and the stars bowed down to him. Have you noticed that in the OT prophets’ writings, when judgment was declared against a city like Tyre or Sidon or Babylon the prophets said things like your stars will fall from the sky, your sun and moon will be blocked out. Jesus is answering the first question and saying that leaders will fall and that of course happened with the fall of 2 Caesars just before Jerusalem fell.

The book of revelation is viewed by non-futurists as a “Revelation of Jesus Christ" that was given, "To show to His servants things which must shortly come to pass." Thus, they claim, the prophecies of Revelation are not about some distant, future event, but things that “came to pass” shortly after they were written. History supports such an assertion.

But what about the church, does the church face tribulation? An inescapable fact is that millions have seen tribulation, starting with the stoning of Stephen and continuing to this very day.

Think of the early church and the horrendous persecution that they suffered for the sake of Christ. THAT was tribulation in anyone’s language. Rome persecuted the Christians. Nero blamed Christians for the fire that destroyed much of Rome and Christians became subject to all sorts of retribution and persecution as a result. Nero took Christians, tied them to stakes, covered them with tar, set them on fire and used them to light the way to some of his parties. That sounds like persecution and tribulation to me!

Likewise, the concept of the Tribulation being confined to a 7 year period makes no sense in the light of world history – is it even possible to suggest that North Korean Christians are not facing tribulation? Christians in the Middle East likewise face tribulation on a day to day basis, people are beheaded, shot, crucified etc. simply for declaring a faith in Christ. History show us constant persecution of Christian believers, the inquisition being a prominent example. The tribulation began with the stoning of Steven and continues to the end of the age.

Jesus warned His followers that in the world they would face tribulation (note, He did NOT say they would escape it. If this were to be the case, would Jesus not have said so?) but encouraged them, in the face of persecution, to be of good cheer, but not because they would escape it but because He had overcome the world. But how is this to be? According to the futurist model, there will be a great falling away of the church and Christ will return for a remnant that remains faithful. But instead of a failing remnant, we see today the overcoming Christ at work.

The gospel is increasing in its effect, with millions coming to Christ TODAY in the non-western world at a rate estimated at 200,000 new believers each day. It’s suggested that 20,000 people come to Christ every day in China alone, in South America there’s about 35,000 per day. You only have to look at the Reinhard Bonnke crusades in Africa where crowds of 650,000 and more – more than a million attending in a couple of cases – to see that the church across the world isn’t falling away – the Kingdom is expanding. We in the West only see our own nations where the church has become lazy in evangelism and more importantly in disciple making, thus there’s been a falling away. The reality is that the world at large is experiencing revival. If we need to have a great falling away before Christ returns, we will have to turn off the revival that is happening globally. But how do you stop God giving visions of Jesus to Moslems that see them turning to Christ in ever increasing numbers?

Futurist doctrine became popular at a time when the world was full of turmoil and war, famine was a global issue, it was easy to see that this could be a time for a one world leader to rise (the antichrist etc). The early 1900’s saw the loss of millions of lives in wars – especially the war to end all wars, as it was known.

Then came the depression and if that didn’t sound enough like the end of the end times, along comes Hitler with his anti Jewish rhetoric and murderous dictatorship (Hitler was seen by many as the antichrist, especially as his bombers rained down fire from heaven on most of Europe as per Rev 13:13 – add in atom bomb and the apocalypse has arrived). When all of that ended, in 1948 Israel was “reborn” – futurists claimed this to be the budding of the fig tree (Mat 24), so this generation would see it all out, so the date setters took out their calculators….one generation = 40 years = so 1988 had to be it! In the 1980’s you could read a best-selling book called “88 Reasons Why Jesus Must Return in 1988” in which the author claimed that Jesus would return at the feast of Rosh Hashanah in 1988. People watched wars continue in Korea and Vietnam, the Middle East crisis, the Cuban crisis - 1988 came and went.

There are still some who refer to 1948 and claim that a generation is “three score years and ten” which would make the return of Christ 2018 – but by their calculations and doctrine, the rapture should have occurred in 2011 unless they are to regard this as the Tribulation. Others have tried for 1995 then 2000, 2012 and a host of dates since then. But so far, no-one has picked it. I guess if people keep saying it will be this year, eventually someone will get it right!

In the 1970’s, Hal Lindsay’s book “The Late Great Planet Earth” captured the attention and interest of the evangelical world and became the best fiction seller of the decade, with over 28 million sales, it was translated into 28 languages across the globe. In the 1990’s Tim Lahaye had similar success with his “Left Behind” series – they sold 65 million copies, were made into movies and into video games. They were imaginative, captivating, toeing the line of futurist doctrine and helping to “spread the word”.

So many people have been damaged by promises that have been unfulfilled. People have quit jobs, failed to go to University, sold homes etc. all because Jesus was going to come on a particular date and take them away from a world that was about to end. They expected things to get bad, for many to fall and only a remnant would remain ‘rapture-ready’.

We are wise not to keep looking for “the antichrist”, rather we should keep our eyes fixed on the REAL Christ. Is He coming soon – I do believe that He is. Perhaps today or tomorrow, but it is possible that it won’t be in my generation. I must live as though He’s coming today and plan as though it’s not for a LONG time.

Why work out a date for His return? If knowing that Christ will return prompts us to live in any way that is different to the way we would otherwise live, then our “otherwise” life is out of order and we should be doing all of those things that we say we’d do if we knew that Christ was returning tomorrow, regardless of whether He’s coming tomorrow or not!

My advice is to simply read the Word of truth, God’s Word rather than the writings and reasonings of those whose predictions and calculations are without real meaning – and if one of them gets it right? We’ll neither know nor care, as our faith gives way to sight and we enter that ultimate destiny, that place prepared for us in The Father’s house, where the things of earth will be of little consequence!