Clearing the Prophetic Chess Board

in Defense of Postmillennialism
By Gary DeMar
AmericanVision.org

Table of Contents

1. Clearing the Prophetic Chess Board: Introduction: 1–25

2. Ezekiel 38–39: 26–42

3. Daniel’s 70 Weeks of Years: 43–56

4. Matthew 24 Outline: 57–120

5. Appendix A: Is “Coming” Always a Reference to the Second Coming?: 121–123

6. Appendix B: Milton Terry and “The Times of the Gentiles”: 124

7. Appendix C: Milton Terry and “Double Sense”: 125

8. Appendix D: John MacArthur, Israel, Calvinism, and Postmillennialism: 126–132

9. Appendix E: An Amillennialist Who Sounds Like a Premillennialist: 133–141

10. Additional Reading: 142–143

Introduction

There’s a scene in the 1993 film Searching for Bobby Fischer where Josh Waitzkin, played by

Max Pomeranc, is being taught that the complexities of chess require knowing more than

where the pieces on the board are at any given moment and what the next move should be. A

master chess player should determine “where they will be in one, two, three, and many moves

ahead.”

1
Ben Kingsley’s character, Bruce Pandolfini, wants Josh to learn to see these necessary moves

before he commits his tactical approach. So he sets up the pieces on the board for Josh so

checkmate can be accomplished in four moves. He tells Josh, “don’t move until you figure it out

in your head.” Josh says he can’t do it unless he can physically move the pieces. Pandolfini tells

Josh,

Clear the lines of lint in your head, one at a time, and the king will be left

standing alone, like a guy on a street corner. Here, I’ll make it easier for you.

He makes it “easier” by sweeping away all the pieces with his arm sending them tumbling to

the floor, leaving only the empty board for Josh to contemplate over. Watch the video clip here:

https://youtu.be/QNVWY5jUIbc

After deliberating over the empty 64 squares for a short time, Josh figures it out and tells

Pandolfini his first move.

A similar process needs to be performed when dealing with a topic like eschatology in general

and postmillennialism in particular. In a way, we are playing with a chessboard that’s been set

up by a group of competitors and pieces that can only move in terms of their rules. This means

that before there can be a discussion of postmillennialism, there must be an evaluation of

passages that seemingly discount postmillennialism. This means the prophetic board must be

swept clean before any of the so-called millennial positions can be discussed.

2
Postmil critics have the board rigged by gluing down some of the pieces so they can’t be

moved. The prophetic chess game must be played around these immovable pieces that from

the start seemingly discount postmillennialism.

It’s not only the specific passages; it’s also the critics who put forth extra-biblical arguments. Dr.

Greg L. Bahnsen’s article “The Prima Facie Acceptability of Postmillennialism,” that first

appeared in The Journal of Christian Reconstruction: Symposium on the Millennium in 1976–

1977, offers a shortlist of what some postmil critics have said about the acceptability of

postmillennialism as a biblical doctrine:

Alva J. McClain says of postmillennialism: “This optimistic theory of human

progress had much of its own way for the half-century ending in World War I of

1914. After that the foundations were badly shaken; prop after prop went down,

until today the whole theory is under attack from every side. Devout

Postmillennialism has virtually disappeared.” 1

J. Barton Payne’s … Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy mentions postmillennialism

only once, and that merely in a footnote which parenthetically declares “two

world wars killed this optimism.” 2 Merrill F. Unger dismisses postmillennialism in

short order, declaring: “This theory, largely disproved by the progress of history,

is practically a dead issue.” 3

“Premillennialism as a Philosophy of History,” in W. Culbertson and H. B. Centz, eds., Understanding the

1

Times (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1956), 22.

2
Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy (New York: Harper and Row, 1973), 596.
3
“Millennium,” Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody Press, revised 1961), 739.

3
 John F. Walvoord tells us that “In eschatology the trend away from

postmillennialism became almost a rout with the advent of World War II”

because it forced upon Christians “a realistic appraisal of the decline of the

church in power and influence.” 4 Hence he says that “In the twentieth century

the course of history, progress in Biblical studies, and the changing attitude of

philosophy arrested its progress and brought about its apparent discard by all

schools of theology. Postmillennialism is not a current issue in

millenarianism.” 5 He accuses it of failing to fit the facts of current history, of

being unrealistic, and of being outmoded and out of step. 6

Jay Adams [who was a partial preterist and held to the early date for the writing

of Revelation] 7 recognizes postmillennialism as a “dead issue” with conservative

scholars, since it predicts a golden age while the world awaits momentary

destruction; he agrees with the above authors that the “advent of two World

Wars ... virtually rang the death knell upon conservative postmillennialism.” 8

Adams apparently offers his own opinion that [Loraine] Boettner’s long-range

postmillennialism “is too difficult to grant when Christians must face the fact of

hydrogen bombs in the hands of depraved humanity.” 9

John F. Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), 9.
4

Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom, 9.

5

Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom, 18.

6

Jay E. Adams, Peterism: Orthodox or Unorthodox? (Stanley, NC: Timeless Texts, 2003).
7

Jay E. Adams, The Time is at Hand (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1970), 2.
8

Adams, The Time is at Hand, 4.

9

4
 Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth captures well the attitude of these

previous writers, stating that “there used to be” a group called

“postmillennialists” who were greatly disheartened by World War I and virtually

wiped out by World War II. Lindsey’s (poorly researched) conclusion is this: “No

self-respecting scholar who looks at the world conditions and the accelerating

decline of Christian influence today is a ‘postmillennialist.’” 10

Dr. Bahnsen described these types of criticisms as “newspaper exegesis,” that is, reading the

Bible through the lens of current events. First Mussolini and then Hitler was the antichrist. Bar

codes and computer chips are the mark of the beast. The locusts in Revelation 9:1–12 are

Vietnam-war-era helicopters. The following is from a prophecy book written by Hal Lindsey in

1973:

I have a Christian friend who was a Green Beret in Viet Nam. When he first read

this chapter he said, “I know what those are. I’ve seen hundreds of them in Viet

Nam. They’re Cobra helicopters! That may be conjecture, but it does give you

something to think about! A Cobra helicopter does fit the sound of “many

chariots.” My friend believes that the means of torment will be a kind of nerve

gas sprayed from its tail. 11

Hal Lindsey (with C. C. Carlson), The Late Great Planet Earth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1970), 176.
10

11
Hal Lindsey, There’s a New World Coming: A Prophetic Odyssey (Santa Ana, CA: Vision House Publishers,
1973), 138–139.

5
I suspect that over the centuries Bible commentators interpreted much of what we read in

Revelation in terms of the news of their own time. 12

For example, John Gill (1697–1771) interpreted the locusts as the main competing religions of

his day: “And their faces were as the faces of men; which may be expressive of the affable

carriage of Mahomet [Muhammad], and his followers, especially to the Christians, and of his

great pretensions to holiness and religion, and of the plausible and insinuating ways, and artful

methods, used by him, to gain upon men; and being applied to the clergy of the church of

Rome, may denote their show of humanity, and their pretended great concern for the welfare

of the souls of men, their flatteries, good words, and fair speeches, with which they deceive the

simple and unwary.”

The biblical approach is to study how locusts are depicted in the Old Testament and pay

attention to the time element in Revelation (1:1–3; 22:10). Sometimes locusts are literal (Ex.

10:4, 12–15) and sometimes symbolic of armies (Judges 6:5; 7:12; Joel 2:4–5).

John Walvoord’s book Armageddon, Oil and the Middle East Crisis went through numerous

updated editions since it was first published in 1974 with the latest edition’s title changed to

Armageddon, Oil, and Terror: What the Bible Says about the Future (2007). Why was the title

changed? Because current events changed.

Imagine what newspaper exegesis would have been like in the first century. Peter and others

were beaten and thrown in prison (Acts 4:1–3; 5:17–18). Stephen was martyred (7:54–60). Saul

ravaged the church in Jerusalem, “entering house after house; and dragging off men and

12
Gary DeMar, Doomsday Déjà Vu: How Prophecy “Experts” have Led People to Question the Authority of the
Bible: http://www.peace-inc.org/images/DoomsdayDejaVu-_Gary_DeMar.pdf

6
women” and putting “them in prison” (8:3). James the brother of John was executed (12:2–3).

Some Jews took an oath to kill Paul (23:12, 30). Paul describes in his second letter to the

Corinthians all the anti-postmil things that happened to him nearly 2000 years ago:

Are they servants of Christ?—I speak as if insane—I more so; in far more labors,

in far more imprisonments, beaten times without number, often in danger of

death. Five times I received from the Jews thirty-nine lashes. Three times I was

beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked, a night and

a day I have spent in the deep. I have been on frequent journeys, in dangers from

rivers, dangers from robbers, dangers from my countrymen, dangers from the

Gentiles, dangers in the city, dangers in the wilderness, dangers on the sea,

dangers among false brethren; I have been in labor and hardship, through many

sleepless nights, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure.

Apart from such external things, there is the daily pressure on me of concern for

all the churches. Who is weak without my being weak? Who is led into sin

without my intense concern? (11:23–29).

Who could have imagined the impact Christianity would have on the world given the fact that a

small band of disciples, most of whom were martyred within 40 years of Jesus’ death,

resurrection, and ascension, and that Christianity would outlast and supplant the Roman

Empire whose accomplishments are now tourist attractions?

7
Apply the historical criticisms of the above postmil critics to 2000 years of history beginning

with the first century and persecution (2 Tim. 3:11), tribulation (1 Thess. 1:5–6), and martyrdom

(John 21:18–19). World conditions were not very encouraging when it came to the advance of

Christianity through the centuries. If the historical logic of postmil critics is sound, there should

have been a steady decline of Christianity from day one.

8
I. The Main Millennial Positions

A. Premillennialism (classic and dispensational) teaches that Jesus returns before (pre-)

the thousand years in Revelation 20 and reigns on the earth.

1. There is no mention of an earthly reign of Jesus Christ, a rebuilt temple, the

institution of animal sacrifices, the re-establishment of the throne of David on earth

(Luke 1:32; Acts 2:29–36), the unconditional land promises made to Abraham (Gen.

15:1–21), the apostles reigning on thrones in Jerusalem (Matt. 19:28); restoring the

kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:5–7), and the promise that Israel will be restored (Zech.

14:1–21; Rom. 11:1–32).

2. There is “no mention of some of the commonest features of premillennialsim: the

luxuriant superabundance of earth’s produce, the animal world’s mutual conciliation

and peaceful submission to mankind, increased human longevity, a rebuilt

Jerusalem, the servitude of the nations, and the return of the ten tribes. The only

reference to any earthly conditions during the millennium concerns the inability of

the serpent to deceive the nations to gather them for the final battle....” 13

3. Given what we do not find in Revelation 20, the following cannot be supported as a

true statement: “Interpreting Revelation 20 according to an honest application of

the literary-historical-grammatical method, which conservative evangelicalism

Charles E. Hill, Regnum Caelorum: Patterns of Millennial Thought in Early Christianity (Grand Rapids, MI:
13

Eerdmans, 2001), 237–238.

9
 largely adopts today, yields a thousand-year reign of Christ on the earth after His

second coming and the first resurrection preceding the final judgment.” 14

4. The early church fathers who are said to be premillennial (there were very few) did

not defend their position by an appeal to Revelation 20. 15

a. “The days will come, in which vines shall grow, each having ten thousand

branches, and each branch ten thousand twigs, and each true twig ten thousand

shoots, and in each one of the shoots ten thousand clusters, and on every one of

the clusters ten thousand grapes, and every grape when pressed will give five

and twenty metretes [about 10 gallons: John 2:6] of wine.”

b. “Observe, children, what ‘he finished in six days’ means. It means this: that in six

thousand years the Lord will bring everything to an end, for with him a day

signifies a thousand years. And he himself bears me witness when he says,

‘Behold, the day of the Lord will be as a thousand years.’ Therefore, children, in

six days—that is, in six thousand years—everything will be brought to an end.

‘And he rested on the seventh day.’ This means: when his son comes, he will

destroy the time of the lawless one and will judge the ungodly and will change

the sun and moon and the stars, and then he will truly rest on the seventh

day.” 16

14
Spencer Carpenter, “The Millennium in the Early Church: Certain Hope to Non-Existence” (2016), 20–21:
https://www.academia.edu/33064085/The_Millennium_in_the_Early_Church_Certain_Hope_to_Non_Existence
See Gary DeMar and Francis X. Gumerlock, The Eary Church and the End of the World (Powder Springs, GA:
15

American Vision, 2006): https://store.americanvision.org/products/the-early-church-and-the-end-of-the-world?

Michael W. Holmes, ed., “The Epistle of Barnabas” in The Apostolic Fathers, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker
16

Books, 2007), 426-429, chap. 15:4-5.

10
 B. Amillennialism does not teach that Jesus will physically reign on the earth for a

thousand years. Like most postmillennialists, amillennialists believe the thousand years

is symbolic of Jesus reigning from heaven throughout the church age until the Second

Coming.

1. The “a” at the beginning of the word is a negative and means “no” earthly millennial

reign.

2. Like premillennialism, amillennialists believe there will be a downgrade of the gospel

and its impact on the world before Jesus returns.

a. Robert Strong, an amillennialist, wrote the following in The Presbyterian

Guardian in 1942: “Amillennialism agrees with premillennialism that the

Scriptures do not promise the conversion of the world through the preaching of

the gospel.” 17

b. William E. Cox agrees with Strong’s assessment: “Premillenarians believe the

world is growing increasingly worse, and that it will be at its very worst when

Jesus returns. Amillenarians agree with the premillenarians on this point.” 18

3. Postmillennialism teaches that Jesus will return after (post) the thousand years

(millennium) of Revelation 20 which is said to be synonymous with the kingdom

established by Jesus.

a. Revelation 20 does not describe what postmillennialists teach on the topic. The

prophetic position must be developed from other passages.

17
Robert Strong, “Amillennialism in the New Testament: Part 1,” The Presbyterian Guardian 11:2 (January 10,
1942), 2: https://opc.org/cfh/guardian/Volume_11/1942-01-10.pdf
William E. Cox, Amillennialism Today (Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1966), 5.
18

11
b. The gospels proclaim the kingdom was “near” (Matt. 3:2; 4:17 Mark 1:15).

c. Jesus said to pray that the kingdom would come and God’s will would be done

on earth as it is in heaven (Matt. 6:10).

d. Paul was “on trial for the hope and resurrection of the dead” (Acts 23:6) not the

rapture of the church.

e. Paul preached the kingdom of God (Acts 28:23, 31) not the rapture of the church

or a physical reign of Jesus on earth.

f. Revelation 20:3 states that Satan was bound [ἔδησεν/edēsen] in a specific way,

that he could not deceive the nations. When did this binging take place? Jesus

asked, “how can anyone enter the strong man’s house and carry off his property

unless he first binds [δήσῃ/dēsē] the strong man? And then he will plunder his

house” (Matt. 12:29). The strongman was bound during Jesus’ earthly ministry.

This was evidence that the kingdom of God had come upon them: “But if I cast

out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you”

(12:28). Here is proof that the nations were no longer deceived (Acts 9:36–11:18;

Rom. 1:8 [world]; 16:25–26 [all the nations]; Col. 1:6 [in all the world], 23 [in all

creation under heaven]; 1 Tim. 3:16 [proclaimed among the nations]).

g. “There is reason to suppose that the church has not at any time since the early

centuries of our era given adequate expression to the teaching of Scripture in its

12
 application to social and political life. Much of Scripture still remains a sealed

book even to the great majority of Christians.” 19

h. “The thing that distinguishes the biblical postmillennialist … from amillennialism

and premillennialism is his belief that Scripture teaches the success of the great

commission in this age of the church. The optimistic confidence that the world

nations will become disciples of Christ, that the church will grow to fill the earth,

and that Christianity will become the dominant principle rather than the

exception to the rule distinguishes postmillennialism from the other

viewpoints.” 20

i. “We may see, then, so far what kingdom it is for the coming of which we are

here taught to pray. It is the kingdom of divine power and grace over man’s will,

its acts and results, of divine order and righteousness in man’s life and all its

relations. In the measure that human caprice is replaced by divine law, human

perversity by divine holiness, this kingdom is advanced; and, as the very position

of the text in the prayer of which it forms a part suggests to us, when God’s will

is done on earth as it is in heaven, then it will have fully come. It is the grand

theme of the whole Bible; yea, throughout all history a certain groaning after it

may be heard, a certain groping after it may be traced.” 21

19
Roderick Campbell, Israel and the New Covenant (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co.,
1954), 311.
20
Greg L. Bahnsen, “The Prima Facie Acceptability of Postmillennialism,” The Journal of Christian
Reconstruction: Symposisum on the Millennialism (Winter 1976–1977):
https://www.cmfnow.com/articles/pt031.htm.
Robert Flint, Christ’s Kingdom on Earth: A Series of Discourses (Edinburgh and London: William Blackwood
21

and Sons, 1865), 60.

13
II. Does Revelation 20 describe a millennium as the term is usually understood?

A. B. B. Warfield (1851–1921), who served as professor of theology at Princeton

Seminary from 1887 to 1921, wrote: “Nothing, indeed, seems to have been more

common in all ages of the Church than to frame an eschatological scheme from this

passage [Rev. 20], imperfectly understood, and then to impose this scheme on the rest

of Scripture vi et armis [with force and arms].” 22

B. The word millennium is not found in the Bible.

1. The word is of recent origin, dating back to the 1630s.

2. Millennium is composed of the Latin mille that means thousand and annus that

means year (from which we get the word “annual” and the “A” in A.D., anno domini,

“in the year of our Lord”).

3. The Greek word used for thousand in Revelation 20 is χίλια (chilia). This means a

person can be called a millennialist or a chiliast. You will find both terms in the

literature.

C. Millennium means two things that aren’t necessarily the same.

1. A period of a thousand years, especially when calculated from the traditional date of

the birth of Christ that includes marking an anniversary like the inauguration of a

new millennium or the celebration of a city’s founding.

Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield, “The Millennium and the Apocalypse,” Princeton Theological Review, 2:4
22

(1904), 599: https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/warfield/warfield_millennium.html

14
 2. The thousand years mentioned in Revelation 20 is said to be a time of gospel

prosperity, relative peace, and righteousness. Does Revelation describe this second

definition of “millennium”?

3. The millennial (kingdom) view must be built from other passages

III. What is the significance of the thousand years?

A. “A ‘thousand years’ is the symbol of heavenly completeness and blessedness; the ‘little

time’ of earthly turmoil and evil. Those in the ‘thousand years’ are safe from enduring

his [Satan’s] attacks.” 23

B. “The millennium of the Apocalypse is the blessedness of the saints who have gone away

from the body to be at home with the Lord.” 24

C. “Thus, the age of the Old Covenant Temple was 1000 years, and this probably is

background for the statement in Revelation 20 that the reign of the saints will last 1000

years in the New Covenant, an event I have suggested began with the destruction of the

Old Covenant Temple….” 25

D. There are times when the number thousand means a literal thousand (10 x 100). Often

the number thousand “serves as a nonliteral symbol for a large quantity.” Milton S.

Terry, in his widely used book Biblical Hermeneutics, neatly summarizes the issue: “As

we have found the number ten to symbolize the general idea of fullness, totality,

completeness, so not improbably the number one thousand may stand as the symbolic

Warfield, “The Millennium and the Apocalypse,” 605–606, 615.

23

Warfield, “The Millennium and the Apocalypse,” 615.

24

James B. Jordan, “Chronologies and Kings, Part 13: The End of the Kingdom of Judah,” Theopolis (July 24,
25

1992): https://theopolisinstitute.com/chronologies-and-kings-part-13-the-end-of-the-kingdom-of-judah/

15
 number of manifold fullness, the rounded aeon of Messianic triumph..., during which he

shall abolish all rule and all authority and power, and put all his enemies under his feet

(1 Cor. xv, 24, 25), and bring in the fullness ... of both Jews and Gentiles (Rom. xi, 12,

25).”

E. How do we determine how the number thousand should be interpreted? When is it

literal, and when is it being used as a symbol? John J. Davis, who taught Hebrew and Old

Testament at Grace Theological Seminary, writes, “Sometimes the number 1000 is

employed to describe an indefinite amount as in Deuteronomy 1:11 and 7:9.” Let’s

consider these examples:

1. “May the LORD, the God of your fathers, increase you a thousand-fold more than

you are, and bless you, just as He promised you!” (Deut. 1:11).

a. What should we make of the phrase “a thousand-fold”? Notice the comparison

to the stars of heaven in Deuteronomy 1:10 (cf. Gen. 15:5): “You are this day as

the stars of heaven for multitude.”

b. If the number of Israelites was at that time compared to the number of stars in

heaven, of which there are billions, and God promised to multiply that number

by a thousand, literalists have some serious interpretive problems.

c. The population of Israel after the Exodus was not in the billions. In this context,

“thousand” means a large, unspecified number, and the use of the star imagery

comparison is hyperbole.

16
2. There’s a similar issue with Deuteronomy 7:9. Just to the thousandth generation?

Are we to expect only 40,000 years of lovingkindness for the Jews? I suspect that

God’s lovingkindness lasts forever (Ezra 3:11).

3. “One of your men puts to flight a thousand, for the LORD your God is He who fights

for you, just as He promised you” (Joshua 23:10; cf. Deut. 32:30). This could be

literal, but most likely it’s an example of hyperbole since it’s highly unlikely that any

single man could put so many to flight. The point of the verse is to show that God is

the One fighting for them.

4. “And the man said to Joab, ‘Even if I should receive a thousand [pieces of] silver in

my hand, I would not put out my hand against the king’s son’” (2 Sam. 18:12). What

if he received two thousand pieces? Would this have been enough to put out his

“hand against the king’s son”?

5. “Remember His covenant forever, the word which He commanded to a thousand

generations” (1 Chron. 16:15). “Forever” is equated with “a thousand generations.”

See Psalm 105:8 below. If the literal approach is taken, then after 40,000 years the

command ceases to hold authority.

6. “If one wished to dispute with Him, he could not answer Him once in a thousand

times” (Job 9:3). How about once in two thousand times? Three thousand? Maybe

four thousand is the magic number. No, a literal interpretation would mean that it’s

possible to dispute with God and eventually win.

7. “For every beast of the forest is Mine, the cattle on a thousand hills” (Psalm 50:10).

Does this mean that God only owns cattle on a thousand hills? What about the cattle

17
 that are not on hills? What about beasts that are not in forests? Note the Hebrew

parallelism: “every beast ... the cattle on a thousand hills.”

8. “For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside...” (Psalm 84:10). So, if I

were to spend 1500 days outside, then that would be better than a day in God’s

courts?

9. “For a thousand years in Thy sight are like yesterday when it passes by, or as a watch

in the night” (Psalm 90:4).

10. “He has remembered His covenant forever, the word which He commanded to a

thousand generations” (Psalm 105:8).

a. Once again, we encounter Hebrew parallelism where “forever” is equal to a

“thousand generations.”

b. As William Plumer writes: “A large definite number [thousand] is put for

perpetuity. God’s faithfulness is unto all generations, Ps. cxix.90.” 26

c. Psalm 119:90 reads: “Thy faithfulness continues to all generations....” So, which

is it, “to all generations” or to “a thousand generations”? Once again,

“thousand” represents more than a literal interpretation of the number.

IV. What is John’s “millennium”? 27

A. The thousand years is the covenantal transition period of doing away with the Old

Covenant order that was “becoming obsolete and growing old and is near [nearly 2000

years ago] to disappear” (Heb. 8:13) and the establishment of the New Covenant order.

26
William S. Plumer, Psalms: A Critical and Expository Commentary with Doctrine and Practical Remarks
(Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, [1867] 1975), 932.
IV.A–B were sent to me by Kim Burgess.
27

18
 1. The “millennium” of Revelation 20 is NOT the Kingdom era but the temporal

period—the time from Jesus’ ministry to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70—in

which the Kingdom comes/is established covenantally so that it may begin its victory

application among the nations.

2. John ends on this note in Revelation 21:24, 26, and 22:2 testifying as to what the

future of the world, in principle, will hold now that the Kingdom has come and been

established covenantally.

3. Christ’s “mustard tree” growth (extensive) and “leavening” (intensive) principles of

the Kingdom's presence and work will have their full application in the world.

B. The eschatological goal in the NT was the covenantal fulfillment in principle of the third

and greatest promise made to Abraham.

1. In Abraham and his seed, all the nations of the earth would be blessed (Gen. 22:18).

2. For that to happen, the covenant promises made to Old Testament Israel had to be

fulfilled resulting in the establishment of the New Covenant order in Israel that

would allow the non-Israelite nations to enter into the Kingdom as first-class citizens

and no longer as proselytes to Judaism.

V. Some biblical arguments (not newspaper headlines like world conditions) offered against

postmillennialism.

• The “rapture” is a given that must fit within one of five different positions: pre-trib,

mid-trib, partial rapture, pre-wrath, and post-trib.

• There is a future seven-year tribulation period when all the end-time prophecies are

fulfilled.

19
 For a detailed study of the rapture, see The Rapture and the Fig Tree Generation.

• There must be an end-time antichrist who rules the world. Dispensationalists claim

he makes and breaks a peace treaty with Israel (Dan. 9:24–27).

• Israel becoming a nation again in 1948 sets the stage for the “rapture” or the Second

Coming: 1948 + 40 years = 1988 or 1948 + 70 years = 2018.

• The Gog and Magog (Ezek. 38–39) prophecy based on Revelation 20:7–9 is said to be

in the future sometime during seven years before the earthly thousand-year reign of

Jesus. Russia (Ezek. 38:2; 39:1) will attack Israel as well as a 200-million-man army on

horseback from China (Rev. 9:16–18). (Dispensationalist must argue for two Gog and

Magog battles. One before the events of Revelation 20 and another one at the end.)

• There will be another rebuilt temple where the antichrist/man of sin/beast will sit

and declare himself to be god (2 Thess. 2). (The NT does not say anything about a

rebuilt temple.)

• The abomination of desolation (Matt. 24:15) must stand in the holy place, that is, in

the newly rebuilt temple.

• The slaughter of millions of Jews (Zech. 13:7–9) during the great tribulation.

• Wars and rumors of wars (Matt. 24:6), earthquakes (24:7), and everything else in the

Olivet Discourse.

20
 • The rise of a ten-nation common market to be ruled by the antichrist (Dan 2:31–35,

40–45; 7:7–8, 19–24; Rev 13:1–2; 17:3, 7, 12–16 ), which happened in 1957/1958 28

and now is made up of 44 nations.

• The sun and moon going dark and stars hitting the earth (Matt. 24:29; Rev. 6:12–14;

12:4). How can postmillennialism be true if these earth-destroying events are in our

future?

VI. Israel First then the Nations

A. Gaps, Postponements, and the Parenthesis

1. Much of today’s eschatology is built on the futurist structure.

2. This requires creating a distinction between Israel and the church.

3. Stopping the prophetic clock at some time early in the book of Acts and creating the

mythical “church age” as if it’s some doctrine contrived to make a distinction

between Israel and something new called the “church.”

For a study of the Israel/Church distinction myth, see 10 Popular Prophecy Myths

Exposed and Answered.

4. Daniel’s 70 Weeks of Years Prophecy: 69 weeks of years (483) years + postponement

and gap of nearly 2000 years so far, then a final week of 7 years.

B. Israel and the Nations

1. “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name

Him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord

28
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/common-market-founded

21
 God will give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house

of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end” (Luke 1:31–33).

2. Now Lord, You are releasing Your bond-servant to depart in peace, according to Your

word; for my eyes have seen Your salvation, which You have prepared in the

presence of all peoples, A LIGHT OF REVELATION TO THE GENTILES, and the glory of

Your people Israel” (Luke 2:29–32; also Isa. 49:6; Acts 13:44–52; 13:47; 26:23).

C. The Lost sheep of the house of Israel:

1. “These twelve Jesus sent out after instructing them: ‘Do not go in the way

of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans; but rather go to the lost

sheep of the house of Israel. And as you go, preach, saying, “The kingdom of heaven

is at hand”’” (Matt. 10:5–7; see Acts 13:51; 18:6).

2. “But whenever they persecute you in one city, flee to the next; for truly I say to you,

you will not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes”

(Matt. 10:23). The coming of the Son of Man refers to His judgment coming against

Jerusalem in that took place in AD 70 before their generation passed away (Matt.

24:27, 34).

3. “There were Jews living in Jerusalem from every nation under heaven” (Acts 2:5).

4. To the Jew First (Rom. 1:16)

5. Acts 9:36–11:18

6. Ephesians 2

7. Romans 11:1–5: “at the present time.”

22
 So-Called Problem Passages

I. Ezekiel 37–39

For a detailed study of Ezekiel 38–39, see the book The Gog and Magog End-Time

Alliance.

II. Daniel 9:24–27.

See Last Days Madness (chap. 25).

III. Zechariah 14.29

IV. The Olivet Discourse mainly based on Matthew 24

See Wars and Rumors of Wars and Last Days Madness.

V. 1 Thessalonians 1:6, 8, 10; 2:14–19, 2 Thessalonians 1:6–8, and Jude 12–15. 30

VI. 2 Thessalonians 2

See Last Days Madness (chaps. 22–23)

VII. 2 Timothy 3.

VIII. 2 Peter 3:3–4.31

IX. Antichrist 32

A. The antichrist is said to be “the king of Babylon” (Isa. 14:4), “Lucifer” (14:12), “the man

of sin (lawlessness) … the son of destruction” (2 Thess. 2:3), “the prince who is to come”

My book on Zechariah 14 is still in its research stage.

29

30
See Gary DeMar, “Does 2 Thessalonians 1 Support Amillennialism?”:
https://americanvision.org/24728/does-2-thessalonians-1-support-amillennialism/
31
See Gary DeMar and David Chilton, “What Does Peter Mean by the Passing Away of Heaven and Earth? A
Study of 2 Peter 3”: https://americanvision.org/3603/what-does-peter-mean-by-the-passing-away-of-heaven-and-
earth-a-study-of-2-peter-3/
32
See Gary DeMar, “Why Do Prophecy Teachers Keep Misleading us about Antichrist?,” American Vision (July
20, 2018): https://americanvision.org/16516/why-do-prophecy-teachers-keep-misleading-us-about-antichrist/

23
 (Dan. 9:26), “the little horn” (7:8; 8:9), “the beast” (Rev. 13: there are two beasts: sea

and land), and several other biblical characters all rolled into one. According to

prophecy writer Tim LaHaye, “Many titles are given to Antichrist in the Scriptures—at

least twenty in number.” 33

B. The word “antichrist” appears only four times in the Bible and never in the book of

Revelation (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7), and the term’s definition is clear and precise.

C. LaHaye admits this, but then adds to the definition by claiming that “The Bible

repeatedly predicts, however, that one person will arise as the embodiment of all anti-

Christian attitudes, purposes, and motives that Satan has implanted in his emissaries

throughout past centuries.” 34

D. David Brickner’s book Future Hope: A Jewish Christian Look at the End of the World

includes a chapter with the title “Who is the Antichrist” but does not mention any of the

only four verses that use the word “antichrist.”

E. Alan Kurschner, author of Antichrist Before the Day of the Lord, mentions 1 John 2:18,

22, and 4:3 but not 2 John 7 where the definition is made clear. The passages where the

word “antichrist” appears get a half-page of discussion by Kurschner in a book of 231

pages about the antichrist. 35

PROPHECY RESOURCES

Tim LaHaye, Revelation Unveiled, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999), 207.
33

LaHaye, Revelation Unveiled, 207.

34

35
Alan Kurschner, Antichrist Before the Day of the Lord: What Every Christian Needs to Know About the Return
of Christ (Pompton Lakes, NJ: Eschatos Publishing, 2013), 12.

24
For more information on the topic of Bible prophecy, check out the following books from

American Vision:

The Beginner’s Guide to Interpreting Bible Prophecy

Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church

Is Jesus Coming Soon?

Left Behind: Separating Fact from Fiction

The Early Church and the End of the World

Identifying the Real Last Days Scoffers

The Gog and Magog End-Time Alliance

Prophecy Wars

The End Times and the Islamic Antichrist

The Rapture and the Fig Tree Generation

Wars and Rumors of Wars

Matthew 24 Fulfilled

Paradise Restored

The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation

Jesus v. Jerusalem

25
 The Gog-Magog Alliance in Ezekiel 38–39
By Gary DeMar
AmericanVision.org

I. Ezekiel 38–39 has been used as the centerpiece of much prophetic speculation.
A. The various interpretations
1. Future
a. The invasion is only symbolic of the attempts of evil forces to overcome God’s
people.
b. It will occur before the Tribulation, either before or at the time of the Rapture or
just after it.
c. It will happen during the Tribulation (cf. Dan. 11:40–41; Rev. 14:14–20).
d. It will take place at the end of the seven-year Tribulation (the battle of
Armageddon; cf. Zech. 12; 14:1–4; Rev. 19:11–21).
e. It will happen between the end of the Tribulation and the beginning of the
Millennium.
f. It will happen at the beginning of the Millennium.
g. It will occur at the end of the Millennium (Rev 20:8).
2. Past
a. In the days of Antiochus Epiphanes, the bitter enemy of the Jews, around 167 B.C.
b. The time of Esther
B. Various Gog and Magog Candidates
1. Goths (4th century)
2. Goths and Moors (5th century)
3. Huns (7th century)
4. Islamic Empire (8th century)
5. Hungarians (10th century)
6. Mongols (14th century)
7. Persecution of the Lollards (14th century)
8. Turks (16th century)
9. Mohammedans and the Papacy (16th century)

26
 10. Pope and Spain (16th century)
11. Native Americans (17th century)
12. France (18th century).
13. Modern-day Russia (20th and 21st centuries)
II. The Literal Interpretation of the Bible
A. Tim LaHaye writes: “The best guide to Bible study is ‘The Golden Rule of Biblical
Interpretation.’ To depart from this rule opens the student to all forms of confusion and
sometimes even heresy. When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek
no other sense, but take every word at its primary, literal meaning unless the facts of
the immediate context clearly indicate otherwise.” 36
B. Ron Rhodes: “Here is a basic rule of thumb for interpreting the Bible: When the plain
sense of Scripture makes good sense, seek no other sense.” 37
C. Rhodes, along with his co-author Norman Geisler, expands on the “plain sense”
interpretive approach.
1. They say that literal “refers to the understanding of a text that any person of normal
intelligence would understand without the help of any special keys or codes.”
2. The literal meaning of Scripture “embraces the normal, everyday, common
understanding of the terms of the Bible. Words are given the meaning they normally
have in common communication.”
3. The interpreter should be mindful of the “historical setting.” Sentences of Scripture
“should not be taken out of the space-time, cultural context in which they were
uttered.”
4. “It is the means by which the interpreter mentally transfers himself into the context
in which the author uttered the words. This guards against the interpretive error of
making the reader’s historical or cultural context the norm for understanding the
text.” 38

36
Tim LaHaye, No Fear of the Storm: Why Christians will Escape All the Tribulation (Sisters, OR: Multnomah, 1992),
240. No Fear of the Storm has been republished as Rapture Under Attack (1998). The “Golden Rule of Interpretation” is
not found in the Bible but is set forth in David L. Cooper, When Gog’s Armies Meet the Almighty in the Land of Israel: An
Exposition of Ezekiel Thirty-Eight and Thirty-Nine, 3rd ed. (Los Angeles, CA: Biblical Research Society, [1940] 1958), [i].
37
Ron Rhodes, Northern Storm Rising: Russia, Iran, and the Emerging End-Times Military Coalition against
Israel (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2008), 20.
38
Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes, Conviction without Compromise: Standing Strong in the Core Beliefs of the
Christian Faith (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2008), 196.

27
III. The Literal Interpretation of the Bible and the Interpretation of Ezekiel 38 and 39.
A. Is the “Golden Rule of Interpretation” followed by modern-day prophecy writers when it
comes to the weapons described?
1. If a modern interpreter “mentally transfers himself into the context in which the
[original] author uttered the words,” would he find jet planes, nuclear weapons, and
other implements of contemporary warfare?
2. How would a first-time, 6th-century B.C reader or hearer of Ezekiel 38 and 39
understand the use of bows and arrows, shields, chariots, horses, cattle, gold, silver,
and clubs?
3. The first readers of Ezekiel’s prophecy would have envisioned a battle fought as it
was described to Ezekiel. This would have been the “plain sense.” Horses, bows and
arrows, war clubs, shields, and chariots had been used in previous battles. There was
no internal textual reason to understand the battle in any way other than what
Ezekiel was describing at God’s direction.
B. Is the “Golden Rule of Interpretation” followed by modern-day prophecy writers when it
comes to the nations described?
1. The nations mentioned by Ezekiel were in existence in the 6th century B.C.: Persia,
Cush, and Put (Ezek. 38:5), along with Gomer and Beth-togarmah (38:6), Sheba,
Dedan, and Tarshish (38:13), and Meshech (38:3)
2. “Tarshish was your customer because of the abundance of all kinds of wealth; with
silver, iron, tin and lead they paid for your wares. Javan, Tubal and Meshech, they
were your traders; with the lives of men and vessels of bronze they paid for your
merchandise. Those from Beth-togarmah gave horses and war horses and mules for
your wares. The sons of Dedan were your traders. Many coastlands were your
market; ivory tusks and ebony they brought as your payment. . . . Judah and the
land of Israel, they were your traders. . .” (Ezek. 27:12–16, 18).
3. In order to get these very specific nations to fit a modern context, their names have
to change to their modern-day designations: Iran, Germany, Iraq, Russia, Turkey,
Sudan, Libya.
a. As we will see, a lot is made of the fact that the Hebrew word rosh found in
Ezekiel 38:2–3 and 39:1 is important because it sounds like “Russia.”
b. If this is true for rosh and Russia, then why isn’t it true for the other nations?

28
 c. C.I. Scofield writes in his popular Reference Bible that “The reference to
Meshech and Tubal (Moscow and Tobolsk) is a clear mark of identification (i.e.,
with Russia).” 39 Again, this is based on similarities of sound.
4. Dispensationalists Mark Hitchcock and Thomas Ice criticize C. Marvin Pate and J.
Daniel Hays for interpreting the list of nations as symbolic. 40 “If this is true,”
Hitchcock and Ice argue, “then why does Ezekiel take the time to specifically
mention ten proper names? Why be so exact? Why not just say that ‘a vast group of
nations will invade’ if that’s what you mean?” 41
a. I agree! In the same way, why is the text so exact in identifying what weapons
are being used? Why not just say “a vast group of terrible and fierce weapons
will be used”?
b. Why is it necessary to claim that the nations listed by Ezekiel have changed their
names at a time in the distant future when the prophecy is said to be fulfilled?
c. The nations mentioned by Ezekiel are described as Israel’s “adversaries” (Ezek.
39:23) who witnessed “the house of Israel [going] into exile for their iniquity
because they acted treacherously against Me, and I hid My face from them; so I
gave them into the hand of their adversaries, and all of them fell by the sword.”
Applying the prophecy of Ezekiel 38 and 39 to modern-day nations is contrary to
the historical context. No nation today had any part in Israel’s exile 2600 years
ago.
C. Is the “Golden Rule of Interpretation” followed by modern-day prophecy writers when it
comes to the commodities described?
1. Gold, silver, cattle, and goods (Ezek. 38:12, 13).
2. How does this become oil and potash?
3. “And every survivor, at whatever place he may live, let the men of that place
support him with silver and gold, with goods and cattle, together with a freewill
offering for the house of God which is in Jerusalem” (Ezra 1:4).
D. Is the “Golden Rule of Interpretation” followed by modern-day prophecy writers when it
comes to “unwalled villages”? (Ezek. 38:11).

39
The Scofield Reference Bible, ed. C. I. Scofield (New York: Oxford University Press, 1917), 883n.
40
C. Marvin Pate and J. Daniel Hays, Iraq—Babylon of the End Times? (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2003), 75.
What Hitchcock and Ice do not tell their readers is that Pate and Hays do not interpret the weapons literally. At
least they’re consistent.
41
Hitchcock and Ice, The Truth Behind Left Behind, 17.

29
 1. “It is interesting to note that during the lifetime of Ezekiel and up until 1900,
virtually all of the villages and cities in the Middle East had walls for defense. Ezekiel
had never seen a village or city without defensive walls. Yet, in our day, Israel is a
‘land of unwalled villages’ for the simple reason that modern techniques of
warfare (bombs and missiles) make city walls irrelevant for defense. This is one
more indication that his prophecy refers to our modern generation. . . . Ezekiel’s
reference to ‘dwell safely’ and ‘without walls . . . neither bars nor gates’ refers
precisely to Israel’s current military situation, where she is dwelling safely because
of her strong armed defense and where her cities and villages have no walls or
defensive bars. The prophet had never seen a city without walls, so he was
astonished when he saw, in a vision, Israel dwelling in the future without walls.
Ezekiel lived in a time when every city in the world used huge walls for military
defense.” 42
2. In Esther we learn that there were Jews who were living in relative peace 43 in
“unwalled towns” (9:19, KJV) when Haman conspired against them. Israel’s
antagonists in Ezekiel are said to “go up against the land of unwalled villages” (Ezek.
38:11). The Hebrew word perazah is used in Esther 9:19 and Ezekiel 38:11. 44
3. Jeffrey is mistaken in his claim that “Ezekiel had never seen a village or city without
defensive walls.” They seemed to be quite common outside the main cities.
Nebuchadnezzar is said to have defeated the kingdoms of Kedar and Hazor (Jer.
49:28–32): “They have no gates or bars” (v. 31). Notice how the language is nearly
identical to what we read in Ezekiel 38:8–13, demonstrating that Ezekiel, like
Jeremiah, is describing conditions as they existed in their day: “Run away, flee! Dwell
in the depths, O inhabitants of Hazor,” declares the Lord; “For Nebuchadnezzar king
of Babylon has formed a plan against you and devised a scheme [Esther 8:3; 9:25]
against you. Arise, go up against a nation which is at ease, which lives securely,”
declares the Lord. “It has no gates or bars; they dwell alone. And their camels will
become plunder, and the multitude of their cattle for booty....”

42
Grant R. Jeffrey, The Next World War: What Prophecy Reveals About Extreme Islam and the West (Colorado
Springs, CO: WaterBrook Press, 2006), 143, 147–148.
43
While the returning exiles were hassled by residents who had occupied the land in Israel’s absence, Darius’
decree put an end to hostilities in a dramatic and definitive way: “And I [Darius] issued a decree that any man who
violates this edict, a timber shall be drawn from his house and he shall be impaled on it and his house shall be
made a refuse heap on account of this. And may the God who has caused His name to dwell there overthrow any
king or people who attempts to change it, so as to destroy this house of God in Jerusalem. I, Darius, have issued
this decree, let it be carried out with all diligence!” (Ezra 6:11–12).
It’s unfortunate that the translators of the New American Standard Version translate perazah as “rural
44

towns” in Esther 9:19 instead of “unwalled villages” as they do in Ezekiel 38:11.

30
 4. Jeffrey’s contention that Israel today is currently “dwelling safely because of her
strong-armed defense” is patently untrue. Since 2006, the Israeli government has
built more than 435 miles of walls in Israel.45
IV. Is the Hebrew word rosh a designation for modern-day Russia?
A. Translation issues.
1. “‘Son of man, set your face toward Gog of the land of Magog, the prince of Rosh,
Meshech, and Tubal, and prophesy against him,’ Thus says the Lord God, ‘Behold, I
am against you, O Gog, prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal’” (Ezek. 38:2).
2. “‘Son of man, set your face toward Gog of the land of Magog, the chief prince of
Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him,’ Thus says the Lord God, ‘Behold, I
am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal’” (Ezek. 38:2).
3. There is no place in the Bible called “Rosh.”
4. Rosh is a common Hebrew word that is used hundreds of times in the Old
Testament. It is most often translated as “chief,” “head,” “beginning,” or “source.”
B. In 1964, S. Maxwell Coder wrote, “If you were to take the name Russia and write it in
Hebrew characters today, you would have upon the page before you the very Hebrew
characters which have appeared in Ezekiel 38:2 ever since the prophecy was written
2500 years ago when there was no such nation, and when the name existed only in a
Biblical prophecy.” 46
1. You don’t have to know Hebrew to see that rosh and Russia don’t even look alike.
The modern Hebrew spelling of Russia, reading right to left as you do in Hebrew, is
, 47 while the spelling of rosh is .

2.  has a long “o” sound, while  has an “oo” sound as in “boot.”

3. The two words only have one letter in common. Reading from right to left, it’s the
first letter  (resh).

4. There are two different Hebrew letters for “s” in Hebrew:  (samech) and  (sin or
shin). The modern-Hebrew spelling of Russia uses  (samech) while rosh uses 
(shin).

45
http://tinyurl.com/3r7yye and http://tinyurl.com/3r7yye
S. Maxwell Coder, “The Future of Russia,” Focus on Prophecy, ed. Charles L. Feinberg (Westwood, NJ:
46

Fleming H. Revell, 1964), 82–83.

http://tinyurl.com/4k6uxp. A search for “rosh,” as in “Rosh HaShana,” will show that it is spelled . The
47

Hebrew  is consistently translated as “chief,” as in Chief of Staff and Chief of Intelligence.

31
 5. In Hebrew, Russia is spelled with five letters while rosh has three (the “o” sound in
rosh is part of the second letter and appears as a dot on top of the letter).

6. The Hebrew word rosh is a common word used in Israel to identify the “prime
minister” as the image below shows.

7. Merrill F. Unger, who does identify rosh as Russia, makes an important point:
“Ancient words in evolving to their modern forms frequently undergo a change in
vowels, while the consonants tend to remain the same.” 48
8. As can be seen, only one consonant is the same.
9. Charles Ryrie, author of Dispensationalism Today, takes issue with the New
American Standard translation of Ezekiel 38:2 in the notes of his own study Bible.
“The prince of Rosh,” he writes, is better translated as “the chief prince of Meshech
and Tubal.” 49

Merrill F. Unger, Beyond the Crystal Ball (Chicago: Moody Press, 1974), 82.
48

Charles C. Ryrie, ed., The Ryrie Study Bible (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1978), 1285.
49

32
 C. Clyde Billington believes he has found a trace of Rosh hidden in the word “Tiras” 50 that
appears in Genesis 10:2: “The sons of apheth were Gomer and Magog and Madai and
Javan and Tubal and Meshech and Tiras.”
1. “The name Rosh is probably derived from the name Tiras mentioned in Genesis 10:2.
The change in the name Tiras to the name Rosh/Rash may be the result of a quirk of
the Akkadian language. . . . The Akkadian language tends either to drop the initial ‘t’
sound in a proper name or to change an initial ‘t’ sound into an ‘s’ sound. . . .
Sometimes an initial ‘t’ sound on a proper noun was changed in Akkadian to an ‘s’
sound. . . . The Akkadian tendency to drop or to change an initial ‘t’ sound in a name
seems to have been especially strong if the initial ‘t’ was followed by an ‘r’ sound,
and the name ‘Tiras’ fits this pattern perfectly.” 51
2. So now Bible students must learn Akkadian to interpret Ezekiel 38:2–3 and 39:1 and
rely on “a quirk” of what the Akkadian language “tends” to do only “sometimes”
based on a “tendency” that “seems” to take place whereby “presto-change-o” Tiras
turns into ras which morphs into rosh which then becomes rashu, reshu, and rashi
then finally Russia. 52
D. Non-Biblical Sources
1. By definition, these are not authoritative
2. The LXX
a. Knowing the time and history of the LXX’s composition might help to understand
why the men who translated Ezekiel chose to transliterate the Hebrew into
Greek as the place name ‘Ρως53 (Rōs or Rhōs).
b. The LXX is a translation of the Hebrew, and it “differs from the Hebrew canon in
the quality of its translation. . . . [S]ome have maintained that the translators

50
“Tiras” is spelled ‫ תירס‬while “rosh” is spelled . The “s” sounds use different Hebrew letters: samek (‫ )ס‬in
“Tiras” and shin () in “Rosh.”
51
Billington, “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy” (Part Two), 166–167.
52
Billington writes: “It should be kept in mind that when Ezekiel wrote the Book of Ezekiel, he was a captive in
Babylon, and the Babylonians at that time still spoke Akkadian” (167). First, Ezekiel was written for the Jews not
the Babylonians (2:3–7). Second, the Jewish Scriptures were written mostly in Hebrew and only some Aramaic
which is very similar to Hebrew. Hebrew is the language of interpretation, not Akkadian. Third, when God wanted
to address the world beyond Israel, He chose the sister language of Aramaic not Akkadian (Dan 2:4–7:1–28).
Fourth, Tiras includes three Hebrew letters not found in rosh: tav, yod, and samech.
53
The Greek uppercase Ρ and lowercase ρ look like the English “P” and “p,” but they are the Greek letter rho
and correspond to our “R” and “r.” The Greek letter ω, while it looks like our “w,” carries a long ō sound. The Greek
ς is “s.”

33
 were not always good Hebrew scholars.” 54 There are numerous differences in
the LXX when compared to the Hebrew text of Ezekiel 38 and 39. For example,
the LXX has “land” instead of “mountains” in 38:8, and in 39:6 “Magog” is
rendered as “Gog.” The last two clauses of Ezekiel 39:28 are missing 55 and the
Hebrew word for “Spirit” (ruach) in 39:29 is translated as “anger” (thumos) in the
Greek.
c. “In early Christian terms, Gog and Magog were often identified with the Romans
and their emperor. Eusebius [of Caesarea] seems to have been the first church
father to suggest this identification. In his view, Gog is the prince of “Ros,” which
stands for the Roman Imperium.” 56
d. In his Demonstration of the Gospel, Eusebius (c. 263–339) wrote that “the
Prophet Ezekiel also mentions Gog, naming him Ruler of Ros, Mosoeh, and
Thobel, probably disguising the city of Rome under the name of Ros, because
empire and power are signified in Hebrew by that word [rosh],” 57 since it has the
meaning of “head.”
e. It’s possible that the translators of the LXX saw the Hebrew word rosh as a way
to identify the emerging frightful enemy to their north in their day. 58 They were
warned by God in Daniel that there would be “a fourth beast, dreadful and
terrifying and extremely strong” that would have “large iron teeth” that would
devour and crush and trample “down the remainder with its feet; and it was
different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns” (Dan. 7:7).
Rome was the perfect candidate for those who feared an invasion from the “far
north.”
f. By the time the LXX was nearing completion, Greece had been broken apart
(Dan. 8:8, 22) and later was “crushed and trampled down” by Rome, the fourth
beast that Daniel saw “coming up from the sea” (Dan. 7:3; also see 2:40–43)
which was “far north” of Israel.

54
Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, rev. ex. ed. (Chicago, IL: Mood
Press, 1986), 504.
55
Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25–48 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 478, note 87.
56
J. Lust, “Gog,” Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, eds. Karel Van Der Toorn, Bob Becking, and
Pieter W. Van Der Horst, 2nd rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995), 375.
57
Eusebius, Demonstratio Evangelica or Evangelical Demonstration, trans. W. J. Ferrar, 2 vols. in 1 (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker, [1920] 1981), Book 9, chap. 3.6 (2:157): http://tinyurl.com/4tmltc. This work also goes by the
title The Proof of the Gospel.
58
“[Rosh] chief, i.e., a person or national entity who rules and governs as a figurative extension of the head as
a crucial body part (Ex 18:25).” (James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains: Hebrew
(Old Testament). Electronic ed. [Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997], 8031, #4).

34
 3. Gesenius
a. “In the nineteenth century,” Iain Duguid suggests, “against the background of
the tensions in Asia Minor that culminated in the Crimean War, Wilhelm
Gesenius identified Rosh as Russia.” 59 In fact, his definition of rosh begins with
“undoubtedly the Russians” as an operating assumption. Russia had been flexing
its military muscle and expansionist goals for some time, and Prussia, where
Gesenius was teaching at the time, was impacted.
b. Dwight Wilson asks, “If Gesenius and other German scholars had not been
writing in an age of intense German nationalism (in the post-Napoleonic era
following the Treaty of Tilsit [1807] by which Czar Alexander I and Napoleon had
carved up Prussia), would they have been quite as certain about their
identification?” 60
c. Gesenius does not offer a single biblical argument, something that one expects
in a lexicon on the Hebrew Bible. He maintains that “the [Aramaic] Targum
Pesch, Aquila [117–138], and the Latin Vulgate [5th-century A.D.] incorrectly
translated ‘Rosh’ as an adjective ‘chief prince of Meshech and Tubal,’” but he
does not offer a biblical rationale why this was improper. To state an objection
does not prove the argument. While Gesenius was a great lexicographer, he was
not an authority on ancient history.
4. Keil and Delitzsch Old Testament commentary on Ezekiel.
a. Takes the position that rosh should be translated as a proper name.
b. While I don’t find anything wrong in using Keil for support, I wonder why his
opinion is any better than that of Ernest W. Hengstenberg (1802–1869) who also
wrote a commentary on Ezekiel and was Keil’s instructor in Hebrew. Here are
Hengstenberg’s comments on the meaning of rosh: “Gog is prince over Magog,
moreover chief prince, king of the kings over Meshech and Tubal, the Moschi
and Tibareni (ch. xxvii. 13, xxxii. 26), who had their own kings, but appear here as
vassals of Gog. Many expositors render, instead of chief prince, prince of Rosh,
Meshech, and Tubal. But the poor Russians have been here very unjustly
arranged among the enemies of God’s people. Rosh, as the name of a people,
does not occur in all the Old Testament.” 61

59
Iain M. Duguid, Ezekiel: The NIV Application Commentary [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999], 452.
Dwight Wilson, Armageddon Now!: The Premillenarian Response to Russia and Israel Since 1917 (Grand
60

Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1977), 152.

61
E. W. Hengstenberg, The Prophecies of the Prophet Ezekiel Elucidated (Minneapolis, MN: James Publications,
[1869] 1976), 333.

35
 c. Here we have two commentators dealing with the same passage and published
about the same time (1861 and 1869), one the pupil (Keil) of the teacher
(Hengstenberg), and they take different approaches to the text.
V. The far North, the Latter Years, and All the Nations
A. Far North
1. While it is true that Russia is north of Israel, it is also true that a number of ancient
nations are north of Israel. Even Mt. Zion is said to be located in “in the far north”
(Ps. 48:2). “This is exactly the same expression as used in Ezek 38:6, 15; 39:2 and Isa
14:13,” 62 which I suppose means straight up.
2. Babylon was mostly east of Israel, but Jeremiah 4:6 warned that the disaster that
came upon Judah would arrive “from the north,” a reference to Babylon (Jer. 1:13–
15; 3:18; 6:1, 22; 10:22; Zech. 2:6–7). Notice that “all the families of the kingdoms of
the north will break forth on all the inhabitants of the land” (Jer. 1:15).
3. Charles Dyer, who teaches that Ezekiel 38 and 39 is describing a future battle, 63
makes the point that “from the north land” and “remote parts of the earth” (Jer.
6:22) are “an apt description of the Babylonians (cf. Hab. 1:6–11)” 64 and their
invasion of Israel in the sixth century B.C. If Babylon is said to invade Israel from the
north when it is actually mostly east of Israel, and north is the “remote parts of the
earth,” 65 then “far north” can have a similar meaning in Ezekiel (38:6, 15; 39:2).
4. The same is also the case when Israel was overrun by the Assyrians (Zeph. 2:13) and
Persians (Isa. 41:25; Jer. 50:3). Consider this description of a northern invasion that
was on the prophetic horizon, a battle fought with bows and arrows and javelins:
“Behold, a people is coming from the north, and a great nation and many kings will
be aroused from the remote parts of the earth” (Jer. 50:41).
5. The “remote parts of the earth” seems like a description far beyond the then-known
world, but it wasn’t. Jeremiah was describing the judgment of Babylon (50:42).

Sverre Bøe, Gog and Magog: Ezekiel 38–39 As Pre-Text for Revelation 19, 17–21 and 20, 7–10 (Wissunt Zum
62

Neun Testament Ser. II, 135) (Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), 384.
63
Charles H. Dyer, What’s Next? God, Israel and the Future of Iraq (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2004), chap. 6.
To his credit, Dyer translates rosh as “chief” and goes on to comment that “Ezekiel used the name as an adjective
to describe this leader. He will be the ‘head prince’ of those other countries.” (World News and Bible Prophecy
[Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1993], 109–110, 111).
64
Charles H. Dyer, “Jeremiah,” The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, eds. John F. Walvoord and
Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 1139.
“They will come from the remote parts of the then-known earth.” (Charles L. Feinberg, “Jeremiah,” The
65

Expositor’s Bible Commentary, gen. ed., Frank E. Gaebelein, 12 vols. [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1986], 6:425).

36
 6. Is the Bible mistaken? Not at all. The language is typical of prophetic/poetry
passages, and it’s no different from the way Ezekiel uses the “remote parts of the
north.”
7. Timothy Daily concludes, “From the perspective of the Holy Land, the invaders came
down from the north, even if their place of origin was actually to the east. Ezekiel is
giving the direction of the invasion, not the place of the invader’s origin.” 66
8. Archeologist Barry Beitzel confirms this analysis when he states that “the Bible’s use
of the expression ‘north’ denotes the direction from which a foe would normally
approach and not the location of its homeland.” 67
9. Paul Tanner concludes: “‘North’ refers not so much to the precise geographical
direction from Israel, but rather to the direction of advance and attack upon Israel
(armies came against Israel from the north). This is how Jeremiah viewed Babylonia,
though Babylonia was technically to the east. Consequently there is no firm basis on
which to interpret Gog as Russia.” 68
10. Even Wilbur M. Smith, who futurizes Ezekiel 38 and 39, admits that Israel’s greatest
enemies always invaded her from [the north]. . . . Syria was immediately north, and
the Babylonians, while geographically east of Palestine, were compelled to enter
Israel from the north, rather than rush their armies across a vast desert.” 69
B. The List of Nations
1. Ezekiel uses the phrase “all the nations” several times (39:21, 23). It’s quite obvious
that the phrase is being used to describe all the then-known nations
2. Cyrus king of Persia, states the following: “The Lord, the God of heaven, has given
me all the kingdoms of the earth and He has appointed me to build Him a house in
Jerusalem, which is in Judah” (Ezra 1:1).
3. “All the nations” is used repeatedly in the Bible and has reference to the known
nations of the day. Here are a few examples:
a. “Then the fame of David went out into all the lands; and the LORD brought the
fear of him on all the nations” (1 Chron. 14:17).

66
Timothy J. Daily, The Gathering Storm (Tarrytown, NY: Fleming H. Revell, 1992), 166.
67
The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1985), 5.
J. Paul Tanner, “Rethinking Ezekiel’s Invasion of Gog,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39:1
68

(March 1996), 33.

69
Wilbur M. Smith, World Crisis and the Prophetic Scriptures (Chicago: Moody Press, 1951), 242.

37
 b. Speaking of Nebuchadnezzar, “And all the nations shall serve him, and his son,
and his grandson, until the time of his own land comes; then many nations and
great kings will make him their servant” (Jer. 27:7).
c. “All nations surrounded me; In the name of the LORD I will surely cut them of”
(Psalm 118:10).
d. “Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men, from every nation under
heaven” (Acts 2:5).
e. “But now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the
commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations,
leading to obedience of faith” (Rom. 16:26).
C. Latter Days, Last Days
1. Ezekiel 38:16 sets the time frame for the battle of Gog and Magog “in the last days.”
a. The NIV translates the phrase as “in days to come.”
b. Darby’s translation has it “end of days.”
c. A number of translations have it as “the latter days.”
d. Young’s Literal translation: ‘In the latter end of the days.”
2. In many cases, the Hebrew word often translated “last days” or “latter days” means
nothing more than “in future days,” “a later time,” or “in days to come.”
3. The Bible does not have a word for “future” or “in the distant future.” This is why J.
A. Thompson concludes that “The phrase in the latter days need not be interpreted
eschatologically, but merely in the sense of ‘in the future.’” 70
4. There are “former days” (Deut. 4:32)—the past—and there are “future days”
(4:30)—an expectation of things to come.71
a. This is confirmed when Moses describes what will happen after he dies: “For I
know that after my death you will act corruptly and turn from the way which I
have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days, for you will do
that which is evil in the sight of the LORD, provoking Him to anger with the work
of your hands” (Deut. 31:29).
b. Moses isn’t skipping over thousands of years of history to describe what will
happen in the distant future. The “the latter days” in Deuteronomy actually

70
J. A. Thompson, Deuteronomy, Tyndale Old Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 1974), 108.
Peter C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy, NICOT (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976), 141.
71

38
 refers to the period of the Judges: “So the anger of the LORD burned against
Israel, and He said, ‘Because this nation has transgressed My covenant which I
commanded their fathers, and has not listened to My voice, I will no longer drive
out before them any of the nations which Joshua left when he died’” (Judges
2:20–21).
5. Futurist Thomas Ice writes: “Sometimes Christians read in the Bible about the ‘last
days’ or ‘end times,’ and tend to think that all of these phrases, all of the time, refer
to the same thing. This is not the case, just as in our own lives there are many
endings: there is the end of the work day, the end of the day according to the clock,
the end of the week, etc. Just because the word ‘end’ is used does not mean that it
always refers to the same time. The word ‘end’ is restricted and precisely defined
when it is modified by ‘day,’ ‘week,’ ‘year,’ etc.” 72
6. Joel Rosenberg, also a futurist in his interpretation of Ezekiel 38 and 39, takes a
similar position: “It’s important to note that the Hebrew term translated as ‘the last
days’ can also be translated as . . . ‘in days to come’ (NIV).” 73
VI. If the battle described in Ezekiel 38 and 39 does not refer to modern-day nations that will
attack Israel, then when and where in biblical history did this conflict take place?
A. The claim is often made that no event in history matches the details of Ezekiel’s two-
chapter prophecy so it is assumed that the planned invasion must still be in our future.
1. Instead of looking to the distant future or finding fulfillment in a historical setting
outside the Bible where we are dependent on unreliable secular sources for
interpreting hints, James B. Jordan believes that “it is in [the book of] Esther that we
see a conspiracy to plunder the Jews, which backfires with the result that the Jews
plundered their enemies. This event is then ceremonially sealed with the institution
of the annual Feast of Purim.” 74
2. Ezekiel 38:5–6 tells us that Israel’s enemies come from “Persia, Cush, and . . . from
the remote parts of the north,” all within the boundaries of the Persian Empire of
Esther’s day.
a. From Esther we learn that the Persian Empire “extended from India to Cush, 127
provinces” in all (Esther 8:9). Ethiopia (Cush) and Persia are listed in Esther 1:1, 3
and Ezekiel 38:5: “Persia, Ethiopia and Put with them, all of them with shield and
helmet.”

72
Thomas Ice, “Are We Living in the Biblical ‘Last Days’?,” National Liberty Journal (September 2006), 4.
73
Rosenberg, Epicenter, 252.
74
James B. Jordan, Esther in the Midst of Covenant History (Niceville, FL: Biblical Horizons, 1995), 5.

39
 b. The other nations were established in the geographical boundaries “from India
to Ethiopia” in the “127 provinces” over which Ahasueras ruled (Esther 1:1).
c. “In other words, the explicit idea that the Jews were attacked by people from all
the provinces of Persia is in both passages,” 75 and the nations listed by Ezekiel
were part of the Persian empire of his day. The parallels are unmistakable.
B. The chief antagonist of the Jews in Esther is Haman, “the son of Hammedatha the
Agagite” (Esther 3:1, 10; 8:3, 5; 9:24).76
1. An Agagite is a descendant of Amalek, one of the persistent enemies of the people
of God. In Numbers 24:20 we read, “Amalek was the first of the nations, but his end
shall be destruction.”
2. The phrase “first of the nations” takes us back to the early chapters of Genesis
where we find “Gomer,” “Magog,” “Tubal,” and “Meshech,” and their father Japheth
(Gen. 10:2), the main antagonist nations that figure prominently in Ezekiel 38 and
39.
3. Haman and his ten sons are the last Amalekites who appear in the Bible.
4. In Numbers 24:7, the Septuagint (LXX) translates “Agag” as “Gog.”
5. “One late manuscript to Esther 3:1 and 9:24 refers to Haman as a ‘Gogite.’” 77
6. Agag and Gog are very similar in their Hebrew spelling and meaning. Agagite means
“I will overtop,” while Gog means “mountain.”

Jordan, Esther in the Midst of Covenant History, 7.

75

76
In the First Targum to Esther, an Aramaic translation of the Hebrew Bible, the following is found: “The
measure of judgment came before the Lord of the whole world and spoke thus: Did not the wicked Haman come
down from Susa to Jerusalem in order to hinder the building of the house of thy Sanctuary?” (Lewis Bayles Paton,
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Esther [New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, (1908) 1916], 194).
‫ בתר פיתגמיא האילין עאלת מדת דינא קדם רבון כל עלמא וכן אמרת הלא המן רשיעא נחית וסליק מן שושן לירושלם לבטלא בנין‬3:1
‫בית מקדשא‬
77
Sverre Bøe, Gog and Magog: Ezekiel 38–39 As Pre-Text for Revelation 19, 17–21 and 20, 7–10 (Wissunt Zum
Neun Testament Ser. II, 135) (Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), 384. Anton Scholz (1892) comments that
“The Book of Esther is a prophetic repetition and further development of Ezekiel’s prophecy concerning Gog.”
Quoted in Paton, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Esther, 56. The point in all these Gog-
Agagite references is to show that there are a number of scholars who saw a literary parallel between Ezekiel 38–
39 and Esther.

40
 7. A cursive Hebrew manuscript identifies Haman as “a Gogite.” 78 Paul Haupt sees a
relationship between Haman’s descriptions as an Agagite and “the Gogite.” 79 These
literary links should not be dismissed.
8. There is another link between Haman the Agagite in Esther and Gog in Ezekiel 38–
39. “According to Ezekiel 39:11 and 15, the place where the army of Gog is buried
will be known as the Valley of Hamon-Gog, and according to verse 16, the nearby
city will become known as Hamonah.” 80 The word hamon in Ezekiel “is spelled in
Hebrew almost exactly like the name Haman. . . . In Hebrew, both words have the
same ‘triliteral root’ (hmn).” 81
9. Haman is the “prince-in-chief” of a multi-national force that he gathers from the 127
provinces with the initial permission of king Ahasuerus to wipe out his mortal
enemy—the Jews (Ex. 17:8–16; Num. 24:7; 1 Sam. 15:8; 1 Chron. 4:42–43; Deut.
25:17–19).
a. Consider these words: “King Ahasuerus promoted Haman, the son of
Hammedatha the Agagite, and advanced him and established his authority over
all the princes 82 who were with him” (Esther 3:1; also see 1:3).
b. Having “authority over all the princes who were with him” makes him a “chief
prince.”
c. In Esther 3:12 we read how Haman is described as the leader of the satraps,
governors, and princes. The importance of this title identifies the “chief prince”
in Ezekiel 38:2–3 and 39:1 as Haman.
C. Ezekiel writes that the forces gathered to fight against Israel are after silver, gold, cattle,
and goods (Ezek. 38:12–13).
1. The Jews who had returned to Jerusalem brought silver, gold, goods, and cattle 83
with them (Ezra 1:4–11; 2:69; 5:14; 6:5; 7:15–16, 18, 22; Neh. 7:71–72), the same
items mentioned by Ezekiel.

78
Paton, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Esther, 194. “When 93a makes him a Gogite (cf.
Ez. 38–39), and L makes him a Macedonian, these are only other ways of expressing the same idea. . .” (194).
Paul Haupt, “Critical Notes on Esther,” OT and Semitic Studies in Memory of W. R. Harper, II (Chicago: 1908),
79

194–204.
80
Jordan, Esther in the Midst of Covenant History, 7.
Jordan, Esther in the Midst of Covenant History, 7. This is quite different from identifying the common Hebrew
81

word rosh with modern-day Russia since there is only one common letter between rosh and Russia (see chapter 4).
82
The Hebrew word shar is used for “prince” in Esther, while naw-see (Ezek. 38:2–3; 39:1, 18).
83
“‘Every survivor, at whatever place he may live, let the men of that place support him with silver and gold,
with goods and cattle, together with a freewill offering for the house of God which is in Jerusalem’” (Ezra 1:4).

41
2. Haman promises to “pay ten thousand talents of silver into the hands of those who
carry on the king’s business, to put into the king’s treasury” (Esther 3:9; see also
3:11; 4:7; 7:4).
3. Where did Haman plan to get the silver to pay the king? From the Jews who had
previously returned to Israel with these valuable commodities. “And the king said to
Haman, ‘The silver is yours, and the people also, to do with as you please’” (3:11).
4. Haman’s goal was “to seize their possessions as plunder” (Esther 3:13). He believed
the Jews would be an easy mark since they had no standing army, and they were in
the process of repairing their defenses.

42
 Daniel’s 70 Weeks of Years
By Gary DeMar
AmericanVision.org
Here are the main questions:
1. Does Daniel 9:24–27 contain information about a future end-time person called the
antichrist who makes and breaks a covenant with the Jews during a seven-year period
based on the 70th week (seven years) of Daniel’s 70-weeks-of-years prophecy?
2. Does the modern-day definition of antichrist fit the biblical definition found in 1 John
1:18, 22; 4:2; 2 John 7?
3. Does Daniel 9:24–27 contain information about a third temple that will be built during
the final week of seven years?
4. Does the New Testament say anything about a rebuilt temple?
5. Does Daniel 9:24–27 state that there is a gap after the 69 weeks of years (483 years) and
before the final week of seven years?

Why It’s Claimed that a Gap is Needed Between Weeks 69 and 70

I. The claim is often made that Israel rejected Jesus as the promised Messiah and that the
prophecy clocked stopped until God decides to deal with Israel as a nation again. This is not
true. The establishment religious leaders in Jerusalem opposed Jesus and colluded with the
Roman government and Herod and conspired to kill Him (John 19:1–15). For the most part,
however, the people embraced Jesus at least as a prophet and possible political deliverer.
A. “But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they
took him for a prophet” (Matt. 21:46).
B. After the feeding of the 5000: “So Jesus, perceiving that they were intending to come
and take Him by force to make Him king, withdrew again to the mountain by Himself
alone” (John 6:1–15).
C. “The crowds going ahead of Him, and those who followed, were shouting, ‘Hosanna to
the Son of David; BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD; Hosanna in
the highest!’ When He had entered Jerusalem, all the city was stirred, saying, ‘Who is
this?’ And the crowds were saying, ‘This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee’”
(Matt. 21:9–10).
II. At Pentecost, “there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation
under heaven” (Acts 2:5, KJV).

43
 A. If the nation of Israel rejected Jesus, why were the first converts Jews?
1. Paul says that the gospel had been “proclaimed in all creation under heaven” (Col.
1:23).
2. The faith of the Romans was “being proclaimed throughout the whole world” (Rom.
1:8).
3. James addresses his letter “to the twelve tribes who are dispersed abroad” (James
1:1. Also 1 Pet. 1:1).
B. The first assembly (ekklesia/church) of believers were likely a mix of Jews and Gentiles
(Greeks).
1. “And great fear came upon the whole church [ekklesia] and upon all who heard
these things” (5:11).
2. Hellenistic Jews and native Hebrews made up the church in Jerusalem (6:1–5).
3. Luke mentions “the church [ekklesia] in Jerusalem” (8:3).
C. Why did God have to speak to Peter directly to incorporate Gentiles into an almost
exclusively Jewish Church (Acts 10) if God had stopped the prophecy clock for Israel?
D. Stephen references “the church [ekklesia] in the wilderness…” (Acts 7:38). We see
something similar in Hebrews 2:12: “in the midst of the [ekklesia/church, KJV],”
referring to Israel under the Old Covenant.
E. Thousands more embraced Jesus as the promised Messiah (Acts 2:41; 84 4:4; 85 21:20):
“And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see,
brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all
zealous for the law” (Acts 21:20).
III. Paul explained that it was a remnant that would be saved. He was an example of that
remnant (Rom. 9–11).
A. “But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who
are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s
descendants, but: “THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED.” That is, it is
not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise
are regarded as descendants” (Rom. 9:6–8).

“Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them
84

about three thousand souls” (Acts 2:41).

“Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five
85

thousand” (Acts 4:4).

44
 B. “I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an
Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected His
people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage
about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? “Lord, they have killed Your
prophets, they have torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they are seeking my
life.” But what is the divine response to him? “I have kept for Myself seven thousand
men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” In the same way then, there has also come
to be at the present time a remnant according to God’s gracious choice” (Rom. 11:1–5).
1. There is no indication by Paul that he is referring to some event in the distant future.
2. It’s “at the present time” that God is fulfilling His promises to Israel and by extension
to the nations.
3. “For just as you [Romans] once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown
mercy because of their [the Jews’] disobedience, so these also now have been
disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown
mercy. For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all”
(Rom. 11:30–32).
C. It’s important to note that those who hold the rapture position believe that two-thirds
of the Jews living in Israel during the tribulation period will be slaughtered (Zech. 13:7–
9).
1. When Paul writes, “all Israel will be saved” (Rom. 11:26), it can’t mean every Jew
then living. It must only refer to a remnant. The difference between the futurist view
and the preterist view is that Jesus issued a 40-year warning for the Jews to escape
from the impending destruction of the temple and Jerusalem.
2. The judgment was local, not worldwide. It could be escaped on foot (Matt. 24:16–
20), and there was a specific sign that told those who were in the city to escape
(Luke 21:20).
IV. The Key Verse for Those who Believe in a Gap and the Postponement of the 70 Weeks
A. “Daniel 9:27 is a key verse to understanding the final seven years. The final week begins
when ‘he’ (the antichrist [not mentioned] or little horn of Daniel 7:8, 20, 24, 8:9, 2;
11:36; Revelation 13:1; 17:3, 7, 12, 16, etc.) ‘confirms the covenant with many for one
week.’ In the midst of the week (3 ½ years [of the final week of seven years of the 490-
year prophecy]) he [antichrist] breaks the covenant [not mentioned] and the time of
desolation begins.” (Kent Hovind, 101)
B. Kent Hovind continues: “[M]illions of believers have also taught” the seven-year-gap
theory for 2000 years” (112). Is this true? There is no evidence that the gap or
parenthesis doctrine was a common belief in the church for nearly two millennia.

45
 1. “The earliest Christian reference to the seventy-weeks prophecy seems to be the
rather brief remark found in The Epistle of Barnabas (ca. A.D. 100) in its discussion of
the ‘spiritual temple’ in the heart.” 86
2. “From several statements made by Josephus, it seems clear that he viewed the
fulfillment of the prophecy in the events leading up to A.D. 70 rather than in the
Maccabean era.” 87
3. J. Paul Tanner writes: “Few discuss whether a hiatus [pause] exists between the
sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. Hippolytus, one of the few who did, viewed the
final week eschatologically at the time when the Antichrist will reign. For Clement,
the hiatus was in A.D. 70 when Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed. Some
church fathers understood that the one making the covenant in verse 27 is Christ
(with the New Covenant for the church), but many (e.g., Irenaeus) associated verse
27 with the Antichrist (a dominant theme for many early church fathers) and related
this verse to Daniel 7, Daniel 8, 2 Thessalonians 2, and Revelation 13.88
4. “[T]there was a strong consensus among the early church fathers (a near unanimous
position, in fact) that Daniel’s seventy-weeks prophecy was fulfilled in Christ, that is,
they held a generally messianic interpretation of the passage. On the other hand
they varied greatly in how they understood the details and how they based their
calculations.” 89
5. “Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Theodoret of Cyrus all regarded the
reference in Dan 9:26 as pertaining to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and the
temple in AD 70.” 90
6. “Only a few opted for a messianic/eschatological position in which the seventy
weeks would not be completed until some future point beyond the first century,
such as the reign of antichrist or the second advent of Christ. This latter position is

86
J. Paul Tanner, “Is Daniel’s Seventy-Weeks Prophecy Messianic?: Part 1,” Bibliotheca Sacra 166 (April–June
2009), 182.
87
Tanner, “Is Daniel’s Seventy-Weeks Prophecy Messianic?: Part 1, 183–184. “Although Josephus’s comments
are somewhat vague, this seems to be the most sensible interpretation of his remarks. See especially The Jewish
Wars 4.5.2 (318, 323) and 6.2.1 (109–10), in The Works of Josephus, trans. William Whiston (Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson, 1987).” Beckwith, “Daniel 9 and the Date of Messiah’s Coming,” 532–36; F. F. Bruce, “Josephus and
Daniel,” Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute 4 (1965): 148–62; and Geza Vermes, “Josephus’ Treatment of
the Book of Daniel,” Journal of Jewish Studies 42 (1991): 149–66.” (Page 184, footnote 9)
88
Bibliotheca Sacra 166 (April–June 2009), 200.
89
Bibliotheca Sacra 166 (April–June 2009), 200.
90
J. Paul Tanner, “Christ in Daniel: Ramifications of Dan 9:26,” ETS Annual Meeting San Diego, CA (Nov. 20,
2019), 3.

46
 found in Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Apollinaris (all of whom were chiliasts). Not all of
these, of course, commented on all the details of the passage.” 91
7. “[M]ost Christian expositors in subsequent church history have understood the
remark in Dan 9:26 about ‘the city and the sanctuary’ to have reference to the
Roman destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70.” 92
V. Without Daniel’s 70 weeks of years prophecy, there can’t be any of the five rapture
positions. They all depend on stopping the clock of prophecy at the end of the 69th week
and inserting a gap or parenthesis between it and the 70th week.
A. The claim: “The seventy-week clocked stopped ticking for the Jews, with one-week
(seven years) left to go.” (100).
B. All five rapture views are based on the operating assumption that the 70 weeks of years
— a total of 490 years — has an intervening gap in time at the end of the 69th week (483
years) and the 70th week (seven years).
C. We are told that we are living in what Henry A. Ironside has called “The Great
Parenthesis … the Interval Between the 69th and 70th Weeks of Daniel’s Prophecy.” He
wrote, “the prophetic clock stopped. There has not been a tick upon that clock for
nineteen centuries.” 93
As we will see, this is all supposition.

Do We Find the Following in Daniel 9:24–27?

1. Is there a gap anywhere in the 70-year exile period? No. See Daniel 9:1–2 (cp. Jer.
25:11).
2. Is there a gap mentioned between the 69th and 70th weeks of Daniel’s 70 weeks
prophecy? No.
3. Is there a time gap between the feet and the toes of Daniel? (92):
a. “In that you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter's clay and partly of iron, it will be
a divided kingdom; but it will have in it the toughness of iron, inasmuch as you saw
the iron mixed with common clay” (Dan. 2:41).

91
J. Paul Tanner, “Christ in Daniel: Ramifications of Dan 9:26,” 2–3.
92
J. Paul Tanner, “Christ in Daniel: Ramifications of Dan 9:26,” ETS Annual Meeting San Diego, CA (Nov. 20,
2019), 3.
93
Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, (1943), 23.

47
 b. “The last human world empire is represented in the image by its feet and ten toes,
which are iron mixed with clay. This final world empire will be ten kingdoms that try
to unite into a world-dominating force. Just as iron will not bond with clay, this final
empire ‘shall be partly strong and partly broken’ (Daniel 2:42).”

Clarence Larkin (1850–1924) in Dispensational Truth

(or God's Plan and Purpose in the Ages)
c. “At some point in this symbolism [of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue] an extended gap in
time must be fixed, because by verse 44 the interpretation describes the future day
of Christ’s millennial reign, as will be seen.” 94
d. First-century Rome had ten imperial provinces: Italy, Achaia, Asia, Syria, Egypt,
Africa, Spain, Gaul, Britain, and Germany. 95
e. In 1927, Oswald J. Smith wrote Is the Antichrist at Hand? In which he identified
Benito Mussolini (1883–1945), who had ruled Italy since 1922, as the antichrist.

Leon J. Wood, Daniel: A Study Guide Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1975), 39–40.
94

F.W. Farrar, The Early Days of Christianity (New York: E.P. Dutton, 1882), 464 note 1.
95

48
i. “Ten nations, no more, no less, are to become allied and known as the Roman
empire because Rome will be the centre, the capital, and it will be in Rome that the
Emperor will reign.” 96
ii. Ample biblical evidence was put forth to establish his claim, and that evidence
turned out to be very wrong.
iii. In his Late Great Planet Earth, Hal Lindsey wrote that a “ten nation [European]
confederacy” would be in place by 1980. For support, he quoted Dr. William
Hallstein, the former president of the European Economic Community, who
described how a “Common Market could someday expand into a ten-nation
economic entity whose industrial might would far surpass that of the Soviet Union.”
Lindsey remarks, “Imagine that. A ‘ten-nation economic entity.’” 97
iv. As of 2020, there are 28 nations in the European Union. This does not include Israel
and the nations of northern Africa since they made up the original Roman Empire.

4. Is there any place in the Bible where there is a gap separating a set number of days,
weeks, or years?: Six days (Ex. 20:9), 40 days and 40 nights (Matt. 4:2; Mark 1:13; Luke
4:2), 40 years (Gen. 7:4; 8:5–7; Ex. 24:18; 34:1–28; Num. 13:2, 25; 14:34), 49 years (Lev.
25:8), 120 years, or 70 years (Dan. 9:1-2; Jer. 25:11; 29:10).
5. An appeal is often made to Luke 4:18-19 (quoting Isa. 61:1–2): “For the past 2000 years,
God has primarily used the Church made mostly of Gentiles to do His work. Prophecies
in the Bible often have interruptions in them. In Luke 4:18, Jesus only quoted half of
Isaiah 61:1–2 because only half was being fulfilled that day. The other half would come
2,000 year later.” (100)

96
Oswald J. Smith, Is the Antichrist at Hand? (Harrisburg, PA: The Christian Alliance Publishing Co., 1927), 18.
97
Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1970), 96−97.

49
 a. It’s debatable whether there is a gap of nearly 2000 years, as Kent Hovind claims
(100).
b. There is no mention of a set number of days, weeks, or years (70 weeks of years) as
we find in Daniel 9:24–27.
c. “And the day of vengeance of our God” (Isa. 61:2) most likely refers to Luke 21:22 —
“For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be
fulfilled” — which refers to the destruction of Jerusalem that took place in AD 70,
before the generation of the disciples of Jesus passed away.
6. Is the word antichrist (anti-Messiah) mentioned in Daniel 9:24–27?
a. We find the word “Messiah” (anointed) that refers to Jesus as the Christ
(Messiah/Anointed), so shouldn’t we find the anti-word that identifies the one who
opposes Him, the Anti-christ, the anti-Messiah?
b. What is the biblical definition of antichrist? (2 John 2:7).
c. When were there many antichrists? (1 John 2:18).
d. Who are the first-century antichrists? They were Jews who should have believed
that Jesus was the promised Messiah (John 1:1-4). Defined by Jesus as those who
“say they are Jews [because a real Jew should be the first to embrace Jesus as the
promised Messiah], and are not, but are a synagogue [gathering] of Satan” (Rev. 2:9;
3:9).
e. Not all Israel rejected Jesus. Some in the religious hierarchy did (John 19:1–15).
f. The first believers were Jews “from every nation under heaven” (Acts 2:5).
g. The first assembly (ekklesia/church) of believers were exclusively Jews (Acts 5:11;
8:1–3).
7. Thousands more embraced Jesus as the promised Messiah (Acts 2:41; 4:4; 21:20): “And
when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how
many myriads [a large but indefinite number/myriad contains ten thousand] of Jews
there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law” (Acts 21:20).
8. Where in the NT is antichrist described as a “prince”?
a. Jesus is the “Prince of Peace” (Isa. 9:6) and the “Prince of Life [archegos]” (Acts
3:14–15)
b. Antichrist(s) is never described as a prince.

50
 c. Jesus says, “for the prince [ἄρχων] of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.”
Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince [ἄρχων] of this world be
cast out” (John 12:31).
d. “Of judgment, because the prince [ἄρχων] of this world is judged” (John 16:11).
e. “And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our
Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.” (Rom. 16:20).
f. LXX: “and the people of the prince [ηγουμένω/one who leads or goes before]…”
(Dan. 9:26).

The Particulars of Daniel 9:24–27

1. Jerusalem was to be restored (Dan 9:25): Jerusalem was restored, and the temple
rebuilt after the exile. Keep in mind that Daniel is writing before the end of the 70 years
of captivity (Dan. 9:1-2; Jer. 25:11).
2. The street and wall were to be rebuilt in troublous times (Dan. 9:25): See the book of
Ezra.
3. Jesus is the Anointed One (Messiah the Prince: Dan. 9:25) — Messiah/Christ — (Luke
4:18–22; Acts 4:27; 10:38).
4. The Messiah was to appear at the appointed time based on the chronology of the 70
weeks-of-years prophecy: “The TIME is fulfilled” (Mark 1:15). Jesus was “made manifest
to Israel” (John 1:29–31). The Wise Men (Matt. 2:1–2) seemed to have some
understanding of the 70 weeks prophecy as did Simeon (Luke 2:25–35) and Anna (Luke
2:22-38).
5. “And after threescore and two weeks [62] shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself”
(Dan. 9:26).
a. The Messiah was to die the death of a covenant breaker for us, “nor for Himself”:
“Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it
is written [Deut. 21:23], Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree” (Gal. 3:13). “He
was cut off out of the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8).
b. This cutting off takes place after the 7+62 weeks of years, that is, after the 483 years
of the 490 years prophecy.
c. “Now ‘AFTER’ 69 weeks does not and cannot mean ‘in’ or ‘during’ the 69 weeks!” 98

Ralph Woodrow, Great Prophecies of the Bible, 117.

98

51
 d. Since the prophecy states that the prophecy is about 70 weeks of years, after the
69th week must mean in the 70th week. (Supposedly the reason for the gap is
because Israel rejected Jesus as the promised Messiah. If Israel had not rejected
Jesus as the Messiah, the events of the seven-year 70th week would have started
immediately. How would that have been possible, and why would it have been
necessary?)
6. To finish the transgression (Dan. 9:24): Jesus declared, “It is finished” (John 19:28–30).
The transgression is finished because (1) Jesus became the sin bearer for us. “He was
wounded for our transgressions” (Isa. 53:5). Our transgressions are no longer counted
against us. “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was
contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross” (Col. 2:14). (2) Finish
the transgression might be a reference to the transgression of the Jews against God of
that generation (Matt. 21:33-45; 23:32, 35-36, 38; Luke 11:47-51; 1 Thess. 2:14-16).
“Last of all he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But when the
vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill
him and seize his inheritance’” (Matt. 21:37-38; cf. 21:33-45; Acts 7:51-52).”
7. To make an end to sin (9:24): Jesus “but now once in the end of the world hath he
appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Heb. 9:26). Jesus was the “lamb
of God, which taketh away the sins of the world” (John 1:29). “Christ died for our sins”
(1 Cor. 15:3).
8. To make reconciliation [atonement] for iniquity (Dan. 9:24): “God was in Christ,
reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath
committed unto us the word of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:19).
9. To bring in everlasting righteousness (Dan. 9:24): If Jesus didn’t bring in everlasting
righteousness, then we are still in our sins. This is not describing earthly righteousness
so there’s no longer any sin in the world. There will still be sin in the premillennial view
of Revelation 20 for 1000 years after Jesus supposedly does away with sin when He
returns after the 7-year period.
a. “and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood,
He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption (Heb.
9:12).
b. “And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of
eternal salvation” (Heb. 5:9).
c. See George Whitefield: “The Righteousness of CHRIST, an Everlasting
Righteousness.”
d. There’s Horatius Bonar’s book: The Everlasting Righteousness: How Shall Man be
Just With God?
52
 10. Seal up the vision and prophecy (Dan. 9:24): Jesus Christ fulfills (and thereby confirms)
the prophecy by His atoning work.
a. “Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to
Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of
man shall be accomplished” (Luke 18:31).
b. “And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet
with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses,
and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me” (Luke 24:44; Acts 3:18).
11. To anoint the most holy [one or place] (Dan. 9:24).
a. (1) Jesus is described as “the HOLY thing…” (Luke 1:35). Peter referred to Jesus as
the “HOLY one” (Acts 3:14), as did John (1 John 2:20). Even the demons referred to
Jesus as “the HOLY ONE of God” (Matt. 1:24). Jesus was anointed two, possibly three
times in the gospels. The last was after the triumphal entry and just before the
crucifixion (Matt. 26:6–13 and Mark 14:3–9). Kenneth Gentry writes: “It was at His
baptismal anointing that the Spirit came upon Him (Mark 1:9-11). And this was
introductory to His ministry, of which we read three verses later: ‘Jesus came to
Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, ‘The time is
fulfilled [the Sixty-ninth week?], and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and
believe in the gospel’ (Mark 1:14-15). Christ is pre-eminently the Anointed One.”
b. (2) Could refer to the “holy place once for all” (Heb. 9:12), the heavenly sanctuary.

What the Antichrist is Supposed to Do

Then after the 62 sevens, the Messiah [Jesus] will be cut off [excommunicated by the
religious rulers of Israel] and have nothing [the cross, Phil. 2:7: “made Himself of no
reputation”]; and the people of the Prince [the enthroned Christ] Who is to come will destroy
the city [Jerusalem] and the sanctuary [Temple]. And its end will come with a flood [like
Noah, like the threats of Deut. 28; like the locust flood of Joel]; even to the end there will be
war [the Jewish War of A.D. 66-70]; desolations are determined.
1. Who will “destroy the city and the sanctuary” (9:26)? Jesus or antichrist? This assumes
another rebuilt temple if it’s the antichrist, but there’s nothing in the NT that says
anything about another rebuilt temple. We know the city and sanctuary were destroyed
in AD 70. This was Jesus’ judgment using the earthly agency of the Roman Empire, like
the way God used Babylon: “And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand
[Nebuchadnezzar]…” (Dan. 1:1–2). See the Parable of the Marriage Feast (Matt. 22:1–
14): “But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and

53
 destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city” (v. 7). Jesus describes these
murderers in Matthew 23:31–36.
2. The “end” of what “shall be with a flood” (9:26)? The end of the city and sanctuary.
3. “Desolations are determined.” Notice that 9:26 does not say that desolations take place
in the span of the 70 weeks of years but only that they are “determined.” This is what
Jesus says in Matthew 23:38: “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” That
desolation was future to that generation but would take place before their generation
passed away (Matt. 24:30): “When ye therefore shall see the abomination, spoken of by
Daniel the prophet [11:31; 12:11], 99 stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him
understand” (Matt. 24:15; Luke 21:20: “And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed
with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.”).
4. “And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week” (Dan. 9:27).
a. The “he” is Jesus.
b. Only God makes and confirms covenants. There’s nothing in the Bible about an
antichrist making or confirming a covenant.
c. “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto
salvation to everyone that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” (Rom.
1:16; 2:10; See John 11:47–53).
d. “These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way
of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the
lost sheep of the house of Israel…. But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye
into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel,
till the Son of man be come. (Matt. 10:5–6, 23). Jesus was confirming His covenant
with Israel.
e. “For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the
remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28).

99
“Returning to the time of the Maccabees and Daniel 11, we need to ask who were the ‘forces from him’ that
desecrated the sanctuary and set up the desolating sacrilege? They were the reigning High Priests Jason and
Menelaus, who apostatized to Greek religion, and who invited Antiochus to help them take over Jerusalem for
their own purposes (Josephus, Antiquities 12:5:1). In the same way, the apostate High Priests between A.D. 30 and
70 cooperated with the Romans in order to suppress the Christian faith and in order to maintain their own
Sadducean combination of Greek philosophy and apostate Judaism…. Antiochus defiled the Temple, but this is only
the aftermath of what the Jews had already done. Antiochus could not really defile the Temple, because he was
not one of God’s peculiar people and he had no legal access to it. His defiling the temple is not the abomination of
desolation, therefore.” (JBJ, “Abomination of Desolation”)

54
f. “But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear
my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel” (Acts 9:15).
g. “Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God,
to confirm the promises made unto the fathers: And that the Gentiles might glorify
God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the
Gentiles, and sing unto thy name” (Rom. 15:8–9).
h. “For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all
while the testator liveth” (Heb. 9:16–17).

55
56
 The Olivet Discourse in Outline

Biblical and Historical Parallels that Point to a Pre-AD 70 Fulfillment

By Gary DeMar

“The destruction of Jerusalem and the whole Jewish state is described [in

Scripture] as if the whole frame of this world were to be dissolved.” — John

Lightfoot (1601–1675)

The question before us is simple: Does the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24; Mark 13; and Luke 21)
describe signs that were fulfilled in (1) events leading up to and including the destruction of
the temple in AD 70, 100 (2) a future generation, (3) a past generation and a future fulfillment
(double fulfillment), or (4) a micro/macro fulfillment? 101
Attempts to get around the plain language of Matthew 24:34 and the meaning of “this
generation” are not exegetically viable.

I. A first-century fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse is not a novel interpretation.

A. Eusebius (c. 263–339): The Proof of the Gospel (Demonstratio evangelica). 102
1. Eusebius makes Israel’s rejection of Jesus and the destruction of the temple in A.D.
70 a major apologetic theme in his Proof of the Gospel. For instance, he speaks “of
the [OT] prophets, wailing and lamenting characteristically over the calamities which
will overtake the Jewish people because of their impiety to Him Who had been
foretold. How their kingdom, that had continued from the days of a remote ancestry
to their own, would be utterly destroyed after their sin against Christ. . . , how their

100
Gary DeMar, Wars and Rumors of Wars: What Jesus really Said about the End of the Age, Earthquakes, a
Great Tribulation, Signs in the Heavens, and His Coming (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2017).
101
Gary DeMar, Prophecy Wars: The Biblical Battle Over the End Times (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision,
2014), chap. 4.
102
Eusebius, The Proof of the Gospel, trans. W. J. Ferrar (New York: Macmillan, 1920). This translation was
published by SPCK in England and Macmillan in the United States in 1920 in two hardback volumes. It was
republished by Baker Books in its “Twin Brooks Series.” It is currently available in a single volume paperback from
Wipf & Stock. For an online version, see http://www.intratext.com/X/ENG0882.HTM

57
 royal metropolis would be burned with fire, their venerable and holy altar undergo
the flames of extreme desolation.... And it is plan even to the blind, that what they
saw and foretold is fulfilled in actual facts from the very day the Jews laid godless
hands on Christ, and drew down on themselves the beginning of the train of
sorrows” (1:1 §7; cp. 1:6 §18; 2:3 §83).
2. Eusebius states of the OT prophecy of their “overthrow” (Amos 4:11): “This is
leveled at the Jewish race, and only received its fulfillment in their case, after their
plot against our Saviour. Their ancient holy place, at any rate, and their Temple are
to this day as much destroyed as Sodom” (5:23:250; cp. 6:1 §257; 6:7 §267).
3. He points out that Zechariah 14 “foretells a second siege of Jerusalem which is to
take place afterwards, which it suffered from the Romans, after its inhabitants had
carried through their outrage on our Saviour Jesus Christ” (6:18 §285; cp. 6:18 §286).
He speaks of “the ruin that should overtake them after the coming of our Saviour,
when, since they rejected the Christ of God...” (6:18 §291).
4. He also states, “that the two chief signs of His presence [i.e., the Messiah’s coming in
the ministry of Jesus] would be the calling of the nations of the world to receive the
true knowledge of God, and the ruin and desolation of the Jews through their
unbelief in Him” (7 §308).
5. Eusebius interprets Micah 1:2–5, which speaks of “the Lord . . . coming forth from
His place” as referring to Jerusalem’s destruction in A.D. 70: “the rulers of the Jewish
people as well, and their kingdom that existed previously, their sacrificial system and
the seats of their teachers, here called Mountains metaphorically [Mic 1:2–5], are
said to be shaken by the Descent of the Lord from heaven. And who could deny that
this was fulfilled after the time of our Saviour Jesus Christ, when he sees all these
things not only shaken, but abolished” (6:13 §271).
6. Eusebius interprets Luke 12:49 as “the Coming of the Lord”: “One might also literally
in another way connect fire and chariots with His coming, through the siege that
attacked Jerusalem after our Saviour’s Advent, for the Temple was burned with fire
not long after, and was reduced to extreme desolation, and the city was encircled by
the chariots and camps of the enemy” (6:25 §306).
7. On the abomination of desolation, Eusebius writes: “And from that time a
succession of all kinds of troubles afflicted the whole nation and their city until the
last war against them, and the final siege, in which destruction rushed on them like a
flood [Dan. 9:26] with all kinds of misery of famine [Matt. 24:7], plague [Luke 21:21]
and sword [Luke 21:24], and all who had conspired against the Saviour in their youth
were cut off; then, too, the abomination of desolation stood in the Temple [Matt.

58
 24:15], and it has remained there even till to-day, while they [i.e., the Jews] have
daily reached deeper depths of desolation.” 103
8. “These words were said in a corner of the earth then, and only those present heard
it. How, I ask, did they credit them unless from other divine works that He had done
they had experienced the truth in His words? Not one of them disobeyed His
command: but in obedience to His will according to their orders they began to make
disciples of every race of men, going from their own country to all races, and in a
short time it was possible to see His words realized. The Gospel, then, in a short time
was preached in the whole world, for a witness to the heathen, and Barbarians and
Greeks alike possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and
language.104
B. The Didache (most likely written prior to AD 70): J. P. Audet writes that “it was
composed, almost certainly in Antioch, between [AD] 50 and 70.” 105
C. Clement of Rome: Of Paul Clement writes, “After preaching both in the east and
west, he gained the illustrious reputation due to his faith, having taught
righteousness to the whole world, and come to the extreme limit of the west.”
Compare this statement to what Jesus says in Matthew 24:14: “And this gospel of
the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a witness to all the nations,
and then the end shall come.” In other places, Paul writes to the Romans that their
“faith is being proclaimed throughout the whole world” (Rom. 1:8). To the
Colossians we learn that, according to Paul, “was proclaimed in all creation under
heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister” (Col. 1:23; cf. 1:6).
D. Ireneaus, writing in Against Heresies: “The Church, though dispersed throughout the
whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their
disciples this faith.” This gives support to the fulfillment of Matthew 24:14 (see 1 Tim.
3:16).
II. Older Bible Commentators from different denominational backgrounds have interpreted
the Olivet Discourse as fulfilled before that first-century generation passed away: “I am
aware that many of the best scholars, many of the most judicious, learned and reliable
critics, both in our own country and in Europe, have entertained and with great ability
defended the opinion that the whole of Matthew 24 which precedes v. 35 must refer

103
Eusebius, The Proof of the Gospel, trans. W. J. Ferrar, 2 vols. in 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1981),
2:138, (403: b-c).
104
Eusebius, Proof of the Gospel, 1:157–158 (137).
105
Quoted by John A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976), 323.
For a more complete discussion of the dating of the Didache, see Gary DeMar and Francis X. Gumerlock, The Early
Church and the End of the World (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2006), 28–32.

59
 exclusively to the judgments on the Jews in connection with their wars with the Romans
from Vespasian to Hadrian.” 106
A. John Lightfoot (1602–1675): “Hence it appears plain enough, that the foregoing verses
are not to be understood of the last judgment, but, as we said, of the destruction of
Jerusalem. There were some among the disciples (particularly John), who lived to see
these things come to pass. With Matt. xvi. 28, compare John xxi. 22. And there were
some Rabbins alive at the time when Christ spoke these things, that lived until the city
was destroyed.” 107
B. Henry Hammond (1605–1660): “I now assure you, that in the age of some that are now
alive, shall all that has been said in this chapter be certainly fulfilled.” 108
C. John Gill (1697–1771): “This is a full and clear proof, that not anything that is said
before [v. 34], relates to the second coming of Christ, the day of judgment, and the end
of the world; but that all belongs to the coming of the son of man in the destruction of
Jerusalem, and to the end of the Jewish state.” 109
D. “I shall prove, when I come to consider them…. The destruction of the city of Jerusalem,
and temple, and Jewish state is fitly enough expressed in such terms, as seem to imply
the final conflagration, and end of the world, and the great day of judgment. Thus 'tis
called the end of all things, I Pet. 4.7. with Luke 21.9. and the last days, James 5.3. The
destruction of a particular country or land is frequently described as the destruction of
the universe. Of this we have many examples, [See Isa. 13. 10, 13. Ch. 34.4. Ezek. 32.7.
Jer 4.23, 24. Joel 2.10. Amos 9.5. Dan. 8.10. with I Maccab. 1.28. Isa. 2.19, 21.]” 110
E. N. A. Nisbett (1787): “Nor can I agree with him when he says, that our blessed Lord
knew very well that he should not come, while that generation, to whom he preached,
was alive, and that all his Apostles knew this, as well as he; for this is expressly contrary
to our Lord’s own assertion, in many parts of the gospels, that the Son of Man would
come before that generation was wholly passed away.” 111

106
Calvin E. Stowe, “The Eschatology of Christ, With Special Reference to the Discourse in Matt, XXIV and XXV,”
Bibliotheca Sacra 7 (July 1850), 471.
John Lightfoot, A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica, 4 vols. (Oxford: Oxford
107

University Press, [1658–1674] 1859), 2:320.

108
Henry Hammond, A Paraphrase, and Annotations Upon all the Books of the New Testament, Briefly
Explaining all the Difficult Places Thereof (London: Printed for John Nicholson, at the King’s-Arms in Little Britain,
1702), 102.
109
John Gill, An Exposition of the New Testament, 3:296.
Richard Kidder (1726), Demonstration of the Messiah. In Which the Truth of the Christian Religion is Proved,
110

against all the Enemies Thereof (But Especially against the Jews), 173.
111
The Prophecy of the Destruction of Jerusalem: AN ATTEMPT TO ILLUSTRATE Various Important Passages in
the Epistles. &c. OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, FROM Our Lord’s Prophecies of the Destruction of Jerusalem, And from
some Prophecies of the OLD TESTAMENT TO WHICH IS ADDED, AN APPENDIX CONTAINING REMARKS UPON DR.

60
 F. Philip Doddridge (1702–1751): “‘And verily I say unto you; and urge you to observe it, as
absolutely necessary in order to understand what I have been saying, That this
generation of men now living shall not pass away until all these things be fulfilled, for
what I have foretold concerning the destruction of the Jewish state is so near at hand,
that some of you shall live to see it all accomplished with a dreadful exactness.” 112
G. Thomas Newton (1704–1782): “It is to me a wonder how any man can refer part of the
foregoing discourse to the destruction of Jerusalem, and part to the end of the world, or
any other distant event, when it is said so positively here in the conclusion, All these
things shall be fulfilled in this generation.” 113
H. Thomas Scott (1747–1821): “This absolutely restricts our primary interpretation of the
prophecy to the destruction of Jerusalem, which took place within forty years.” 114
I. Adam Clarke (1762–1832): “[Matthew 24] contains a prediction of the utter destruction
of the city and temple of Jerusalem, and the subversion of the whole political
constitution of the Jews; and is one of the most valuable portions of the new covenant
Scriptures, with respect to the evidence which it furnishes of the truth of Christianity.
Everything which our Lord foretold should come on the temple, city, and people of the
Jews, has been fulfilled in the most correct and astonishing manner; and witnessed by a
writer [Flavius Josephus] who was present during the whole, who was himself a Jew,
and is acknowledged to be an historian of indisputable veracity in all those transactions
which concern the destruction of Jerusalem. Without having designed it, he has written
a commentary on our Lord’s words, and shown how every tittle was punctually fulfilled,
though he knew nothing of the Scripture which contained this remarkable prophecy. His
account will be frequently referred to in the course of these notes; as also the admirable
work of Bishop Newton on the prophecies.” 115

MACKNIGHT’S Commentary and Notes on the two Epistles to the Thessalonians (Canterbury, 1787):
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/1787_nisbett_doj.html
112
Philip Doddridge, The Family Expositor; or, A Paraphrase and Version of the New Testament; with Critical
Notes, and a Practical Improvement of each Section, 6 vols. (Charlestown, MA.: Ethridge and Company, 1807),
1:377.
113
Thomas Newton, Dissertations on the Prophecies Which Have Remarkably Been Fulfilled (London: J. F. Dove,
1754).
114
Thomas Scott, The Holy Bible Containing the Old and New Testaments, According to the Authorised Version;
with Explanatory Notes, Practical Observations, and Copious Marginal References, 3 vols. (New York: Collins and
Hannay, 1832), 3:111.
115
http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=mt&chapter=024. Clarke writes the following in his
commentary on 1 Peter 4:7: “Peter says, The end of all things is at hand; and this he spoke when God had
determined to destroy the Jewish people and their polity by one of the most signal judgments that ever fell upon
any nation or people. In a very few years after St. Peter wrote this epistle, even taking it at the lowest
computation, viz., A. D. 60 or 61, Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans. To this destruction, which was literally
then at hand, the apostle alludes when he says, The end of all things is at hand; the end of the temple, the end of

61
III. Contemporary Commentators on the interpretation of “this generation.”
A. Marcellus Kik’s exposition of Matthew 24 first published in 1948.116
B. Robert G. Bratcher and Eugene A. Nida: “[T]he obvious meaning of the words ‘this
generation’ is the people contemporary with Jesus. Nothing can be gained by trying to
take the word in any sense other than its normal one: in Mark (elsewhere in 8:12, 9:19)
the word always has this meaning.” 117
C. William Lane: “The significance of the temporal reference has been debated, but in
Mark ‘this generation’ clearly designates the contemporaries of Jesus (see on Chs. 8:12,
38; 9:19) and there is no consideration from the context which lends support to any
other proposal. Jesus solemnly affirms that the generation contemporary with his
disciples will witness the fulfillment of his prophetic word, culminating in the
destruction of Jerusalem and the dismantling of the Temple.” 118
D. D. A. Carson: “[This generation] can only with the greatest difficulty be made to mean
anything other than the generation living when Jesus spoke.” 119
E. John Nolland: “Matthew uses genea here for the tenth time. Though his use of the term
has a range of emphases, it consistently refers to (the time span of) a single human
generation. All the alternative senses proposed here [in 24:34] (the Jewish people;
humanity; the generation of the end-time signs; wicked people) are artificial and based
on the need to protect Jesus from error. ‘This generation’ is the generation of Jesus’
contemporaries.” 120
F. William Sanford LaSor: “If ‘this generation’ is taken literally, all of the predictions were
to take place within the life-span of those living at that time.” 121
G. G. R. Beasley-Murray: “The meaning of ‘this generation’ is now generally
acknowledged…. For Mark the eschatological discourse expounds the implication of the

the Levitical priesthood, the end of the whole Jewish economy, was then at hand.” (Clarke’s Commentary on The
New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, 2 vols. [New York: Carlton & Porter, 1810], 2:864).
J. Marcellus Kik, Matthew 24: An Exposition (Swengel, PA: Bible Truth Depot, 1948); Matthew Twenty-Four:
116

An Exposition (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1948); An Eschatology of Victory (Phillipsburg, NJ:
Presbyterian and Reformed, 1971). The last edition includes an Introduction by R. J. Rushdoony, Kik’s study of
Revelation 20, and four articles on “Historic Reformed Eschatology” by Kik.
117
Robert G. Bratcher and Eugene A. Nida, A Translator's Handbook of the Gospel of Mark (New York: United
Bible Societies, 1961), 419.
William L. Lane, Commentary on the Gospel of Mark (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 480.
118

D.A. Carson, “Matthew” in The Expositor=s Bible Commentary, gen. ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, 12 vols. (Grand
119

Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1985), 8:507

120
John Nolland The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
2005), 988–989.
William Sanford LaSor, The Truth About Armageddon: What the Bible Says About the End Times (Grand
121

Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1987), 122.

62
 prophecy of judgment in verse 2, and so implies the perversity of ‘this generation,’
which must suffer the doom predicted…. This generation is not to pass away until ‘all
these things happen’ (tauta panta genetai). The first term, tauta, appeared previously
in verse 29: ‘When you see these things happening...’ A clearer precedent for tauta
panta, however, appears in the question of the disciples in verse 4: ‘When will all these
things be, and what is the sign when all these things will be completed?’ The response
to the request for a sign has been given, above all in verses 14–15; the question
concerning the ‘when’ is answered in verse 30. In view of Mark’s setting of the
statement, however, it is difficult to exclude from ‘all these things’ the description of
the parousia in verses 24–27.” 122
H. Jack P. Lewis: “The meaning of generation (genea) is crucial to the interpretation of the
entire chapter. While Scofield, following Jerome, contended that it meant the Jewish
race, there is only one possible case in the New Testament (Luke 16:8) where the
lexicon suggests that genea means race. 123 There is a distinction between genos (race)
and genea (generation). Others have argued that genea means the final generation; that
is, once the signs have started, all these happenings would transpire in one generation
(cf. 23:36). But elsewhere in Matthew genea means the people alive at one time and
usually at the time of Jesus (1:17; 11:16; 12:39,41,45; 23:36; Mark 8:38; Luke 11:50f.;
17:25), and it doubtlessly means the same here.” 124
I. “Christ’s use of the words ‘immediately after’ [in Matthew 24:30] does not leave room
for a long delay (2,000 years or more before his literal second coming occurs), neither
does the explicit time-scale given in Matthew 24:34. The word ‘parousia’ does not occur
in this section but is prominently reintroduced in the new paragraph which begins at
Matthew 24:36, where its unknown time is contrasted with the clear statement that the
events of this paragraph will take place within ‘this generation” (Matthew 24:36). This
section is therefore in direct continuity with what has gone before, the account of the
siege of Jerusalem. Here we reach its climax.” (P. 936) “The language ... is drawn from
Daniel 7:13–14, which points to the vindication and enthronement of Jesus (rather than
his second coming [‘parousia’]). ... In this context, therefore, this poetic language
appropriately refers to the great changes which were about to take place in the world,
when Jerusalem and its temple were destroyed. It speaks of the ‘Son of Man’ entering
into his kingship, and ‘his angels’ gathering in his new people from all the earth. The fall
of the temple is thus presented, in highly allusive language, as the end of the old order,
to be replaced by the new regime of Jesus, the Son of Man, and the international
growth of his church, the new people of God…. The NIV margin offers ‘race’ as an

Mark 13 (), 333–334.

122

The New American Standard translates genea in Luke 16:8 as “kind,” but “generation” is equally valid.
123

Jack P. Lewis, The Gospel According to Matthew, Part 2; Living Word Commentary: Sweet Publishing, 1976),
124

128.

63
 alternative to ‘generation.’ This suggestion is prompted more by embarrassment on the
part of those who think Matthew 24:30 refers to the ‘parousia’ (second coming) rather
than by any natural sense of the word ‘genea’!” 125
J. F. F. Bruce: “The phrase ‘this generation’ is found too often on Jesus’ lips in this literal
sense for us to suppose that it suddenly takes on a different meaning in the saying we
are now examining. Moreover, if the generation of the end-time had been intended,
‘that generation’ would have been a more natural way of referring to it than ‘this
generation.126
K. R. T. France: “‘This generation’ has been used frequently in this gospel for Jesus’
contemporaries, especially in a context of God’s impending judgment; see 11:16; 12:39,
41–42, 45; 16:4; 17:17, and especially 23:36, where God’s judgment on ‘this generation’
leads up to Jesus’ first prediction of the devastation of the temple in 23:38. It may safely
be concluded that if it had not been for the embarrassment caused by supposing that
Jesus was here talking about his parousia, no one would have thought of suggesting any
other meaning for ‘this generation,’ such as ‘the Jewish race’ or ‘human beings in
general’ or ‘all the generations of Judaism that reject him’ or even ‘this kind’ (meaning
scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees). Such broad senses, even if they were lexically
possible, would offer no help in response to the disciples’ question ‘When?’” 127
L. Paul Copan: “In these passages, the ‘coming’ (the Greek verb is erchomai = ‘[I] come’) is
expected within Jesus’ own ‘adulterous and sinful generation.’ Something dramatic will
apparently take place in the near future.” 128
M. “‘[T]his generation’ (ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη) in the gospels always means the people of Jesus’
own time (11:16; 12:41–42; 23:36) not, as some have proposed, the generation of the
last days in history, the Jewish people, the human race in general, or the sinful
people.” 129

New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, eds. Gordon. J. Wenham, J. A. Motyer, D. A. Carson, R. T.
125

France (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 936, 937.

F. F. Bruce, The Hard Sayings of Jesus (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1983), 227
126

R.T. France, The Gospel of Matthew (NICNT) (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007), 930.
127

128
Paul Copan, When God Goes to Starbucks: A Guide to Everyday Apologetics (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books,
2008), 163. See the full contents of chapters 15 and 16.
129
Grant R. Osborne, Matthew: Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan,
2010), 899–900.

64
 Background to the Olivet Discourse130
The context for the Olivet Discourse is found in the Matthew 23 when Jesus
spoke to the “multitudes and to His disciples” (Matt. 23:1) that included the
scribes and Pharisees (23:13) regarding the future of Jerusalem (23:37) and the
desolation of the temple (23:38). Jesus was in the temple when He declared
that their “house” was going to be left to them “desolate” (23:38). This word
about the temple’s desolation leads Jesus’ disciples “to point out the temple
buildings to Him” (Matt. 24:1). But before this Jesus made a statement that
many believe is a promise that one day in the distant future Israel will embrace
Jesus as the Messiah. How Jesus meant “until” — makes all the difference in
how this verse is interpreted.

Matthew 23:39: “For I say to you, from now on you shall not see Me until you say, ‘Blessed is
He who comes in the name of the Lord!’”
Barry Horner states: [Gary DeMar] “references three uses in Matthew of the Greek adverb, ἕως,
heōs, meaning ‘until’ (5:26; 18:30; 18:34) that do express contingency, especially because all
three instances describe human parabolic situations. Hence it is alleged that Matthew 23:39 is
similarly meant to declare contingency, “until you say,” though maybe you will and maybe you
won’t. However ἕως, heōs is used on sixteen additional times in Matthew, and none of these
allow for conditional usage, and especially several, like 23:39, that are eschatological
declarations (10:23; 16:28; 17:9; 22:44; 24:34, 39; 26:36).” 131

1. An action is required of Jesus’ present audience: “until you say” (see Acts 2:37–41). If a
future generation was in view, Jesus could have made this particularly clear by saying
“until they see.”
2. R. T. France argues, the word “For, with which the verse begins, unambiguously links it
with God’s abandonment of his house in v. 38.” 132
3. “There is no prediction here, only a condition. Or, rather, the only prediction is an
emphatic negative, ‘from now on you will certainly not see me,’ to which the following
‘until’ clause provides the only possible exception. They will not see him again until they
welcome him, but the indefinite phrasing of the second clause gives no assurance that
such a welcome will ever be forthcoming.” 133

DeMar, Wars and Rumors of Wars, chap. 1.

130

Barry Horner, “The Olivet Discourse: Matthew 24—Futurism and Preterism,” 9, note 8.
131

R. T. France, The Gospel According to Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI:
132

Eerdmans, 1990), 333.

R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007), 884–885.
133

65
 4. “It is remarkable that so many interpreters can find a positive prediction in what is in
fact an emphatically negative prediction.” 134
5. If their response was considered to be a certainty, Jesus would have said “when you
say” (e.g., Matt. 2:8; 6:2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 17; 17:27; 135 24:15; 136 24:33, 137 44).
6. A certainly of a future audience of Jews embracing Jesus of the Messiah would read,
“when they say.”
7. The use of “until” in Matthew 10:23; 16:28; 17:9; 22:44, which Horner claims is not
being used conditionally, is based on the action of the Son of Man which is always a
certainty.
8. In Matthew 24:39, 138 the coming of the flood is not based on the actions of the people;
its timing was set by God irrespective of what the people did.
9. Maybe they will and maybe they won’t. In these examples, the actions are conditional
because the desired result is contingent on what people do or don’t do:
a. “Truly I say to you, you will not come out of there until you have paid up the last
cent” (Matt. 5:26).
b. “But he was unwilling and went and threw him in prison until he should pay back
what was owed” (Matt. 18:30).
c. “And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should
repay all that was owed him. So shall My heavenly Father also do to you, if each of
you does not forgive his brother from your heart” (Matt. 18:34–35).
10. Only those who say “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord” will see Jesus.
11. If the use of “until” is not conditional, does this mean that every Jew will say “Blessed is
He who comes in the name of the Lord”?
12. Based on the fact that according to dispensationalists, two-thirds of the Jews will be
killed during the Great Tribulation (Zech. 13:8), therefore, only a remnant will respond
and be saved; therefore, the response is conditional.

134
France, The Gospel of Matthew, 885, note 11. Donald Green maintains that those who argue for the
conditional approach of “until” have not based their arguments “on independent exegesis, but rather in reliance
on R. T. France, Matthew, in Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 332.”
(Green “A Critique of Preterism,” 30, note 82). Are we to suppose that France did not do his own “independent
exegesis”? Green needs to take a look at France’s latest commentary and the extensive exegetical work he has
done on this issue (France, The Gospel of Matthew, 884–885, especially note 11 which is a direct answer to Green’s
claims).
135
“But, lest we give them offense, go to the sea, and throw in a hook, and take the first fish that comes up;
and when you open its mouth, you will find a stater [coin]. Take that and give it to them for you and Me” (Matt.
17:27).
136
“Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet,
standing in the holy place (let the reader understand)” (Matt. 24:15).
137
“[E]ven so you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door” (Matt.
24:33).
“[A]nd they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so shall the coming of the Son
138

of Man be” (Matt. 24:39).

66
13. With these considerations, the use of “until” is conditional based on how the people of
Israel would respond. Some did, and some didn’t as events in Acts (see below) make
clear.
14. This is not an everlasting disenfranchisement but the fulfillment of covenantal promises
made centuries before through the prophets. The fulfillment begins at Pentecost, not
some distant time in the future.
a. “Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men, from every nation under
heaven” (Acts 2:5).
b. When those from “the house of Israel heard this, they were pierced to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, ‘Brethren, what shall we do?’ And
Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus
Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy
Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off, as
many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself.’ And with many other words he
solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying, ‘Be saved from this perverse
generation!’” (Acts 2:37–40).
c. Not everyone repented: “So then, those who had received his word were baptized;
and there were added that day about three thousand souls (Acts 2:41).
d. “Moses said, ‘The Lord God shall raise up for you a prophet like me from your
brethren; to Him you shall give heed in everything He says to you. And it shall be
that every soul that does not heed that prophet shall be utterly destroyed from
among the people.’ And likewise, all the prophets who have spoken, from Samuel
and his successors onward, also announced these days. It is you who are the sons of
the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying to
Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’ For you
first, God raised up His Servant, and sent Him to bless you by turning every one of
you from your wicked ways” (Acts 3:22–26).
e. “But many [not all] of those who had heard the message believed; and the number
of the men came to be about five thousand” (Acts 4:4).
f. “And all the more believers in the Lord, multitudes of men and women, were
constantly added to their number to such an extent that they even carried the sick
out into the streets, and laid them on cots and pallets, so that when Peter came by,
at least his shadow might fall on any one of them. And also the people from the
cities in the vicinity of Jerusalem were coming together, bringing people who were
sick or afflicted with unclean spirits; and they were all being healed” (Acts 5:14–16).
g. Notice the Jewish opposition (Acts 4:1–31; 5:17–18, 21, 27; 7:54–8:1). Obviously
these Jews did not say “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord,” but many
others did.
h. “And the word of God kept on spreading; and the number of the disciples continued
to increase greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were becoming
obedient to the faith” (Acts 6:7).
67
 i. “And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers, that God
has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also
written in the second Psalm, ‘Thou art My Son; today I have begotten Thee’” (Acts
13:32–33).

Matthew 24:1: “And Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples
came up to point out the temple buildings to Him.”
1. In Matthew 23:38, Jesus told His audience that their “house” was going to be left to
them “desolate.”
2. The disciples understood this to mean the temple that was still standing (John 2:19).
3. There is nothing in this passage that implies that Jesus has a future temple in mind; it
was the temple that was standing before them: “His disciples came up to point out the
temple buildings to Him.”
4. The NT does not say anything about a rebuilt temple.

Matthew 24:2: “And He answered and said to them, ‘Do you not see all these things? Truly I
say to you, not one stone here shall be left upon another, which will not be torn down.’”
1. Jesus predicts that the temple that was standing in His day – “not one stone here” --
would be torn down so that not a single stone would be left upon another.
2. There is no debate over whether this event happened. The temple was destroyed in A.D.
70 by the Roman armies led by Titus, the son of Emperor Vespasian.
3. “During the long siege a terrible famine raged in the city and the bodies of the
inhabitants were literally stacked like cordwood in the streets. Mothers ate their
children to preserve their own strength. The toll of Jewish suffering was horrible but
they would not surrender the city. Again and again they attempted to trick the Romans
through guile and perfidy. When at last the walls were breached Titus tried to preserve
the Temple by giving orders to his soldiers not to destroy or burn it. But the anger of the
soldiers against the Jews was so intense that, maddened by the resistance they
encountered, they disobeyed the order of their general and set fire to the Temple.
There were great quantities of gold and silver there which had been placed in the
Temple for safekeeping. This melted and ran down between the rocks and into the
cracks of the stones. When the soldiers captured the Temple area, in their greed to
obtain this gold and silver they took long bars and pried apart the massive stones. Thus,
quite literally, not one stone was left standing upon another. The Temple itself was
totally destroyed, though the wall supporting the area upon which the Temple was built

68
 was left partially intact and a portion of it remains to this day, called the Western
Wall.” 139
4. “We do not have any remains of the Herodian temple itself because of the devastating
Roman destruction in A.D. 70.” 140
5. “Strictly speaking, the Temple proper is not a matter of archaeological consideration
since only one stone from it and parts of another can be positively identified.” 141

Matthew 24:3: “And as He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him
privately, saying, ‘Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of Your coming
[parousia], 142 and of the end of the age?’”
1. “End of the age” (aion) not the “end of the world” (kosmos), as the KJV and other
versions often translates it.
2. “Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our
instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come” (1 Cor. 10:11).
3. “Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world;
but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin
by the sacrifice of Himself” (Heb. 9:26).
4. The use of “last days” refers to the last days of the old covenant: Acts 2:17; 143 Heb. 9:26;
Heb. 1:1–2; James 5:3, 8–9; 1 Peter 1:20; 1 Peter 4:7.

139
Ray C. Stedman, What's This World Coming To?: An Expository Study of Matthew 24-26, the Olivet Discourse
(Palo Alto, CA: Discovery Publications, 1970).
140
Harold Mare, The Archaeology of the Jerusalem Area (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1987), 141.
141
H. T. Frank, An Archaeological Companion to the Bible (London: SCM Press, 1972), 249.
142
For a lexical study of parousia, see below under Matthew 24:27.
143
“And it shall be in the last days,’ God says, ‘That I will pour forth of My Spirit upon all mankind; and your
sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream
dreams.’” Thomas Ice must add a word to Acts 2:16 to make it fit his parenthesis eschatology. He rewrites the
verse to read, “But this is [like] that which was spoken by the prophet Joel.” He tries to explain the addition of
“like” this way: “The unique statement of Peter (‘this is that’) is in the language of comparison and similarity, not
fulfillment.” (Ice, “Acts,” Prophecy Study Bible, ed. Tim LaHaye [Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2000], 1187, note
on Acts 2:16). He’s begging the question, assuming what he must first prove. Dispensational author Stanley D.
Toussaint writes, contradicting Ice on his point, “This clause does not mean, ‘This is like that’; it means Pentecost
fulfilled what Joel had described.” (Stanley D. Toussaint, “Acts,” The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament,
John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck [Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983], 358). After saying this, he goes on to argue:
“However, the prophecies of Joel quoted in Acts 2:19–20 were not fulfilled.” So which is it? He says the fulfillment will
come “if Israel would repent.” But the elect remnant of Israel did repent: “Now having heard this, they were pierced to
the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, ‘Brethren, what shall we do?’ And Peter said to them, ‘Repent.
. .’” (2:37–38). The result? “So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and there were added that day
about three thousand souls” (2:41).

69
 5. Robert Young comments: “AS HE SAT,] lit. ‘he sitting down upon the hill of the olives the
disciples came forward saying, Say to us,. . . sign of thy presence (lit. being along-side,’)
and of the full-end of the (Jewish) age? Not ‘of the world,’ as in the C.V.” 144
6. Parallel accounts
a. “Tell us, when shall these things be?” (Matt. 24:3).
b. “Tell us, when shall these things be…?” (Mark 13:4).
c. “Teacher, when therefore shall these things be?” (Luke 21:7).
7. Each account concludes with “this generation will not pass away until all these things
take place” (Matt. 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32).
8. N. T. Wright notes in his book Surprised by Hope (p. 128) that the Greek word parousia
“is usually translated ‘coming’ but literally it means ‘presence’—that is, presence as
opposed to absence”:
a. “The first meaning was the mysterious presence of a god or divinity, particularly
when the power of this god was revealed in healing. People would suddenly be
aware of a supernatural and powerful presence, and the obvious word for this was
parousia. Josephus sometimes uses this word when he is talking about YHWH
coming to the rescue of Israel. God’s powerful, saving presence is revealed in action,
for instance when Israel under King Hezekiah was miraculously defended against the
Assyrians.
b. “The second meaning emerges when a person of high rank makes a visit to a subject
state, particularly when a king or emperor visits a colony or province. The word for
such a visit is royal presence: in Greek, parousia. In neither setting, we note,
obviously but importantly, is there the slightest suggestion of anybody flying around
on a cloud. Nor is there any hint of the imminent collapse or destruction of the
space-time universe.”
9. Josephus (c. 37- c. 100) “uses ‘parousia’ for the theophany at —> Sinai and also for
God’s almighty presence in history (Ant. 3.80, 202-3; 9.55; 18.284).” 145

Matthew 24:4: “And Jesus answered and said to them, ‘See to it that no one misleads you.’”
1. Jesus is warning His present audience. Notice the use of the second-person plural “you.”
2. Is there any indication in this verse that Jesus is warning them about a distant
generation or any generation but their own?

Robert Young, Concise Critical Comments on the Holy Bible (London: Pickering & Inglis, n.d.), 24.
144

Martin Karrer, “Parousia,” The Encyclopedia of Christianity, eds. Erwin Fahlbusch and Geoffrey William
145

Bromiley, 5 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005), 4:47.

70
 3. The burden of proof is on the futurist to prove that a future audience is in view given
the use of “you”; it is not on the preterist to prove a future generation is not in view
given the use of “you.”

Matthew 24:5: “For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will mislead
many.”
1. In Greek, anti (as in “antichrist”) can have the meaning “in place of” as well as “against.”
2. An anti-Christ could be someone who claims to be in the place of the real Messiah, of
whom there were many in John’s day which was a sure indication that it was “the last
hour” (1 John 2:18).
3. John may have been referring to messianic imposters (1 John 2:22; 4:3; 2 John 7).
4. Dispensationalist Larry Spargimino states that “false messiahs were not limited to the
first century.” 146
a. This means, according to him, there were false messiahs in the first century. Simon
claimed to be called “the Great Power of God” (Acts 8:9–11).
b. Alexander Keith, in his study of the first-century destruction of Jerusalem, wrote that
“Dositheus, the Samaritan, pretended that he was the lawgiver prophesied of by
Moses.” 147
c. There were so many impostors preying on the gullibility of the people that under the
procuratorship of Felix (Acts 23:24), “many of them were apprehended and killed
every day. They seduced great numbers of the people still expecting the Messiah;
and well therefore might our Saviour caution his disciples against them.” 148
d. Simon claimed to be called “the Great Power of God” (Acts 8:9–11). Simon “had for
a long time astonished them with his magic arts” (8:11) which certainly fall into the
category of “great signs and wonders.” In Acts 13:6 we read about Elymus who is
described as “a magician” and “a Jewish false prophet” who was working to turn
people “away from the faith” (13:8). This sounds a lot like what Jesus said would
happen in that generation: “as to mislead, if possible, even the elect” (Matt. 24:24).
e. Paul was thought to be “the Egyptian who some time ago stirred up a revolt and led
the four thousand men of the Assassins out into the wilderness” (Acts 21:38). This

146
Larry Spargimino, “How Preterists Misuse History to Advance Their View of Prophecy,” The End Times
Controversy: The Second Coming Under Attack, eds. Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice (Eugene, OR: Harvest House,
2003), 210.
Alexander Keith, Evidence of the Truth of the Christian Religion, Derived from the Literal Fulfillment of
147

Prophecy; Particularly as Illustrated by the History of the Jews and by the Discoveries of Recent Travelers
(Edinburgh: William Whyte & Co., 1844), 60.
148
Thomas Newton, Dissertations on the Prophecies, Which Have Remarkably Been Fulfilled, and at This Time
Are Fulfilling in the World (London: J. F. Dove, 1754), 333.

71
 incident is reminiscent of Jesus’ words about those who claimed that He might be
“in the wilderness” (Matt. 24:26).
f. Those who had rejected their Messiah at the “time of [their] visitation” (Luke 19:44),
the same people who wanted to make Jesus king to overthrow the tyrants of Rome
(John 6:15), were still looking for a political savior right up until the time of
Jerusalem’s destruction.
5. Donald E. Green argues that “There is little historical evidence for false Christs
appearing around the time of the Jewish war or for false Christs performing great
miracles.” 149 This may be true, but there is also “little historical evidence” outside the
New Testament for the true Christ, that is, Jesus Christ. We should expect this since
Jesus was a political and religious threat to the Roman Empire.150 Moreover, there are
no extant documents from the first century in existence today. All we have are copies of
late-dated documents from that era. Here is some of the extra-biblical material related
to Jesus Christ
a. Josephus calls James “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ.”
b. Suetonius makes one statement regarding “Chrestus.” “As the Jews were making
constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome.”
c. Tacitus writes that “Nero fastened the guilt of starting the blaze and inflicted the
most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by
the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme
penalty during the reign of Tiberius 14–37 at the hands of one of our procurators,
Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment,
again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome,
where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre
and become popular.”

Matthew 24:6: “And you will be hearing of wars and rumors of wars; see that you are not
frightened, for those things must take place, but that is not yet the end.”
1. Wars and rumors of wars: “The Pax Romana (Roman Peace) was established under
Augustus in 17 B.C.

Donald E. Green, “A Critique of Preterism” (2001).

149

150
Although see Robert E. Van Voorst’s Jesus Outside the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000),
Craig L. Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2007), R. T.
France’s The Evidence for Jesus (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1986), F. F. Bruce’s Jesus and Christian Origins
Outside the New Testament (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1974), Darrell L. Bock, Studying the Historical Jesus
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2002), Richard Bauckman, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
2006), Gary R. Habermas, The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ (Joplin, MO: College Press,
[1996] 2008).

72
 2. Jesus and the apostles lived during the most peaceful period of the Roman Empire. The
last major insurrection in Palestine occurred before Jesus was born in 7 B.C.
3. “In Rome itself, four emperors came to a violent death in the short space of eighteen
months. Were one to give account of all the disturbances that actually occurred within
the Empire after Jesus’ death, he would be constrained to write a separate book.” 151
4. Wars and rumors of wars can only be signs in times of peace.
5. “You are about [μελλήσετε] to hear.” According to several secular histories of the era,
wars were common throughout the Roman Empire prior to the destruction of the
temple in AD 70. “The end” is the “end of the age” (24:3). “The forty years that
intervened before the destruction of Jerusalem were full of these in all directions; but
we may probably think of the words as referring specially to wars, actual or threatened,
that affected the Jews, such, e.g., as those of which we read under Caligula, Claudius,
and Nero (Jos. Ant. xx. 1, 6). The title which the historian gave to his second book, ‘The
Wars of the Jews,’ is sufficiently suggestive.” (Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers)

Matthew 24:7: “For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in
various places there will be famines and earthquakes.”
1. Famine
a. Mention of a worldwide famine is mentioned in Acts 11:28–29. The Greek word
translated “world” in some translations is oikoumenē, not kosmos.
b. Famine relief? (Rom. 15:25–28; 1 Cor. 16:1–5).
c. “Suetonius (Claud. 18) speaks of assiduæ sterilates [continual droughts]; and Tacitus
(Ann. Xii. 43) of ‘frugum egestas, et orta ex eo fames’ [death of crops, and thence
famine] about the same time. There was famine in Judæa in the reign of Claudius...
mentioned by Josephus, Antt. iii. 15.3.” 152
d. “With regard to the famines, reference has been made to the dearth under Claudius,
Acts 11:28.” 153 In a footnote, Lange’s commentary notes: “There was also a
pestilence at Rome about [AD] 65, which in a single autumn carried off 30,000
persons. (Sneton. Nero 39, Tacit. Annal. xvi. 13.)”
2. Earthquakes
a. “Now the centurion, and those who were with him keeping guard over Jesus, when
they saw the earthquake and the things that were happening, became very
frightened and said, ‘Truly this was the Son of God!’” (Matt. 27:54).

Kik, An Eschatology of Victory (1971), 92.

151

1:236.
152

Johann Peter Lange, “Gospel of Matthew” in Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal,
153

and Homiletical, comments on Matthew 24.

73
 b. “And behold, a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord descended
from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it” (Matt. 28:2).
c. “[A]nd suddenly there came a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the
prison house were shaken; and immediately all the doors were opened and
everyone's chains were unfastened” (Acts 16:26).
d. The major earthquakes that occurred after the Olivet Discourse but before the
destruction of Jerusalem noted by historians are: Crete (AD 46 or 47), Rome (AD 51),
Phrygia (AD 53), Laodicea (AD 60), Campania (AD 62 or 63), Pompeii (AD 63), and
Judea (according to Josephus). 154
e. There is no mention by Jesus of an increase or severity of earthquakes, just that
there will be earthquakes in various places.

Matthew 24:8: “But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs.”
1. Related to the time period stated by Jesus (“this generation”).
2. Matthew 24:34 governs the end point of events.

Matthew 24:9: “Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be
hated by all nations on account of My name.”
1. This period of tribulation, which affects believers, is different from the one described by
Jesus in 24:22 which affects those who do not flee and thereby escape the coming
judgment.
2. Notice the use of “you” (three times).
3. The first persecutions are recorded in Acts.
a. Peter and John are arrested, placed in custody (Acts 4:3), commanded not to preach
(4:18) and threatened by the Sanhedrin (4:21).
b. The apostles are arrested, placed in prison (5:18) and commanded once again to
stop teaching in Jesus’ name (5:28).
c. The persecution escalates in Acts chapter 6 when Stephen is arrested and falsely
accused of blasphemy (6:12–13). This results in Stephen’s murder (7:58–60).
d. A “great persecution” is discussed in Acts 8. It is so severe that the Jerusalem church
is scattered throughout Judea and Samaria.
e. In this persecution both men and women are dragged from their homes, placed in
prison (Acts 8:1, 3; 9:1–2, 26:9–10) and put to death (26:10).

Alford, The New Testament For English Readers, 1:163.

154

74
 f. Saul even attempted to force believers to blaspheme the Lord (Acts 26:11).
g. In Acts 12 Herod begins to persecute the church “because he saw that it pleased the
Jews” (vs. 3).
h. Herod’s policy led to the murder of James (12:2) and the arrest of Peter (12:4–5).
Fortunately, God delivered the apostle by supernatural means (12:7ff.).
i. At the instigation of unbelieving Jews, the mob at Lystra “stoned Paul and dragged
him out of the city, supposing him to be dead” (Acts 14:19).
4. Paul gives us a glimpse of his experience as an apostle to the Gentiles in 2 Corinthians
11:23–27: “Are they servants of Christ? (I speak as if insane) I more so; in far more
labors, in far more imprisonments, beaten times without number, often in danger of
death. Five times I received from the Jews thirty-nine lashes. Three times I was beaten
with rods, once I was stoned, . . . dangers from my countrymen, dangers from the
Gentiles, dangers in the city, dangers in the wilderness, dangers on the sea, dangers
among false brethren; I have been in labor and hardship, through many sleepless nights,
in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure.”
a. Paul speaks of the “present distress” (1 Cor. 7:26).
b. In 2 Thessalonians Paul writes about the suffering of believers “in the midst of all
your persecutions and afflictions which you endure” (1:4) and promises that God will
“repay with tribulation those who trouble you” (1:6).
c. Paul tells Timothy (2 Tim. 3:10–12): “But you followed my teaching, conduct,
purpose, faith, patience, love, perseverance, persecutions, and sufferings, such as
happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium and at Lystra; what persecutions I endured,
and out of them all the Lord delivered me! And indeed, all who desire to live godly in
Christ Jesus will be persecuted.”
5. Peter describes a similar set of experiences.
a. “Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal among you, which comes upon you
for your testing, as though some strange thing were happening to you” (1 Pet.
4:12).
b. The Roman persecution, which was often sporadic and unorganized, became an
official policy under Nero.
6. John writes of tribulation in his day.
a. “Do not marvel, brethren, if the world hates you” (1 John 3:13). Jesus had warned
His disciples, “If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated
you” (John 15:18).

75
 b. John describes himself as a “fellow partaker in the tribulation” (Rev. 1:9).
7. Geoffrey Bromily writes: “A drastic change came in July of A.D., 64, when Nero accused
of setting a disastrous fire in Rome and unable to clear himself by gifts or sacrifices,
decided to make the Christians scapegoats, and started a persecution which for its
cruelty would evoke censure even from those who regarded Christianity as a debased
superstition (Tacitus Ann. xv. 44). References to this persecution may perhaps be found
in 1 Peter, and also in 2 Timothy, in which Paul mentions his trial and impending death.
1 Clem. 1:1 also refers to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul at this time, and Eusebius
(HE ii.25.5ff.) adds that Peter suffered death by crucifixion and Paul by beheading. If
Revelation belongs to the age of Nero, the persecution extended to Asia Minor, for the
opening letters mention pressures and martyrdoms (2:2, 10, 13, 19; 3:8), and the author
himself suffered exile for the word of God and the witness of Christ (1:9).” 155

Matthew 24:10: “And at that time many will fall away and will deliver up one another and
hate one another.”
1. Jesus warned earlier of a coming falling away (Matt. 10:21–22, 36). Speaking to His
disciples, Jesus says: “But whenever they persecute you in this city, flee to the next; for
truly I say to you, you shall not finish going through the cities of Israel, until the Son of
Man comes” (10:23; cp. 16:27–28; 24:30).
2. Savage wolves: “I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you,
not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking
perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them” (Acts 20:29–30).
3. False teachers.
a. “As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus, in order
that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, nor to pay
attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation
rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith” (1 Tim. 1:3–4).
b. “Among these are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered over to Satan,
so that they may be taught not to blaspheme” (1 Tim. 1:19–20).
c. “If anyone advocates a different doctrine, and does not agree with sound words,
those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is
conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial
questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive

Geoffrey W. Bromily, “Persecute; Persecution,” The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, gen. ed. G.
155

W. Bromily, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 3:772.

76
 language, evil suspicions, and constant friction between men of depraved mind and
deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain” (1 Tim. 6:3–5).
d. “O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, avoiding worldly and empty
chatter and the opposing arguments of what is falsely called ‘knowledge’—which
some have professed and thus gone astray from the faith. Grace be with you” (1
Tim. 6:20–21).
e. “But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness, and
their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, men
who have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken
place, and thus they upset the faith of some” (2 Tim. 2:16–18).
f. “All who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and
Hermogenes” (2 Tim. 1:15).
g. Demas, who was said to have “loved this present world,” deserted Paul (2 Tim.
4:10).
h. “At my first defense no one supported me, but all deserted me; may it not be
counted against them” (2 Tim. 4:16). There were also Judaizers who were constantly
distorting Jesus’ message and preaching doctrines that opposed “the gospel of
Christ” (Gal. 1:6–10).
i. “They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us,
they would have remained with us; but they went out, in order that it might be
shown that they all are not of us” (1 John 2:19).
j. Paul, writing about his own generation, said, “Now the Spirit expressly says that in
the latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and
doctrines of demons” (1 Tim. 4:1).
k. There was a “little apostasy” prior to the destruction of the temple: Acts 20:28-31; 2
Cor 11:13; Gal 1:8-9; 1 Tim 4:1; 2 Tim. 4:3; 2 Pet 2:1, 20-22; 1 Jn 2:18; 4:1. Paul
mentions “false brethren” (2 Cor 11:26; Gal 2:4; Acts 15:1, 24) and how he had been
deserted by Demas (2 Tim 4:10). At one point “all deserted” him (4:16). John writes:
“They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us,
they would have remained with us; but they went out, in order that it might be
shown that they are not of us” (1 Jn 2:19).

Matthew 24:11: “And many false prophets will arise, and will mislead many.”
1. “And when they had gone through the whole island as far as Paphos, they found a
certain magician, a Jewish false prophet whose name was Bar-Jesus” (Acts 13:6).

77
 2. “For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of
Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light” (2 Cor.
11:13–14).
3. “I have been on frequent journeys, in dangers from rivers, dangers from robbers,
dangers from my countrymen, dangers from the Gentiles, dangers in the city, dangers in
the wilderness, dangers on the sea, dangers among false brethren” (2 Cor. 11:26).
4. “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from
God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).
5. “But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false
teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the
Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves” (2 Peter 2:1–3).

Matthew 24:12: “And because lawlessness is increased, most people’s love will grow cold.”
1. There were problems with homosexuality (Rom. 1:26–31; 1 Cor. 6:9–11), incest (1 Cor.
5:1), prostitution (1 Cor. 6:15–16), and fornication (1 Cor. 5:1, 11; Rev. 2:20).
2. General unrighteousness (1 Cor. 6:9–11; 1 Tim. 1:8–11).
3. Secular history (e.g., Caligula and Nero).

Matthew 24:13: “But the one who endures to the end, he shall be saved.”
1. The “end” is a reference to the “end of the age” (Matt. 24:3).
2. “ENDURE,] lit. ‘remain under (it),’ till the end of the trial, or of the Jewish dispensation,
as in Luke 21:18, 19.” 156
3. Saved eternally (Matt. 24:24)?
4. Saved from the tribulation (Matt. 24:22)?: “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by
armies, then recognize that her desolation is at hand. Then let those who are in Judea
flee to the mountains, and let those who are in the midst of the city depart, and let not
those who are in the country enter the city” (Luke 21:20–21 and Matt. 24:16–20).
5. John Gill writes: “[T]he same shall be saved; with a temporal salvation, when Jerusalem,
and the unbelieving inhabitants of it shall be destroyed: for those that believed in Christ,
many of them, through persecution, were obliged to remove from thence; and others,
by a voice from heaven, were bid to go out of it, as they did; and removed to Pella, a

Young, Concise Critical Comments, 25

156

78
 village a little beyond the Jordan, and so were preserved from the general calamity; and
also with an everlasting salvation, which is the case of all that persevere to the end, as
all true believers in Christ will.” 157

Matthew 24:14: “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world
[oikoumene] for a witness to all the nations, and then the end shall come.”
1. Consider this comment related to Matthew 24:14: “I’ve got news for you: the gospel
was not preached to all nations by the time of Nero’s death...” 158 What does the Bible
say?
2. John Chrysostom (A.D. 347–407)
a. “He [Jesus] added moreover, ‘And this gospel shall be preached in the whole world
for a witness to all nations, and then shall the end come,’ of the downfall of
Jerusalem. For in proof that He meant this, and that before the taking of Jerusalem
the gospel was preached, hear what Paul says, ‘Their sound went into all the earth
[oikoumenē]’ [Rom. 10:18]; and again, ‘The gospel which was preached to every
creature which is under Heaven’ [Col. 1:23]... in twenty or at most thirty years the
word had reached the ends of the world.”
b. “‘After this therefore,’ says He, ‘shall come the end of Jerusalem.’ For that He
intimates this was manifested by what follows. For He brought in also a prophecy, to
confirm their desolation, saying, ‘But when ye shall see the abomination of
desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place’ [Matt.
24:15]....
c. “Says He: ‘For then shall be tribulation, such as never was, neither shall be’ [Matt.
24:21]. And let not any man suppose this to have been spoken hyperbolically; but let
him study the writings of Josephus, and learn the truth of the sayings. For neither
can anyone say, that the man being a believer, in order to establish Christ's words,
hath exaggerated the tragic history. For indeed he was both a Jew, and a determined
Jew... What then says this man? That those terrors surpassed all tragedy, and that
no such had ever overtaken the nation...” 159

157
John Gill, An Exposition of the New Testament (Streamwood, IL: Primitive Baptist Library, 1979 [1809]),
1:288
158
Michael S. Heiser, “The Falling Away and the Restrainer,” Naked Bible Podcast Transcript Episode 224 (July
14, 2018), 10: http://bit.ly/2PxMQfA
159
Philip Schaff, ed., “St. Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew” (75 and 76) in A Select Library
of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), 10:452, 457.

79
 3. Eusebius: “Thus, under the influence of heavenly power, and with the divine co-
operation, the doctrine of the Saviour, like the rays of the sun, quickly illumined the
whole world; and straightway, in accordance with the divine Scriptures, the voice of the
inspired evangelists and apostles went forth through all the earth, and their words to
the end of the world.” (Book II, Ch.III.).
4. The Greek word oikoumenē 160 is used and not kosmos in Matthew 24:14 and yet it is
most often translated as “world” (e.g., KJV, NASV, NIV, ESV) giving the impression of
worldwide gospel proclamation.
5. It’s interesting that J. N. Darby’s translation of Matthew 24:14 translates oikoumenē as
“the whole habitable earth.” This translation is more correct than “world.”
6. Robert Young comments: the “good-news of the reign (of Christ) shall be proclaimed (as
by a herald) in all the inhabited world, (which in Acts 11.28; 17.6; 24.5; Luke 21.26
means simply Palestine or the Roman empire), for a testimony to all the nations (see
Rom. 1.8), and then shall be the end of the temple.” 161
7. The only time Matthew’s Gospel uses oikoumenē is in 24:14.
8. Oikoumenē is used in Luke 2:1 for the geographical limits of the Roman Empire’s taxing
authority. The translation often given is “Roman Empire” or “inhabited earth.”
9. Oikoumenē is also used in Acts 11:28 to indicate that the famine was an Empire-wide
event and not worldwide.
10. J. A. Alexander writes in his comments on Acts 11:28 where oikoumenē is also used and
often translated as “world”: Throughout all the world, literally on (or over) the whole
inhabited (earth). This phrase, though strictly universal in its import, is often used in a
restricted sense. The Greeks, in their particular pride of race, applied it to their own
country; the Romans, in like manner, to their empire.... [The] famine came upon the
whole empire (or the whole known world.” 162
11. Biblical testimony of the extent of the preaching of the gospel.
a. Jesus said of the Pharisees, “you travel around on sea and land to make one
proselyte” (Matt. 23:15).
b. “Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men, from every nation under
heaven. And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were
bewildered, because they were each one hearing them speak in his own language.

For a comprehensive study of how oikoumene is used in the New Testament, see Gary DeMar, “The Gospel
160

Preached to All the World Oikoumene in Biblical Context.”

Young, Concise Critical Comments on the Holy Bible, 25.
161

J. A. Alexander, Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1956), 438–439.
162

80
 And they were amazed and marveled, saying, ‘Why, are not all these who are
speaking Galileans? ‘And how is it that we each hear them in our own language to
which we were born? Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of
Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia,
Egypt and the districts of Libya around Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews
and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs—we hear them in our own tongues speaking of
the mighty deeds of God’” (Acts 2:5–11).
c. “First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, because your faith is being
proclaimed throughout the whole world [kosmos]” (Rom. 1:8). Even if Jesus had
used kosmos in Matthew 24:14, Romans 1:18 would have fulfilled it.
d. “But I say, surely they have never heard, have they? Indeed they have; ‘Their voice
has gone out into all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world’” (Rom.
10:18).
e. “[T]he gospel, which has come to you, just as in all the world also it is constantly
bearing fruit and increasing, even as it has been doing in you also since the day you
heard of it and understood the grace of God in truth” (Col. 1:5–6). 163
f. “[I]f indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not
moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was
proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister”
(Col. 1:23).
12. “All the nations.”
a. “Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching
of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept
secret for long ages past, but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the
prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made
known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith” (Rom. 16:25–26).
b. “And by common confession great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed
in the flesh, was vindicated in the Spirit, beheld by angels, proclaimed among the
nations, believed on in the world [kosmos] taken up in glory” (1 Tim. 3:16).

163
Dispensationalist Norman Geisler writes: “to every creature under heaven. This is obviously a figure of
speech indicating the universality of the gospel and its proclamation, not that every person on the globe heard
Paul preach. In Acts 2:5 this phrase describes countries without including, for example, anyone from North or
South America (cf. Also Gen. 41:57; 1 Kings 10:24; Rom. 1:8).” (Norman L. Geisler, “Colossians,” in The Bible
Knowledge Commentary: New Testament (An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty), John F.
Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, eds. [Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983], 675).

81
 c. “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world [oikoumene] for a
witness unto all nations [ethnoi]; and then shall the end come” (Matt. 24:14)
d. “But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: ‘Their sound has gone out to all the
earth [γῆν], and their words to the ends of the world [οἰκουμένης: oikoumenēs]”
(Rom. 10:18).
e. “And the gospel must first be preached among all nations [ἔθνη]” (Mark 13:10).
f. “...My gospel... has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been
made known to all nations [ἔθνη]...” (Rom. 16:25–26)
g. “And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world [kosmos] and preach the gospel to every
creature” (Mark 16:15)
h. “...the gospel, which has come to you, as it has also in all the world [kosmos], as is
bringing forth fruit...,” (Col. 1:5–6).
i. “And he said unto them ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every
creature [kitisis]” (Mark 16:15).
j. “...from the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature [kitisis]
under heaven, of which I, Paul became a minister” (Col. 1:23).
k. “But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall
be witnesses to “But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: ‘Their sound has gone
out to all the earth (ge), and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all
Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth [ge]” (Acts 1:8).
l. “But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: ‘Their sound has gone out to all the
earth [ge], and their words to the ends of the world’” (Rom. 10:18).
13. “For the Jews, the people who were to be judged, and who were at that time scattered
over the Roman Empire or world [James 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1; 2:1; Acts 2:5]; the oikoumene,
or that which is ruled over. That it was the Jews to whom the Gospel was to be
preached, is plain from the statement that it was to be preached in the world, not for
the conversion of the nations, as the [great] commission directs [Matt. 28:18-20], but
for a witness to them that God did not bring this judgment upon His ancient people
without first seeking to win them to His Son. That such a witness was borne, the labours
of Paul fully attest. Not a synagogue or colony was overlooked by him in any city he
visited. Even when sent to Rome as a prisoner, his first effort was to call together the
chief of the Jews and preach to them the kingdom of God. The disciples asked about the
end of the age [Matt. 24:3], and He here replies, that the Gospel shall be preached all
over the world, i.e., wherever the scattered people are, and then shall the end come.
This is certainly not very definite as to the time, but before He closes, the limit of its
extension is clearly given by bounding it within that generation [Matt. 24:34].” 164

William Hurte, The Restoration New Testament Commentary in Question and Answer Form: A Catechetical
164

Commentary (Rosemead, CA: Old Paths Publishing Co., [1884] 1964), 48.

82
Matthew 24:15: “Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation 165 which was
spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place 166 (let the reader
understand).”
1. Futurists need a rebuilt temple in order for this passage to be fulfilled. There is not a
single passage anywhere in the New Testament that says anything about a rebuilt
temple.
2. Notice the audience reference: “when you see.”
3. Luke describes this event differently: “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by
armies, then recognize that her desolation is at hand” (21:20). 167 He seems to be
describing an event as a prelude to the actual abomination.168
4. Mark describes the event more generally: “But when you see the abomination of
desolation standing where it should not be (let the reader understand), then let those
who are in Judea flee to the mountains” (Mark 13:14).
5. Roman desecration.
a. Offering sacrifices: “And now the Romans, upon the flight of the seditious into the
city, and upon the burning of the holy house itself, and of all the buildings lying
round about it, brought their ensigns to the temple and set them over against its
eastern gate; and there did they offer sacrifices to them, and there did they make
Titus Imperator, with the greatest acclamations of joy. And now all the soldiers had

165
For a comprehensive discussion of the topic, see James B. Jordan “The Abomination of Desolation”:
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Modern/1988_jordan_abomination.html
166
The “holy place” may signify an area larger than the “holy of holies.” The Bible often refers to Jerusalem as a
holy place (Neh. 11:1, 18; Isa. 48:2; 52:1; 66:20; Dan. 9:16, 24; Joel 3:17). Israel itself is called the “holy land” (Zech.
2:12). “Daniel 9:25 even calls Jerusalem ‘the holy city’ (whereas Matthew speaks of ‘the holy place.’” (Kenneth L.
Gentry, Perilous Times: A Study of Eschatological Evil [Texarkana, AR: Covenant Media Foundation, 1999], 60).
167
“To a large extent the problems that confront anyone who tries to explain Matthew’s or Mark’s parallel
accounts, with their highly symbolic language...are absent from Luke’s account. The latter could almost be called a
commentary on that of Matthew and Mark.” (William Hendriksen, The Gospel of Luke [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker,
1978], 937).
168
The Roman general (Cestius Gallus) and his armies fled the area for a time. William Whiston (the translator
of Josephus) writes in a note: “There may be another very important, and very providential reason be here
assigned for this strange and foolish retreat of Cestius; which, if Josephus had been now a Christian, he might
probably have taken notice of also; and that is, the affording the Jewish Christians in the city an opportunity of
calling to mind the prediction and caution given them by Christ about thirty-three years and half before, that
‘when they should see the abomination of desolation’ (The idolatrous Roman armies, with the images of their idols
in their ensigns, ready to lay Jerusalem desolate,) ‘stand where it ought not;’ or, ‘in the holy place,’ or, ‘when they
should see Jerusalem encompassed with armies,’ they should then ‘flee to the mountains.’ By complying with
which those Jewish Christians fled to the mountain of Perea, and escaped this destruction.”

83
 such vast quantities of the spoils which they had gotten by plunder, that in Syria a
pound weight of gold was sold for half its former value.” 169
b. Trampling the temple holy places.
6. Jewish abomination.
a. The Jews had turned the temple into a “robber’s den” in Jesus’ day (Matt. 21:13).
Why should it surprise us that they would continue to desecrate the temple?
b. Temple functions were being abused (Matt. 23:2–3).
c. There was a great deal of blood-letting going on in the temple area. The Sicarii (first-
century Jewish terrorists) 170 instituted their own high priests, made a military
fortress out of the Temple, brought Idumeans into the Temple, and covered the
Temple and the altars with dead bodies.
d. Jesus told the “scribes and Pharisees,” “Behold, your house is being left to you
desolate!” (Matt. 23:38).
i. The temple is now “your house,” that is, the house of the scribes and Pharisees.
ii. The Romans didn’t do anything to the temple to make it an abomination; it was
something the Jews did.
iii. “Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some
of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your
synagogues, and persecute from city to city that upon you may fall the guilt of all
the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood
of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple
and the altar. Truly I say to you, all these things shall come upon this generation”
(Matt. 23:34–36).
e. Jesus leaves the temple because it rejected Jesus as the lamb of God and continued
to sacrifice animals: “And Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when
His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him” (Matt. 24:1).
i. The Shekinah Glory departs.
ii. Golden Calf (Ex. 32).
iii. Eli’s two sons (1 Sam. 2–4).

169
Josephus, The War of the Jews,” Book VI, Chapter VI, Section 1 (Partial).
170
Richard Horsley, “The Sicarii: Ancient Jewish ‘Terrorists,’” The Journal of Religion, 59:4 (Oct. 1979), 435–458.
See Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book XX, Chapter VIII, Section 5.

84
 iv. “Yet you will see far greater abominations” (Ezekiel 8–11).
v. “Then the glory of the LORD departed from the threshold of the temple” (10:18).
vi. He who kills an ox is like one who slays a man;
He who sacrifices a lamb is like the one who breaks a dog’s neck;
He who offers a grain offering is like one who offers swine’s blood;
He who burns incense is like the one who blesses an idol.
As they have chosen their own ways,
And their soul delights in their abominations,
So I will choose their punishments
And will bring on them what they dread.
Because I called, but no one answered;
I spoke, but they did not listen.
And they did evil in My sight
And chose that in which I did not delight” (Isa. 66:3–4).
7. “Others have argued, especially in light of Luke 21:20 and Daniel’s words, that either the
destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or the desecration of the temple at that time,
whether by the apostate Jews beforehand or the Romans afterward, fulfilled Jesus’
prophetic words.” 171
Matthew 24:16: “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.”
1. A change in audience: from “you” to “those.”
2. Christians who followed Jesus’ instructions knew of this prophecy and would have
responded before unbelievers.
3. The judgment is local. To escape the onslaught, all one needed to do was flee to the
mountains surrounding Jerusalem. If Jesus had been describing a worldwide
conflagration, there wouldn’t have been any place to hide.
Matthew 24:17–21: “let him who is on the housetop not go down to get the things out that
are in his house; and let him who is in the field not turn back to get his cloak. But woe to
those who are with child and to those who nurse babes in those days! But pray that your
flight may not be in the winter, or on a Sabbath.”
1. These verses reinforce the local nature of the tribulation.
2. The houses have flat roofs (Matt. 24:17; Mark 13:15). Flat-roofed houses were common
in first-century Israel (Mark 2:4; Acts 10:9).

“The Abomination that Causes Desolation,” Baker’s Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology
171

85
 3. The people are told to pray that their escape does not occur on the Sabbath or in the
winter (Matt. 24:20). First-century Israel had and enforced strict Sabbath laws. The
extra-biblical law defined a “Sabbath day’s journey” (Acts 1:12). This hardly applies to
today’s world or even to modern-day Israel.
4. The concern about travel would be significant for those on foot or using a beast of
burden.
5. These first-century descriptions cannot apply to a modern military force that would use
helicopters, tanks, jets, shoulder-fired missiles, HUMVs, and armored personnel carriers.
6. The account in Luke describes an ancient method of laying siege to a city that would not
be used in modern warfare. “For the days shall come upon you when your enemies will
throw up a bank before you, and surround you, and hem you in on every side, and will
level you to the ground and your children within you, and they will not leave in you one
stone upon another [Matt. 24:2], because you did not recognize the time of your
visitation” (Luke 19:43–44). Josephus documents this method of siege warfare.
7. Matthew 24:18 describes an agrarian society (fields).
8. Mark describes a time when synagogues were places of worship and there would be
religious and civil opposition (Matt. 10:17; Mark 13:9).
a. Acts 5:40
b. Acts 16:22–23
c. Acts 18:17
d. Acts 22:19
e. Acts 25:6–12
9. “But [Lot’s] wife, from behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt” (Gen.
19:26).
10. Referring to a time when cloaks were important: “If you ever take your neighbor’s cloak
as a pledge, you are to return it to him before the sun sets” (Ex. 22:26).

Matthew 24:21: “for then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the
beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall.”
1. Jesus tells us in Matthew 24:34 that “This generation will not pass away until ALL 172
THESE THINGS take place.”

172
The use of “all” can have the meaning of “all without distinction” and not “all without exception” as in “the
end of all things is at hand” (1 Pet. 4:7). The use of “these,” however, does specify all the things listed by Jesus.

86
2. Luke describes the time as one of “great distress” as being “upon the land,” that is, the
land of Israel, “and wrath to this people, and they will fall by the edge of the sword”
(Luke 21:22–24).
a. The use of “swords” makes it an ancient battle. All a person had to do to escape the
impending tribulation was to leave the city and head for the mountains.
b. The boundary of this particular “great tribulation” or “great distress” did not extend
beyond the city limits of Jerusalem.
c. “Great tribulation” is not a term that by definition refers to a worldwide event. The
famine in Egypt and the land of Canaan is described by Stephen as a “great
tribulation” (thlipsis megalē) (Acts 7:11).
3. The phrase is most likely an example of hyperbole -- a “rhetorical superlative.”
a. “Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem from every nation under heaven” (Acts
2:5). From every single nation in the entire world?
b. The gospel had been preached “in all creation under heaven” (Col. 1:23). Did this
include China, India, Japan, the Hawaiian Islands, the Americas, all in the first
century?
c. “Thus He has confirmed His words which He had spoken against us and against our
rulers who ruled us, to bring on us great calamity; for under the whole heaven there
has not been done anything like what was done to Jerusalem” (Dan. 9:12).
d. “And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation
until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the
book, will be rescued” (Dan. 12:1).
e. In Daniel 9:12, we are told “for under the whole heaven there has not been done
anything like what was done to Jerusalem.”
f. “Moreover, there shall be a great cry in all the land of Egypt, such as there has not
been before and such as shall never be again” (Ex. 11:6; cf. 9:18; 10:14). What
about the dispensationalist’s version of the Great Tribulation?
4. God said to Solomon: “Behold, I have given you a wise and discerning heart, so that
there has been no one like you before you, nor shall one like you arise after you” (1
Kings 3:12).
a. Was Solomon greater than Hezekiah?: “He trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel; so
that after him there was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor among
those who were before him” (2 Kings 18:5).

87
 b. Was Josiah greater than Solomon and Hezekiah?: “Before him there was no king
like him who turned to the Lord with all his heart and with all his soul and with all
his might, according to all the law of Moses; nor did any like him arise after him” (2
Kings 23:25).
c. Was Jesus greater than Solomon?: “The Queen of the South will rise up with this
generation at the judgment and will condemn it, because she came from the ends of
the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, something greater than
Solomon is here” (Matt. 12:41).
5. The phrase was used to describe the destruction of the first temple: “And because of all
your abominations, I will do among you what I have not done, and the like of which I
will never do again” (Ezek. 5:9).
a. It was done again in A.D. 70.
b. According to dispensationalists, it will be done again during their version of the
Great Tribulation.
6. Robert Young’s comments are interesting: “from the beginning of the world (i.e. Jewish
economy) till now, nor ever may happen.” 173
7. Josephus: “It is therefore impossible to go distinctly over every instance of these men’s
iniquity. I shall therefore speak my mind here at one briefly: -- That neither did any
other city ever suffer such miseries, not did any age ever breed a generation more
fruitful in wickedness than this, from the beginning of the world....” 174
8. C.H. Spurgeon 1868: “The destruction of Jerusalem was more terrible than
anything that the world has ever witnessed, either before or since. Even Titus
seemed to see in his cruel work the hand of an avenging God.” 175

Matthew 24:22: “And unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved;
but for the sake of the elect those days shall be cut short.”
1. Some commentators claim that the use of “all flesh” must be a reference to the whole
world as we know it today.

Young, Concise Critical Comments on the Holy Bible, 25.

173

The Wars of the Jews or History of the Destruction of Jerusalem (Book 5, Chap. 10, par. 5).
174

Commentary on Matthew, 412.

175

88
 2. “[A]ccording to the context,” William Lane writes, “pasa sarx (‘all flesh’] . . . must be
understood of Judea and Jerusalem. Cf. Jer. 12:12 where a similar expression designates
the inhabitants of Judea.” 176
3. In other contexts, “all flesh” does not always mean every person without exception, that
is, everybody alive in the entire world.
a. “But this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel, . . . ‘That I will pour forth
of My Spirit upon all flesh’“ (Acts 2:16–17). The context makes it clear that “all flesh”
is a reference to all types of people: sons and daughters, young men and old men,
and bond slaves, both men and women. Not everyone without exception, but
everyone without distinction, Jews as well as Gentiles.
b. “‘All mankind’ seems to be defined by what follows: old and young, women as well
as men.” 177 Every person in the world was not present at Pentecost and yet the
language seems universal.
4. The Old Testament also uses “all flesh” in terms of limited geography: “On all the bare
heights in the wilderness destroyers have come, for the sword of the LORD is devouring
from one end of the land/earth [eretz] even to the other; there is no peace for anyone
[lit., all flesh]” (Jer. 12:12). “All flesh” is limited by the context to all flesh in the land of
Judah . . . the whole sinful population of Judah.” 178
a. In addition to Jeremiah 12:12, Isaiah 66:16 is a statement of a localized judgment:
“All flesh is here not to be taken in a universal sense, as, for example, [James D.]
Smart does, but is defined by the following verse. It stands for those of the Jewish
nation, the great majority, who have abandoned the Lord for the service of idols.
The verse pictures the judgment to fall upon the Jewish nation at the time of Christ,
with all the actual tragic consequences of that judgment in the sufferings that befell
the Jews until the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70. It is this of which our Lord
speaks in Matthew 24:22 (not His usage of the words pasa sarx, all flesh).” 179
b. After dismissing interpretations that apply Isaiah 66:16 to “the battle of
Armageddon,” J. A. Alexander argues that “the Apocalyptic prophecies are
exegetical of those in the Old Testament, from which their images and terms are
borrowed. —A much surer clue to the primary application of the one before us is
afforded by our Saviour’s words in Matt xxiv. 22, where in speaking of the speedy
destruction of Jerusalem he says, that excepting the elect no flesh should be saved,

William L. Lane, Commentary on the Gospel of Mark (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 471 n. 82.
176

Everett F. Harrison, Acts the Expanding Church (Chicago: Moody Press, 1975), 58.
177

C.F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament: Jeremiah, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI:
178

Eerdmans, 1950), 1:227.

Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah (NICOT), 3 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972), 3:530.
179

89
 i.e. no portion of the Jewish race but those who were ordained to everlasting life
through faith in him.” 180
5. Contrary to Stanley Toussaint’s claim that “‘All flesh’ describes all humanity” and that
“the Tribulation described in Matthew 24:21 is of such huge proportions that human life
stands in jeopardy on planet earth,” it is better to read “all flesh” in the context of
Matthew 24 to mean nothing more than those living in Judea at the time of the sack of
Jerusalem, “presumably meaning specifically those caught up in the thlipsis [tribulation]
of v. 19.” 181
6. If “no life would have been saved” referred to the whole world, then why does Jesus
designate the mountains surrounding Jerusalem as a place of safety? (Matt. 24:16). This
is hardly a description of a world-wide tribulation if going to the mountains outside
Jerusalem allows refugees to escape the coming conflagration.
7. Dispensationalists do not hold that the “all Israel” of Romans 11:26 refers to every Jew
who has ever lived.
8. Consider Zephaniah 1:2–3: “‘I will completely remove all things from the face of the
earth,’ declares the Lord. ‘I will remove man and beast; I will remove the birds of the sky
and the fish of the sea, and the ruins along with the wicked; and I will cut off man from
the face of the earth,’ declares the Lord.”
a. Note that this was a judgment against “Judah” and “all the inhabitants of
Jerusalem” (1:4).
b. It’s described as “the great day of the Lord” (v. 14).
c. It was to come “very quickly” (v. 14) and accompanied by “darkness and gloom, a
day of clouds and thick darkness” (v. 15).

Matthew 24:23–26: “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Christ,’ or ‘There He is,’
do not believe him. For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs
and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. Behold, I have told you in advance.
If therefore they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go forth, or, ‘Behold, He
is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe them.”
1. This warning refers to a period just before the actual destruction of the temple.
2. Josephus writes: “A false prophet was the occasion of these people’s destruction, who
had made a public proclamation in the city that very day, that God commanded them to
get upon the temple, and that there they should receive miraculous signs of their

J.A. Alexander, The Prophecies of Isaiah, 2 vols. in 1 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1953), 2:470.
180

R.T. France, The Gospel of Mark (NIGTC) (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 528.
181

90
 deliverance. Now, there was then a great number of false prophets suborned by the
tyrants to impose upon the people, who denounced this to them, that they should wait
for deliverance from God....” 182
3. “[F]or one Jonathan, a vile person, and by trade a weaver, came thither and prevailed
with no small number of the poorer sort to give ear to him; he also led them into the
desert, upon promising them that he would show them signs and apparitions....[O]f
these many were slain in the fight, but some were taken alive, and brought to
Catullus.” 183
4. Like false prophets who gave the people an artificial sense of security during the
Babylonian invasion (Jer. 5:2–6; 6:14; 8:11: 29:9), there were false prophets during this
period of great tribulation.

Matthew 24:27: “For just as the lightning comes from the east, and flashes even to the west,
so shall the coming [παρουσία/parousia] of the Son of Man be.”
1. The meaning of παρουσία/parousia. 184 Reggie Kidd makes the following parenthetical
comment regarding the translation of παρουσία, where he says, “the ESV unfortunately
also translates ‘coming’—24-27; 36-41).” 185
a. G. Abbott-Smith, Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament (Edinburgh: T. & T.
Clark, 1964) p. 347. “Parousia”—1. Usually a being present, presence. 2. A coming,
arrival, advent. A technical term for the visit of a king.
b. William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 4th ed. (Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 1952), p. 635, c1. “Parousia”—1. Presence…the proofs of his presence.
2. Coming, advent as the first stage in presence.
c. Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider, eds., Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) V3, p. 43, c2. “Parousia”—Presence; arrival. Derived
from the verb “be present.” Originally meant presence…frequently means “arrival”
as the onset of presence.
d. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, ed., The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986) V3, p. 664, c1. The basic meaning of parousia is “presence.”

Josephus, Wars of the Jews,” 7.5.2.

182

Josephus, Wars of The Jews, 7.11.10.

183

The material that follows is taken from www.christsecondpresence.com/Signs/signs_parousia.htm

184

Reggie M. Kidd, “Matthew,” A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the New Testament: The Gospel Realized,
185

ed. Michael J. Kruger (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2016), 57.

91
 . . . In Greek, “presence” has an exact equivalent in παρουσία, parousía, but this
word is rendered “presence” only in 2 Co. 10:10; Phi. 2:12; the Revised Version
(British and American); Phi. 1:26 (the King James Version “coming”). Elsewhere
parousía is rendered “coming,” but always with “presence” in the margin. Otherwise
in the New Testament “presence” represents no particular word but is introduced
where it seems to suit the context (compare e.g. Act 3:13 the King James Version
and Act 3:19). See PAROUSIA.
e. “Parousia” (parousía), a word fairly common in Greek, with the meaning “presence”
(2 Co. 10:10; Phi. 2:12). More especially it may mean “presence after absence,”
“arrival” (but not “return,” unless this is given by the context), as in 1 Co. 16:17; 2
Co. 7:6, 2 Co. 7:7; Phi. 1:26.
f. Colin Brown, ed., The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976) p. 898. “Parousia”—Presence, appearing, coming.
Presence (with certain effects following) … and arrival, someone coming in order to
be present.
g. Alexander Balman Bruce, The Expositor’s Greek Testament (London: Hodder and
Storighton, 1907) V1, p. 289, c1. “Parousia”—Literally presence; second presence.
h. Frederick Dale Bruner, Matthew, a Commentary, Vol. 1: The Churchbook (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) p. 474. The word parousia can also be translated
“presence.”
i. Ethelbert W. Bullinger, A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek
New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975) p. 598, c2. “Parousia”—The being
or becoming present; presence, arrival.
j. The Classic Greek Dictionary (Chicago: Follett Publishing Company, 1949), English to
Greek, p. 184. “Parousia”—1. A being present, presence. 2. Arrival.
k. The Complete Biblical Library—The New Testament Greek-English Dictionary
(Springfield, MO: The Complete Biblical Library, 1991) Pi-Rho, p. 101, c1, #3814.
“Parousia”—Presence, coming, advent, arrival. Classical Gk. from verb pareimi
#3780, compound of #3706 para “beside” and #1498 eimi “I am.” Means
“presence.” Also, denotes the “arrival” of someone or something. In the papyri, for
example, a woman writes that her “presence” (parousia) is necessary in order to
take care of certain financial concerns…. New Testament Usage. Paul…illustrated this
same understanding when he contrasted his presence (parousia) with his absence
(apousia [#660]). Personal presence…
l. F. L. Cross, ed., The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1997) p. 1223, c1. “Parousia”—Presence or arrival.

92
m. Matthew S. DeMoss, Pocket Dictionary for the Study of New Testament Greek
(Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 2001) p. 94. “Parousia”—Presence or arrival.
n. George C. Divry, ed., Divry’s Modern English-Greek and Greek-English Desk
Dictionary (New York: D. C. Divry, Inc., Publishers, 1961) p. 634. “Parousia”—
Presence.
o. Walter A. Elwell, ed., Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1988) V2, p. 1616. “Parousia”—Transliteration of a Greek word meaning “presence,”
“arrival,” “appearance,” or “coming.”
p. Sinclair B. Ferguson and David F. Wright, eds., New Dictionary of Theology (Downers
Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 1988) p. 299, c2. “Parousia”—The word means
“presence” or “arrival,” and was used of visits of gods and rulers.
q. David Noel Freedman, ed., The Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992)
V5, p. 166, c1. The Greek word parousia is used in the New Testament to speak of
the arrival or presence of someone. It is also used as a technical term to speak of the
arrival or presence of Christ in glory…
r. David Noel Freedman, ed., Dictionary of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000) p.
1009, c2. “Parousia”—A Greek noun used of persons or things, meaning “arrival” or
active “presence” (from the verb pάreimi, “to be present”).
s. Timothy Friberg, Barbara Friberg, Neva F. Miller, Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New
Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000) p. 302, c1. “Parousia”—1. Being
present, presence. Opposite of άπουσία (absence, being away) 2. Coming, arrival.
t. Henry Snyder Gehman, New Westminster Bible Dictionary (Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1970) p. 703. “Parousia”—Gr., presence.
u. Ceslas Spicq, Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, trans. and ed. James D.
Ernert (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994) vol. 3, p. 53. “Parousia” —
Presence, arrival, visit, manifestation. Sometimes the presence of persons or things.
Sometimes arrival, coming, visit. In the Helenistic period it refers…either to a divine
manifestation often very close to epiphania or the formal visit of a sovereign, his
“joyous entry” into a city “that honors him as a god”…. In line with these usages, the
New Testament uses parousia for the glorious coming of the Lord Jesus…. The royal
and imperial “visits.” There were great feasts…glory and joy on the part of the
people were in response to the prince’s active and beneficent presence…
v. William H. Genty, ed., The Dictionary of Bible and Religion (Nashville: Abington,
1973). “Parousia”—The Greek term parousia, literally “presence” or “arrival,” used
in first century literature of the visit of an important dignitary to a city or land…

93
w. James Hastings, ed., A Dictionary of the Bible (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons,
1903) V3, p674, c2. “Parousia”—Lit. “presence” as opposed to absence, hence the
arrival which introduces that presence.
x. Alvah Houg, ed., An American Commentary on the New Testament. Commentary on
the Gospel of Matthew, by John A. Broadus (Philadelphia: American Baptist
Publications Society, 1886) p. 482, c1. “Parousia”—Presence or arrival.
y. Wilbert Francis Howard and James Hope Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament
Greek (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1920) V2, p. 320. “Parousia”—παρουσία, in which
the RV marginal note (Gr. “Presence”) would suggest that the idea of “motion
towards” is to be excluded; outside evidence for the technical meaning “royal visit”
shows that advent is as literal a rendering as presence, which occurs in some places.
z. A. N. Jannaris, A Concise Dictionary of the English and Modern Greek Languages as
Actually Written and Spoken (London: John Murray Publishers, Ltd., 1959) p. 289, c2.
“Parousia”—Presence, appearance.
aa. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, eds., Theological Dictionary of the New
Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1967) V5, p. 858. “Parousia”—1. Presence—to
be present. 2. Appearing—to have come.
bb. G.W.H. Lampe, ed., A Patristic Greek Lexicon (London: Oxford University Press, 1961)
p. 1043, c2. “Parousia”—A. Presence B. Arrival, appearance, personal visit, advent.
cc. R.C.H. Lenski, Interpretation of St. Matthew’s Gospel (Columbus, OH: The Wartburg
Press, 1943) p. 928. (To the American Lutheran Conference) “Parousia”—Coming
and Presence.
dd. Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1996), p. 1343. “Parousia”—1. Presence, of persons. 2. Arrival.
Note, many ancient Greek writings are cited for these conclusions.
ee. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene A. Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament
(New York: United Bible Societies, 1988) p. 726, 85.25. “Parousia”—The presence of
an object at a particular place—“presence, being at hand, to be in person.” 2 Cor.
10:10, when he is with us in person (literally “…his bodily presence”).
ff. Alan Hugh McNeile, The Gospel According to St. Matthew (London: MacMillan and
Company, Ltd., 1915) p. 344. In classical Greek it tends rather to the meaning
“presence” than “arrival,” but the latter is illustrated by the use in papyri (2nd and 3rd
century AD) for the visit of a king or other official.
gg. Paul Kevin Meagher and Thomas C. O’Brien, eds., Encyclopedic Dictionary of Religion
(Washington, DC: Corpus Publications, 1979) V2, p. 2680, c1 (Catholic). “Parousia”—
A transliteration of the classical Greek word for presence or arrival.
94
 hh. Allen C. Meyers, ed., The Eerdmans, Bible Dictionary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987)
p. 795, c2. “Parousia”—Arrival, presence.
ii. James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek Testament
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960), Foreword. “Parousia,” as applied to the return of
the Lord, is simply the anglicizing of the Greek word which literally means
“presence.”
jj. William D. Mounce, The Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1993) p. 360, c2. “Parousia”—Presence; a coming, arrival,
advent.
kk. Wesley J. Perschbacher, ed., The New Analytical Greek Lexicon (Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson Publishers, 1990) p. 315, c1, (3952). “Parousia”—Presence; a coming,
arrival, advent.
ll. Charles F. Pfeiffer, John Rea, and Howard F. Vos, eds., Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia
(Chicago: Moody Press, 1975) V2, p. 1392, c1. “Parousia”—…Gr. Parousia in certain
cases conveys the idea of presence (II Cor. 10:10; Phil 2:12). …The word parousia as
an eschatological term signifies the moment of arrival of the returning Christ plus His
subsequent presence with His redeemed people.
mm. J. T. Pring, The Oxford Dictionary of Modern Greek (Oxford: The Clarendon Press,
1982) p. 148, c1. “Parousia”—Presence, attendance.
nn. Harry Rimmer, The Coming King (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1941). Harry Rimmer
(D.D., Sc.D.), who was styled “Fundamentalism’s outstanding spokesman” until his
death, admitted that the word parousia meant personal presence. In his book, The
Coming King, he observed that the Greek word parousia is used 13 times in
describing the return of Christ and not once does it have the thought of “coming.”
oo. W. Robertson, The Expositor's Greek Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) V1,
p. 289. “Parousia”—Literally presence, second presence.
pp. Joseph Bryant Rotherham, The Emphasized Bible, 3rd ed., (Grand Rapids: Kregel
Publications, 1984) Appendix, p. 271. 186

186
“In this edition the word parousia is uniformly rendered ‘presence’ (‘coming,’ as a representative of this
word, being set aside). The original term occurs twenty-four times in the New Testament, viz.: Matthew 24:3, 27,
37, 39; 1 Corinthians 15:23; 16:17; 2 Corinthians 7:6, 7; 10:10; Philippians 1:26; 2:12; 1 Thessalonians 2:19; 3:3;
4:15; 5:23; 2 Thessalonians 2:1, 8, 9; James 5:7, 8; 2 Peter 1:16; 3:4, 12; and 1 John 2:28. The sense of ‘presence’ is
so plainly shown by the contrast with ‘absence’ (implied in 2 Corinthians 10:10, and expressed in Philippians 2:12)
that the question naturally arises, Why not always so render it? The more so, inasmuch as there is in 2 Peter 1:16
also, a peculiar fitness in our English word ‘presence.’ This passage, it will be remembered, relates to our Lord’s
transformation upon the Mount. The wonderful manifestation there made was a display and sample of ‘presence’
rather than of ‘coming.’ The Lord was already there; and, being there, he was transformed (compare Matthew

95
 qq. Merrill C. Tenny, ed., The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1975) p. 601, c1. The noun parousia (παρουσία) which occurs
twenty-four times in the New Testament, is a compound form composed of the
preposition παρά “along side, beside” and the substantival form of the very είμι, “to
be.” It basically means “being along side of” and conveys the sense of the English
word “presence.” It is used in the New Testament of a person’s presence as
contrasted to his absence (Phil. 2:12). It contains the thought of the “coming” or
“arrival” of a person as the first stage of his presence that is to follow.
rr. Joseph Henry Thayer, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1976) p. 490 c2. “Parousia”—1. Presence… 2. The presence of
one coming, hence the coming, arrival, advent.
ss. Archibald Robertson Thomas, Word Pictures in the New Testament (New York:
Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1930), V1, p. 188. “Parousia”—Presence as opposed
to absence (Phil. 2:12) … [p. 187] Presence, common in the papyri for the visit of the
emperor.
tt. Robert L. Thomas, ed., New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible
(Nashville: Holman, 1981) p. 1673, c3. #3952 Parousia from the present part. Of
#3918b. A presence or coming. #3918b Pareimi—to be present, to have come.
uu. Verlyn Verbrugge, ed., The NIV Theological Dictionary of New Testament Words
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000) p. 978. “Parousia”—Presence, appearing, coming,
advent. Denotes general presence and arrival.
vv. Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1946) V1, p. 127. “Parousia”—Originally presence, to be present. Also arrival.

17:2, footnote) and the ‘majesty’ of his glorified person was then disclosed. His bodily ‘presence’ was one which
implied and exerted ‘power;’ so that ‘power and presence’ go excellently well together—the ‘power’ befitting such
a one and the same moment witnesses of both. The difficulty expressed in the notes to the second edition of this
New Testament in the way of so yielding to this weight of evidence as to render parousia always by ‘presence,’ lay
in the seeming incongruity of regarding ‘presence’ as an event which would happen at a particular time and which
would fall into rank as one of a series of events, as 1 Corinthians 15:23 especially appeared to require. The
translator still feels the force of this objection, but is withdrawn from taking his stand upon it any longer by the
reflection that, after all, the difficulty may be imaginary. The parousia, in any case, is still in the future, and may
therefore be enshrouded in a measure of obscurity which only fulfillment can clear away: it may, in fine, be both a
period—more or less extended during which certain things shall happen—and an event, coming on and passing
away as one of a series of divine interpositions. Christ is raised as a firstfruit—that is one event; He returns and
vouchsafes his ‘presence,’ during which he raises his own — that is another event, however large and prolonged;
and finally comes another cluster of events constituting ‘the end.’ Hence, after all, ‘presence’ may be the most
widely and permanently satisfying translation of the looked for parousia of the Son of Man.”

96
 ww.W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Westwood, NJ:
Fleming H. Revell Company, 1962) p. 208. “Parousia” literally, a presence, para, with,
and ousia, being…denotes both an arrival and a consequent presence with.
xx. Daniel D. Whedon, Whedon's Commentary, 14 Vols. (New York: Carlton & Porter,
Hunt & Eaton, 1866) p. 277. The word parousia, never in the whole New Testament,
signifies anything else than presence.
yy. Robert Young, Analytical Concordance to the Bible, 8th ed. (London: Lutterworth
Press) p. 770, c2. “Parousia”—A being alongside, presence.
zz. Max Zerwick and Mary Grosvenor, A Grammatical Analysis of the Greek New
Testament, 4th ed., (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1981) p., 77 (Catholic).
“Parousia”—Be at hand/present, presence; coming, arrival.
aaa.Christianity Today (a well-known evangelical magazine) published a series of essays
on “Fundamentals of the Faith.” The essay in booklet form on “The Second Advent
of Christ” had this to say about parousia: “…let us look at the Greek words used in
the New Testament for the idea of the return. First of all, there is the word parousia,
which means basically ‘presence.’”
bbb. Thomas L. Constable in his commentary on 2 Thessalonians in The Bible Knowledge
Commentary acknowledges that parousias has the meaning of “presence,” although
he identifies it with the rapture. 187
ccc. In this edition [of The Emphasized Bible] the word parousia is uniformly rendered
“presence” (“coming,” as a representative of this word, being set aside). The original
term occurs twenty-four times in the N.T., viz.: Mt. xxiv. 3, 27, 31, 39; 1 Cor. xv. 23;
xvi. 17; 2 Cor. vii. 6, 7; x. 10; Phil. i. 26; ii. 12; 1 Thess. ii. 19; iii. 3; iv. 15; v. 23; 2
Thess. ii. 1, 8, 9; James v. 7, 8; 2 Pet. i. 16; iii. 4, 12 and 1 John ii. 28. The sense of
“presence” is so plainly shewn by the contrast with “absence” (implied in 2 Cor. x.
10, and expressed in Phil. ii. 12) that the question naturally arises, — Why not
always so render it? The more so, inasmuch as there is in 2 Pet. i. 16 also, a peculiar
fitness in our English word “presence.” This passage, it will be remembered, relates
to our Lord’s transformation upon the Mount [Matt. 17:1-13] The wonderful
manifestation there made was a display and sample of “presence” rather than of
“coming.” The Lord was already there; and, being there, he was transformed (cp.
Mt. xvii. 2, n.) and the “majesty” of his glorified person was then disclosed. His
bodily “presence” was one which implied and exerted “power”; so that “power and
presence” go excellently well together — the “power” befitting such a “presence”;
and the three favoured disciples were at one and the same moment witnesses of

Thomas L. Constable, “2 Thessalonians,” The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, eds. John F.
187

Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Victor Books/Scripture Press Publications, 1983), 717,

97
 both. The difficulty expressed in the notes to the second edition of this N.T. in the
way of so yielding to this weight of evidence as to render parousia always by
“presence,” lay in the seeming incongruity of regarding “presence” as an event
which would happen at a particular time and which would fall into rank as one of a
series of events, as 1 Co. xv. 23 especially appeared to require. The translator still
feels the force of this objection, but is withdrawn from taking his stand upon it any
longer by the reflection that, after all, the difficulty may be imaginary.188
2. Jesus is using judgment language (“like lightning”) that is common in the Old Testament,
to describe His presence/coming189 that will result in the destruction of the temple and
the judgment on Jerusalem.
a. “And [Jesus] said to them, ‘I was watching Satan fall from heaven like lightning’”
(Luke 10:18). Similar to wind and fire, lightning does “surrogate duty for the image
of the invisible God…. Scripture uses lightning as proof of God’s terrifying
presence. It frightens believer and infidel alike…. As proof that God attends his
chosen people in battle, lightning routs his enemies (Ps. 77:18; 97:4, cf. 144:6; 2 Sam
22:13–15, cf. Ps 18:14).” 190
b. Lightning is associated with violent destruction and terror as God uses Babylon to
deliver His judgment (Ezek. 21:10, 15, 28). Notice the parallels with the Olivet
Discourse:
i. “Son of man, set your face toward Jerusalem, and speak against the sanctuaries,
and prophesy against the land of Israel” (21:1)

Joseph Bryant Rotherham, The Emphasized Bible, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1984),
188

Appendix, 271.
189
“This presence, I remark further, I understand to be a literal one. The expression, ‘Christ’s literal presence,
or coming,’ is often taken as meaning nothing less than a material and visible one, so that the denial of such a
coming is thought to be a rejection of the doctrine of his literal coming. This is wholly unwarranted. It might as well
be said that to deny that God is a material and visible being is to deny his literal existence. The Parousia is a literal
presence, as truly as when Christ says, ‘Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the
midst of them’ [Matt. 18:20]. It is not a figurative one, not one existing constructively or as an object of thought,
but a true, actual presence, as real, though not under the same conditions, as when he was here in the flesh. It is
also a personal Presence. The same unwarranted restriction of meaning is often given to this phrase, as if Christ
could not be personally present unless subject to the senses of sight and touch. How often after his resurrection
did he render himself invisible to his disciples while he was with them. By a personal presence I mean that Christ is
here himself in propria persona [in one’s own proper person], not merely by the official work of the Spirit, nor by
any representative whatever.” (Israel P. Warren, The Parousia: A Critical Study of the Scripture Doctrines of Christ’s
Second Coming; His Reign as King; the Resurrection of the Dead; and the General Judgment, 2nd ed. (Portland, ME:
Hoyt, Fogg & Donham, (1879) 1884]).
“Lightning,” Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, eds. Leland Ryken, James C. Wilhoit, and Tremper Longman III
190

(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1998), 512–513

98
 ii. “Thus all flesh [Matt. 24:22] will know that I, the Lord, have drawn My sword
[Luke 21:24] out of its sheath. It will not return to its sheath again”’” (Ezek. 21:5).
iii. Sword, like lightning, is being used as a metaphor for judgment.
c. Lightning is associated with the sword and arrow in local judgments (2 Sam. 22:15;
Ps. 18:14; 144:6). Did God use actual arrows in routing David’s enemies or did David
use them? (Ps. 18:14) Notice the comparison of arrows with lightning.
3. Lightning is a local phenomenon.
a. Of the 30 occurrences of the word “lightning” in the Bible, not one of them describes
a global event. 191
b. John MacArthur argues that “Christ promised that His coming would be obvious to
all: ‘As the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the
coming of the Son of Man be’ (Matthew 24:27 NKJV).” 192
c. Thomas Ice offers a similar interpretation: “Matthew 24:27, which says, ‘Just as the
lightning comes from the east, and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of
the Son of Man be,’ emphasizes a global coming.” 193
d. Of course, lightning is not seen by everyone in the world when it strikes. When
there’s a lightning storm in Sacramento, California, no one in Atlanta, Georgia, sees
it. Our ability to see extends only from horizon to horizon.
e. Contrary to MacArthur’s claim that “every person in every nation of the world will
take note,” 194 it’s clear that Jesus is describing a series of local events to be
experienced by that first-century generation that could be escaped by heading to
the mountains outside of Judea (Matt. 24:16).

Matthew 24:28: “Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather.”
1. Being familiar with the Hebrew Scriptures, Jesus’ disciples would have understood what
He was describing when He referenced a corpse and vultures (or eagles).

191
Job 37:3 may be the exception if the Hebrew eretz refers to the “earth” rather than the “land.” The Hebrew
word can also be translated as “light.” In the New American Standard Bible translation, the Hebrew word ‫( אוֹר‬ore)
as “light” 105 times and “lightning” five times. Other translations of ore: dawn, daylight, early morning, lights, sun,
sunlight, sunshine.
192
John MacArthur, The Coming of Christ (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1999), 110. As “light” and lightning
five times.
Thomas Ice, “Olivet Discourse,” The Popular Encyclopedia of Bible Prophecy, eds. Tim LaHaye and Ed
193

Hindson (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2004), 255.

194
MacArthur, The Coming of Christ, 110

99
 a. They would have recognized the words of Jeremiah that described a judgment of
those who violate God’s covenant: “The dead bodies of this people will be food for
the birds of the sky and for the beasts of the earth” (Jer. 7:33).
b. Stated later in Jeremiah, “[God] will cause them to fall by the sword before their
enemies and by the hand of those who seek their life; and I will give over their
carcasses as food for the birds of the sky and the beasts of the earth” (19:7).
2. A similar image of judgment is found in Job 39:26–30: “Is it at your command that the
eagle mounts up and makes his nest on high? On the cliff he dwells and lodges, upon
the rocky crag, an inaccessible place. From there he spies out food; His eyes see it from
afar. His young ones also suck up blood; and where the slain are, there is he.”
3. Josephus records that more than a million Jews were killed. The streets were littered
with dead bodies.

Matthew 24:29: “But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be
darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the
powers of the heavens will be shaken.”
1. Some commentators (e.g., D.A. Carson) argue that it’s at this point that Jesus shifts to
events surrounding a future physical coming, His Second Coming.
a. If the preceding verses apply to the judgment on Jerusalem and the destruction of
the temple, then the following verses must as well because of the phrase “But
immediately after the tribulation of those days....”
b. The use of “immediately” does not offer any other meaning than “immediately”
(Matt. 3:16; 4:20, 22; 8:3; 13:5, 20, 21; 14:22, 27, 31; 20:34; 21:2, 3; etc.).
c. “‘Immediately’ does not usually make room for much of a time gap—certainly not a
gap of over 2000 years.” 195
2. The use of “decreation language”: The meaning of sun, moon, stars, and the powers of
the heavens shaken.
a. The biblical approach is to follow the Bible’s own interpretive methodology of how
the use of sun, moon, and stars applies to the temporal judgment of nations (Isa.
13:10–13; 24:19–23; 34:4; Ezek. 32:6–8; Joel 2:10, 30–31; 3:15–16; Hab. 3:6–11). In
none of these passages is the destruction of the earth in view.

195
Paul T. Butler, The Gospel of Luke (Joplin, MO: College Press, 1981), 485. Quoted in William R. Kimball, What
the Bible Says About the Great Tribulation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985), 155.

100
 b. In the OT Israel is described as “sun, moon, and stars” (Gen. 37:9).
c. Israel is like the stars: “The Lord your God has multiplied you, and behold, you are
this day like the stars of heaven in number. May the Lord, the God of your fathers,
increase you a thousand-fold more than you are and bless you, just as He has
promised you!” (Deut. 1:10-11).
d. In the NT Israel is symbolized as “sun, moon, and stars” (Rev. 12:1–2).
3. Tim LaHaye writes that the image of the sun, moon, and eleven stars of Genesis 37:9
and the “woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet,” and having “on
her head a crown of twelve stars” (Rev. 12:1) “is a reference to the nation of Israel.” 196
4. Tim LaHaye writes: “These objects are light-conveying objects: The moon is a reflector,
the sun, a source of light. They are symbolic of Israel as God’s light-bearer to
humankind. This Israel was in Old Testament days, for God intended her to propagate
His message from the Holy Land to the entire world. Unfaithful in the dissemination of
this message, the nation of Israel fell under the judgment of God.” 197
5. When used in Genesis 37 and Revelation 12, the sun, moon, and stars “are symbolic of
Israel.”
a. If they are symbolic of Israel in Genesis 37:9 and Revelation 12:1, then why doesn’t
the same hold true in Matthew 24:29?
b. When Israel is faithful, the sun is shining, the moon is giving off its reflective light,
and the stars are positioned high in the heavens.
6. “In Ecclesiastes 12:1, 2, we find that the expression ‘while the sun, or the light, or the
moon, or the stars, be not darkened’ is used to symbolize good times. Consequently, the
reverse—an expression about the sun, moon, and stars being darkened—would
symbolize ‘evil days,’ days of trouble.” 198
7. The “heavens will be shaken” is also found in the OT and is a metaphor for judgment.
a. “Therefore I shall make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken from its
place at the fury of the Lord of hosts in the day of His burning anger” (Isa. 13:13; also
see Joel 2:10; 3:16).

196
Tim LaHaye, Revelation Unveiled, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999), 198.
LaHaye, Revelation Unveiled, 198. Emphasis added. Also see LaHaye, Prophecy Study Bible, 47, note on
197

Genesis 37:6–11, and 1383, note on Revelation 12:1–5.

198
Ralph Woodrow, The Great Prophecies of the Bible (Riverside, CA: Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association,
1971), 81.

101
 b. “Then the earth shook and quaked, the foundations of heaven were trembling and
were shaken, because He was angry” (2 Sam. 22:8).
c. “See to it that you do not refuse Him who is speaking. For if those did not escape
when they refused him who warned them on earth, much less will we escape who
turn away from Him who warns from heaven. And His voice shook the earth then,
but now He has promised, saying, "YET ONCE MORE I WILL SHAKE NOT ONLY THE
EARTH, BUT ALSO THE HEAVEN." This expression, "Yet once more," denotes the
removing of those things which can be shaken, as of created things, so that those
things which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, since we receive a kingdom
which cannot be shaken, let us show gratitude, by which we may offer to God an
acceptable service with reverence and awe; for our God is a consuming fire” (Heb.
12:25-29).
8. Israel and her capital had become like Babylon (1 Pet. 5:13; Rev. 14:8; 16:19; 17:5; 18:2,
10, 21) like the way Jerusalem had become Egypt and Sodom (Rev. 11:8).
9. Concerning Pharaoh and Egypt: “And when I extinguish you, I shall cover the heavens
[Ex. 10:21-23; Isa. 34:4; Ezek. 30:3, 18; 34:12], and darken their stars; I shall cover the
sun with a cloud [Joel 2:2, 31; 3:15; Amos 8:9; Matt 24:29; Mark 13:24f; Luke 21:25; Rev
6:12; 8:12], and the moon will not give its light. All the shining lights in the heavens I
shall darken over you and shall set darkness on your land” (Ezek. 32: 7-8).
10. “And I looked when He broke the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake; and the
sun became black as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became like blood;
and the stars of the sky fell to the earth, as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by
a great wind” (Rev. 6:12-13). If the fig tree is a symbol for Israel (Matt. 21:19), then this
makes perfect sense. Also, if literal stars or even meteorites fell to the earth in chapter 6
of Revelation, then how could anything happen after this event? Moreover, how would
it be possible to create an electronic tracking system in chapter 13 so no one could buy
or sell?
11. John Owen wrote: “Not to hold you too long upon what is so plain and evident, you may
take it for a rule, that, in the denunciations of the judgments of God, through all the
prophets, heaven, sun, moon, stars, and the like appearing beauties and glories of the
aspectable [capable of being seen] heavens, are taken for governments, governors,
dominions in political states, as Isaiah 14:12–15; Jeremiah 15:9; 51:25. (Isaiah 13:13;
Psalm 68:8; Joel 51:10; Revelation 8:12; Matthew 24:29; Luke 21:25; Isaiah 60:20;
Obadiah 4; Revelation 8:13; 11:12; 20:11.) 199

John Owen, “ΟURΑΝΩΝ ΟURΑΝΙΑ: Shaking and Translating of Heaven and Earth” (preached April 19, 1649),
199

Complete Works of John Owen, 16 vols. (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 1966), 8:255.

102
Matthew 24:30: “and then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the
tribes of the land will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of
heaven with power and great glory.”
1. The use of “coming,” including coming on clouds (Num. 11:25; Ex. 19:9–12; Ps. 97:2–5;
104:3; Isa. 19:1; Dan. 7:13; Nahum 1:3), is not always a reference to a physical coming or
the Second Coming.
a. Earlier in the Gospels, there are references to Jesus’ coming to His first-century
audience (Matt. 10:23; 16:27–28). 200
b. Notice the three times Jesus threatened to judge the churches of Asia Minor by His
“coming” if they did not repent (Rev. 2:5, 16; 3:3). These threats make no sense if
the comings refer to a future distant coming.
c. Jesus stated that His coming in judgment would be before the last apostle died: “For
the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will
then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of
those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man
coming in His kingdom” (Matt. 16:27–28; cf. John 21:1–3).
2. Throughout the Bible, God showed Himself by the presence of clouds, even though He
was not physically present (Ex. 13:21; 14:24; 19:9; 20:21; 24:15; 33:9; 34:5; 1 Kings
8:12).
3. “Behold, the LORD is riding on a swift cloud, and is about to come to Egypt” (Isa. 19:1;
see also Ps. 104:3–4). “Coming on clouds,” therefore, is not necessarily an indicator that
the physical presence of God is required.
4. Jesus quotes from Daniel 7:13 and Psalm 110:1.
a. The Son of Man “comes up to the Ancient of Days.”
b. Jesus is describing an ascent to heaven not a descent to earth.
c. LaHaye writes that Daniel 7:13 reveals “that Christ will come from heaven to the
earth,” this is not what the text says. The Ancient of Days is enthroned in heaven,
not on earth or in the “sky” (Dan. 7:9).
5. Daniel 7:13 is quoted again, along with a portion of Psalm 110:1, when Caiaphas the
high priest asks Jesus if He is “the Christ, the Son of God” (Matt. 26:63). Jesus says to

200
The plural “some” fits the context very well. “There are some of those who are standing here [Peter, James,
John, and other unnamed disciples] who shall not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His
kingdom” (Matt. 16:28; see Mark 9:14).

103
 him, “You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter [lit., from now on] 201
you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the
clouds of heaven” (Matt. 26:64; see Heb. 8:1–2).
6. N.T. Wright offers the following exposition of Matthew 26:64 that also quotes Daniel
7:13: “The Daniel text ... has nothing to do with a figure ‘coming’ from heaven to earth.
Despite the widespread opinion that this is what it ‘must’ mean in the gospels, there is
no reason to suppose that on the lips of Jesus, or in the understanding of the earliest
traditions, it meant anything other than vindication. It speaks of exaltation: of one who,
representing ‘the people of the saints of the most high’, is raised up from suffering at
the hands of the beasts and given a throne to sit on, exercising royal power.... Jesus is
not . . . suggesting that Caiaphas will witness the end of the space-time order. Nor will
he look out of the window one day and observe a human figure flying downwards on a
cloud. It is absurd to imagine either Jesus, or Mark, or anyone in between, supposing the
words to mean that.” 202
7. The “sign” is that the Son of Man is enthroned in heaven (Acts 1:9–11; 2:25–36; 7:55–
46; 13:32–37; Eph. 1:15–23).
8. “For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is
above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in
heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus
Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Phil. 2:9–11).
9. The question of “seeing” (John 1:51; cp. Ezek. 1:1; 10:11).
a. The same Greek word (horao) is used in John 1:51 as in Matthew 24:30 and 26:64.
b. “Ye shall see. Not, perhaps, with the bodily eyes, but you shall have evidence that it
is so. The thing shall take place, and you shall be a witness of it.... It is not probable

201
R. T. France points out that “Coming on the clouds of heaven (together with the phrase ‘the Son of man’) is a
clear allusion to Daniel 7:13, already similarly alluded to in 24:30.... We have seen that its natural application in
terms of its Old Testament source is to the vindication and enthronement of the Son of man in heaven, not to a
descent to earth. It is therefore in this verse a parallel expression to ‘seated at the right hand of Power’; the two
phrases refer to the same exalted state, not to two successive situations or events. In this verse the
appropriateness of this interpretation is underlined by the fact that this is to be true ‘from now on’ (hereafter is a
quite misleading rendering of the more specific phrase ap’ arti, which, as in 23:39 and 26:29, denotes a new period
beginning from now). Indeed it is something which Jesus’ inquisitors themselves will see (an echo of Zc. 12:10, as in
24:30?), for it will quickly become apparent in the events of even the next few weeks (not to mention the
subsequent growth of the church) that the ‘blasphemer’ they thought they had disposed of is in fact now in the
position of supreme authority.” (R. T. France, Matthew: Tyndale New Testament Commentaries [Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1985], 381.)
N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996), 524–525.
202

104
 that Jesus referred to any particular instance in which Nathanael should literally see
the heavens opened.” 203
c. Matthew Henry comments: “Yet they are great things which he here foretells: You
shall see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the
Son of man. (a.) Some understand it literally, as pointing at some particular event.
Either, [a.] There was some vision of Christ’s glory, in which this was exactly fulfilled,
which Nathanael was an eye-witness of, as Peter, and James, and John were of his
transfiguration. There were many things which Christ did, and those in the
presence of his disciples, which were not written (John 20:30), and why not this?”
d. “See” can refer to a physical seeing, although there is nothing in the gospel accounts
where this event is recorded. The same could be true of seeing the Son of Man
coming on the clouds of heaven.
10. “In the phrase hai phulai tēs gēs, ‘the tribes of the earth,’ if tēs gēs is uniformly
translated in the NT as ‘the earth,’ then the absence of any mention of the land of Israel
there is virtually guaranteed. But the context suggests that Zech. 12:10, 14 is inferred by
Matthew in this instance, in which case ‘the tribes of the Land [of Israel]’ is a more
appropriate translation.” 204
Matthew 24:31: “And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather
together [ἐπισυνάξουσιν/ἐπισυνάγω] His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky
to the other.”
1. Angels can either refer to supernatural beings (Heb. 1:14) or human beings.
a. Dispensationalist Ed Hindson: “The term angel (Greek, angelos) means ‘messenger.’
God’s angels are His divine messengers (Heb. 1:14; Rev. 1:1), and His true prophets
and preachers are called angels of the churches (Rev. 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14).” 205
b. Commentator R. T. France writes: “I once argued that, since the basic meaning of
[angelos] is ‘messenger’ (even though its NT uses are predominately in the
secondary sense of ‘angel’), here ‘the context favours strongly the primary meaning’.
In that case v. 27 [of Mark 13] would be describing the work of Christian
missionaries, sent out by the enthroned Son of Man in 8:38, and in the absence of
any clear indication that the normal NT meaning of [angelos] is inappropriate here, I
now think it more likely that angels are here credited with a ‘missionary’ role in the

203
Albert Barnes, Barnes' Notes on the New Testament: Luke and John, ed. Robert Frew (London: Blackie &
Son, 1884–1885), 190.
Barry Horner, Future Israel: Why Christian Anti-Judaism Must be Challenged (Nashville: Broadman &
204

Holman, 2007), 229.

205
Ed Hindson, “False Christ’s, False Prophets, Great Deception,” Foreshadows of Wrath and Redemption,
William T. James, ed. (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1999), 33.

105
 ingathering of God’s people; cf. the description of angels in Heb. 1:14 as [‘Are they
not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will
inherit salvation?’].” 206
2. The elect were present in Jesus’ day (Matt. 24:22, 24).
3. There may be a relationship between this passage and Matthew 10:23: “But whenever
they persecute you in this city, flee to the next; for truly I say to you, you shall not finish
going through the cities of Israel, until the Son of Man comes.”
4. Because the land of Israel is in view, the “four winds” and “one end of heaven to the
other” are symbolic metaphors that would include the land of Israel (Matt. 10:23) and
the known world (see Acts 2:5–13; Rom. 1:10; Col. 1:6, 23; 1 Tim. 3:16; Rom. 16:25–27).
5. When Israel was in captivity, we are told that “a great trumpet” was blown and those
“who were perishing in the land of Assyria and who were scattered in the land of Egypt
will come and worship the LORD in the holy mountain at Jerusalem” (Isa. 27:13).
a. Isa. 11:11-12
b. Isa. 43:5-6
c. Isa 49:12, 18
d. Jer. 31:8
e. Matt. 23:37
6. “Therefore the chief priests and the Pharisees convened a council, and were saying,
‘What are we doing? For this man is performing many signs. If we let Him go on like this,
all men will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and
our nation.’ But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them,
‘You know nothing at all,’ nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that
one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish.’ Now he did not say
this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was
going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also
gather [συναγάγῃ] together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. So
from that day on they planned together to kill Him” (John 11:47–53).
Matthew 24:32: “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already
become tender, and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near.”
1. Dispensationalist John F. Walvoord rejects the fig-tree-equals-Israel view. He writes: “A
better interpretation is that Christ was using a natural illustration. Because the fig tree
brings forth new leaves late in the spring, the budding of the leaves is evidence that

R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark (NIGTC) (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 536–537.
206

106
 summer is near. In a similar way, when those living in the great tribulation see the signs
predicted, they will know that the second coming of Christ is near. The signs in this
passage, accordingly, are not the revival of Israel, but the great tribulation.” 207
2. “Actually, while the fig tree could be an apt illustration of Israel, it is not so used in the
Bible. In Jeremiah 24:1–8, good and bad figs illustrate Israel in the captivity, and there is
also mention of figs in 29:17. The reference to the fig tree in Judges 9:10–11 is obviously
not Israel. Neither the reference in Matthew 21:18–20 nor that in Mark 11:12–14 with
its interpretation in 11:20–26, gives any indication that it is referring to Israel, any more
than the mountain referred to in the passage.208 Accordingly, while this interpretation is
held by many, there is no clear scriptural warrant for it. 209
3. Other dispensationalists are beginning to reject the popular belief that the fig tree of
Matthew 24:32 refers to modern-day Israel. Larry D. Pettegrew, professor of theology at
dispensational-oriented Master’s Seminary, states: “The fig tree, however, does not
illustrate Israel becoming a nation in 1948. The fig tree is simply an illustration from
nature.” 210
4. Mark Hitchcock, pastor of Faith Bible Church in Edmond, Okla., and author of 2012, the
Bible, and the End of the World and The Late Great United States, takes issue with the
often used argument that the fig tree in Matthew 24:32 describes the reinstitution of
the nation of Israel,211 a point he also made in his book The Complete Book of Bible
Prophecy. 212 In an interview, he stated, “It just says the fig tree will blossom and this
generation won’t pass away until all those things are fulfilled.” 213

207
John F. Walvoord, Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come (Chicago, IL: Moody, [1974] 1980), 191–192.
Walvoord is clearly wrong about this. First-century Israel is the object of Jesus’ judgment discourse in Matthew
208

21:18–20 and Mark 11:12–14. See Gary DeMar, “Fruitless Trees and the Nation of Israel,” Last Days Madness:
Obsession of the Modern Church (Atlanta, GA: American Vision, 1994), 303-10.
209
John F. Walvoord, Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come (Chicago, IL: Moody, [1974] 1980), 191–92.
210
Larry D. Pettegrew, “Interpretive Flaws in the Olivet Discourse,” TMSJ 13/2 (Fall 2002), 173–190.
211
LaHaye and many popular prophecy writers see Matthew 24:32 as the key NT prophetic passage: “when a
fig tree is used symbolically in Scripture, it usually refers to the nation Israel. If that is a valid assumption (and we
believe it is), then when Israel officially became a nation in 1948, that was the ‘sign’ of Matthew 24:1-8, the
beginning ‘birth pangs’—it meant that the ‘end of the age’ is ‘near.’” (Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, Are We Living
in the End Times? Current Events Foretold in Scripture . . . And What They Mean [Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House
Publishers, 1999], 57). The editors of LaHaye’s own Prophecy Study Bible (2000) disagree: “the fig tree is not
symbolic of the nation of Israel” (1040).
212
Mark Hitchcock, The Complete Book of Bible Prophecy (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1999), 158.
Troy Anderson, “Bible Scholar Predicts New Date of Christ's Second Coming,” Charisma News (December
213

6,2012): http://www.charismanews.com/us/34832-bible-scholar-predicts-new-date-of-christs-second-coming

107
 5. If Israel is the fig tree in Matthew 24:32, then Israel is the fig tree in Matthew 21:18–20
where Jesus says, “‘No longer shall there ever be any fruit from you.’ And at once the fig
tree withered.”
a. The olive tree is a more appropriate symbol for Israel (Rom. 11:17–21).
b. In Luke’s parallel account, we read about “the fig tree and all the trees” (Luke
21:29).
c. “So [Zacchaeus] ran on ahead and climbed up into a sycamore tree in order to see Him,
for He was about to pass through that way…. And Jesus said to him, ‘Today salvation has
come to this house, because he, too, is a son of Abraham’” (Luke 19:1-10).
d. A fig tree, like all trees, is known by its fruit (Matt. 3:10; 7:16-21; Luke 3:9).

Matthew 24:33: “even so YOU too, when YOU see all these things, recognize that He is near,
right at the door.”
1. Jesus makes it clear that it is His present audience (“you”) that will “see all these things.”
2. “Near” is defined as “right at the door” (cf. James 5:8–9).
3. Could be “He is near” or “it is near,” the “it” referring to the kingdom of God (Luke
21:31; Matt. 3:2).

Matthew 24:34: “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things
take place.”
A. Jesus was mistaken.
1. C. S. Lewis: “But there is worse to come. ‘Say what you like,’ we shall be told, ‘the
apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from
the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And,
worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their
Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so
many words, “this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.” And He was
wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else.’ It is
certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.” 214
2. Bertrand Russell: “I am concerned with Christ as he appears in the Gospel narrative as it
stands, and there one does find some things that do not seem to be very wise. For one

C. S. Lewis, The World’s Last Night and Other Essays (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1960), 97–
214

98.

108
 thing, He certainly thought that His second coming would occur in clouds of glory before
the death of all the people who were living at that time. There are a great many texts
that prove that and there are a lot of places where it is quite clear that He believed that
His coming would happen during the lifetime of many then living. That was the belief of
His earlier followers, and it was the basis of a good deal of His moral teaching.” 215
3. Bart Ehrman in Misquoting Jesus: His trek down the road of skepticism begins with what
he describes as “one of the most popular books on campus” that was being read while
he was a student at Moody Bible Institute in the 1970s, Hal “Lindsay’s [sic] apocalyptic
blueprint for our future, The Late Great Planet Earth.” Ehrman writes that he “was
particularly struck by the ‘when’” of Lindsey’s prophetic outline of Matthew 24. Ehrman
writes that “this message proved completely compelling to us. It may seem odd now—
given the circumstances that 1988 has come and gone, with no Armageddon—but, on
the other hand, there are millions of Christians who still believe that the Bible can be
read literally as completely inspired in its predictions of what is soon to happen to bring
history as we know it to a close.”
4. Christopher Hitchens in a debate with Douglas Wilson at Westminster Theological
Seminary on October 29, 2008. See the film Collision.
5. Vincent Bugliosi, the lead prosecutor in the Charles Manson trial and co-author of Helter
Skelter, sees unfulfilled prophecy as an indictment of Jesus’ credibility in his book
Divinity of Doubt: The God Question (2011).
a. Bugliosi comments on the Bible’s statement, “‘Behold, I am coming soon’
(Revelation 22:12).” 216
b. In an extended endnote, he writes the following: “How soon did Jesus mean? Very
soon. Indeed, in Matthew 16:27–28 he said, concerning his return to ‘judge all
people’ (Judgment Day), ‘I assure you that some of you who are standing here right
now will not die before you see me, the Son of Man, coming in My kingdom.’ (See
also Mark 9:1; Mark 13:30 [‘this generation’], and Luke 9:27.) James 5:8 proclaims,
‘The coming of the Lord is at hand.’ This poses what would seem to be an
insurmountable problem for bible Fundamentalists (creationists).... But how can
they get around Jesus saying he was going to return during the lives of many of those
living during his time?” 217

Bertrand Russell, Why I Am Not a Christian (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1957), 16.
215

Vincent Bugliosi, Divinity of Doubt: The God Question (New York: Vanguard Press, 2010), 129.
216

Bugliosi, Divinity of Doubt, 302, note 9.

217

109
 c. Bugliosi also references John 21:21–23 where Jesus implies that He will return
before the apostle John dies. Since Jesus has not returned, then John must still be
alive somewhere in the world today218 or Jesus was mistaken.
d. “Jesus said to [Peter], ‘If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You
follow Me!’ Therefore this saying went out among the brethren that that disciple
[John] would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, ‘If
I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?’ Therefore this saying went
out among the brethren that that disciple would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him
that he would not die, but only, ‘If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to
you?’”
B. This “race.”
1. Would be genos instead of genea. If Jesus had meant to say “race,” He would have used
genos.
a. Arno C. Gaebelein, who takes a futurist position on this passage, argues in another
context, “Some have taught that the word ‘church’ means a synagogue. Church and
synagogue, however, are totally different terms.” 219
b. In a footnote on the same page, Gaebelein writes: “Of late this argument has been
pressed in certain quarters that the word church means synagogue. However, if the

218
Bugliosi is sloppy in his research on this issue in a number of ways. He mentions a 1959 “novel” by Wilson
Tucker with the title The Planet Earth. It was not a novel but a 1959 short story called “The Planet King” that is
found in the book The Best of Wilson Tucker (1982).
I’ve only found one modern author who even suggests that John might still be alive. David Dolan’s Israel in
Crisis is a perfect example of forcing the Bible to fit an already developed prophetic system. Dolan tries to explain
Jesus’ comments in John 21:18–23 in which Jesus says to Peter about John, “If I want him to remain until I come,
what is that to you? You follow Me” (21:22). Because Dolan holds to a futuristic eschatology, he must force Jesus’
words into his dispensational mold: “In further nonbiblical research, I discovered that many early church
authorities believed that John had never died. This was based on the Lord’s mysterious words in John 21 and also
on the fact that, unlike the other apostles, no credible account exists about his death. I suspect that may be
because John did not die.” (David Dolan, Israel in Crisis: What Lies Ahead? (Grand Rapids, MI: Fleming H. Revell,
2001), 143.)
Dolan speculates that John could have been living on a Greek island for two millennia, wandering around the
world hiding his true identity disguised, or caught up into heaven like Elijah where he has been supernaturally
preserved until he is needed. John 21:23 refutes this notion: “yet Jesus did not say to [Peter] that [John] would not
die, but only, ‘If I want to remain until I come, what is that to you.’”
So what is the meaning of Jesus’ words? John Gill offers the best explanation. The “coming” referred to by
Jesus in John 21 refers, “not till his second coming to judge the quick and the dead at the last day” but the coming
“in his power . . . on the Jewish nation, in the destruction of their city and temple by the Romans [in AD 70].” As
Gill points out, “till which time John did live, and many years after; and was the only one of the disciples that lived
till that time, and who did not die a violent death.”
219
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Gospel of Matthew (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1961), 384.

110
 Lord had meant synagogue the Holy Spirit surely would have used the Greek
‘synagogē’ instead of ‘ecclesia.’”
c. On Matthew 24:34, he argues, “The word genea means not necessarily the same
persons living, but it also has the meaning of race. The English word ‘generation’ has
this meaning of ‘family or a race or a certain class of people.’ And so has the Greek.
It is used in that sense in Luke xvi:8 ‘This generation’ is the race sprung from
Abraham, God’s chosen earthly people.” 220
d. Let’s apply Gaebelein’s logic on synagogue and church to race and generation: “if
the Lord had meant race the Holy Spirit surely would have used the Greek ‘genos’
instead of ‘genea.’”
e. Notice the hedge words “not necessarily.” Also notice that he does not compare the
use of genea in Matthew 24:34 with the way Matthew uses the phrase in other
passages (Matt. 11:16; 12:39, 41, 45; 23:36).
2. “While some have attempted to relate ‘generation’ (Gr genea) to the race of the
Jews, indicating the survival of their race until Christ’s return, this seems
somewhat stretched. Arndt and Gingrich [A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament] (p. 153) prefer ‘age’ or ‘period of time.’” 221
3. “[γενεά]: the sum total of those born at the same time, expanded to include all
those living at a given time and freq. defined in terms of specific characteristics,
generation, contemporaries... Jesus looks upon the whole contemp. generation
of Israel as a uniform mass confronting him (cp. Gen 7:1; Ps 11:8) Mt 11:16;
12:41f; 23:36; 24:34; Mk 13:30; Lk 7:31; 11:29-32, 50f; 17:25; 21:32. . . the time
of a generation, age (as a rule of thumb, the time between birth of parents and
the birth of their children.” 222
4. Makes no logical sense: “The Jewish race will not pass away until all these things
take place; therefore when all these things take place the Jewish race will pass
away.” See Stanley Toussaint’s comment on this topic below (B.8.)
5. Makes the Jewish race for all time “wicked” (Luke 11:29) and “perverse” (Acts
2:40).
6. “What does it mean, therefore, that “this generation” would not pass away until
all these things take place (24:34)? Some pretribulationists have suggested that
“generation” in this passage means “race,” or “nation,” or “family.” Thus the

Gaebelein, The Gospel of Matthew, 514.

220

221
Edward E. Hindson and Woodrow Michael Kroll, KJV Bible Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, [1994]
1997), 1949.
222
Walter Bauer, Frederick William Danker, W.F. Arndt, and F.W. Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of
the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000),
s.v. “γενεὰ.” Also available online at https://goo.gl/PBGjU7

111
 Lord would be saying that the nation of Israel would not pass away until all of
the things spoken of in the Olivet Discourse are fulfilled. Though this is a true
statement, this interpretation is based on an unusual meaning for “generation”
(genea). Moreover, the “until” is a problem, for it would imply that the nation of
Israel would pass away after the second coming, and Scripture certainly does not
teach this. Some good Bible teachers have argued that “this generation” is used
in a negative sense, a pejorative sense, meaning “wicked generation.”35 This
interpretation is based on the way “generation” is often used throughout the
Gospels—the wicked generation that refused the Kingship to Christ. According to
this view, Christ, in effect, is setting the record straight with His disciples who
believed in the immediate arrival of the Kingdom inhabited only by the
righteous. Instead, says Christ, the wicked will be here until after the tribulation
and second coming. In addition, Jesus may be making the point that the wicked
will receive the judgments of the tribulation. This view may be correct. It is
certainly true that the wicked will be on earth until after the tribulation and
second coming. Its weakness is that it is questionable that “this generation” is
used enough in a pejorative sense to become a technical term for wicked
people.” 223
7. In volume four of Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Michael Brown argues
that genea “normally means generation” but “can sometimes mean race,”
although he does not offer any biblical evidence or examples to support his
claim. In a footnote, he admits that “this argument ... should not be pressed too
strongly since the nuance of ‘race’ would have been much clearer had the Greek
word genos, as opposed to genea, been used here.” 224 In the end, Dr. Brown
admits that the best translation of genea is “generation” and not “race.” It’s this
kind of reasoning that has led most Bible commentators to abandon the “race”
translation.
8. The following is Charles Ryrie’s comment on Matthew 24:34 from his Study
Bible: “this generation. No one living when Jesus spoke these words lived to see
‘all these things’ come to pass. 225 However, the Greek word can mean ‘race’ or
‘family’ which makes good sense here; i.e., the Jewish race will be preserved, in
spite of terrible persecution, until the Lord comes.” Stanley Toussaint, a
dispensationalist, dismisses Ryrie’s line of argument: “A second interpretation,

223
Larry D. Pettegrew, “Interpretive Flaws in the Olivet Discourse,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 13/2 (Fall
2002), 173–190.
Michael L. Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus: New Testament Objections, vol. 4 (Grand Rapids,
224

MI: Baker Books, 2006), 154 and 321, note 277.

According to Matthew 24:33, it was those of Jesus’ audience who would see the signs: “so, you too, when
225

you see all these things, recognize that He [or “it”: Lk. 21: 31] is near, right at the door.”

112
 held by a number of futurists, affirms that the noun γενεά means race, that is,
the Jewish race. Bauer, Arndt, and Gingrich give ‘clan’ as a primary meaning, but
they list only Luke 16:8 as an illustration in the New Testament. It is difficult for
dispensational premillennialists to take this view because this would imply that
Israel would cease to exist as a nation after the Lord’s return: ‘This race of Israel
will not pass away until the Second Advent.’ But Israel must continue after the
Second Advent into the millennium in order to fulfill the promises God made to
that nation.” 226
C. This nation (ethnos): the use of ethnos is used elsewhere Matthew 24 (vv. 7, 9, 14).
Why would Jesus choose genea when He really meant “nation”?
D. “This generation” is really “that generation” (Henry Morris). 227 There is a perfectly
good Greek word for “that” if that was what Jesus wanted to say.
E. This evil kind or type of generation:
1. “‘This generation’ then ‘represents an evil class of people who will oppose Jesus’
disciples until the day He returns.’” An interpretation, not a translation.
2. Jesus has a particular generation in mind; that’s why He used the near
demonstrative “this.”
3. See Matthew 12:38–45. 228 It was that first-century generation that asked for a
sign.
F. “The generation that sees these signs.”
1. In order to get this translation, “this” has to be replaced with “the” and four
words have to be added to the verse: “The generation that sees these signs will
not pass away....” This is not the way to interpret the Bible. In addition, we are

Stanley D. Toussaint, “A Critique of the Preterist View of the Olivet Discourse,” Bibliotheca Sacra (October-
226

December 2004), 483–484.

227
“The word ‘this’ is the demonstrative adjective and could better be translated ‘that generation.’ That is, the
generation which sees all these signs (probably starting with World War I) shall not have completely passed away
until all these things have taken place” (1045) (Henry Morris, Christian Defender’s Bible, 1045).
228
The Pharisees say to Jesus, “We want to see a sign” (Matt. 12:38). Jesus answers, “An evil and adulterous
generation craves for a sign” (12:39). That makes their generation an evil and adulterous generation since they are
the ones who asked for a sign. Even so, Jesus gives them a sign, “the sign of Jonah the prophet” (12:39). And when
was the sign of Jonah the prophet fulfilled? In their day, and only their day: “for just as Jonah was three days and
three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of
the earth” (12:40). The use of “this generation” (12:41–42) is used by Jesus to point out how their generation will
be judged by the people of Nineveh and the Queen of the South because someone greater than Jonah and
Solomon “is here.” The “here” was in Jesus’ day since only those people living in Jesus’ day could actually see the
sign of the resurrection. To repeat, Jesus does not say “this kind of generation will not pass away.” He says “this
generation,” the same phrase that is used in Matthew 23:36, a verse that Thomas Ice says “is an undisputed
reference to A.D.70.”

113
 told in Matthew 24:33 who will see the signs: “even so you too, when you see all
these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.” The “you” is them not
us.
2. Thomas Ice and Tim LaHaye claim that Matthew 24:34 should be read, “The
generation that ‘sees’ these things will not pass till all is fulfilled.” 229
3. In his book The Beginning of the End, Tim LaHaye writes, “Soon the door to
survival, Jesus the Christ, is going to be closed, and God will thunder judgment
upon this generation.” 230 What generation does LaHaye have in view with his
use of “this generation”? Of course, it’s the generation alive in 1972. “The fact
that we are the generation that will be on earth when our Lord comes certainly
should not depress us.” 231
4. Matthew 24:33 tells us what generation will see “all these signs”: “[E]ven so you
too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.”
The generation of Jesus’ day saw all the signs of Matthew 24. The “you” refers to
the audience that heard the prophecy.
G. Genētai: “begin to take place.”
1. One last attempt to circumvent the obvious meaning of the timing of “this
generation” is to claim that the use of the Greek verb genētai means that the
passage should read “until all these things begin to take place.” Robert H.
Mounce lists this meaning as a possible way to understand the timing of
Matthew 24:34, although he does not accept it: “[I]f genētai (happen) is taken as
an ingressive aorist, 232 the sentence would indicate that before the generation
alive at that time had died, all the things described in connection with the end
will have started to take place.” 233
a. Genētai in Matthew 24:34 is not an ingressive aorist since an ingressive aorist
must meet three criteria: (1) The present tense of the verb in question must
denote a state of continued action; (2) the verb in question must be a

Error! Main Document Only.Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice, Charting the End Times: A Visual Guide to
229

Understanding Bible Prophecy (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2001), 36.
Tim LaHaye, The Beginning of the End (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1972), 172.
230

LaHaye, The Beginning of the End, 172.

231

232
Emphasizes the beginning of the action. “We are told, ‘Jesus wept’ (Jn. 11: 35). Many scholars remark that
the aorist tense of ‘wept’ is the ingressive aorist. Hence, some translate the verse, ‘Jesus burst into tears.’”
(William Hendriksen, The Gospel of John [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 19 ], .) Is He still weeping?
Robert H. Mounce, Matthew (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), 235.
233

114
 denominative (a verb built on a noun 234); (3) the verb must be a first aorist
rather than a second aorist.
b. Genetai is a (1) second aorist rather than a first aorist; (2) it is not a
denominative; (3) the present tense of ginomai does not denote a state of
continued action.
2. None of the Greek grammars (e.g., Robertson,235 Blass-Debrunner-Funk, 236 Dana
& Mantey 237) suggest this meaning of genētai in Matthew 24:34 (or Mark 13:30
or Luke 21:32).
3. “In Arndt & Gingrich, it is interesting that the extensive entry on ginomai makes
no reference to genētai in Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32, so that no
specific meaning is attributed. Even the exact form genētai is not parsed.” 238
4. The bodily “coming of Christ,” as futurists understand the references to
“coming” in Matthew 24:30, did not “begin” to take place in the first century.
5. Let’s plug in the destruction of the temple as one of “these things” that begins to
take place: “This generation will not pass away until the destruction of the
temple begins to take place.” The destruction of the Temple didn’t “begin” to be
destroyed before that generation passed away; it was destroyed before that
generation passed away, and it is no longer being destroyed.
6. Stanley Toussaint, a premillenialist, argues against it, specifically referencing C.E.
Stowe’s article 239 cited by Barry Horner for support (see my debate with
Horner) 240: “This approach fails to note the significance of the words ‘all these
things’ . . . in the same verse. It could hardly be said that all these things began to
be [fulfilled] in the lifetime of the disciples. How could Christ begin His coming at
the time when it is described as being like lightning? Nor does this explanation fit
the meaning of verse thirty-three,” 241 which reads “even so YOU too, when YOU
see all THESE things, recognize that He is near, right at the door” (Matt. 24:33).

234
In English “shelf” and “carpet” form the denominatives “to shelve” and “to carpet,” but when we “carpet
the stairs,” we put carpet on stairs and when we “shelve a book,” we put a book on a shelf.
A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research.
235

Grammar of New Testament Greek.

236

A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament.

237

Barry Horner, “The Olivet Discourse: Matthew 24—Futurism and Preterism” (2008), 31. This paper was
238

prepared by Horner for the November 22, 2008 debate.

Stowe, “The Eschatology of Christ, With Special Reference to the Discourse in Matt, XXIV and XXV.”
239

http://www.americanvision.com/matthew24futureorfulfilled.aspx
240

241
Stanley D. Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew (Portland, OR: Multnomah, 1980), 279. The odd
this is that Toussaint seems to have changed his view in a paper he wrote critiquing a preterist interpretation of

115
 7. The abomination of desolation did not begin to stand in the temple and is still
standing (Matt. 24:15).
8. The people of Judea did not begin to flee to the mountains and are still fleeing
(24:16).
9. The great tribulation, according to futurists, did not begin to take place since it is
viewed as a definite period (seven years) sometime in the future (24:21).
10. To say “until all these things begin to take place” destroys the parenthesis theory
which is the foundation of dispensationalism: no prophecy is being fulfilled this
side of the rapture. Either the Olivet Discourse refers to that first-century
generation, or it refers to a single future generation. It cannot refer to ongoing
prophetic fulfillment.
11. Let’s suppose “begin to pass away” is the correct rendering of genētai in
Matthew 24:34. Since “this generation” always means the generation to whom
Jesus is speaking, the “beginning to pass away” would start with Jesus’
declaration on the Mount of Olives of the unfolding of these events and end at
the close of that present generation. Note that genētai is used in Matthew 24:32
and is translated as “has already become tender.”
12. Doug McIntosh writes: “How do we know that Matthew 24:34 contains an
ingressive aorist? Because all the things that Jesus prophesied had not taken
place when that generation passed away, and Jesus is not a false prophet.” 242
a. This is a classic example of begging the question, declaring to be true what
must first be proven.
b. As has been pointed out on numerous occasions, that the use of “this
generation” by Jesus always refers to the generation to whom He was
speaking and no other (see the discussion above on “this generation” and
near demonstratives).

Matthew 24: “A fifth interpretation seems best. It takes the verb genētai as an ingressive aorist. The same verb is
found in all three Synoptics and is translated ‘takes place’ (Matt. 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32). As an ingressive
aorist it emphasizes the beginning of the action with the meaning ‘begin to take place.’ All those things would
begin in that generation and find their ultimate completion at the Second Advent. This fits with the idea of not
being deceived by the events mentioned in Matthew 24:4–8. The Lord specifically referred to these as ‘the
beginning of birth pangs’ (v. 8).” The “beginning of birth pangs” refers to the events of “this generation” not some
future generation. There is the further problem of when these events began to take place. The coming of the Son
of Man began in that generation? The sun and moon went dark in that generation? The stars fell in that generation
and continue to fall? http://planetpreterist.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2241&catid=1
242
Doug McIntosh, “The Tender Branches” (March 28, 2010):
http://www.cornerstonebibch.org/html/Sermons/Matthew/Matt091.pdf

116
 c. So then, one of the reasons genētai is not an ingressive aorist, in addition to
the grammatical reasons listed above, is that the “this generation” refers to
the generation to whom Jesus was speaking.
13. Royce Gordon Gruenler, “Second Aroist Active/Middle Indicative” in William D.
Mounce, Basics of Biblical Greek: Grammar (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1993),
193.
H. This generation.
1. The right word: genea.
2. Even the New Scofield Study Bible says, “The prediction of v. 36 [in Matt. 23] was
fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.” 243
a. Why would the meaning of the same phrase (“this generation”) mean
something different just one chapter later?
b. If Jesus wanted to distinguish the two generations, He could have easily
avoided all confusion by using “that generation.”
3. Genea is used throughout the gospels to refer to a distinct time designated as a
“generation” (Mt. 1:17; 11:16; 12:39, 41, 42, 45; 16:4; 17:17; 23:36; 24:34; Mk.
8:12, 38; 9:19; 13:30; Lk. 1:48, 50; 7:31; 9:41; 11:29, 30, 32, 50, 51; 16:8; 17:25;
21:32).
a. “So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations,
from David until the captivity in Babylon are fourteen generations...” (Mt.
1:17).
b. “His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation” (Lk.
1:50).
c. If anyone attempted to translate “generation” as “race” in these passages
the result would be absurdity. For example, there would be 42 different
races of Jews between Abraham and Jesus (cf. Mt. 1:17).
4. The most common usage of “this generation” (he genea haute) occurs 18 times
in the gospels (Mt. 11:16; 12:41, 45; 23:36; 24:34; Mk. 8:12 [twice], 8:38; 13:30
Lk. 7:31; 11:29 [in sentence form]; 11:30, 31, 32, 50, 51, 17:25; 21:32).
a. The use of the near demonstrative “this” tells us that Jesus had His own
generation in view.

C. I. Scofield, The New Scofield Study Bible (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989), 1167, footnote 3.
243

117
 b. If Jesus wanted to identify a future generation, He could have chosen the far
demonstrative “that”: “that day” (Matt. 7:22); “that hour” (10:19); “that
time” (24:10); “that day and hour” (24:36).
c. The pronouns ταῦτα, these, αὕτη, this, refer to events close at hand; the
pronoun ἐκείνης, that, to that which is distant.
d. Matthew uses “this” throughout his gospel to identify things that are near:
“this day” (6:11); “this man” (8:9); “this city” (10:23); “this place” (12:6); “this
people” (15:8); “this rock” (15:18); “this little child (18:4); “this mountain”
(21:21); “this stone” (21:44); “this image” (22:20); “this gospel” (24:14); “this
woman” (26:13); “this night” (26:31), etc. Why not “this generation”?
e. The same is true of the plural “these” and “those: “these stones” (Matt. 3:9;
4:3); “when will these things be?” (24:3); “all these things” 24:33, 34) and
“those days” (24:19, 22, 29, 38).
5. In his comments on Ephesians 3:5, premillennialist Harold Hoehner writes: “The
word genea occurs 236 times in the LXX and it appears 184 times in the
canonical books. Over 150 times it is translated from [the Hebrew dor], meaning
‘period, age, generation’ (Gen 7:1; 9:12; Exod 3:15). It is frequently used of the
period covered by a generation of humans (Gen 15:16; Exod 1:6). In the NT it
occurs forty-three times, thirty-three times in the Synoptics, and only four times
in Paul’s writings (Eph 3:5, 21; Phil 2:15; Col 1:26) with the same basic meaning
of ‘age’ or ‘generation.’ This matches with the parallel passage in Col 1:26 where
it states that the mystery was hid from the ages (αἰώνων) and the generations
(γενεῶν).” 244

Matthew 24:36–25:1–46
1. Marcellus Kik states that “the first 35 verses of Matthew 24 relate to the destruction of
Jerusalem and the events preceding that destruction. With verse 36 a new subject is
introduced, namely, the second coming of Christ and the attendant final judgment. This
forms the content of Matthew 24:36–25:46.” 245
2. Others see no break at 24:36.246 If Jesus is referring to a far distant Second Coming of
Jesus, taking “that day and hour” literally, it says too little. If the generation were future,
Jesus would most likely have said something related to not knowing the time of the

Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2002), 437–438.
244

Kik, Matthew Twenty-Four (1948) and An Eschatology of Victory (1971).

245

See Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness, 4th ed. (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1999), chap. 15.
246

118
 generation not the day and hour. Jesus’ statement of “this generation,” that is their
generation not passing away, identifies the generation but not the day or hour.
3. “But of that day and hour knoweth no man: Which is to be understood, not of the
second coming of Christ, the end of the world, and the last judgment; but of the coming
of the son of man, to take vengeance on the Jews, and of their destruction; for the
words manifestly regard the date of the several things going before, which only can be
applied to that catastrophe, and dreadful desolation: now, though the destruction itself
was spoken of by Moses and the prophets, was foretold by Christ, and the believing
Jews had some discerning of its near approach; see (Hebrews 10:25) yet the exact and
precise time was not known: it might have been: calculated to a year by Daniel’s weeks,
but not to the day and hour; and therefore our Lord does not say of the year, but of the
day and hour no man knows; though the one week, or seven years, being separated
from the rest, throws that account into some perplexity; and which perhaps is on
purpose done, to conceal the precise time of Jerusalem's destruction: nor need it be
wondered at, notwithstanding all the hints given, that the fatal day should not be
exactly known beforehand; when those who have lived since, and were eyewitnesses of
it, are not agreed on what day of the month it was; for, as Dr. Lightfoot observes,
Josephus [De Bello Jud. l. 6. c. 26.] says, ‘that the temple perished the “tenth” day of
“Lous,” a day fatal to the temple, as having been on that day consumed in flames, by the
king of Babylon.’” 247
4. “Ωρα [ōra/hour], here, is translated season by many eminent critics, and is used in this
sense by both sacred and profane authors. As the day was not known, in which
Jerusalem should be invested by the Romans, therefore our Lord advised his disciples to
pray that it might not be on a Sabbath; and as the season was not known, therefore
they were to pray that it might not be in the winter; Matthew 24:20.” 248
5. We find the following in Revelation 14:6–7: “And I saw another angel flying in
midheaven, having an eternal gospel to preach to those who live on the earth, and to
every nation and tribe and tongue and people; and he said with a loud voice, ‘Fear God,
and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come; worship Him who
made the heaven and the earth and sea and springs of waters.”
a. John mentions that the presence of many antichrists indicated “that it is the last
hour” (1 John 2:18), that is, near the time when Jesus’ judgment coming was
about to unfold.
b. “So remember what you have received and heard; and keep it, and repent.
Therefore, if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know

John Gill,
247

Adam Clarke.
248

119
 at what hour I will come to you” (Rev. 3:3). The warning is not directed at some
distant church but
c. “Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from
the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to
test those who dwell on the earth” (Rev. 3:10). “That hour” that “is about to
come upon the whole oikoumenē,” not some unidentified time in the distant
future.
d. “And the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour and day and month
and year, were released, so that they would kill a third of mankind” (Rev. 9:15).
e. “and he said with a loud voice, ‘Fear God, and give Him glory, because
the hour of His judgment has come; worship Him who made the heaven and the
earth and sea and springs of waters’” (Rev. 14:7).

120
 Appendix A
Is “Coming” always a Reference to the Second Coming?

A. Every reference to Jesus’ coming is not a reference to His second coming.

1. “I am coming [ἔρχομαί/erchomai] to you [church in Ephesus] ... unless you
repent” (Rev. 2:5).
2. “Repent ... or else I am coming [ἔρχομαί/erchomai] to you quickly ... to make war
against them with the sword of My mouth” (Rev. 2:16).
3. “If you will not wake up, I will come [ἥξω/hēxō] like a thief, and you will not know
at what hour I will come [ἥξω/hēxō] upon you” (Rev. 3:3).
B. What the commentators say:
1. “The Ephesian Christians were also sharply warned that if they did not heed
exhortation, they could expect sudden judgment and removal of the candlestick. As
[Henry] Alford comments, this is ‘not Christ’s final coming, but His coming in special
judgment is here indicated.’” 249
2. “Some interpreters see here a reference to the judgment to be inflicted by Christ
at his second coming, but it is more likely that these words refer to some kind of
visitation which will bring a historical judgment upon the church so that destruction
will befall it and it will cease to exist as a church.” 250
3. “If the church does not repent, Christ will come and remove their lampstand from
its place. The reference is not so much to the parousia as it is to an immediate
visitation for preliminary judgment. Christ, after all, walks among his churches
(2:1).” 251
4. “The words ‘I will soon come to you’ [2:16] should be understood as a coming
‘against’ the congregation in judgment, as in v. 5, and not as a reference to Christ’s
second coming.” 252

John F. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ: A Commentary (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1966), 57.
249

George Eldon Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972), 39–40.
250

251
Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 70. If each church
is one of “seven golden lampstands” (2:1), then Jesus is “the One who walks among” the churches.
Alan F. Johnson, Revelation: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 46.
252

121
 5. “This coming of Christ is not the Second Coming. It is a special coming of visitation,
in judgment and discipline.” 253
B. Old Testament comings of Jehovah
1. “The hand of the LORD will come with a very severe pestilence on your livestock
which are in the field, on the horses, on the donkeys, on the camels, on the herds,
and on the flocks” (Ex. 9:3).
2. “For on the third day the LORD will come down on Mount Sinai in the sight of all
the people.... [T]here was thunder and lightning flashes and a thick cloud upon the
mountain and a very loud trumpet sound” (Ex. 19:11, 16).
a. Compare language with Matthew 24:7 (lightning), 24:31 (trumpet), and 24:30
(clouds).
b. “No one has ever seen God” (John 1:18), and yet God is said to have down “in
the sight of all the people.”
3. “Behold, the LORD is riding on a swift cloud, and is about to come to Egypt; the
idols of Egypt will tremble at His presence, and the heart of the Egyptians will melt
within them” (Isa. 19:1).
4. “For behold, the LORD is about to come out from His place to punish the
inhabitants of the earth [land] for their iniquity; and the earth [land] will reveal her
bloodshed, and will no longer cover her slain” (Isa. 26:21).
5. “And the Lord will cause His voice of authority to be heard, And the descending of
His arm to be seen in fierce anger, And in the flame of a consuming fire In
cloudburst, downpour and hailstones” (Isa 30:30).
6. “So will the LORD of hosts come down to wage war on Mount Zion and on its hill”
(Isa. 31:4d).
7. “For Behold, the LORD is coming forth from His place. He will come down and
tread on the high places of the earth [land]” (Micah 1:3).
8. “For behold I am coming, and I will dwell in your midst” (Zech. 2:10).
Jonathan Edwards (1736): “‘Tis evident that when Christ speaks of his coming; his being
revealed; his coming in his kingdom; or his kingdom’s coming; He has respect to HIS APPEARING
in those great works of his Power, Justice and Grace, which should be in the Destruction of
Jerusalem and other extraordinary Providences which should attend it.” (Miscellany #1199)

Steven J. Lawson, Final Call (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1994), 86.
253

122
“Thus there was a final to the Old Covenant world: all was finished with a kind of Day of
Judgment, in which the people of God were saved, and His enemies terribly destroyed.” (vol. 1,
p. 445)
Henry Alford (1868): “We may observe that our Lord makes ‘when the Lord comes’ coincide
with the destruction of Jerusalem, which is incontestably the overthrow of the wicked
husbandmen. This passage therefore forms an important key to our Lord’s prophecies, and a
decisive justification for those who, like myself, firmly hold that the ‘coming of the Lord’ is, in
many places, to be identified, primarily, with that overthrow.” On Matt. 21:33-46
David Brown (1858): “Those who have not directed their attention to prophetic language will be
startled if I answer, ‘The coming of the Lord’ here announced is his coming in judgment against
Jerusalem – to destroy itself and its temple…”
John Wesley (1754) “Josephus’ History of the Jewish War is the best commentary on this
chapter (Matt. 24). It is a wonderful instance of God’s providence, that he, an eyewitness, and
one who lived and died a Jew, should, especially in so extraordinary a manner, be preserved, to
transmit to us a collection of important facts, which so exactly illustrate this glorious prophecy,
in almost every circumstance.” 254

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, 4th American ed. (New York: J. Soule and T.
254

Mason, 1818), 81. Note on verse 14. On Josephus see, DeMar, Prophecy Wars, chap. 5.

123
 Appendix B
Milton Terry on the “Times of the Gentiles”
“The statement of Luke xxi, 24, that ‘Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the
Gentiles until the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled,’ is supposed to involve events
which did not take place in that generation. The ‘times of the Gentiles’ (kairoi
ethnown) are assumed to be the times of the opportunities of grace afforded to
the Gentiles under the Gospel. But to understand the words in this sense would
be, as Van Oosterzee observes, to interpolate a thought entirely foreign to the
context. ‘The times of the Gentiles,’ says Bengel, ‘are the times allotted to the
Gentiles to tread down the city;’ but there is nothing in the passage or context to
authorize his further remark that ‘these times shall be ended when the
Gentiles’s conversion shall be full consummated,’ and that the treading down by
Romans, Persians, Saracens, Franks, and Turks is to be understood. These kairoi
[times] are manifestly times of judgment upon Jerusalem, not times of salvation
to the Gentiles. The most natural and obvious parallel is Rev. xi. 2, where the
outer court of the temple is said to be ‘given to the Gentiles,’ by whom the holy
city shall be trodden down forty-two months, a period equivalent to the ‘time
and times and half a time’ of Rev. xii, 14, and of Dan. vii, 25; xii, 7. This is a
symbolical period of judgment (see above, p. 384 [in Biblical Hermeneutics], but
does not denote ages and generations. It is three and a half—a divided seven, a
short but signal period of woe. The ‘times of the Gentiles,’ therefore, are the
three and a half times (approximating three and a half years) during which the
Gentile armies besieged and trampled down Jerusalem.” 255

Milton S. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, unabridged ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, n.d.), 445.
255

124
 Appendix C
Milton Terry “Double Sense”
“The hermeneutical principles which we have now set forth necessarily exclude
the doctrine that the prophecies of Scripture contain an occult [hidden] or
double sense. It has been alleged by some that as these oracles are heavenly and
divine we should expect to find in them manifold meanings. They must needs
differ from other books. Hence has arisen not only the doctrine of a double
sense, but of a threefold and fourfold sense, and the rabbis went so far as to
insist there are ‘mountains of sense in every word of Scripture.’ We may readily
admit that the scriptures are capable of manifold practical applications;
otherwise they would not be so useful for doctrine, correction, and instruction in
righteousness. But the moment we admit the principle that portions of Scripture
contain an occult or double sense we introduce an element of uncertainty in the
sacred volume, and unsettle all scientific interpretation. ‘If the Scripture has
more than one meaning,’ says Dr. [John] Owen, ‘it has no meaning at all.’ ‘I hold,’
says Ryle, ‘that the words of Scripture were intended to have one definite sense,
and that our first object should be to discover that sense, and adhere rigidly to
it… To say that words do mean a thing merely because they can be tortured into
meaning it is a most dishonorable and dangerous way of handling Scripture.’
‘This scheme of interpretation,’ says [Moses] Stuart, ‘forsakes and sets aside the
common laws of language. The Bible excepted, in no book, treatise, epistle,
discourse, or conversation, ever written, published, or addressed by any one
man to his fellow beings (unless in the way of sport, or with an intention to
deceive), can a double sense be found. There are, indeed, charades, enigmas,
phrases with a double entente, and the like, perhaps, in all languages; there have
been abundance of heathen oracles which were susceptible of two
interpretations but even among all these there never has been, and there never
was a design that there should be, more than one sense or meaning in reality.
Ambiguity of language may be, and has been, designedly resorted to in order to
mislead the reader or hearer, or in order to conceal the ignorance of
soothsayers, or to provide for their credit amid future exigencies; but this is
quite foreign to the matter of a serious and bona fide double meaning of words.
Nor can we for a moment, without violating the dignity and sacredness of the
scriptures, suppose the inspired writers are to be compared to the authors of
riddles, conundrums, enigmas, and ambiguous heathen oracles.’” 256

Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, 493–494.

256

125
 Appendix D
John MacArthur, Israel, Calvinism, and Postmillennialism

By Gary DeMar

My two talks deal for “A Purchased Victory” deal with the biblical and cultural impediments

that are often raised against postmillennialism. One topic I did not mention is the place of Israel

in prophecy as it relates to postmillennialism. The following is a partial response since it is

integral to premillennialism while postmillennialism is often ignored on the subject. What some

postmil critics fail to recognize is that postmillennialists have always had a significant role for

the future conversion of Jews while premillennialists do not. Premillennialists believe that two-

thirds of the Jews living in Jerusalem during the time of the great tribulation will be slaughtered

(Zech. 13:7–9). I’ve written about this in several places. See here and here.

I asked Dr. Michael Brown, who is premil, in our debate about Replacement Theology how he

reconciles his claim that God is not finished with Israel with Zechariah 13:7–9. Why would God

wait nearly 2000 years to redeem a single generation of Jews only to have the antichrist wipe

out two-thirds of them? If this is a future event, why aren’t premillennialists warning the Jews

in Israel what’s about to take place? He told me he would study the issue and get back to me.

He never has.

John MacArthur laid down the gauntlet on the issue of prophecy in his opening talk at the 2007

“Shepherds’ Conference” that was titled “Why Every Self-Respecting Calvinist Is a

Premillennialist.” He was emphatic that only premillennialism takes the prophecies concerning

the future of Israel seriously. Contrary to MacArthur, the historical record demonstrates that

postmillennial Calvinists had developed a prophetic role for the Jews hundreds of years before

126
Scofield. The books and articles that make this case are not obscure or difficult to find. They are

certainly available (or they should be) in the library at MacArthur’s Master’s Seminary. Iain

Murray, the author of The Puritan Hope, a book that I’m using to make my historical case

against MacArthur’s claims, spoke at the Shepherds’ Conference on March 11, 2001. So

MacArthur and the seminary faculty know of Murray’s work. If students at The Master’s

Seminary are not being taught these things in their classes dealing with prophecy, then they are

being shortchanged, misinformed, and, dare I say, led astray.

So what did MacArthur fail to tell the attendees at the Shepherds’ Conference? In the mid-

seventeenth century, the Westminster Larger Catechism, in the answer to Question 191,

displayed the hope for the future conversion of the Jews. Part of what we pray for in the

second petition, “Thy kingdom come,” is that “the gospel [be] propagated throughout the

world, the Jews called, the fullness of the Gentiles brought in.” In his commentary on the Larger

Catechism, Thomas Ridgeley (1667–1734) wrote, “Hence, we cannot but suppose that those

prophecies which respect [to the conversion of the Jews], in the latter day, together with the

fullness of the Gentiles being brought in, shall be more eminently accomplished than they have

hitherto been.” 257 Ridgeley spends several pages refuting “ancient and modern Chiliasts, or

Millennarians” 258 and defends what can only be described as postmillennialism over against

premillennialism.

257
Thomas Ridgeley, Commentary on the Larger Catechism, 2 vols. (Edmonton, AB Canada: Still Waters Revival
Books, [1855] 1993), 2:621. Ridgeley’s original work was titled A Body of Divinity: Wherein the Doctrines of the Christian
Religion are Explained and Defended, Being the Substance of Several Lectures on the Assembly's Larger Catechism and
was published in 1731.
258
Ridgeley, Commentary on the Larger Catechism, 1:558–562.

127
 We freely own, as what we think agreeable to scripture, that as Christ has, in all

ages, displayed his glory as King of the Church, so we have ground to conclude,

from scripture, that the administration of his government in this world, before

his coming to judgment, will be attended with greater magnificence, more visible

marks of glory, and various occurrences of providence, which shall tend to the

welfare and happiness of his church, in a greater degree than has been beheld or

experienced by it, since it was planted by the ministry of the apostles after his

ascension into heaven. This we think to be the sense, in general, of those

scriptures, both in the Old and New Testament, which speak of the latter-day

glory. 259

*****

We have, hence, sufficient ground to conclude, that, when these prophecies

shall have their accomplishment, the interest of Christ shall be the prevailing

interest in the world, which it has never yet been in all respects; so that

godliness shall be as much and as universally valued and esteemed, as it has

hitherto been decried, and it shall be reckoned as great an honour to be a

Christian, as it has, in the most degenerate age of the church, been matter of

reproach.... In short, there shall be, as it were, a universal spread of religion and

holiness to the Lord, throughout the world. 260

Ridgeley, Commentary on the Larger Catechism, 1:562.

259

Ridgeley, Commentary on the Larger Catechism, 1:563–564.

260

128
This is postmillennialism at its best. Ridgeley knew his history well enough to know that the

majority of theologians in the seventeenth century held to an advancing kingdom through the

proclamation of the gospel which includes the future conversion of the Jews.

Similarly, the Westminster Directory for Public Worship instructed ministers to pray “for the

Propagation of the Gospel and Kingdom of Christ to all nations, for the conversion of the Jews,

the fullness of the Gentiles, the fall of Antichrist, and the hastening of the second coming of the

Lord.” 261 In 1652, a group of eighteen Puritan ministers and theologians, including both

Presbyterians and Independents, affirmed that “the Scripture speaks of a double conversion of

the Gentiles, the first before the conversion of the Jews, they being Branches wild by nature

grafted into the True Olive Tree instead of the natural Branches which are broken off.... The

second, after the conversion of the Jews.” 262

The Savoy Declaration, drawn up in October 1658 by English Congregationalists meeting at the

Savoy Palace, London, included the conversion of the Jews in its summary of the Church’s

future hope:

We expect that in the latter days, Antichrist being destroyed, the Jews called,

and the adversaries of the kingdom of his dear Son broken, the churches of

Christ being enlarged and edified through a free and plentiful communication of

Quoted in J. A. DeJong, As the Waters Cover the Sea: Millennial Expectations in the Rise of Anglo-America
261

Missions, 1640–1810 (Kampen: J. H. Kok, 1970), 37–38.

262
Quoted in Iain Murray, The Puritan Hope: Revival and the Interpretation of Prophecy (London: The Banner of
Truth Trust, 1971), 72. Interestingly, some of this same language—the phrase “double conversion of the Gentiles”
in particular—was used by Johann Heinrich Alsted, whose premillennial The Beloved City or, The Saints Reign on
Earth a Thousand Yeares (1627; English edition 1643) exercised great influence in England. See De Jong, As the
Waters Cover the Sea, 12.

129
 light and grace, shall enjoy in this world a more quiet, peaceful, and glorious

condition than they have enjoyed. 263

Because they believed that the Jews would be converted, Puritan and Presbyterian churches

earnestly prayed that Paul’s prophecies would be fulfilled. Murray notes that “A number of

years before [the Larger Catechism and Westminster Directory for Public Worship] were drawn

up, the call for prayer for the conversion of the Jews and for the success of the gospel

throughout the world was already a feature of Puritan congregations.” 264 Also, among Scottish

Presbyterian churches during this period, special days of prayer were set aside partly in order

that “the promised conversion of [God’s] ancient people of the Jews may be hastened.” 265 In

1679, Scottish minister Walter Smith drew up some guidelines for prayer meetings:

As it is the undoubted duty of all to pray for the coming of Christ’s kingdom, so

all that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity, and know what it is to bow a knee

in good earnest, will long and pray for the out-making of the gospel-promises to

his Church in the latter days, that King Christ would go out upon the white horse

of the gospel, conquering and to conquer, and make a conquest of the travail of

his soul, that it may be sounded that the kingdoms of the world are become his,

and his name called upon from the rising of the sun to its going down. (1) That

the old offcasten Israel for unbelief would never be forgotten, especially in these

Quoted in DeJong, As the Waters Cover the Sea, 38.

263

Murray, The Puritan Hope, 99.

264

Quoted in Murray, The Puritan Hope, 100.

265

130
 meetings, that the promised day of their ingrafting again by faith may be

hastened; and that the dead weight of blood removed off them, that their

fathers took upon them and upon their children, that have sunk them down to

hell upwards of seventeen hundred years. 266

Puritan Independent Thomas Goodwin, in his book, The Return of Prayers, encouraged people

to pray for “the calling of the Jews, the utter downfall of God’s enemies, the flourishing of the

gospel.” Goodwin assured his readers that all these prayers “will have answers.” 267

Jonathan Edwards, a noted postmillennialist and someone MacArthur quotes unfavorably in his

Shepherds’ talk, outlined the future of the Christian Church in his 1774 History of Redemption.

Edwards believed that the overthrow of Satan’s kingdom involved several elements: the

abolition of heresies and infidelity, the overthrow of the kingdom of the Antichrist (the Pope),

the overthrow of the Muslim nations, and the overthrow of “Jewish infidelity”:

However obstinate [the Jews] have been now for above seventeen hundred

years in their rejection of Christ, and however rare have been the instances of

individual conversions, ever since the destruction of Jerusalem ... yet, when this

day comes, the thick vail that blinds their eyes shall be removed, 2 Cor. iii.16.

and divine grace shall melt and renew their hard hearts ... And then shall the

house of Israel be saved: the Jews in all their dispersions shall cast away their old

Quoted in Murray, The Puritan Hope, 101–102.

266

Quoted in Murray, The Puritan Hope, 102.

267

131
 infidelity, and shall have their hearts wonderfully changed, and abhor

themselves for their past unbelief and obstinacy.

He concluded that “Nothing is more certainly foretold than this national conversion of the Jews

in Romans 11.” 268

Jonathan Edwards, “History of Redemption,” The Works of Jonathan Edwards, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: The
268

Banner of Truth Trust, [1834] 1974), 1:607.

132
 Appendix E

An Amillennialist Who Sounds Like a Premillennialist

By Gary DeMar

I came across the following post on Facebook: “Prof. D. J. Engelsma gives a devastating rebuke

to the Postmil notion of ‘Christianizing the world.’” The poster asked for comments. Here was

my first comment: “David Engelsma is fixated on the common grace argument. That’s a

Christian Reformed Church amillennial problem. Engelsma uses almost no Scripture. His

eschatology is closer to dispensationalism” that amillennialism

I later added this comment:

“The Common Grace amils that Engelsma condemns share his prophetic

position: ‘These common grace Dutch scholars and their North American

academic disciples have all been amillennialists. As amillennialists, they believe

that Satan’s earthly kingdom and influence will expand over time until Jesus

comes with His angels in final judgment.’ (Gary North, Millenniliasm and Social

Theory, 82). This is Engelsma’s position as well.”

Englesma spends more time on the creeds and confessions than he does on Scripture. Instead

of offering a detailed counter exegesis to a preterist interpretation of Matthew 24, he assumes,

like dispensationalists, that it is a prophetic description of end-time events: “This interpretation

of Matthew 24 is basic to the postmillennial denial of apostasy, Antichrist, and great tribulation

for the church in the future,” he writes. “For in the light of this explanation of Matthew 24, the

133
postmillennialist goes through the entire New Testament rigorously applying all prediction of

such things to the destruction of Jerusalem.” When a prophetic passage is about a soon coming

judgment, then yes, the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem is in view, and Prof. Engelsma doesn’t

give any exegetical evidence to the contrary.

While I am impressed with creeds and confessions of the church, they are not equal to

Scripture. The Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 31 says as much:

III. All synods or councils, since the apostles times, whether general or particular,

may err; and many have erred. Therefore they are not to be made the rule of

faith, or practice; but to be used as a help in both.

In fact, the WCF was changed on an eschatological issue: the antichrist. The original WCF

identified the papacy as the antichrist. Here is the original version from Chapter 25:

VI. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the

Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of

sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all

that is called God.

Here’s the American revised version:

134
 6. There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the

pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof.

Prof. Engelsma is fond of quoting confessional statements while giving little regard to biblical

exegesis in his article “Jewish Dreams” that appeared in the January 15, 1995 issue of The

Standard Bearer. Have we become Romanists?

Yes, Engelsma does reference a few Bible passages, but only as props to support an already

accepted confessional statement that he believes excludes postmillennialism from the status of

orthodoxy. Proof-texting and confession-citing are not substitutes for biblical exegesis.

Engelsma calls postmillennialism a “heresy.” Is he willing to include, for example, John Owen,

the principal author of the postmillennial Savoy Declaration, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Hodge,

A. A. Hodge, B. B. Warfield, Marcellus Kik, and John Murray as heretics because of their

postmillennial beliefs?

Consider A. A. Hodge. Hodge, son of Princeton professor Charles Hodge, served as Professor in

Systematic Theology at Princeton Seminary from 1877 until his death in 1886. Hodge made the

case that “the kingdom of God on earth is not confined to the mere ecclesiastical sphere, but

aims at absolute universality, and extends its supreme reign over every department of human

life.” 269 The implications of such a methodology are obvious: “It follows that it is the duty of

every loyal subject to endeavour to bring all human society, social and political, as well as

ecclesiastical, into obedience to its law of righteousness.” 270

269
A.A. Hodge, Evangelical Theology: Lectures on Doctrine (Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, [1890]
1990), 283.
Hodge, Evangelical Theology, 283.
270

135
In addition, he had no problem teaching that there are political implications to the preaching

and application of the gospel. Consider the following:

It is our duty, as far as lies in our power, immediately to organize human society

and all its institutions and organs upon a distinctively Christian basis. Indifference

or impartiality here between the law of the kingdom and the law of the world, or

of its prince, the devil, is utter treason to the King of Righteousness. The Bible,

the great statute-book of the kingdom, explicitly lays down principles which,

when candidly applied, will regulate the action of every human being in all

relations. There can be no compromise. The King said, with regard to all

descriptions of moral agents in all spheres of activity, “He that is not with me is

against me.” If the national life in general is organized upon non-Christian

principles, the churches which are embraced within the universal assimilating

power of that nation will not long be able to preserve their integrity.271

In addition to a lack of rigorous exegesis and ignoring Reformed postmillennial advocates, he

also fails to reference the Westminster Confession of Faith and its Larger and Shorter

catechisms and instead quotes Peter Toon’s interpretation of the assembly’s work. Engelsma is

selective in the way he presents the confessional statements of the church. He chooses what

suits his purpose.

Hodge, Evangelical Theology, 283–284.

271

136
In the Larger Catechism the kingship of Christ is said to be evidenced by Christ’s “overcoming all

their enemies, and powerfully ordering all things for his own glory” (LC, Q. 45). Thomas Ridgeley

(c. 1667–1734), in his massive commentary on the Larger Catechism, published between 1731

and 1733, gives a decidedly post-millennial interpretation of the Assembly’s position:

We freely own, as what we think agreeable to scripture, that as Christ has, in all

ages, displayed his glory as King of the Church, so we have ground to conclude,

from scripture, that the administration of his government in this world, before

his coming to judgment, will be attended with greater magnificence, more visible

marks of glory, and various occurrences of providence, which shall tend to the

welfare and happiness of his church, in a greater degree than has been beheld or

experienced by it, since it was planted by the ministry of the apostles after his

ascension into heaven. This we think to be the sense, in general, of those

scriptures, both in the Old and New Testament, which speak of the latter-day

glory. 272

The Shorter Catechism is no less postmillennial. “Christ executeth the office of a king, in

subduing us to himself, in ruling and defending us, and in restraining and conquering all his and

our enemies” (SC, Q. 26). The evidence of His exaltation is made visible to His Church when He

does “gather and defend his church, and subdue [her] enemies” (LC, Q. 54).

272
Thomas Ridgeley, Commentary on the Larger Catechism, previously titled A Body of Divinity: Wherein the
Doctrines of the Christian Religion are Explained and Defended, Being the Substance of Several Lectures on the
Assembly’s Larger Catechism (Edmonton, AB Canada: Still Waters Revival Books, [1855] 1993), 1:562.

137
The Larger Catechism in the second petition of the Lord’s Prayer states, “we pray, that the

kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, the gospel propagated throughout the world, the

Jews called, [and] the fullness of the Gentiles brought in . . . and that he would be pleased so to

exercise the kingdom of his power in all the world, as may best conduce to these ends” (LC, Q.

191).

None of these examples squares with Engelsma’s notion that “the church in the end-time will

be a persecuted church, not a triumphalist church” (173). Paul says that “all who desire to live

godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” (2 Tim. 3:12). Just before this verse, Paul tells Timothy,

“Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these [see verses 1–7] also oppose the truth,

men of depraved mind, rejected in regard to the faith. But they will not make further progress;

for their folly will be obvious to all, just as Jannes's and Jambres's folly was also. Now you

followed my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, perseverance, persecutions, and

sufferings, such as happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium and at Lystra; what persecutions I

endured, and out of them all the Lord rescued me!”(vv. 8–11).

Prof. Engelsma insists that passages like Matthew 24, 2 Thessalonians 2, and 2 Timothy 3

address conditions near the time when Jesus returns at the end of history. While this view is

popular today, especially among dispensationalists, it cannot survive exegetical scrutiny. There

is a great deal of biblical and historical evidence to demonstrate that these passages refer to

conditions leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

Postmillennialists do not do their work in an exegetical vacuum. I devoted hundreds of pages of

detailed exegesis to Matthew 24:1–34 in my books Last Days Madness and Wars and Rumors of

Wars. More than fifty pages were devoted to 2 Thessalonians 2 in Last Days Madness. I also

138
discussed Titus 2:13 in detail. In each case, I showed that these passages, and many more like

them, refer to events of the first century. Moreover, I was able to demonstrate that numerous

non-postmillennial Bible commentators agree with me.

Prof. Engelsma claims that the solemn duty of the Protestant Reformed Churches “from the

soon-coming Christ [is] to expose the hopes of postmillennialism as ‘Jewish dreams,’” language

taken from the amillennial Helvetic Confession of Faith. The “soon-coming Christ”? Prof.

Engelsma sounds more like Hal Lindsey, Dave Hunt, and Tim LaHaye than a Reformed Christian

when he concludes his article with these words.

Be prepared for the Antichrist!

Hope for the second coming of Christ!

Hope only for the second coming of Christ!

So, if a new Hitler rises, “Hope only for the second coming of Christ!” Don’t work to keep him

from rising or stop him if he and his minions gain control? Englesma doesn’t seem to

understand the biblical definition of antichrist (1 John 2:22; 2 John 7), how there were many of

them, they were alive in John’s day, and their existence was evidence that “it was the last hour”

(1 John 2:18) for those in John’s day.

Dave Hunt, an anti-Reformed author, wrote How Close Are We?: Compelling Evidence for the

Soon Return of Christ in 1993. The church has been preaching the “soon-return of Christ” for

centuries. This doctrine has been the bane of Reformed theology, the benefit of

139
dispensationalism, and the ruin of our nation. What did Hunt mean by “close” and “soon”? He

certainly didn’t mean 2000 years in the future.

Jesus said that He would return in judgment before the last apostle died (Matt. 16:27–28; cf.

John 21:18–23). Jesus promised His disciples that He would return in judgment to destroy the

temple before their generation passed away (Matt. 24:2, 34). The Thessalonians knew the

identity of the man of lawlessness and the restrainer. “The mystery of lawlessness was already

at work,” Paul wrote (2 Thess. 2:6–7). It is evident, therefore, that Paul is describing events that

the Thessalonians were familiar with.

Revelation 1:1 states that the events depicted therein “must shortly take place.” The time is

said to be “near” (1:3) for those who first read the book. We are told in the last chapter of

Revelation that the described events “must shortly take place” (22:6) because the time was

near (22:10). Jesus said He was coming “quickly” (22:7). And to confirm what was said in the

first chapter, “the time is near” (22:10). The book Revelation was written nearly two-thousand

years ago. If words mean anything, then the events of Revelation are now history. Dave Hunt

certainly meant for his reads to understand “close” and “soon” to mean near in terms of time,

so why not the New Testament writers like James who wrote, “the coming of the Lord is near”

and “the judge is standing right at the door” (James 5:8–9)

Prof. Engelsma can follow the dispensationalists and claim that these time indicators are fluid

and do not mean what they mean elsewhere in the New Testament, or he can deal with them

honestly and get back to doing exegetical work and quit relying on man-made documents to do

his thinking for him. Until Prof. Engelsma deals with exegetical issues, the only ones who will

140
listen to him will be those who already agree with him, a number that is steadily declining in his

tiny denomination.

141
 Additional Reading
Available at www.AmericanVision.com
Books by Gary DeMar
1. A Beginner’s Guide to Interpreting Bible Prophecy
2. Is Jesus Coming Soon?
3. Last Days Madness.
4. The Early Church and the End of the World (with Francis X. Gumerlock).
5. The Gog and Magog End-Time Alliance.
6. Left Behind: Separating Fact from Fiction.
7. 10 Popular Prophecy Myths Exposed and Answered.
8. Identifying the Real Last Days Scoffers.
9. Prophecy Wars: The Biblical Battle over the End Times.
10. Newspaper Exegesis, the Antichrist, and the End-Time Islamic Mahdi
11. Wars and Rumors of Wars
12. The Rapture and the Fig Tree Generation

Other Helpful Books

13. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation.
14. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Book of Revelation Made Easy.
15. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. and Thomas Ice, The Great Tribulation: Past or Future?:
Two Evangelicals Debate the Question.
16. Francis X. Gumerlock, Revelation and the First Century: Preterist Interpretations
of the Apocalypse in early Christianity.
17. Francis X. Gumerlock, The Day and the Hour: Christianity’s Perennial Fascination
with Predicting the End of the World.
18. Peter J. Leithart, the Promise of His Appearing: An Exposition of Second Peter.
19. John L. Bray, Matthew 24 Fulfilled.
20. C. Marvin Pate, ed., Four Views on the Book of Revelation.

142
21. Darrell L. Bock, Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond.
22. Steve Gregg, Revelation: Four Views (A Parallel Commentary).
23. David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation.
24. David Chilton, Paradise Restored: A Biblical Theology of Dominion.
25. Dwight Wilson, Armageddon Now! The Premillenarian Response to Russia and
Israel Since 1917.
26. Joel McDurmon, Jesus v. Jerusalem.

143