Truth Magazine

By Jack L. Holt

The heart and core of the dispensational theory is that Christ came to earth to restore the physical kingdom of David to Israel. But since Israel did not accept Him as King, He was frustrated in this mission. This “unforeseen” event caused the Old Testament prophecies to be postponed. Further, the church was set up as an interim arrangement until Christ comes again. At His second coming Christ will set up His kingdom and reign on David’s throne in earthly Jerusalem for a literal thousand years.

The dispensational (premillennial) theory should be seen for what it really is. It is not just harmless speculation about “unfulfilled prophecy,” but is rank unbelief. This “harmless theory” voids the true mission of Christ to the world and makes the death of Christ an accident. One way to prove this whole theory is false is to show from the Scriptures that the mission of Christ was spiritual. And in fulfilling this mission the cross was not accidental but a just moral necessity (Rom. 3:24-26).

“Why did my Savior come to earth and to the humble go?” Here is a trustworthy statement about His mission: “This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” (1 Tim. 1:15). In 1 John 4:14 it is declared, “And we have seen and do testify that the Father hath sent His Son to be the Savior of the world.” Further, “Ye know He was manifested to take away sins” (1 John 3:5). The Hebrew writer tells us “He appeared to take away sin by the sacrifice of Himself” (Heb. 9:26). Now did Jesus come to set up a material kingdom or to die for the sins of the world?

The salvation of man from sin is possible only because a sacrifice for sin has been made. Jesus came “not to be ministered unto, but to minister (not reign as an earthly king, JLH) and to give His life a ransom for many” (Matt. 20:28). Paul didn’t think the death of Christ was an accident. He wrote, “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3). If His death was according to the Scriptures how was it an accident? Peter said, “He was delivered according to the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God” (Acts 2:23). As Jesus approached the cross He said, “The Son of man must go as it is written of Him” (Matt. 26:24). But the dispensationalist makes the “must” an accident.

Isaiah spoke of the suffering and vicarious death of Jesus in chapter fifty-three. In Acts 8, we see the Ethiopian eunuch reading and reflecting on this chapter when Philip joined him. When the eunuch wanted guidance, Philip began at the same Scripture and preached unto him Jesus. Philip found Jesus, not national Israel in Isaiah 53. Jesus, His mission, His sufferings and death, are in the Old Testament. In an effort to escape the New Testament interpretation of Isaiah 53, some seek to apply the chapter to the nation of Israel. There are three reasons why this chapter cannot apply to national Israel.

First, the chapter tells us of one who voluntarily suffered. This was never true of Israel. They didn’t volunteer to go into captivity. Second, the one who suffers in this chapter is innocent. This is not true of a nation, nor of any mere man. “All we like sheep have gone astray,” but He didn’t. The New Testament writers apply the passage to Jesus (1 Pet. 2:22ff; Lk. 22:37; Heb. 9:28) Third, the one who suffers in this chapter suffers for the sins of others. It is not only voluntary suffering, but vicarious suffering. The nation of Israel never suffered for the sins of the world. When you read Isaiah 53, you come face to face with Jesus. The message of that chapter is the Gospel message of the spiritual mission of Christ.

In revealing the purpose of His coming Jesus said, “I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me” (John 6:38). In doing God’s will, Jesus came to earth not to set up an earthly kingdom, but to die for our sins. Paul pictures the journey of Christ to earth in Phil. 2:5-9. Jesus was in the form of God, (v. 5) but He didn’t cling to that. He voluntarily emptied Himself of the glories of heaven (v. 7; John 17:4-5) and took upon Himself the form of a servant and became obedient to death, even the death of the cross (v. 8). This death, far from being an accident, was involved in the incarnation itself and was involved in the will of God (Heb. 10:5-10).

Before Jesus left heaven, He knew the cross was at the end of the road (Heb. 12:2 – check Vincents Word Studies here). Paul said, “Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that ye through His poverty (not through His reigning as an earthly, king) ye might be rich” (2 Cor. 8:9). The riches of the kingdom of Christ are spiritual.

Jesus knew the redemption could be won only by the way of the cross. In the temptation He rejected “the easy way,” to gain the kingdoms of the world as offered by the devil (Matt. 4:8-10). In the garden, as He faced the agonizing death of the cross, He prayed that the will of God that He came to do would be done (Matt. 26:39). His going to the cross was not the surrender to fate by a helpless, frustrated victim but the voluntary sacrifice of one whose soul was strong and who loves us all with a “love divine all love excelling.” The cry from the cross, “It is finished,” was not the cry of a helpless victim, but the cry of the greatest victor the world has ever known.

The death of Jesus differed from the death of all other men. “He dismissed His spirit” (Matt. 27:50). He chose the moment of His death. His death was completely voluntary. “No man taketh (my life) from me, but I lay it down of myself” (John 10:18; Phil. 2:5-7): Death was not forced upon Him, for He had control of all events. He could also have raised Himself from the dead.

Jesus was not afraid to die. He had powers at His disposal that He could have used to escape death (Matt. 26:53). But had He escaped death the question comes, “How then could the Scripture be fulfilled that thus it must be?” (Matt. 26:54). Here and in other verses you have the Divine Imperatives. It is not, “Well, I guess I’ll go to the cross since this is the way the Jews want it,” but this is the way it must be. (Check these “Divine Musts,” Matt. 16:21; Mk. 9:31; 14:49; Lk. 9:22; 17:25; 24:7; John 12:34; 20:9; Acts 17:3; Heb. 9:16).

To say that Jesus formed the purpose of dying for man after opposition to Him arose among the Jews is just a futile attempt to evade the plain statements of the Scriptures.

In Lk. 24:24-27, Jesus said, “. . . O fools and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: ought not Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.” Jesus said the Scriptures are about Me, about My suffering and death. Why be so slow to believe them? The dispensationalists are not slow to believe them, they don’t believe them at all! Why did Jesus put an “ought not Christ to have suffered these things,” if it were all an accident?

In v. 26, Jesus said He was to suffer these things and enter into His glory. When Christ entered into His glory, He received the kingdom. Put two scriptures together, “Grant that my two sons may sit . . . in thy kingdom” (Matt. 20:20-21). Then, “Grant that we may sit . . . in thy glory” (Mk. 10:35-37). When Christ entered into His glory, He received the kingdom. But He must suffer and die to enter into His glory. Without the sufferings and death of Christ there could be no kingdom or glory. There must be first the cross, then the crown (cf. 1 Tim., 3:16; Heb. 2:9). Now since you can’t have the kingdom without the cross, if the cross was an accident, was the kingdom also an accident?

Jesus was not a helpless victim of Jewish unbelief. Neither was He a helpless martyr for His ideals who was swept along by the current to the cross. He was in complete control of all things every step of the way to the cross. Nothing could be done by man to hinder or thwart the divine mission. Jesus lived by. God’s will and in keeping with His time and every event had its hour. “Known unto God are all His works from the beginning” (Acts 15:18).

The Scriptures clearly teach that the mission of Christ was spiritual. He came to die on the cross to save a lost world not to restore the national kingdom to Israel. That fact proves dispensationaIism is false to the core. The whole dispensational program is materialistic, unscriptural and those who accept it are guilty of unbelief. The people of God should not glory in some materialistic hope. With Paul let us say, “God forbid that we should glory save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Guardian of Truth XXVI: 3, pp, 34-35
January 21, 1982

By Ron Halbrook

Armageddon when? Now, of course! Armageddon Now! has been the rally cry of premillennialists since the early centuries after the establishment of the church and is the title of a study on The Premillenarian Response to Russia and Israel Since 1917 (subtitle/. Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1977 published this work by Dwight Wilson, a minister in the Assemblies of God denomination, a third-generation premillennialist, and a history professor at Bethany Bible College in Santa Cruz, California for fourteen years at the time of publication.

Wilson does not attempt to explain the Bible passages used and abused by his premillenarian brethren. He only reports the use of certain passages in various efforts to capitalize on public unrest to gain converts by predicting “an imminent, personal return of Jesus Christ to establish an earthly kingdom which will last a millennium” (p. 11). Though the author cautions his brethren against crying, “Now!” again and again, which creates skepticism, he does not repudiate the earthly reign theory. Still, his material is a veritable arsenal of facts which powerfully refute such a theory.

There are over eight million American premillennialists, concentrated among Southern Baptists; in the “largest entirely premillenarian denomination, the Assemblies of God;” and scattered elsewhere in sects and among major denominations (p. 12). Wilson warns that theories, speculations, and predictions will increase as the year 2,000 draws near enough “to induce a sense of crisis or terror,” and that any continuing trouble in the Middle East will reinforce the trend toward “an ever more deafening roar of ‘Armageddon Now’!” (p. 13)

Two key, independent historical events have played a vital role in premillennial doctrine since November of 1917. The British Foreign Secretary, Arthur Balfour, announced his government’s intention to work toward the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jews. The same month saw the rise of a Bolshevik revolution in Russia. These events played into the hands of literalistic interpreters of such prophets as Isaiah and Ezekial, whose theories had become popular during the nineteenth century. The Scofield Reference Bible (1909) has proven to be one of the most effective vehicles for spreading premillenarian ideas, with three million copies published in this century. Its notes (see for instance on Ezek. 38:2) present this scheme: Israel is restored to Palestine, Russia leads a confederacy to invade Palestine, and the Lord returns in a blaze of glory to deliver the Jewish remnant in the Battle of Armageddon – a site west of Jordan in the plain of Jezereel. Thus begins the millennium of His kingdom.

Down through history :various other schemes have been offered – all generally reflecting the national and political interests of the interpreters. For instance; the Turks were identified to lead the invasion of Palestine when they were perceived by British interpreters to be a threat to British aspirations. Repeatedly, wars in Europe and other upheavals have been proclaimed as the inauguration of such end-time events. Some eighty books were published on the subject in England during 1649 alone.

Prophetic movements, journals, and conferences blossomed in nineteenth century England and America, especially during the century’s last quarter, but Russia was of more concern to British interpreters because she threatened their country’s interests. The Jewish Zionist movement for a homeland was aided by premillennialists in so-called Christendom. The Balfour Declaration excited premillennialists on both sides of the Atlantic and as soon as Russia was perceived as a direct threat to American interests, the scheme seemed to be set. The interpreters have been kept busy to this day watching Israel and Russia in the news. The rise and fall of a mood of crisis, especially when Americans fear Russia as a threat, has played a crucial role since 1917 in creating a receptive mood in American for premillennialism.

As Wilson ably shows, premillennial literature “is strewn with a mass of erroneous speculations which have undermined their credibility” (p, 216). Every crisis in history has been identified in some way as a part of the prophetic timetable. The various chapters of the book document identifications made in such categories as are shown on the chart which we have arranged for summary purposes.

Identifications On The, False Prophetic Timetable

Supposed Prophecy	Identity in History
Sign of the End	Russo-Japanese War, World War I, World War II, Palestine War, Suez Crises, June War, and Yom Kippur War
Revival of the Roman Empire	Mussolini’s Empire, League of Nations, United Nations, European Defense Community, Common Market, and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
The Antichrist	Napoleon, Mussolini, Hitler, and Henry Kissinger
Northern Confederation Formed By	Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Rapallo Treaty, Nazi-Soviet Pact, and the Soviet Bloc
“Kings of the East”	Turks, Lost Tribes of Israel, Japan, India and China
The “Latter Rain”	1897, 1917, and 1948
End of the “Times of the Gentiles”	1895, 1917, 1948, and 1967

Wilson points Out the vital (though unconscious) role of national self-interest in premillennial theories. For instance, aggression and other violations of international law against Israel bring meager protest because, it is said, this is all part of the prophetic timetable anyway. Who is man to object to God’s action? But Israel is no threat to American interests. Of course, the existence of Israel as a state is essential to the supposed prophetic timetable, so American premillennialists have supported the state of Israel and favored American aid to it, especially military aid. Russia is considered a threat to America.

If Russian aggression had been consistently treated with the same determinism as Israel was, the Iron Curtain would have been hailed as a wonderful sign of the end . . . . In general, premillenarians called for resistance to ever hint of Russian expansion, demanding conformity to international law and justice, rather than consenting to prophetic considerations (p. 217).

The credibility of premillennialism is also shaken by their opportunistic exploitation of “every conceivably possible prophetic fulfillment for the sake of their prime objective: evangelism” (p. 218). Apparently, evangelistic goals are worth the risk of repeated false identifications. The end justifies the means.

Armageddon Now! is available in paperback from the Guardian of Truth Bookstore for $4.95 and is well worth the price. This book is a valuable tool to anyone studying the premillennial position.

Guardian of Truth XXVI: 2, pp. 28-29
January 14, 1982

By Daniel King

Premillennialists have always loved to dabble in the prophets. The reason for this is twofold: First, most people are completely ignorant of the prophets. They could tell you a little about the gospels, something about Acts, and perhaps a tidbit about the New Testament epistles – but the majority could not tell you a single thing about the Old Testament prophets. This makes the premillennialist’s remarks relatively “safe”; he can wax eloquent in his speculative discourses without fear of much contradiction. Second, they love the prophets because they were written under a carnal covenant for the people of a carnal nation whose hopes and dreams were connected with a carnal city in a this-world land. Despite the fact this covenant has been taken away (Col. 2:14; Eph. 2:15) and nailed to the cross of Christ, and although national Israel has been displaced by a spiritual people, the church (Gal. 6:16), and even though the land that flowed with milk and honey has given place to a heavenly country (Heb. 11:16) with its Holy City the New Jerusalem (Heb. 13:14; Gal. 4:26), the premillennialist yet sets his hopes and dreams upon this world and its glories and treasures. He looks for happenings which he is confident the prophets previously announced, ignoring the clear indication by inspired men that the prophetical words had special reference to the days of the Messiah’s first advent, not His second. As Peter said, “Yea and all the prophets from Samuel and them that followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of these day. . .” (Acts 3:24).

One of the favorite segments of Old Testament prophecy for the speculative thinker is Ezekiel 38, a virtual premillennialist playground. It shall be our purpose in the present paper to note some of the outlandish identifications and interpretations forced upon this chapter, and give careful attention to its actual meaning in Scripture and history.

Premillennial Presuppositions

Two fundamental presuppositions make it impossible for the premillennialist interpreter to make good sense out of Ezekiel 38, or any other prophecy for that matter. To begin with, he is an incurable futurist. No matter what the evidence to the contrary, he always sees a prophecy as still looking to the future for its historical realization. Too, he is an inveterate eisegete, wed to the dishonorable and dishonest practice of introducing into an ancient text the events and historical and political happenings that he sees occurring about him in his own time. Never mind the fact that others have gone this way before him; he ignores the plain and incontrovertible fact that history has since shown them utter fools; he is forever, like his. predecessors, living in the last days. As will be seen, these assumptions are manifestly at work in the theories spun by speculators who wrest Ezekiel 38 to their own destruction (2 Pet. 3:16).

Misapplications

A number of chapters in Ezekiel have been misused in an effort to justify premillennial expectations. Noteably, the “Woman in the Wilderness” of 20:34-37, the “Restoration of Israel” prophecies of chaps. 34, 36, 37, and 39, the “Great Tribulation” of chap. 38, the “Armageddon” portent of chap. 39, as well as the “Millennial Restoration of the Temple and Cult” in chaps. 40-48 – these all have been resorted to as evidence of end-time happenings that have as their center earthly Israel and a carnal kingdom. The plain fact is that none of these passages teaches what is alledged. The church, the New Israel and the spiritual Temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16; 2 Cor. 6:16; etc.) are being considered: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God. . .”, and “ye are the temple of the living God”, Paul tells the Corinthian church. To the Ephesians he says, “Each several building, fitly framed together, groweth into a holy temple in the Lord. . .” (2:21). The so-called Armageddon passages, as Ezekiel 38 and 39:17-20, with the Tribulation passages of the book, all describe in highly figurative language the birthpangs of the church and the persecution she would meet in her first days of life. As usual, though, the premillennialist looks upon these texts as literal to the degree and extent that fits the limits of his theory. This we have come to expect from him, however, for prophecy and even non-prophecy is read in the light of his speculative ideas rather than from the point of view of the whole teaching of the Bible, inclusive of its New Testament fulfillments and explanations of Old Testament obscurities.

For example, Hal Lindsey in his book The Late Great Planet Earth has a chapter entitled “Russia is a Gog” in which he claims Ezekiel 36 and 37 “speak of the final restoration of the Jews to the land of Palestine, a restoration from which they will never be scattered again” (p. 60). Of chapters 38 and 39 he asserts, “These chapters indicate with certainity that after the physical restoration of the nation, but before the spiritual rebirth, the great northern enemy will invade Israel” (p. 62). He goes on, “Then God will supernaturally judge the northern invaders, and this is the very act which will impel the Israeli people to know and believe in their true Messiah, Jesus Christ (Ezek. 39:6-8)” (p. 62). Russia is identified as the enemy of the people of God in the series of occurrences described by the prophet as the prophecy is interpreted by Lindsey, “For centuries, long before the current events could have influenced the interpreter’s ideas, men have recognized that Ezekiel’s prophecy about the northern commander referred to Russia” (p. 63).

Such an identification of Russia as the Northern Enemy of Ezekiel 38 is not an isolated one. Such writers as R.W. Dehaan (Israel and the Nations in Prophecy, chap. 9), J. Dwight Pentecost (Prophecy for Today, chap. 10), and Salem Kirban (Guide to Survival, chap. 11), with a host of others, are wed to this view. Says Kirban, “If you will draw a straight line from Jerusalem to the North pole on your map, you will find that this line will pass right near the city of Moscow” (op. cit., p. 231). Lindsey (Armageddon, pp. 44,4, 445) says the following facts establish Russia in the Rosh of Ezek. 38:1-2: (1) Prophetic scholars are “in almost unanimous agreement” on this identification; (2) “Chief” in Hebrew is Rosh, similar in sound to Russia; (3) An alternate translation of “chief” is “bear”, the well known symbol of Russia; (4) Russia is to the north of Israel; (5) Meshech has a “suspicious correspondence to Moscow.”

Herbert W. Armstrong, giving the texts a slightly different twist, espouses British- Israelism: “The one central master key to prophecies as a whole is the identity of the United States and the British nations in these prophecies for today” (The U.S. and the British Commonwealth in Prophecy, p. 8). Further, “It is conclusively proved as all students of prophecy know, that ‘God’ in the land of ‘Magog’ is Russia. ‘Meshech’ is Moscow, ‘Tubal’ is Tobolsk” (“Will Russia Attack America,” p. 5).

In most cases, the premillennialist speculator further identifies “Tarshish and the young lions” of Ezekiel 38:13 with Great Britain and the United States, i.e. the English-speaking nations.

The Real Meaning

While the majority of dispensational writers reject the British-Israelism of Herbert W. Armstrong and the nowdisgraced Garner Ted, one wonders why their method should be so ill-favored by them. After all, it is the same method used by all dispensationalists in almost every phase of their interpretive technique. Every ancient nation or people stands for some modern nation or people, Rosh for Russia, Tarshish and the young lions for English speaking moderns, etc. Why would it not be credible for Israel to stand for America?

But the difficulty runs deeper than merely this. The problem is a monstrous hermeneutical one, viz. that touches their whole frame of reference with respect to the principles of interpretation and explanation of biblical texts. Returning for a moment to a passage cited earlier, namely Acts 3:24, we are reminded that the end of the law and of Old Testament prophecy, its culmination and realization, came in Christ and the establishment of his church: “Yea and all the prophets from Samuel and them that followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of these days . . . .” Therefore, the direction of prophecy was not toward the end of the world or of the created order, but the conclusion of the order established by God in the Mosaical dispensation. To note that language highly symbolic in nature was utilized to express that ending and the new beginning is not very surprising to the close student of the Old Testament prophets (or the New Testament prophet John, for that matter), for this was ever their way of writing and speaking. We may, for our part, express our endorsement of the simple yet correct remark made by the erudite van Hengstenberg, who in commenting upon John’s use of Ezekiel’s figure in Revelation 20:7, said: “That Gog ‘and Magog represent generally all the future enemies of the kingdom of God, arid that we have here embraced in one large picture all that has been developing itself in a long series of events, so that the explanations which take them as referring to the Syrian kings, the Goths and Vandals, or the Turks, are all alike true, and only false in their exclusiveness.” Ezekiel 38 represents therefore a highly stylized portrait of the church’s origin under the pressure and persecution of her enemies, which enemies as the prophet shows were utterly vanquished, leaving the Temple of God (the church) a triumphant people. Every new enemy would be a new Gog, but would be overcome with the same decisiveness.

Questions

1. Why do the premillennialists like the prophets? Why can they feel “safe” about what they write and preach?
2. What connection does Acts 3:24 have to their handling of the prophets?
3. Identify two presuppositions you see at work in premillennial approaches to Ezek. 38. Show how this is true specifically as that chapter is interpreted. Can you think of other cases where the same thing manifests itself?
4. Show how New Testament texts that refer to the “temple of God,” the “new Jerusalem,” the “House of God,” “Israel,” etc. help us in understanding these prophecies.
5. Summarize some of the premillennial views of Ezek. 38. How does Russia enter the discussion? The United States? The British Commonwealth countries?
6. What is British-Israelism? Is it popular among premillennialists?
7. Look up the word “hermeneutics” in a good dictionary. Explain how premillennial views of Scripture pose “hermeneutical” problems.
8. Compare Ezekiel 38 and Rev. 20:7. What do Gog and Magog represent in each case? How do the two texts complement one another?
9. Does Ezekiel 38 offer hope to the church when it today faces adversity (materialism, sensualism, communism, denominationalism, cultism)?
10. Thought Question: The time of fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy is explained by him to be “in the latter years” (38:8) or “the latter days” (38:16). How would these expressions relate to similar expressions found in the New Testament (cf. Acts 2:16-17; Heb. 1:1-2; etc.)?

Guardian of Truth XXVI: 2, pp. 25-27
January 14, 1982

By T.G. O’Neal

Matthew 24 is a chapter that has often been misunderstood. It has been used by false teachers to set forth various ideas and theories about the second coming of Christ. A “reign of Christ on earth” is supposed to be taught in this passage.

Both Mark (chapter 13) and Luke (chapter 21) record the same material Matthew does. The three chapters must be considered together to understand all Jesus taught. In this article our reference will be mainly to Matthew 24.

Christ was asked two questions. (1) “When shall these things be?” “These things” in Mt. 24:3 refer to the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem mentioned the verses 1-2. (2) “What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” Jesus answered these two questions in order.

One need to note that what Jesus said was privately unto his disciples on the Mt. of Olives. (Mt. 24:3) Therefore, one should not expect what was said to be applied to everybody on the earth for all time to come.

Verses 4-8

Christ in these verses warns his disciples about being deceived. If they could be deceived, so can men today. The disciples, not men today, would hear of the wars and rumors of wars of that day, but they were not to be troubled for “the end is not yet” – the temple was not to be destroyed just then. Nations and kingdoms would arise against each other, but “these are the beginning of sorrows.” Rome was at war with Syria, Samaria and others at this time before the destruction of Jerusalem. Famines, earthquakes and pestilences would be in different places. Earthquakes were in Crete, Smyrna, Miletus, Chios, Samos, Laodicea, Hieropolis and Colosse. Read of famine in Acts 11:27-30. Verse 8 shows “all these are the beginning of sorrows” and not the end as it is usually contended by false teachers.

Verses 9-13

In these verses Christ shows there will be a time of suffering and persecution. The disciples would be hated, offended, betrayed, afflicted and killed for the Lord’s cause (verses 9-10). False prophets would arise to deceive many (verse 11). The one who endured unto the “end” would be saved (verse 13).

Verse 14

Christ shows before the end of Jerusalem came the gospel was to be preached in all the world (see Mk. 16:15-20; Psa. 19:4; Rom. 10:18). When the gospel is preached unto all the world, Christ said, “then shall the end come” – the end of the Jewish state and the destruction of the temple.

Verses 15-26

When the “abomination of desolation” mentioned in verse 15 took place Christ gave certain instruction (see Dan. 9:23-27). The “abomination of desolation” of Daniel was the Roman army Luke tells us (Lk. 21:20). When this happens, those in Judea are to flee to the mountains (verse 16/. This is not addressed to those in America. Those on the housetops were to flee. Woe or difficulty would be with those with child or small children (verse 19).

The disciples were to pray their fleeing to the mountains would not take place in winter when they would be cold nor on the sabbath when the city gates would be closed. Although the law of Moses was nailed to the cross, the Jewish authorities would have the gates to the city closed since the law was still the civil law of the land.

No flesh would be saved if the days had not been shortened. In the battle of Jerusalem, Josephus says about a million people were killed and that some of the fires were put out by the flowing of human blood. For the elect, the children of God, those days would be shortened.

In verses 23-26, Christ forewarns them of being deceived. Some would say Christ is at a certain place, and Christ said “believe it not” (verse 23). If they said Christ was in the desert or secret chambers the disciples were to believe it not (verse 24). Christ forewarned them (verse 25).

Verses 27-28

In these verses we have a second reference to the “abomination of desolation” spoken by Daniel. The “abomination” was the Roman army encamped at Jerusalem (Lk. 21:20). The Roman army encamped east of Jerusalem and came quickly toward the west in attacking Jerusalem is the significance of the first part of verse 27. The “coming of the Son of man” is the Lord’s coming in judgment upon the Jewish nation and not his second coming. Verses 27 and 30 mention the coming of the Son of man, but chapter 26:64 shows the Son of man “coming in the clouds of heaven” and at the same time he is “sitting on the right hand of power.” This is a coming in judgement. Since the Roman army was coming upon Jerusalem, the “carcase” of verse 27 was Jerusalem and the “eagles” were the army under the ensign of eagles.

Verses 29-31

Christ said after the tribulation “shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of heaven shall be shaken” (verse 29).

Many have expected these things to happen to the literal sun, moon and stars. We understand Jesus did not mean the literal sun, moon and stars for the tribulation is passed and they are still in the heaven.. The Holy’ Spirit through Isaiah used similar language in telling the downfall of Babylon. (Read Isaiah 13, noting verse 10). When the Holy Spirit moved Ezekiel to speak against “Pharoah king of Egypt” He said, “Arid when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light” (Ezek. 32:7-9). When the Holy Spirit used such language to describe the downfall of ancient Egypt and Babylon, why should one not understand similar language of the Holy Spirit used to describe the fall of the Jewish State?

Concerning the “Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven” note the remarks on verses 27-28.

Verse 31 says what is said in verse 14, that is, the gospel is to be preached to all the earth before the destruction of Jerusalem.

Verses 32-35

Jesus gives them a parable of a fig tree. They knew summer was near when they saw the fig tree put forth leaves. Then Jesus says, “So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the door” (verse 33). In verse 3 they wanted to know “when shall these things be.” Jesus tells them in verse 33 they “shall see all these things.”

Verses 33 and 34 are important to this discussion. If the disciples did not see “all these things” then these disciples are still alive on earth for Jesus said, “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled” (Verse 34).

“Ye” – the disciples (Mt. 24:3; Mk. 13:3) – “shall see all these things.” The “ye” does not refer to people living two thousand years in the future. “This generation” was the living generation at the time of Christ and his apostles – not a generation in the twentieth century. If “these things”, have not been “fulfilled” then we have a whole generation living now who were living in the time of Christ. Since this is not true, “these things” were fulfilled then as Christ said they would be.

Concerning the kingdom, Jesus said, “verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power” (Mk. 9:1). Either the kingdom has already come or there are men on earth alive who stood in the presence of Christ and heard him speak. Since all admit this is not so, we know the kingdom has come (see also Col. 1:13-14).

Jesus informed the disciples that his words would not pass away, but that heaven and earth, which was considered to be permanent, would pass away (verse 35).

Verses 33 and 34 show that what Jesus said in verses 4-35 refer to the destruction of Jerusalem, the downfall of the Jewish State, and NOT to the end of the world.

End and Second Coming

In verse 3, the second question asked was “What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the world?” Jesus replies to that question by saying, “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven but my Father only” (verse 36). In view of that which the “Father only” knows, it is interesting that the Adventists, Jehovah Witness, the Armstrongs and others “see” things which they say causes them to “know” when Jesus was or is coming.

Christ gives only one thing about the second coming of Christ that is certain – it is uncertain when he will come. He illustrates this with the uncertainity of the flood (verses 37-39); of two working in a field, (verse 40); and two women grinding at the mill, (verse 41). When ye “think not” it will then be when “the Son of man cometh!”

No Contradiction

If the things mentioned in verses 4-35 refer to the second coming of Christ, this would make Jesus contradict himself. From the signs Jesus mentions in verses 4-35 he said the disciples could “KNOW that it is near, even at the doors” (verse 33). Yet, in verse 42 he said, “ye KNOW NOT what hour your Lord doth come.” The entire 24th chapter does not refer to the second coming for this would make Jesus say one time they could KNOW when it would be and then say later they KNOW NOT when it would be. This would make Christ contradict himself, which he did not.

When the Lord comes he will reward the righteous (verses 45-47) and punish the wicked (verses 48-51).

Guardian of Truth XXVI: 2, pp. 23-25
January 14, 1982