We are continuing our series on the “this generation” of (Matthew 24:34) and are discussing the various false interpretations that have been set forth in order to avoid the most clear one. We now approach a false interpretation that is probably the most detrimental to the Christian Church in our generation and one that has left many Evangelicals faith cold causing them to question the reliability of some of their so called “prophecy experts.” In addressing this interpretation I also wanted to take a look at the alleged OT “proof texts” that support that the gathering of Israel back into her land in 1948 is somehow a fulfillment of prophecy. I will be covering the Dispensational false teaching that OT prophecies and promises made to Israel cannot “in any way” be fulfilled by the Church. To the Dispensationalist, this even includes the promise of the New Covenant which has profound implications upon the Christian faith and the gospel. These are SERIOUS issues and I hope you will open your Bible as we begin this very important study.

2) “Our generation which saw Israel become a nation 1948 will witness Christ’s return.”

Hal Lindsey, an alleged “prophecy expert” who, based on current events and not the Bible claimed,

“WE are the generation that will see the end times… and return of Christ.” And “unmistakably… this generation is the one that will see the end of the present world and the return of Christ”[1]

And then this view was fueled from the pulpit from the mega church Pastors such as Chuck Smith of the Calvary Chapel movement:

“…that the generation of 1948 is the last generation. Since a generation of judgment is forty years and the Tribulation period lasts seven years, I believe the Lord could come back for His Church any time before the Tribulation starts, which would mean any time before 1981. (1948 + 40 – 7 = 1981).”[2]
In his book Future Survival (1978) Chuck wrote,

“From my understanding of biblical prophecies, I’m convinced that the Lord is coming for His Church before the end of 1981.”[3]

Having attended Pastor Chuck Smith’s church–Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa, CA as a very young boy till about the age of 22, I was indirectly and directly influenced by this false interpretation. As a boy crossing the intersection of Sunflower and Fairview everyday for school I would read the words, “Jesus is coming soon. God keeps His promises” painted on the back wall of the Chapel Store (the church book store). After the Lord saved me at the age of 18, I would then attend and graduate from Calvary Chapel Bible College and had more direct interaction with Lindsey’s and Smith’s false newspaper eschatology. For Smith and Lindsey, Christ’s announcement that He is coming “soon” only “truly” meant His was coming “soon” for our generation because it was said that only our generation witnessed the “super sign” of Israel becoming a nation in 1948.

Another popular Calvary Chapel Pastor and author Jon Courson, instead of confronting Lindsey and Smith sought to manipulate his following as well and tried to ignite the dulling faith of those failed predictions of Smith and Lindsey,

“The fig tree is the symbol of Israel nationally, historically, and scripturally. On May 14, 1948, the fig tree blossomed once again when the land of Israel was returned to the Jews. Jesus said the generation that sees that event take place will not pass away. Who is that generation? We are.”[4]

“Written by a then-unknown author named Hal Lindsay, The Late Great Planet Earth exposed an entire generation to the concepts of the Rapture of the church and the return of Jesus Christ. It was foundational to the Jesus Movement of the 70s, which started on the West Coast, spread across the country, and eventually circled the globe. Lindsay and other teachers of prophecy during that time stressed this teaching in Matthew 24. The parable of the fig tree enflamed the hearts of an entire generation for Jesus said the budding of the fig tree signaled His impending return.

What is the budding of the fig tree? Scripture interprets Scripture. Thus, Jeremiah, Joel, Hosea, and others identify the fig tree as the nation Israel. For centuries, Israel seemed to be a dead tree. In the year A.D. 70, the Romans marched into Jerusalem, destroyed the city, and took over the country. The Jews scattered every direction in fulfillment of Deuteronomy 28:64-67. But in addition to saying the Jews would be scattered throughout the world, God also said, But The Lord liveth, which brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither I had driven them; and they shall dwell in their own land (Jeremiah 23:8).” (Courson, ibid,)

“So it was that on May 14, 1948, Israel became a nation again. The fig tree that had appeared to be dead and hopeless suddenly sprang back to life and blossomed just as Jesus prophesied. And, according to Matthew 24:34, the generation that saw that happen would be the final generation.

What constitutes a generation? Hal Lindsay and others taught that a Biblical generation could be a thirty-eight to forty-year time period.

And the Lords anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until all the generation, that had done evil in the sight of the LORD, was consumed. Numbers 32:13

And the space in which we came from Kadesh-barnea, until we were come over the brook Zered, was thirty and eight years; until all the generation of the men of war were wasted out from among the host, as the LORD sware unto them. Deuteronomy 2:14

Thus, anticipation grew. Excitement and expectancy filled the hearts of many, for if you add forty years to 1948 and if you believe the rapture of the Church takes place seven years before the return of Jesus, the Rapture would take place in 1980 or 1981. Truly the time was near! T-shirts, bumper stickers, and posters were printed. Maranatha Come quickly, Lord became the watchword of believers. 1981 came. So did 1982, 83, 84, 85, and 86. And then something began to happen. A whole bunch of radical Christians began to cool off, saying, Maybe were here for a while after all. Maybe we shouldn’t be so committed to this kingdom thing. Oh, they didn’t say it in those exact words, but that’s what they were thinking. And a dulling of expectancy swept over our generation.

What went wrong? Perhaps forty years is not the figure we should work with when looking at a Biblical generation. Take a look at Genesis 15

And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; and also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance. But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again. Genesis 15:13, 14, 16

Here in Genesis 15, God refers to the four-hundred-year period the Jews were in Egypt as four generations. Therefore, in this model, a generation is not forty years but one hundred years. If a generation is one hundred years, am I suggesting that the Rapture will take place in 2048 one hundred years after the rebirth of the nation of Israel? No. I suggest it will be before then. You see, there is a principle in Bible interpretation called the Principle of First Mention that says foundational understanding about any given subject is usually found in the first place it is mentioned in Scripture. Where is the Greek term, generation first mentioned? In Matthew 1:17 we read: So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.

Sharpen your pencils and think with me: Christian and Jewish theologians alike agree that, based on Biblical genealogies, Abraham was called by God in the year 2085 B.C. Genesis 2 tells us he was seventy-five years old at that time, which means Abraham was born in 2160 B.C. Matthew 1:17 tells us there were forty-two generations (14×3) from Abraham to Christ. So, if you divide 2160 the year of Abrahams birth by 42, you get 51.4. Thus, scripturally, there is validity for a Biblical generation to be 51.4 years”

“I believe you who are in your teens and early twenties are very possibly the last generation. Set your heart on things above. Live for heaven. Seek first the kingdom, and you will be happy presently, rewarded eternally, and grateful constantly.

You who are older, continue setting an example for us who are younger. Continue to make the Lord top priority in your life. Were looking to you in a very real sense. Please keep the fire hot.

Fellow baby boomers, we need to realize that Jesus Christ is coming soon. We don’t have time to play around. We don’t have time to chase worldly pursuits any longer. We need to return to ministry and service, worship and prayer, Bible study and street witnessing. Whatever it was you used to do when you were fired up about Jesus in the 70s, do it again. Maranatha!” (Courson, ibid)

Well, 1999 like 1981, came and went too! And just like the last days cults of Mormonism and the Watchtower of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, when Jesus doesn’t come back in the lifetime and 40 year generation of their “Holy Spirit led,” “prophets” and “prophecy expert” teachers, they just keep stretching out the meaning of “this generation” from 40 to 50, 60, 70 – 100 years and manipulating and trying to get people “fired up” with new newspaper eschatological schemes and scenarios that allegedly teach that our generation is the one that will witness the “rapture.” This is how these last days cults, TBN and such mega churches as the Calvary Chapel’s “Jesus movement” have grown!

Well, I’m 41 now, so I guess according to Jon Courson I am somewhere between the younger generation that is going to see Christ’s return and the baby boomers who’s faith have become cold and dull due to the false date setting of men like Lindsey, Smith and Courson. So I (and I hope you will too) accept John’s exhortation and challenge to: 1) Set my heart on things above, 2) Live for heaven, 3) Seek first the kingdom, 4) I won’t play around, and 5) return to ministry, service, worship, prayer, Bible study, and witnessing. In doing these things however I will need to refute Jon’s false interpretation of “this generation.”

“Look at the fig tree and all the trees” (Luke 21:29)

As we have seen Dispensationalists usually interpret the fig tree in Matthew 24:32 as the Nation of Israel coming back into the land in 1948. And usually Amillennialists, Postmillennialists and Preterists counter with Luke 21:29 and ask, “Well, if Israel is the fig tree beginning to get tender in 1948, then what about “all the trees” or nations? What happen to them in 1948?!?” It is then pointed out that the next verse equates the signs with the leaves beginning to get tender and the kingdoms arrival with Christ’s return as “summer.” Well, why not combine the two concepts? I don’t have a problem in the least seeing Israel as the “fig tree” and the rest of “all the trees” as the Gentile nations in this passage. Other than the abomination of desolation, the other major sign that marked “the end” is the Great Commission. The gospel was bearing fruit throughout the land of Israel and among the Gentile nations within the Roman Empire or world as they knew it (cf. Colossians 1:5-6, 23; Isaiah 27:6).

PROPHECY FULFILLMENT

“And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world (Greek oikumene) for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come” (Matthew 24:14)

“But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed:

‘Their sound has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world (Greek oikumene)” (Romans 10:18)

“And the gospel must first be published among all nations (Greek ethnos)”

(Mark 13:10)

“…My gospel… has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations (Greek ethnos)…” (Romans 16:25-26)

“And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world(Greek kosmos) and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15)

“…of the gospel, which has come to you, as it has also in all the world(Greek kosmos), as is bringing forth fruit…,” (Colossians 1:5-6).

And he said unto them ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature (Greek kitisis) ” (Mark 16:15)

“…from the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature (Greek kitisis) under heaven, of which I, Paul became a minister” (Colossians 1:23)

“But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth (Greek ge)” (Acts 1:8).

“But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed:

‘Their sound has gone out to all the earth (Greek ge), and their words to the ends of the world” (Romans 10:18)

The Great Commission and bearing forth fruit here is the fulfillment of Genesis 1:28 and paradise is being restored and about to come into its fullness at Christ’s imminent return. Although not a preterist, G.K. Beale at least makes the parallels:

Genesis 1:28

Colossians 1:6, 10

‘increase [auxano] and multiply and fill the earth…and rule over all the earth’.

‘in all the world also it [‘the word of truth, the gospel’] is bearing fruit and increasing [auxano] (v.6); ‘in every good work bearing fruit and increasing [auxano]…’ (v.10).

“Several commentators have noticed that verse 6 and 10 are an allusion to Genesis 1:28 (and perhaps 1:22). It appears that the Hebrew text may be the focus, since the Greek Old Testament renders the Hebrew para (‘bear fruit’) by auxano (‘increase’) and raba (‘to multiply’) by plethuno (‘to multiply’).”[5]

There is a new Adam—Christ, and He is exercising dominion through His seed and progeny–the Church. Through the Holy Spirit, His light was shinning through them and transforming them as God’s New Covenant Creation (verse 3; cf. 2 Corinthians 3-5:17).

The Church or God’s New Israel (comprised of believing Jews and Gentiles) was the fig tree or the “seed” that was “being sown” and “being raised” (the present tense is used in 1 Corinthians 15:37-44) through the gospel and the transforming power of the Holy Spirit. This process would reach its resurrection fullness and maturity at Christ’s return. His return would usher in an “end” to the Old Covenant “the law” of the Adamic and Mosaic body of sin and death for His people (Rom. 5-8; 1 Cor. 15). Without God attending to Israel as His olive tree, vine, or seed, her vineyard could not bring forth resurrection life/fruit, and there could be no salvation/resurrection/harvest for the Gentiles or the rest of “all the trees” (Luke 21:29-31/Rom. 11:15ff.).

Combined, Reformed theologians such as Peter Leithart and James Jordan understand the resurrection and harvest of Daniel 12:2-3 and Matthew 13 as an evangelistic/resurrection process for Israel, that ended at the end of her Old Covenant age in A.D. 70.[6] The wheat and the tares were in the process of growing together as they each responded to the gospel. I understand the presence of the Holy Spirit as a glorious light reflecting the glory of Jesus Christ raising and changing God’s elect from the Old Covenant mode of existence to the New. Between A.D. 66-70 Christ as the “Sun of Righteousness” came from the East to the West (cf. Matthew 24:27 – I translate astrape as the rays of light from the sun and not the lightning) bringing the final maturity and ripeness to the fruit and gathered it into His barn while burning up the chaff, tares and grass (Matthew 3:2-12; Matthew 13; 1 Corinthians 15-“first fruits” harvest motif., Revelation 7, 14; James 1:11; 5:1-9).

I may be wrong, but to me (and my reading of Isaiah and the OT prophets), the putting forth of the fig tree’s leaves and their blossoming (the Restored New Covenant Israel) along with all the trees (the time for the fullness of the Gentiles to be gathered and engrafted/redeemed into the Kingdom), seems to embrace the substance and fulfilling of the sign of the Great Commission in relation to Christ’s return in AD 70. Through the sign of the Great Commission being fulfilled and the power of the gospel, people/trees were about to blossom and become a well watered garden of God in His restored kingdom/paradise placed within the Land (Isaiah 27:6; 35; 44:1-5; 61:11). The Jew understood his Temple, City/Jerusalem and Promised Land to be the “heavens and earth” or a heaven on the earth of light in which the beasts/gentiles needed to come out of the darkness of their lands and enter in order to be saved. This is what we see in the book of Revelation with paradise being restored and the nations coming to the New Jerusalem for life (cf. Revelation 21-22:6-7, 10-12, 17, 20).

It always amazed me how Pastor Chuck Smith wanted to get people excited about how much agriculture and flowers he saw over in Israel the last time he was visiting there. He used this as an alleged “sign” along with Israel becoming a nation in 1948 and her making plans to re-build the temple again, that we were indeed living in the generation that would witness Christ’s return – yadee yadee – you know the story I’m sure. But this isn’t the kind of fruit and blossoming the book of Isaiah or Jesus is concerned with! The Bible is always interested in the heart and it is “within” and “in” this realm where the kingdom of God/heaven would come in Jesus’ “this generation” (Lk. 17:20-37; Lk. 21:31-32).

As I have sought to use the “this nation will not pass until all these things are fulfilled” interpretation against the dispensationalists by teaching that indeed the Old Covenant nation of Israel did indeed pass away in AD 70; so too I will use the Israel=fig tree argument against them here by offering a much better explanation as to how the remnant of Israel (the fig tree) and the nations (“and all the trees”) began to bud and blossom through the sign of the Great Commission being fulfilled before Christ’s imminent return in AD 70.

Since the alleged “re-gathering” of Israel in 1948 is supposed to be the “supersign” that we are living in the last days generation predicted by Jesus, we should give some attention to this imaginative interpretation. Instead of rebuking Hal Lindsey and Chuck Smith’s false interpretation and predictions arising from this text, Calvary Chapel Pastor and Evangelist Greg Laurie still teaches this, and quoting from Mark 13:28-29 he writes,

“Jesus said the rebirth of Israel will be a supersign of the last days…” “Of course we know this prophecy was fulfilled not that long ago. On May 14, 1948…”[7]

1948 – A fulfillment of what prophetic “re-gathering”?

In this section I want to analyze the various “proof texts” that Dispensationalists use to support that 1948 was a fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. I will focus mainly on the writings of John Hagee and Thomas Ice. We also examine the empty claims of Dispensationalists that OT prophetic material made to Israel cannot be applied or fulfilled in the Church age.

Now days most Dispensationalists are either abandoning the system or going further into it by embracing the “Christian Zionist Movement.” This movement seeks to try and persuade Jews from around the world to move back to Israel in order to usher in the Great Tribulation period and hasten the pre-tribulation “rapture” of the Church. Newspaper prophetic sensation John Hagee has built a foreign policy advocacy organization called Christians United for Israel (CUFI) around this false doctrine and false interpretation of Scripture. He is pushing for a pre-emptive war with Iran to quicken the “rapture.” In 2006 while lobbying in Washington Hagee was clear in his agenda, “The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God’s plan for both Israel and the West,” he said. This was supposed to be a step in the right direction as allegedly mapped out in the Bible, “a biblically prophesied End Time confrontation…which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation…and the Second Coming of Christ.” Hagee not only uses guilt manipulation techniques on the members of his church and T.V. audiences to tithe to his “ministries” through his false “prosperity gospel,” but also uses guilt manipulation to push his false Dispensational Zionism doctrine. Hagee clearly insists that if you are not on board with him and his alleged Holy Spirit led agenda of believing 1948 was a fulfillment of prophecy, and that God has a literal real estate “forever” in the literal city of Jerusalem today, any other view for a Christian to embrace “sin.”[8] It is sad that this false doctrinal system/gospel of Hagee’s is tolerated among Evangelicals and it is more scary when he is allowed to lecture and manipulate our politicians and give them “altar calls” while pushing this agenda as part of his “gospel” of redemption etc…

In Deuteronomy 4:25-31; 28 – 29; and Leviticus 26, God lays forth His covenant with Israel of blessings and cursings. If Israel obeyed God they would be blessed in the land and if they disobeyed, they would be “scattered” among the Nations. The condition for their re-gathering back into the land was repentance and faith. Even though this is clearly laid out in the texts above, Dispensational Premillennialists such as Tim LaHaye, Thomas Ice, and Arnold Fruchtenbaum assert (in order to defend their system that 1948 was a prophetic gathering), that Scripture actually addresses two re-gatherings of Israel in the land: 1) in un-belief, and 2) another re-gathering in belief. Thomas Ice quoting his favorite dispensationalist theologian states,

“The re-establishment of the Jewish state in 1948 has not only thrown a wrench in amillennial thinking, but it has also thrown a chink in much of the premillennial thinking. Amazingly, some premillennialists have concluded that the present state of Israel has nothing to do with the fulfillment of prophecy. For some reason the present state somehow does not fit their scheme of things, and so the present state becomes merely an accident of history. On what grounds is the present state of Israel so dismissed? The issue that bothers so many premillennialists is the fact that not only have the Jews returned in unbelief with regard to Jesus, but the majority of the ones who have returned are not even Orthodox Jews. In fact the majority are atheists or agnostics. Certainly, then, Israel does not fit in with all those passages dealing with the return. For it is a regenerated nation that the Bible speaks of, and the present state of Israel hardly fits that picture. So on these grounds, the present state is dismissed as not being a fulfillment of prophecy.

However, the real problem is the failure to see that the prophets spoke of two international returns. First there was to be a regathering in unbelief in preparation for judgment, namely the judgment of the Tribulation. This was to be followed by a second worldwide regathering in faith in preparation for blessing, namely the blessings of the messianic age. Once it is recognized that the Bible speaks of two such regatherings, it is easy to see how the present state of Israel fits into prophecy.”[9]

Ice then seeks to give us some proof texts for this position,

“In 1948 when the modern state of Israel was born, it not only became an important stage-setting development but began an actual fulfillment of specific Bible prophecies about an international regathering of the Jews in unbelief before the judgment of the Tribulation. Such a prediction is found in the following Old Testament passages: Ezekiel 20:33-38; 22:17-22; 36:22-24; 38-39; Isaiah 11:11-12; Zephaniah 2:1-2 presupposes such a setting.” (Ice, Ibid.).

Scripture simply does not teach a prophetic “re-gathering in unbelief” and that is why other dispensationalists are struggling with this position! Let’s briefly address some of these passages that Dispensationalists use as their “proof texts”:

Ezekiel 20:33-38

The context of this passage is dealing with the Babylonian captivity and has nothing to do with Israel being re-gathered back into the land in 1948! The context is that Israel was being unfaithful to God and wanted to be like the heathen nations around them. Therefore, God would take Israel out of her land in the wilderness (symbolic of the Babylonian captivity) and “purge” the wicked there so that the unbelievers would perish as God had purged the unbelieving generation under Moses in the wilderness. So this text actually teaches the opposite of what Dispensationalists say, because it would be the unbelievers who would be purged and die outside the land and not enter it. How is this passage teaching us that unbelievers would be re-gathered in the land of Israel in 1948 “in unbelief” is baffling to say the least!

Paul combines and applies both Isaiah 52:11 and Ezekiel 20:34 to the Church age in 2 Corinthians 6:17 which Dispensationalists claim cannot be done in any way.

Ezekiel 22:18-22

Again, the context is the “near” (vs.3-4) judgment of Israel by means of the Babylonians in B.C. 586 for their sins of spilling innocent blood and idolatry. The unbelievers are “dross” and would “melt.” This prophecy has nothing to do with God gathering Israel in the land in 1948 as a covenant gathered blessing, and it definitely does not teach a gathering of Israel in unbelief in 1948 either!

Ezekiel 36:22-24

The immediate context of this chapter is describing Israel’s sins of idolatry and her sins of blood guilt. For these reasons she was scattered into the Gentile nations and made slaves. As slaves they remained unfaithful to God and were thus a poor witness of Jehovah to the nations in which they were scattered. But God for His own great name sake would cleanse them from their sins and call them back into their land to rebuild the waste places. In type form, this prophecy (and chapter 37) was fulfilled under the restoration of Nehemiah and Ezra when the people came back into the land in repentance and began re-building the waste places of Jerusalem. There is NO contextual evidence whatsoever that there was a “re-gathering” of Israel in “unbelief” let alone any suggestion whatsoever that 1948 is the focus of this prophecy!

Ezekiel 37, 40-48

John Hagee writes of this chapter,

“MORE THAN 2,600 years ago the prophet Ezekiel prophesied the resurrection of Israel from the Gentile graves in the lands to which she had been scattered, predicting the rebirth of Israel, which took place May 14, 1948.”[10]

“I want to make it clear that I do not believe that Ezekiel’s vision has anything to do with the resurrection of the dead saints of the church.” (Ibid.).

“The dry bones in Ezekiel’s vision represent the nation of Israel during the Dispora, beginning in A.D. 70 (Ezkek. 37:11). Gradually the bones came together, and the sinews and flesh came upon them.” (ibid. 130-131).

And popular Calvary Chapel Pastor and Evangelist Greg Laurie has sought to get his piece of this sensationalistic money making pie as well,

“On more than one occasion in Scripture, Israel is compared to a fig tree (see Judg. 9:11; Hos. 9:10; Joel 1:7-8). I believe that Mark 13:28-29, along with many other Scripture passages, such as Ezekiel 37-39, speak of the rebirth of Israel—the regathering of God’s people. When the nation of Israel comes back into the existence, Jesus was stating prophetically, it is a supersign that His coming is near.”[11]

Of course some Dispensationalists disagree with Lindsey, LaHaye, Smith, Laurie, Courson, Ice, etc., that Ezekiel 37 has anything to do with 1948,

“The Israelites residing in Palestine today are not the fulfillment of this prophecy.”[12]

Everyone agrees that the resurrection depicted in Ezekiel 37 is a “national” resurrection. In other words Israel experienced national and covenantal “death” when she was scattered from her land and experiences a “resurrection” when she is restored back into the land. Again, like chapter 36, this prophecy was partially fulfilled through typology when the two houses of Israel came back into the land under the restoration and leadership of Ezra and Nehemiah. However, both chapters contain elements of Messiah’s work of salvation (the anti-type) with the coming Messianic New Covenant.

Ezekiel 37:22-28 discusses the coming New Covenant King/Shepherd who would cause: 1) His people to possess the land, 2) establish an everlasting covenant of peace with them, 3) multiply them, and 4) “sanctify” them by establishing His “sanctuary” and “tabernacle” in their midst forever.

Are OT prophecies fulfilled in the Church? IN CHRIST OR IN THE LAND?

Dispensationalism makes the bizarre claim that OT prophecies made to Israel cannot be fulfilled “in any sense” to the Church. Keith Mathison provides a helpful list of quotes from some of Dispensationalism’s leading theologians on this point:

Lewis Sperry Chafer. “That the Christian now inherits the distinctive Jewish promises is not taught in Scripture.”

J. Dwight Pentecost. “…it would be impossible for the church to fulfill God’s promises made to Israel.”

Charles C. Ryrie. “The church is not fulfilling in any sense the promises to Israel.”[13]

They believe that OT prophecies concerning the restoration of Israel in such passages as Isaiah 11, 35, 43, 44, 61; Ezekiel 11, 28, 34, 37; Jeremiah 16, 18, were made exclusively to Israel and therefore cannot be fulfilled in and through the Church “in any sense.” Dispensational Zionist John Hagee believes these passages motivate the Church to get Jews around the world to re-inhabit Israel today in order to hasten the “rapture” of the Church and usher in the last days World War III event.[14] However, the context of these passages and how they are understood by the NT authors, make it clear that these “gathering in the land” promises were fulfilled 70 years after the Babylonian captivity under the restoration ministries of Ezra and Nehemiah (in type or partial fulfillment form), which pointed to them being ultimately fulfilled in Christ and through the Church (2 Corinthians 1:20).

Dispensationalism argues that Israel under the Abrahamic covenant has not yet inherited all of the land promised by God, in spite of God clearly saying otherwise (Genesis 15:18; 1 Kings 4:20-21; Joshua 11:23; 21:41-45; Nehemiah 9:21-25). The objection from Dispensationalists is that Israel has not inherited the land “forever.” Sometimes in Scripture “forever” means forever and other times it simply means a long time. In the passages listed above, God’s promises made to Israel concerning the land had not failed to come to pass. Indeed in type and shadow form, through the 40 year reigns of David and in particularly Solomon, Israel received peace in all the land that God had promised to give Israel. All the blessings under the Old Covenant were realized “in the land.” However, in the NT we discover that the anti-type and “true” fulfillments of the Abrahamic promise is found in the gradual 40 year “this generation” pre-parousia reign of Jesus and the reception of a “heavenly country” that was “about to come” in the first century (Hebrews 11:13-16; 13:14YLT). The writer to Hebrews (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) applies the New Covenant Promised Land, City, Tabernacle/Temple, Mount Zion, Sabbath/Rest/Inheritance and Kingdom promises made to Old Covenant Israel to the Church with the reception of these promises to be fulfilled at Christ’s “in a very little while” coming in which He would “not tarry” (Heb. 1-10:37). The NT emphasis is not “in the land” but rather in a person – “in Christ” through faith. For “in Christ” and through the Church, are all the OT promises of God realized and fulfilled (cf. 2 Corinthians 1:20).

The New Covenant promises

Since the gathering back into the land and New Covenant prophecies of Jeremiah 30-31parallel much of the same historical re-gathering and New Covenant material found in Ezekiel 37, we should probably examine the blatantly unbiblical comments of dispensationalists who claim that the New Covenant promises made to Israel are not being fulfilled in the Church. Dwight Pentecost writes,

“the Church cannot be presently fulfilling the New Covenant.” John Walvoord agrees, saying that “the New Covenant is with Israel and awaits the second coming of Christ for its fulfillment.” (Mathison, Ibid. 28)

Pentecost concedes that if the Church has been redeemed with the blood of Christ under the New Covenant, then the other covenants must also be applied to the Church and that would mean that the Bible does not teach an earthly millennium,

“The whole covenant takes on importance, in addition, for amillennialism attempts to show that the church is fulfilling Israel’s covenants because the church today is redeemed by the blood. If the church fulfills this covenant, she may also fulfill the other covenants made with Israel and there is no need for an earthly millennium.”[15]

Charles Ryrie claims that the Bible condemns Dispensatinalism if the New Covenant is being fulfilled by the Church,

“If the church is fulfilling Israel’s promises as contained in the new covenant or anywhere in the Scriptures, then [dispensational] premillennialism is condemned.”[16]

These are obviously startling statements to say the very least. How can any Christian claim that he or she has not been redeemed by the blood of Christ’s blood under the New Covenant when the Scriptures are so clear that we are? The answer is that these men have become so engrossed in defending their eschatological system, that this has forced them into rejecting foundational elements to the gospel and indeed the Christian faith.

One King

Jesus began fulfilling the Davidic Covenant or “One King” prophecies of (Ezek. 37:22; Jer. 30:9) at His ascension (Heb. 1-2). Every element that is required for a King to reign is given to Christ through the Church. He was seated on a throne and rules through a City and Nation—that is the Church (1 Pet. 2:9; Heb. 12; Gals. 4). The sending of the Messiah and the fulfillment of the Davidic and New Covenant is the focus of attention in (37:24ff.).

One Shepherd with one flock

Jesus would be Israel’s “one shepherd” who’s sheep would walk in His judgments and observe His teachings and do them (Ezk. 37:24). This prophecy is clearly fulfilled in the words of Jesus in John 10 and 17. Obviously OT promises made to Israel are being applied to the Church–the New Covenant fold of God! In the striking and sacrifice of the True Shepherd, the everlasting New Covenant (v. 25) seals the sheep’s/Churches salvation (Mark 14:27; Mt. 26:28; Heb. 8, 12:24, 13:20).

A New Covenant Temple, Peace and Sacrifices

The New Covenant of peace and temple motif began with Christ sending the Holy Spirit within His people. It would be competed and matured when He returned in AD 70 for them. At this time God placed His glory and everlasting peace “within” the Church who is the ultimate New Covenant fulfillment of the Temple promises (Hag. 2:9/Jn. 14). Christ and the Church are the fulfillment of Israel’s New Covenant Tabernacle/Sanctuary/Temple promises with Christ being the chief corner stone (Isaiah 28:16; Psalm 118:22-23/“the builders rejected”/Acts 4 “YOU rejected”/Mt. 21:33-45/1Pet. 2:4 -10; Ezk. 37:27/2 Cor. 6:16; Ephs. 2:19-20; Amos 9:11-12/Acts 15:7-19). God’s New Covenant/Temple/Kingdom plans for Israel were not postponed because of Jesus’ rejection and sacrifice (per Dispensationalism), but rather this rejection of the nation and belief of the remnant and the Gentiles established and began fulfilling God’s Kingdom promises made to Israel with Christ’s return in AD 70 bringing them to full maturity. While here in Ezekiel 37 and on the temple motif alone, we see Paul quoting Ezekiel 37:27 in 2 Corinthians 6:16 and applying this prophecy to the Church! But Dispensationalists seem oblivious to the hermeneutics of Paul and remain adamant that this is somehow a prophetic description of a “literal” rebuilt temple in the millennial age,

“These promises anticipate the detailed plans for God’s new sanctuary (chaps. 40-43). This literal structure will serve as a visual object lesson to Israel and the nations of God’s presence in the midst of His people.” (Walvoord & Zuck, Ibid., 1299).

BUT Paul claims that the Church is the fulfillment of these temple/millennial promises and says nothing about a literal “rebuilt” temple in order to fulfill Israel’s millennial promises thousands of years off in the future!

One of the most disturbing elements within Dispensationalism’s “literal hermeneutic,” is that within this literal rebuilt temple, animal sacrifices will be re-instituted. Some Dispensationalists such as Scofield gave the farm away by claiming that it is possible that the sacrifices in Ezekiel’s temple prophecy are not to be interpreted literally,

“The references to sacrifices is not to be taken literally, in view of the putting away of such offerings, but is rather to be regarded as a presentation of the worship of redeemed Israel, in her own land and in the millennial temple, using the terms with which the Jews were familiar in Ezekiel’s day”[17]

But obviously if the sacrifices are not to be interpreted literally, then neither should the altar or the entire temple structure itself be so interpreted.

The vision of the Temple structure is completely symbolic as James Jordan points out,

“The things Ezekiel describes in these chapters could never have been built. The Temple, City, and Land are entirely visionary and symbolic. The Kingdom of God in the Restoration was going to be so powerful and glorious that it simply could not be pictured in any architectural model that could be built. Only a vision would do.”[18]

Unfortunately, most Dispensationalists seek to defend that these are literal animal sacrifices taking place after Christ has returned to Jerusalem and sits on his literal throne,

“However no difficulty exists if one understands the proper function of these sacrifices. First, animal sacrifices never took away human sin; only the sacrifice of Christ can do that (Heb. 10:1-4, 10). In Old Testament times Israelites were saved by grace through faith, and the sacrifices helped restore a believer’s fellowship with God. Second, even after the church began, Jewish believers did not hesitate to take part in the temple worship (Acts 2:46; 3:1; 5:42) and even to offer sacrifices (Acts 21:26). They could do this because they viewed the sacrifices as memorials of Christ’s death.” (Walvoord & Zuck, Ibid., 1305).

First of all, the writer of this statement (Charles H. Dyer) fails to acknowledge that the writer to the Hebrews applies the sacrifice of Christ’s blood of the New Covenant to the Church thus “condemning” (Ryrie’s term) Dispensationalism altogether (Heb. 7-10, 12).

Secondly, I appreciate the admission by Mr. Dyer, that Jewish Christians were obeying the Old Covenant Mosaic Law, because this is what Jesus clearly taught they should do in Matthew 5:17-19 before He fulfilled it all. Here Jesus instructs that ALL the jots and tittles of the Mosaic Old Covenant Law are to be obeyed UNTIL: 1) heaven and earth passes away, which is equivalent to the time period of when 2) all the Law would be fulfilled. Dispensationalist Thomas Ice seems oblivious to what this text says and actually cites it to claim that the Mosaic Law was fulfilled in Christ’s first coming,

“The Mosaic Covenant…” “…was fulfilled through the ministry of Jesus Christ during His first advent (Matthew 5:17). (Ice, Charting the End Times, Ibid., 79).

But clearly the Old Covenant Law was not all fulfilled in Christ’s first coming, but was binding and should be obeyed until heaven and earth passes away or it is all fulfilled. But since the futurist interprets “heaven and earth” here as the planet having not yet vanished, this necessitates that the Church today should be obeying all of the Mosaic Law—including the animal sacrifices. However, the truth is that the Christian Jews did participate in temple worship and animal sacrifices during a particularly unique period (“this generation” roughly AD 30-70) in which the Old Covenant was still being fulfilled by Jesus and the New was reaching its full maturity. According to the writer to the Hebrews, the Old Covenant Law was still in the process of “aging” and would “soon vanish” at Christ’s “in a very little while” return in which the “about to” reception of the New Jerusalem/Creation would take place (Heb. 8:13-10:37-13:14YLT). This all took place “soon” when the Old Covenant Mosaic Temple was destroyed at Christ’s return in AD 70. Dispensationalists (and most futurists) concede that “soon” in (Hebrews 8:13) is a literal time statement that most likely applies to AD 70,

“…the author’s words suggest that he recalled the prophecy of Jesus that the temple in Jerusalem would be destroyed (Matt. 24:1-2). Probably this prophecy was fulfilled soon after Hebrews was written. If so, it was a dramatic confirmation of the writer’s thesis about the Old Covenant.”[19]

But unfortunately once in Matthew 24 and Luke 21, the abomination and desolation of this same first century temple Jesus and the disciples are looking at and discussing, becomes an alleged rebuilt one thousands of years removed from them. How you might ask? Apparently all it takes is a wave from the eisegetical wand of Dispensational theology. And although the literally “soon” vanishing of the Old Covenant in (Hebrews 8:13) applies to the temple being destroyed in AD 70, Christ’s coming in a “very little while” in which He would “not delay” in (Hebrews 10:37) is spiritualized away by these “literalists” and finds no contextual harmony with their literal interpretation of “soon” in (Hebrews 8:13)!

Once the Mosaic Law was all fulfilled and it “soon vanished” at Christ’s imminent return in AD 70, there is no Scriptural support for the statement that “The Old Covenant Is Not Dead.” (Hagee, In Defense, Ibid., 158). God indeed has kept His vows and has not altered His covenant promises, sending Jesus in a literally “some standing here,” “this generation,” “soon,” “in a very little while” time period in order to fulfill all of Israel’s promises by AD 70. For Dispensationalism to claim otherwise and return to the prophecies contained in the prophets and Old Covenant Law for support of another re-built temple with animal sacrifices, is a complete reversal of what the book of Hebrews teaches. The writer instructs us that redemption moves from physical Old Covenant types and shadows to their spiritual New Covenant substances and “true” fulfillments in Christ and through the Church. The writer says nothing about all of the Old Covenant Law being fulfilled in Christ’s earthly ministry, and neither does he teach that it is “not dead” and will somehow come back to life again thousands of years off in the future with another re-built temple for Israel! These concepts are literally READ INTO THE PAGES OF THE NT with millions of evangelical Christians asleep and refusing to be Bereans and hold these men accountable!

Dispensationalists claim that other OT passages such as Isaiah 66:20-23 teach the literal temple and sacrifice motif to take place in our future. And yet Paul references this passage in Romans 15:16 to demonstrate that he was a priest (in the temple predicted by Isaiah) offering up as a sacrifice the Gentiles (not literal animals). The prophecies in Isaiah that Dispensationalists reference as “proof texts” concerning the Jews and Gentiles coming to the “last days” Holy Mountain/Mount Zion/Temple, Jesus and the NT authors identify as being spiritual and fulfilled in the Church (John 4; Hebrews 12; Ephesians 2; 1 Peter 2).

The unity of Ezekiel’s visions of the heavenly Temple

Most Dispensationalists have not been exposed to other historical views of the Church other than their “literal” interpretations coming from their local church or TV “prophecy experts.” Therefore I would like to expose the reader to some excellent exegetical comments of the Ezekiel Temple from a few Reformed theologians and then I will put these concepts together and place them in their proper NT preterist paradigm.

Following the lead of Block, G.K. Beale points out the unity of the visions in Ezekiel and that this heavenly/spiritual Temple is not a literal structure but is rather intimately connected with God’s presence among His people during the exile period,

“…chapter 40 begins where chapter 11 left off describing God’s heavenly presence that had departed from the physical temple and had taken up invisible residence with the remnant of Israel in exile (11:16, 23-25). It is, therefore, quite viable that Ezekiel’s final vision of the temple describes the heavenly sanctuary to which the remnant on earth are related (Tuell 1996). The formal and thematic parallels between chapters 1, 8 – 11 and 40 – 48 ‘require that the same hermeneutical principles [of symbolism] employed in the interpretation of the previous prophecies apply here, and that one interpret this block [chs. 40 – 48] in the light of the previous visions of God’ (Block 1998: 496-497).” [20]

But how would Jews worship in the midst of exile without a temple? The answer as Beale points out lies within God’s promise to be their Temple and in analyzing the Qumran community who considered themselves as being the last days Temple Ezekiel prophesied. The Jew during a time in which the current temple was defiled with an apostate priesthood or was destroyed by Gentile invaders taught that the renewal of the covenant and atonement could come through ones own repentance, obedience and commitment to the Word of God,

“This spiritualization of the altar in the temple was based on analogy with the temple altar in Ezekiel 41:22. To engage continually in the study of the Law was equivalent to building the temple prophesied in Ezekiel 40 – 47 (Midrash Rabbah Leviticus 7:3). Repentance could be ‘accounted unto a person as if he had … built the Temple and the altar, and offered theeron all the sacrifices’ (Midrash Rabbah Leviticus 7:2). Part of the precedent for Qumran and John conceptualizing Ezekiel’s temple in a non-structural manner and applying it to a remnant of Israel or to the church may have been given by the prophet Ezekiel himself!” (Beale, Ibid., 318).

Another Reformed view taken from James Jordan sees the descent of the heavenly temple in Ezekiel 40 – 48 being more applicable during the reformation and rebuilt temple under Ezra. He emphasizes its fulfillment during the post exilic era before then applying it to the New Covenant Temple or age of the Church under Messiah,

“This time Ezekiel was given a vision and blueprint for the post-exilic Temple, but it was a temple so vast and huge that it could never be built. Ezekiel’s visionary Temple symbolized both the nature and the glory of the restoration establishment, but the Temple actually built by Ezra was a small affair. Ezra’s Temple symbolized the nature, but not the glory, of the new restoration covenant.” (Jordan, Ibid., 242).

He also points out that there is a de-creation that takes place upon the Land of Israel and the Temple during this period (cf. Jer. 4:23-28, see also Isa. 24-25) and that even the language of a new heavens and earth should be applied to the covenant’s renewal under Ezra and Nehemiah before it is applied to the New Creation’s arrival at Christ’s return,

“The new covenant and the new heavens and earth ultimately point to the coming of Christ, but their first fulfillment is to be found in the restoration of Israel from exile. That restoration was a downpayment, a pledge of God’s faithfulness. After all, each new covenant, being a resurrection in more glorious form of the previous one, pointed to the New Covenant.

It is often overlooked that the restoration establishment was indeed a new covenant, and an advance in glory beyond the Davidic establishment. Whether we call the post-exilic establishment a new covenant or simply a “covenant renewal,” the fact is that there were very great changes involved in the new cosmos, changes equivalent to the changes involved in the previous new covenants.” (Jordan, Ibid., 243-244).

The River

Of the river in Ezekiel 47 Jordan writes,

“This is not a picture first and foremost of the New Testament, but of the spiritual realities present in the Restoration. This is indicated by the context of the prophecy, but there are also clear indications in the text, especially the fact that the river in Chapter 47 only flows in one direction, not four, and only to the edge of the Holy Land, not into the wider world.” (Jordan, Ibid., 246).

Jesus in John 4 and particularly in John 7:37-38 Jesus promises that the coming of the Holy Spirit would be like water welling up within the believer’s heart. Jesus claims that this is in fulfillment of the “Scriptures.” Of what Scriptures is Jesus alluding to? Since the Apostle Paul has already identified the promise of the Ezekiel Temple with the believer and the Church, it only follows that this is so because his Master had taught His disciples the same. John Gill and John Lightfoot are on the right track when Gill writes,

“And here may be an allusion to the waters issuing out of Ezekiel’s temple, #Eze 47:1 Re 22:1 Zec 14:8. Dr. Lightfoot and others tell us it was a custom of the Jews, which they received by tradition, the last day of the feast of tabernacles to have a solemnity, which they called Libatio aquae—The pouring out of water. They fetched a golden vessel of water from the pool of Siloam, brought it into the temple with sound of trumpet and other ceremonies, and, upon the ascent to the altar, poured it out before the Lord with all possible expressions of joy. Some of their writers make the water to signify the law, and refer to #Isa 12:3; #Isa 55:1. Others, the Holy Spirit. And it is thought that our Saviour might here allude to this custom. Believers shall have the comfort, not of a vessel of water fetched from a pool, but of a river flowing from themselves. The joy of the law, and the pouring out of the water, which signified this, are not to be compared with the joy of the gospel in the wells of salvation.”[21]

Again, it is difficult to understand how Dispensationalists can claim that that OT promises made to Israel cannot be fulfilled in and through the Church when Jesus and the NT writers do just that very thing in practically every page of the NT!

In the book of Revelation, Christ’s imminent coming serves to reward and clothe the Church with the New Creation. It is through the power of Christ and the Church that the gospel of the Eternal Life is preached to sinners and this is symbolically described as a river flowing and welcoming the Gentile nations to come through its gates and receiving healing in drinking from its living waters (Rev. 21-22:17).

The measuring of the Temple

A lot of Dispensationalists claim that the Ezekiel Temple must be physical since there is so much detail given to its measurements. But in the OT measuring generally was a symbolic way of decreeing protection for the covenant people[22] and there are obvious elements of symbolism and numerology as well.

In Revelation 11 we see this concept of measuring the Temple once again, but this time it is connected with the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. It is more than difficult to dismiss the parallel subject matter in regard to the prophecy of the fall of Jerusalem between Luke 21:24 and Revelation 11:2. Both passages discuss the “trampling” of “Jerusalem” or the “holy city” by the “Gentiles.” In Revelation 11:1-2 the inner sanctuary, the worshippers and the altar are measured. This represents the New Covenant believers. The “outer court” is not to be measured because it’s so called worshippers have become apostate and will not be given God’s protection and given over to the Romans to be trampled and judged. The “outer court” represents the physical structure of the Old Covenant system itself[23] – the destruction of the earthly temple and city and the worshippers who have looked to it for their salvation rather than to Christ and His followers.

Putting the Temple promises of Ezekiel 37, 40 – 48 all together

I would agree with Keith Mathison when he concludes that no matter which view above is the correct one, the heavenly Temple described in Ezekiel 40 – 48 is a non-literal structure,

“If the unique introductory fourmula connects all three visions, then the question is whether the temple vision in chapters 40-48 “refers to the purely heavenly temple dimension that descends in the midst of the faithful saints on earth (as in chapters 1 and 11), or the heavenly dimension in the midst of another (new) earthly temple in the structural form, as in chapters 8-9.” In either case, the emphasis is upon the heavenly dimensions of the temple dwelling in the midst of God’s people. Beale concludes that the vision of Ezekiel 40-48 is “a figurative vision of a real heavenly temple that would descend and be established on earth in a non-structural form in the latter days.”[24]

Ezekiel prophesied of a literal “at hand” or “near” Day of the Lord (Ezekiel 7 & 12) upon Judah for her apostasy. Her temple and city were about to be imminently destroyed by the Babylonians and was depicted as a symbolic and metamorphic de-creation event. In Matthew 24, Jesus is predicting a “this generation” imminent return of Himself upon the clouds to bring an end to the Old Covenant system and age once and for all using the familiar metamorphic and symbolic language of the prophets.

Although the heavens and earth of Israel’s Temple and City would lay desolate through God sending the Babylonians, God assured His faithful remnant that He would function as their sanctuary during their exile and absence of a literal temple. This transition period of a spiritual temple laid the foundation for the NT teaching that the Christ and His disciples was the True New Covenant last days Temple predicted by the prophets.

The other typological picture comes in the form of the restoration period or covenant renewal during the ministries of Ezra and Nehemiah. The “gathering” and resurrection of the Jews and their Gentile proselyte converts whom came from among the Gentile nations of slavery and exile (death) back into the Land in faith and repentance (resurrection) to rebuild the temple and city, were typological of the restoration, “gathering” and glory of the New Covenant Temple/Creation that Christ would perform in and through the Church. During the transition period, Christian Jews continued Old Covenant worship in the Temple until Jesus as their High Priest appeared a second time and thus fulfilled all of the promises of that covenant system (Mt. 5:17-19; Heb. 9:6-10, 26-28). During this period the out pouring of the Holy Spirit, obedience to Jesus’ teachings and the spread of the gospel throughout the Roman Empire was the process by which Israel’s “last days” New Covenant Temple was being built up. This was the “already” aspect of Biblical eschatology and the descent of the heavenly last days Temple. The “not yet” to Biblical eschatology in the form of the completion and maturity of the last days Temple is undisputedly tied to Christ’s imminent parousia in AD 70 (Rev. 21-22:6-7, 10-12, 20).

The Jew understood his covenant with Jehovah in the Land and Temple to be a “heaven and earth” filled with the living waters and light of Torah. When Gentile converts came from among the death and darkness of their nations to Jerusalem in faith and repentance, they partook of the cleansing waters of God’s Word and were considered a “new creation.” This is what we see taking place in Revelation 21-22:17.

Multiplying seed promises

The Abrahamic and Davidic covenants of multiplying seed is fulfilled in Christ and those placing their faith in Him (either Jew or Gentile) and thus become the fulfillment of these New Covenant promises (Gen. 9, 12-13, 15, 17,22:17-18àGal. 3:16, 29; Isaiah 53:10, Isaiah 65-66; 2 Sam. 7:12; Psalm 18:50; 89:29). The fulfillment of these Abrahamic “faith,” “seed” and “circumcision” promises that constitute the New Covenant “Jew” had not been postponed thousands of years (per Dispensationalism), but were being fulfilled in Paul’s day through the Church (Rms. 2:28-29; 4).

Jeremiah 31:31-34

The NT is very clear that the New Covenant promises made to Israel through Jeremiah apply and are fulfilled in the Church (Luke 22:20; Heb. 7-12 especially 8:6-13; 2 Cor. 3:6).

Ezekiel 38-39

There is nothing in these two chapters that even remotely suggests that Israel is being “re-gathered” in “unbelief” in 1948 as the fulfillment of this prophecy. It is said that God’s judgment of the wicked will be a witness to the nations of Himself. He also states that He will make Himself holy in the ones He calls back into the land 39:27-29 and this as well is a witness to the nations. Again repentance, faith, cleansing, and restoration in the hearts of Israel are necessary requirements to be gathered from among the nations back into the land. We can understand from the text how FIRST the wicked being judged are a witness to the nations of God’s holy character, but how was 1948’s alleged re-gathering in unbelief a witness of God’s holiness and faithful covenant dealings with Israel? The answer is that it isn’t and simply does not meet the covenantal requirements. And if 1948 is a fulfillment of Israel’s Old Covenant Mosaic Law promises, are Dispensationalists claiming that currently Israel is under the Old Covenant while we are currently living in the Church age?
John Hagee writes,

“We are on a countdown to crisis. The coming nuclear showdown with Iran is a certainty. The war of Ezekiel 38-39 could begin before this book gets published (MJS- don’t worry it won’t and it will get “revised” once again!). Israel and America must confront Iran’s nuclear ability and willingness to destroy Israel with nuclear weapons.” (Hagee, Ibid., 53).

“No prophetic scripture is more crystal clear than Ezekiel’s vivid and specific description of the coming massive war in the Middle East that will sweep the world toward Armageddon. Ezekiel’s war as described in chapters 38 and 39 will consist of an Arab coalition of nations led by Russia for the purpose of exterminating the Jews of Israel and controlling the city of Jerusalem.”(Ibid.).

Of the battle of Armageddon as described in Revelation 16, Wal-Mart sensation Tim LaHaye writes of China’s alleged involvement,

“…China is already moving in the political direction that will make it possible for her to do what Revelation indicates she will during the Tribulation: march over the Euphrates River to participate in the Battle of Armageddon. Such an action would have been considered impossible just sixty years ago. Today it is not only feasible, but with her Communist-inspired obsession to take over all of Asia and perhaps even the entire world, it may be feasible. Just another suggestion that “the time is near.”[25]

Revelation 16:16 is simply a historic reference and symbol of war that is directed to a place – the mount of Megiddo or the city of Megiddo where famous battles of Israel had been fought (Judges 5:19; 2 Kings 23:29) and is thus used as we might use the term of someone “Meeting your Waterloo.” Gary DeMar captures the intent of the text well when he writes,

“Israel remembered Megiddo as a place where God vented His divine wrath against rebellion, whether exhibited by Israel or a foreign power. God brought the nations of the world against first-century Jerusalem as he had promised (Matthew 22:7; 24:34). Rome, as an “empire of nations” (Syria, Asia Minor, Palestine, Gaul, Egypt, Britain, and others) representing all the nations of the world (see Luke 2:1),came up against Jerusalem and destroyed her.” “There were those in Israel who actually attempted to fight against this world empire and, met their “Waterloo.” “It no more takes place in Megiddo than Jerusalem is Sodom, Egypt, and Babylon”[26] (MJS – These cities in Revelation describe apostate old-covenant Jerusalem 11:8; 18:24/Matthew 23:31-36).

As John writes towards the end of Jesus’ and his “this generation,” the prophetic last days battle, was to be fulfilled “shortly” not 2,000+ years away.

Like the other eisegetical embarrassing elements to Dispensational Zionism, is the belief that Russia will invade Israel because Ezekiel 38:2 and 39:1 use the Hebrew words rosh (which sounds like Russia) and Meshech (which sounds like Moscow). The other reasons are that Russia has some ancient cities residing in its domain that were ancient cities recorded in Ezekiel. But none of these other cities “sound like” their modern counterparts like Rosh (Russia) and Mesech (Moscow) allegedly do. Obviously this sound alike word game of “hermeneutics” is a “make up the interpretive rules as you go” game that is being plaid fast and loose with God’s Word. Again DeMar writes,

“The most damaging piece of evidence to the theory that Ezekiel 38 and 39 refer to modern Russia’s invasion of Israel during the Great Tribulation is that there is no mention of Gog and Magog or Meshech and Tubal in Revelation 4-19, yet this passage is where dispensationalists tell us the Great Tribulation is described. Revelation 20:8 describes the battle of Gog and Magog as coming after the thousand years. Moreover, its characteristics are quite different from the Ezekiel battle. This means, like “Jezebel” (Revelation 2:20), “Sodom and Egypt” (11:8), and “Babylon” (14:8), the Battle of Gog and Magog is characteristic of an Old Testament event, but it is not the same event! One is past (Ezekiel 38-39); the other is future – after the “thousand years” (Revelation 20:8).” (DeMar, Ibid., 366).

Another problem for Dispensationalists revolves around the question – was the gathering of Israel in 1948 a “super sign” that we are in the “later days” or “last days” of (38:16), or are the “last days” strictly an OT prophecy for Israel separated from the Church? Hard line Dispensationalists claim that we are not in the last days because the OT never predicted the church and the “last days” prophecies only address Israel after the “rapture” of the Church takes place. But others such as Charismatic Dispensationalists teach that the gifts of Acts 2 are continuing in our day (“the last days”), and that 1948 was the “super sign” that God’s time clock for Israel has been activated. In other words it is a sign that the Church is in the last days expecting the imminent “rapture.” But if the distinctions between the Church age and the last days to Israel’s age overlap, this collapses the Dispensational system.

These passages in Ezekiel (cf. also chapters 6 and 12) are referring to the scattering of Israel among the nations in the Babylonian captivity and are not addressing a scattering which took place in AD 70. When does Scripture teach that God would “gather” Israel back into her land from among the nations? Jeremiah tells us that it would be after 70 years were completed (Jer. 29). And this typological scattering and re-gathering under the hands of Cyrus, Ezra and Nehemiah pictured the true fulfillment of the New Covenant promises in Ezekiel 37 and Jeremiah 31under Jesus. This historical slavery and deliverance only typified the slavery of sin of which Jesus through the New Covenant gathering of the Gospel and through His parousia would deliver His people from.

Isaiah 11:1-12

Dispensationalists understand this section of Isaiah 11to be teaching a literal 1,000 year millennial period and Ice sites it as a proof text for a gathering of Israel in unbelief in 1948. This allegedly results to Israel’s millennial period in our imminent future. But again, the text only supports a gathering of the remnant of Israel and the Gentiles into the Kingdom in belief and not unbelief (vv. 11-12)!

Like we saw in 2 Corinthians 6:16/Ezekiel 37:27, Paul once again dismisses the Dispensational theory that Isaiah 11 is dealing with a future millennial period when he quotes Isaiah 11 in Romans 15:8-12. Here Paul makes it crystal clear that God was in the process of fulfilling His covenant promises to Israel because this fulfillment was resulting in the salvation of the Gentiles. Clearly if the “gathering” of Israel is the “in that day” millennial period which results in the salvation of the Gentiles, then Paul is emphatically teaching that this prophecy was being fulfilled and that the Church was in the millennial period. This portion of Isaiah deals with the second exodus theme which I will deal with in more detail towards the end of this article.

Isaiah 35:10

John Hagee appears to believe that Isaiah 35, 43, and 44 are dealing with literal “agricultural accomplishments” fulfilled in 1948 and today,

“If Israel as a nation had not been reborn, if the Jews had not returned to the land, if the cities of Israel had not been rebuilt, if the Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) had not been occupied, if the trees that the Turks cut down had not been replanted, if the agricultural accomplishments of Israel had not been miraculous, there would be a valid reason for every person to doubt that the Word of God is true. But listen to the prophets of God declare his intention for the Jews of the world to reinhabit Israel.” (Hagee, In Defense of ISRAEL, Ibid., 150).

It is indeed true that under the blessings and curses of the Old Covenant Mosaic Law that God would withhold rain (harden the land) or give rain (cause fruitful produce) for Israel in order to picture the state of their hearts. The desert beginning to bloom and blossom is really dealing with the hearts of God’s people turning to Him in faith and repentance under Ezra and Nehemiah, but is ultimately fulfilled in the out pouring of the Holy Spirit upon Jew and Gentile (the Church) in the NT.

Verse 3ff. is quoted in Hebrews 12:12. Within the immediate context, this passage is designed to comfort the fearful among Israel of the invading Gentile Lords. Eventually God would come and deliver them and bring them back into their land through Cyrus, Nehemiah, and Ezra – all types of Christ. Therefore, in type form, this historical coming of the Lord in judgment and salvation would picture the imminent return of Jesus in AD 66-70 – Hebrews 10:37. In Hebrews 12:11-13, the writer interprets the agriculture, the way/path, and healing of Isaiah 35 as a “harvest of righteousness” and “peace” to be realized in the salvation of Jesus. Unfortunately for Hagee and Dispensational theology in general, the writer to the Hebrews in chapter 12 does not teach that Israel’s kingdom promises of salvation and a New Covenant were “postponed” until 1948 (and counting into the “literal” 1,000 years millennial period), but rather that they were being fulfilled and received in the first century by the Church!

Jesus performed literal miracles of deliverance in the Gospels for the “unclean” from their blindness, deafness, not being able to speak, leprosy and being lame (vv. 5-6), because these infirmities pictured the bondage of sin in the heart of man. Jesus would bring the ultimate healing (the forgiveness of sins) through the cross, outpouring of the Holy Spirit and at His parousia in AD 70.

Isaiah’s promises to Israel of a “highway of holiness” and “Way” that the “redeemed” travel on (vv. 8-10), have not been postponed for thousands of years, but are being fulfilled today in the Church age through faith in Christ (cf. John 14:6).

Isaiah 43:5-6

Clearly God did bring His scattered children back into the land from the south, north, east and west from the Assyrian and Babylonian (cf. v.14) captivities through the deliverance of Cyrus and the restoration period of Ezra and Nehemiah’s day. As in Isaiah 11 the “second” or “new” exodus under Messiah is the contextual setting here and was ultimately fulfilled in Christ’s blood and parousia.

God gathered all kinds of His children from the east, west, north, and south into His kingdom through the preaching of the Gospel and at His return in AD 70 (Isaiah 27:13/Mt. 24:14-30-31; Luke 21:22-32). These children included not just the remnant of Israel, but the Gentiles and they were gathered into the kingdom when the Old Covenant Kingdom was judged and taken from the Jews and given to the Church in AD 70 (Mt. 21:33-43; Luke 13:28-30).

Again, Christ and His New Covenant salvation is the “way” and “new thing” (cf. Jeremiah 31:21-22, 31) in the desert which causes men’s hearts to blossom as the very garden of God (43:19-21).

Isaiah 44:24, 26

Here it becomes abundantly clear that the “miraculous” “agricultural accomplishments” that Hagee literalizes, the prophet Isaiah identifies as the water and outpouring of the Holy Spirit into the hearts of His people. The water is the Holy Spirit and the grass, meadow and poplar trees are God’s people (vv. 1-4).

The time of deliverance here is clearly typified during the time of Cyrus who functioned as God’s shepherd and would, “…accomplish all that I please; he will say of Jerusalem, Let it be rebuilt, and of the temple, Let its foundations be laid.” (v. 28).

Perhaps there is some application for false prophets such as Hal Lindsey, Chuck Smith, Jon Courson and John Hagee in verse 25. God clearly has made “foolish” their “Holy Spirit led” false predictions of the 1948 “this generation” scenario–“overthrowing” them, and making them “nonsense” and “fools” in His sight!

Isaiah 61:4

The “miraculous” “agricultural accomplishments” or the “planting of the Lord,” according to Isaiah has to do with His people being “oaks” and displaying the sprouting of His righteousness and praise before the nations (vv. 3, 11).

Jesus applies the fulfillment of Isaiah 61:1-2’s “the year of the Lord’s favor” to His personal ministry in Luke 4:16-19. There is nothing in the prophecies of Isaiah or anywhere in the Gospels that even remotely suggests that Jesus’ ministry and Kingdom promises made to Israel got postponed for some 2,000 years and counting.

Amos 9:11-15 is a parallel prophecy to Isaiah 61:4 and the rebuilding and restoration here is clearly identified as the salvation of the remnant of Jews and the Gentiles in Acts 15:16-17. This rebuilding of the ancient ruins was fulfilled in type form during Nehemiah’s ministry and fulfilled in anti-type form through the building up of Christ and His master builders the Apostles and the Church.

Zephaniah 2:1-2

This is but yet another prophetic passage that has to do with the Babylonian captivity which was “near” and would hasten “quickly” during the time the prophecy was written (Zeph. 1:7, 14). The context is dealing with a casting out of Judah from the land in judgment because of sin and not a “re-gathering” back into the land in unbelief in 1948! God was calling Judah to gather together in repentance or face their imminent judgment. They refused this exhortation (3:6-8).

Let’s now move on to consider another interpretive error of “this generation” make in hopes to avoid the obvious and clear interpretation.

[1] Hal Lindsey, The 1980’s: Countdown to Armageddon, back-cover, p.144, New York: Bantam, 1980

[2] Chuck Smith, End Times, The Word for Today, 1978, 35.

[3] Francis X. Gumerlock, the Day and the Hour Christianity’s Perennial Fascination with Predicting the End of the World, (Atlanta, GA: American Vision, 2000), 290.

[4] Jon Courson, Jon Courson’s APPLICATION COMMENTARY NEW TESTAMENT CD-ROM, Nelson pub.

[5] G.K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission A biblical theology of the dwelling place of God, (Downers Grove, Illinois: INTERVARISTY PRESS, 2004), 264. See also references to Genesis and trees as Nations and people in Ezekiel 31; 47; Revelation 22).

[6] James B. Jordan, THE HANDWRITING ON THE WALL, A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2007), 619-628. And Leithart sees the harvest at the end of “this age” in Matthew 13 as taking place by A.D. 70, Peter J. Leithart, THE PROMISE OF HIS APPEARING AN EXPOSITION OF SECOND PETER, (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2004), 94-95.

[7] Greg Laurie, ARE THESE THE LAST DAYS? HOW TO LIVE EXPECTANTLY IN A WORLD OF UNCERTAINTY, (Ventura, CA: Regal Books From Gospel Light, 2005), 20.

[8] John Hagee, IN DEFENSE OF ISRAEL THE BIBLE’S MANDATE FOR SUPPORTING THE JEWISH STATE, (Lake Mary, FL: FrontLine, 2007,) 4-5. It is true that Christians are called to continue in doctrine and in the teachings of Jesus and Apostles, but since Hagee’s teaching is not Biblical, his exhortations are purely manipulative.

[9] Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice, CHARTING THE END TIMES A visual Guide to Understanding Bible Prophecy, (Eugene, Oregon, 2001), 86, (emphasis added).

[10] John Hagee, (REVISED AND UPDATED) JERUSALEM COUNTDOWN A PRELUDE TO WAR, (Lake Mary, FL: Frontline pub, 2007), 129.

[11] Greg Laurie, Ibid.

[12] John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, The Bible Knowledge Commentary An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty OLD TESTAMENT (Colorado Springs, Colorado: Victor Cook Communications Ministries, 2004), 1298.

[13] Keith A. Mathison, DISPENSATIONALISM Rightly Dividing the People of God?, (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1995), 19 (bold emphasis added).

[14] Hagee, Jerusalem Countdown, Ibid., 129-135. John Hagee, IN DEFENSE OF ISRAEL THE BIBLE’S MANDATE FOR SUPPORTING THE JEWISH STATE, (Lake Mary, FL: Front Line Pub., 2007), 149-154.

[15] Dwight Pentecost, THINGS TO COME A Study in Biblical Eschatology, (Findlay, OH: Dunham Publishing Company, 1958)

[16] Curtis I. Crenshaw and Grover E. Gunn, III, DISPENSATIONALISM TODAY, YESTERDAY, AND TOMORROW, (Memphis, TN: Footstool Publications, 1986), 175.

[17] C.I. Scofield, The New Scofield Reference Bible, (New York: Oxford, 1967), 888.

[18] James B. Jordan, THROUGH NEW EYES Developing a Biblical View of the World, (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc., 1988), 246.

[19] John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, Zane C. Hodges, The Bible Knowledge Commentary An Exposition of the Scriptures NEW TESTAMENT by Dallas Seminary Faculty (Colorado Springs, CO: Victor COOK COMMUNICATIONS MINISTRIES, 2004), 800.

[20] G.K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission A biblical theology of the dwelling place of God, (Downers Grove: Illinois, 2004), 339.

[21] John Gill, John Gill’s Expositor, Online Bible CD.

[22] Beale, Ibid., 314.

[23] Kenneth L. Gentry (contributing author), FOUR VIEWS ON THE BOOK OF REVELATION, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998), 65-66.

[24] Keith A. Mathison, FROM AGE TO AGE THE UNFOLDING OF BIBLICAL ESCHATOLOGY, (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2009), 257.

[25] Tim LaHaye, REVELATION UNVEILED, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan 1999), 256.

[26] Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness, (Atlanta GA: American Vision, 1999), 318.

We ended part 1 of our exposition of Matthew 24:34 by examining the strong lexical evidence that genea should be understood as the first century contemporary generation that Jesus was speaking to and therefore the language of Christ coming on the clouds, gathering His elect, and the de-creation cosmic imagery (“all these things”) should not be interpreted with a strict literalism.  Brown understanding the analogy of Scripture, was even forced to say that  such passages as 2 Peter 3 and 1 Thessalonians 4 could be interpreted through the lense of a first century “historical judgment.”  In other words, the more clear passages such as ”this generation” should guide the exegete into understanding some of the seemingly more difficult passages that use apocalyptic language as being fulfillled as “historical judgments” - ie. AD 70, and not an end of time event.

We now turn our attention to examining some of the false interpretations of genea.

False Interpretations of “This Generation” Considered

1) “This race” will not pass a way

Of the 27 translations I looked at for genea, only one (WUESTNT) sought to translate it with having no regard to the context and with a futurist bias, “This nation shall by no means pass away until all these things take place.” And although the reader may find some documentation somewhere giving genea a meaning of “nation, stock, or race,” even those sources will or should admit that the predominant meaning is, “The whole multitude of men living at the same time” or “a period of “30 – 40 years.” It is difficult to understand how so many can be led astray in translating or interpreting genea as “race” when even the KJV and Strong’s Concordance admits that the word is used 42 times with the predominant translation being “generation,” – 37 times as “generation,” 2 times as “time,” 2 times as “age,” and only 1 time as “nation.”

This particular interpretation and translation has been popularized by the dispensationalist Scofield Study Bible and commentators such as Adam Clarke.  Not  only have dispensationalists embraced this false definition of “this generation,” but even amillennialists such as Anthony Hoekema. Hoekema quoting F. Buchsel states,

“It should be noted that the word “generation (genea), as commonly used in the Synoptic Gospels, may have a qualitative meaning as well as a temporal one: ‘This generation is to be understood temporally, but there is always a qualifying criticism. Thus we read of an ‘adulterous’generation (Mark 8:38), or an ‘evil’ generation (Matt. 12:45; Luke 11:29), or an ‘evil and adulterous’ generation (Matt. 12:39; 16:4), or an ‘unbelieving and perverse’ generation (Matt. 17:17; cf. Luke 9:41; Mark 9:9).’” “By ‘this generation,’ then, Jesus means the rebellious, apostate, unbelieving Jewish people, as they have revealed themselves in the past, are revealing themselves in the present, and will continue to reveal themselves in the future.”[1]

This is just a ridiculous interpretation. Just because there is an adjective describing how sinful Jesus’ contemporary generation is because of their rejection of Him does not in the slightest bit change the “temporal” meaning of genea to a 2000 + years and counting “qualitative” one!

Adam Clarke seeking to defend this interpretation writes of Matthew 24:34,

“…this race; i.e. the Jews shall not cease from being a distinct people, till all the counsels of God relative to them and the Gentiles be fulfilled.” “…till all the nations of the world should receive the Gospel of Christ, after which the Jews themselves should be converted unto God, #Ro 11:25…”[2]

But what is extremely puzzling, is that Clarke doesn’t interpret genea outside of the Olivet Discourse this way and even concedes that a preterist interpretation indeed can be the “true” one since it fits not only the context, but corresponds nicely with Jesus’ teaching elsewhere,

“But still it is literally true in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem. John probably lived to see these things come to pass; compare #Mt 16:28, with # Joh 21:22; and there were some rabbins alive at the time when Christ spoke these words who lived till the city was destroyed, viz.Rabban Simeon, who perished with the city; R. Jochanan ben Zaccai, who outlived it; R. Zadoch, R. Ismael, and others.” (Adam Clarke, Ibid.).

It is also puzzling that Clarke believes “race” should be the novel interpretation here because the Great Commission wasn’t fulfilled to the nations of the world and yet he clearly believed the Great Commission of Matthew 24:14 and Romans 10:28 was fulfilled prior to AD 70,

“Perhaps no more is meant here than the Roman empire; for it is beyond controversy that pasan thn oikoumenhn, # Lu 2:1, means no more than the whole Roman empire: as a decree for taxation or enrolment from Augustus Caesar could have no influence but in the Roman dominions; but see on # Lu 2:1. Tacitus informs us, Annal. l. xv., that, as early as the reign of Nero, the Christians were grown so numerous at Rome as to excite the jealousy of the government; and in other parts they were in proportion. However, we are under no necessity to restrain the phrase to the Roman empire, as, previously to the destruction of Jerusalem, the Gospel was not only preached in the lesser Asia, and Greece, and Italy, the greatest theatres of action then in the world; but was likewise propagated as far north as SCYTHIA; as far south as ETHIOPIA; as far east as PARTHIA and INDIA; and as far west as SPAIN and BRITAIN. On this point, Bishop Newton goes on to say, That there is some probability that the Gospel was preached in the British nations by St. Simon the apostle; that there is much greater probability that it was preached here by St. Paul; and that there is an absolute certainty that it was planted here in the times of the apostles, before the destruction of Jerusalem. See his proofs. Dissert. vol. ii. p. 235, 236. edit. 1758. St. Paul himself speaks, # Col 1:6, 23, of the Gospel’s being come into ALL THE WORLD, and preached TO EVERY CREATURE under heaven. And in his Epistle to the Romans, #Ro 10:18, he very elegantly applies to the lights of the Church, what the psalmist said of the lights of heaven. Their sound went into ALL THE EARTH, and their words unto the END of the WORLD. What but the wisdom of God could foretell this? And what but the power of God could accomplish it?

Then shall the end come. When this general publication of the Gospel shall have taken place, then a period shall be put to the whole Jewish economy, by the utter destruction of their city and temple.” (Adam Clarke, Ibid.).

Since Clarke failed to interpret genea from it’s immediate context and sought to run to Romans 11 for his support, we should briefly turn our attention to this important eschatological passage.
Romans 11 “all Israel will be saved.”

There is of course great debate between Amillennialists, Premillennialists and Postmillennialists on the salvation of “all Israel” in Romans 11:25-26. Postmillennialists such as Gentry and Mathison argue that “all Israel” being saved refers to a mass conversion of ethnic Jews before Christ comes in our future. Amillennialists understand “all Israel” being saved to refer to the salvation of the church as the new Israel of God.

As for the view that “all Israel” refers to ethnic Jews in our future, we can immediately know that this view is incorrect. With the passing of the old covenant in AD 70, there is no covenantal Israel other than the united Jew-Gentile church. So the covenant promises in Romans 11 cannot refer to the modern nation of Israel or to the modern Jewish race or community. The only “Israel” in the New Testament that was to be cleansed from sin is the church, the body of Israel’s Messiah. This is the “Israel” (“all” of it) that entered into the Holiest of Holies in AD 70 (Heb. 9:8). Let us briefly summarize Paul’s argument in Romans 11.

Even though God’s old covenant people in their last generation were being hardened and excluded from the coming inheritance, that did not mean that God had rejected old covenant Israel (Rom. 11:1-2). Although it may have looked like Israel was being utterly cut off in her last generation, the truth was that old covenant Israel was being saved in her last days. God was actually saving “all Israel” —fulfilling His promises to “the fathers”— partly by means of the hardening of its last generation. Here is how:

1. By means of old covenant Israel’s transgression/failure and rejection in her last days, riches and reconciliation (through the gospel) were coming to the gentiles (Acts 13:46; 18:6; 28:18). As Paul said, “They are enemies for your sakes” (Rom. 11:28).

2. The salvation of the gentiles was making last-days Israel “jealous,” so that a remnant was becoming zealous for righteousness and being saved (Rom. 11:2-10,11,13,14).

3. The hardening, or reprobation, of old covenant Israel in her last generation was to continue until the fullness of the gentiles came in, i.e., came into Israel (Rom. 11:25).

4. In this manner, or by this process, all of the saints of historic, old-covenant Israel were going to be saved (resurrected) along with the last-days remnant and the believing gentiles who had been grafted into historic Israel. The consummation of this process took place in the Parousia of Christ in A. D. 70, according to the promises made to the fathers (Rom. 11:26).

This is when Israel died, was resurrected, and made new. This is when all of the elect (the Old Testament saints, the last-days Jewish remnant, and the believing gentiles) were consummately united in Christ and became the fulfilled “Israel of God.” It was at Christ’s return to close the Old Covenant age in AD 70 that all Israel was saved.

If Jesus wanted to give the meaning of “Jewish race,” here in Matthew 24:34, He would have used the Greek word genos which means,

“1) kindred 1a) offspring 1b) family 1c) stock, tribe, nation 1c1) i.e. nationality or descent from a particular people 1d) the aggregate of many individuals of the same nature, kind, sort.”[3]

Although interpreting genea as “race” has no solid contextual or lexical evidence, this interpretation does not necessarily contradict ours in that Jesus is addressing the Jewish race, to be for sure, but it is clearly His contemporary Jewish audience which He is holding responsible for the blood guilt of the nation of Israel and therefore she will see her nations house/temple destroyed and her Old Covenant age brought to an end (cf. Mt. 23:30-24:34). And of course we agree that the Jewish race did pass away with the destruction of the temple. Pastor David Curtis sites several impressive sources which demonstrate that the Jews as a “race” today indeed did pass away in AD 70,

“But for those who attempt to translate it as “this race of Jews will not pass, till all these things are fulfilled,” it must be understood that THERE IS NO JEWISH RACE TODAY.

Many people today still consider the Jewish people as a race. Numerous verses identify Israel, in New Testament prophecy, in terms of their tribal associations; however, these associations do not extend beyond the first century. One example of this is Matthew 24:30, which we looked at last week, where Christ declares that “the tribes of the (land) shall mourn.”

After the destruction of Jerusalem, however, the nation of Israel, after the flesh, was scattered throughout the earth, and lost all tribal relations. This scattering was made immutable due to the fact that all tribal genealogical records were destroyed with the Temple in A.D. 70. The simple fact is that there is no existing Jewish race.

Consider the following quotations:

The Encyclopedia Brittanica (1973)
“The Jews As A Race: The findings of physical anthropology show that, contrary to the popular view, there is no Jewish race. Anthropornetric measurements of Jewish groups in many parts of the world indicate that they differ greatly from one another with respect to all the important physical characteristics.” (vol. 12, page 1054)

Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem (1971)
“It is a common assumption, and one that sometimes seems ineradicable even in the face of evidence to the contrary, that the Jews of today constitute a race, a homogeneous entity easily recognizable. From the preceding discussion of the origin and early history of the Jews, it should be clear that in the course of their formation as a people and a nation they had already assimilated a variety of racial strains from people moving into the general area they occupied. This had taken place by interbreeding and then by conversion to Judaism of a considerable number of communities. . . .”

“Thus, the diversity of the racial and genetic attributes of various Jewish colonies of today renders any unified racial classification of them a contradiction in terms. Despite this, many people readily accept the notion that they are a distinct race. This is probably reinforced by the fact that some Jews are recognizably different in appearance from the surrounding population. That many cannot be easily identified is overlooked and the stereotype for some is extended to all – a not uncommon phenomenon” (Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem, 1971, vol. 3, p. 50).

Encyclopedia Americana (1986)
“Racial and Ethnic Considerations. Some theorists have considered the Jews a distinct race, although this has no factual basis. In every country in which the Jews lived for a considerable time, their physical traits came to approximate those of the indigenous people. Hence the Jews belong to several distinct racial types, ranging, for example, from fair to dark. Among the reasons for this phenomenon are voluntary or involuntary miscegenation and the conversion of Gentiles to Judaism” (Encyclopedia Americana, 1986, vol. 16, p. 71).

Collier’s Encyclopedia (1977)
“A common error and persistent modern myth is the designation of the Jews as a ‘race! This is scientifically fallacious, from the standpoint of both physical and historical tradition. Investigations by anthropologists have shown that Jews are by no means uniform in physical character and that they nearly always reflect the physical and mental characteristics of the people among whom they live” (Collier’s Encyclopedia, 1977, vol. 13, p. 573).

Today, being a Jew simply means that one is of the Judaistic religion or a convert to it, or else in a “brotherhood” of those who are. Therefore, being a Jew has nothing to do with race. We are familiar with a number of notable figures, such as Sammy Davis, Jr., Elizabeth Taylor, and Tom Arnold, in fact, who became Jews by conversion to the religion of Judaism.

John Bray said, “Many Christians do not know that the vast majority of so-called Jews in the world today are the Ashkenazim Jews, while the remainder of them are the Sephardim Jews. The Ashkenazim Jews have as their background not the nation of Israel but a country called Khazaria, which country at one time was the largest country in Europe. The settlers of Khazaria were Turks and Huns. In A.D. 740 King Bulan of Khazaria decided to adopt the Judaistic religion for his country. A number of Jews were already living there. So he converted to Judaism, along with all his officials, and whole nation ended up being known as a nation of Jews. In 970 Russia came in and dominated the situation, and the Khazars were scattered, many of them going down into Poland and Lithuania. Where at the dawn of our modern civilization the largest concentration of Jews were found. Today, the largest percentage of so-called Jews in the world have as their background this group of people.” (This information is fully documented in detail in John Bray’s book, Israel in Bible Prophecy)

Funk and Wagnall’s New Encyclopedia (1970)
“In 1970 the Israeli Knesset adopted legislation defining a Jew as one born of a Jewish mother or a convert.” (vol. 14, p. 214)

H.G. Wells
“There can be little doubt that the scattered Phoenicians in Spain and Africa and throughout the Mediterranean, speaking as they did a language closely akin to Hebrew and being deprived of their authentic political rights, became proselytes to Judaism. For phases of vigorous proselytism alternated with phases of exclusive jealousy in Jewish history. On one occasion the Idumeans, being conquered, were all forcibly made Jews. There were Arab tribes who were Jews in the time of Muhammad, and a Turkish people who were mainly Jews in South Russia in the ninth century. Judaism is indeed the reconstructed political ideal of many shattered peoples – mainly Semitic…. The main part of Jewry never was in Judea and had never come out of Judea” (The Outline of History,p. 505).

Therefore, we can clearly and confidently assert that there is no such thing as a Jewish race, nor ever can there be.

These facts are devastating to Dispensationalism. Obviously, if the nation that they call the heir of Israel is shown to have no relationship to the pre-desolation nation, there is no credibility to that system. There are no twelve tribes today, there is no Jewish race today.

We know that there is no possibility that this passage of the Olivet Discourse has any relation to a future Jewish race, since there is no such thing. Since the fall of Jerusalem, and the scattering of the nation of Israel in the first century, the nation calling itself Israel has consisted of a collection of people from nearly every nation in the world, with no relation to the twelve tribes of the historical nation known as Israel. Any attempts to state that there is, or will ever again be, a race of Israelites are proven to be futile and of no force. There is no Jewish race. So, as you can see, to try to translate the word genea as race, does not fly.”[4]

Let’s now move on to some more erroneous interpretations of “this generation,” and one that I see as the most dangerous for the Church today.

[1] Anthony Hoekema, The Bible And The Future, (Eerdmans pub., 1979), 116-117, (emphasis added).

[2] Adam Clarke, Adam Clarke’s Commentary by Gary Gallant, Online Bible Software Version 2.10.06.

[3] Greek English Online Bible Greek Lexicon, Online Bible Software, Ibid, (emphasis added).

[4] David Curtis, MATTHEW 24-25 FULFILLED AND APPLIED, www.treeoflifeministries.info See also David’s site, www.bereanbiblechurch.org

An Exposition of Matthew 24:34, Part 1

Introduction

In Matthew 24:34 the disciples are told that the signs, the coming of Jesus and the end of the age that the disciples previously asked about (“all these things”), would be fulfilled within their “this generation.” I will begin our study of Matthew 24:34 by quoting various translations that have correctly understood its meaning and from there we will examine accurate definitions from various Bible dictionaries and the lexical evidence. While examining if there is any warrant to interpreting genea in any other way than the contemporaries of Jesus, we will also be examining false interpretations of genea which allegedly teach: 1) that Jesus meant that the entire Jewish race would not pass away until all things were fulfilled. 2) Our contemporary generation which saw Israel become a nation in 1948 is the end time generation. 3) Jesus’ uses the phrase “this generation” to be referring to a future generation that is alive to witnesses these signs whenever they begin to be fulfilled. 4) Jesus is simply describing an evil generation of people that is descriptive of the last days generation – whoever that may be. We will also be looking at key texts in the NT to see how the word “generation” (Gk. genea) is used to give us an even clearer and more definitive interpretation of Matthew 24:34. And lastly, we will examine Matthew 24:34 as the anti-type or the projected terminal “last days” generation of Deuteronomy 32:5, 20. I will argue that Jesus’ use of “this generation” along with Paul’s and Peter’s (Philippians 2:15; Acts 2:40), needs to be seen in the overall context of the new exodus motif in which the Jews expected their Messiah to recapitulate another 40 year New Covenant redemption for Israel and in-gathering of the Gentiles.

Relevant Translations

“Remember that all these things will happen before the people now living have all died.” (Mt. 24:34 GNT)

“Don’t take this lightly. I’m not just saying this for some future generation, but for all of you. This age continues until all these things take place.” (Mt. 24:34 The Message)

“I tell you the truth, all these things will happen while the people of this time are still living.” (Mt. 24:34 NCV)

“Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” (Mt. 24:34 KJV)

The Lexical Evidence

The Thayer Greek-English Lexicon and Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words defines genea here in Matthew 24:34 (and in the other relevant passages), as Jesus addressing His Jewish contemporary generation (AD 30-70) and therefore is the subject of the prophetic pronouncement,

“the whole multitude of men living at the same time: Mt.xxiv. 34; Mk. xiii. 30; Lk. i. 48; xxi. 32; Phil. ii. 15; used esp. of the Jewish race living at one and the same period: Mt. xi. 16; xii. 39, 41 sq. 45; xvi. 4; xxiii.36; Mk. Viii. 12, 38; Lk. Xi. 29 sq. 32, 50 sq.; xvii. 36; Heb. iii. 10…” “…who can describe the wickedness of the present generation, Acts viii. 33 (fr. Is. Liii. 8 Sept.).”1

“…of the whole multitude of men living at the same time, Matt. 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 1:48; 21:32; Phil. 2:15, and especially of those of the Jewish people to the time in which they lived, the world came to mean age, i.e., a period ordinarily occupied by each successive generation, say, of thirty or forty years, Acts 14:16; 15:21; Eph. 3:5; Col. 1:26; see also, e.g., Gen. 15:16.”2

Although somewhat inconsistent, the most impressive Greek work and interpretation I have come across thus far comes from Collin Brown,

“In Matt. it has the sense of this generation, and according to the first evangelist, Jesus expected the end of this age (Time, art. aion) to occur in connection with the judgment on Jerusalem at the end of that first generation (see Mk. 9:1 and Matt. 16:28).”3

And again,

“But if these events were expected within the first generation of Christians (and “generation” is the most probable translation of genea), either Jesus or the evangelists were mistaken…” or “…there is an alternative interpretation of the passage which points out that insufficient attention has been paid to the prophetic language of the passage as a whole.

The imagery of cosmic phenomena is used in the OT to describe this-worldly events and, in particular, historical acts of judgment. The following passages are significant, not least because of their affinities with the present context: Isa. 13:10 (predicting doom on Babylon); Isa. 34:4 (referring to “all the nations”, but especially to Edom); Ezek. 32:7 (concerning Egypt); Amos 8:9 (the Northern Kingdom of Israel); Joel 2:10 (Judah). The cosmic imagery draws attention to the divine dimension of the event in which the judgment of God is enacted. The use of Joel 2:28-32 in Acts 2:15-21 provides an instance of the way in which such prophetic cosmic imagery is applied to historical events in the present (cf. also Lk. 10:18; Jn. 12:31; 1 Thess. 4:16; 2 Pet. 3:10ff.; Rev. 6:12-17; 18:1). Other OT passages relevant to the interpretation of the present context are Isa. 19:1; 27:13; Dn. 7:13; Deut. 30:4; Zech. 2:6; 12:10-14; Mal. 3:1. In view of this, Mk. 13:24-30 may be interpreted as a Son of man will be vindicated. Such prophecy of judgment on Israel in which a judgment took place with the destruction of Jerusalem, the desecration of the  Temple and the scattering of Israel – all of which happened within the  lifetime of “this generation.” “…Such an interpretation fits the preceding discourse and the introductory remarks of the disciples (Mk. 13:1ff. par.).” (Brown, Ibid., 38-39).

Brown is at least attempting to allow the Bible to interpret itself.  And if I’m not mistaken, he seems to be consenting that the “rapture” or resurrection passage of 1 Thessalonians 4:16 can been seen as fulfilled by the “historical event” of AD 70 just as the language of Matthew 24 can or should be interpreted.  Unfortunately, he was inconsistent in interpreting 1 Thessalonians 4 and some of these other texts elsewhere with a Full Preterist hermeneutic.      

1. Joseph Henry Thayer, D.D., A GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1977), 112 (bold emphasis added).

2. W.E. Vine (edited by F.F. Bruce), VINE’S Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Iowa Falls, Iowa: World Bible Publishers, 1981), 42 (emphasis added).

3. Colin Brown, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology Vol. 2, (Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 37-38 (bold emphasis added).

The study of hermeneutics is defined as “the science or study of interpreting the Scriptures.” The Westminster Confession of Faith correctly states that, “The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture, is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.”[1] J.I. Packer understands this to mean “that we must give ourselves in Bible study to following out the unities, cross-references and topical links which Scripture provides.”[2]

In mathematics and logic: If A bears some relation to B and B bears the same relation to C, then A bears it to C. Or the property of equality is transitive – for if A = B and B = C, then A = C.  Therefore, things which are equal to the same thing are also equal to one another. If equals be added to equals, the wholes are equal.

A = (Matt. 24:27-31, 34)

B = (1 Thess. 4:15-17)

C = (1 Cor. 15)

THE CONTRADICTION & HOUSE DIVIDED OF FUTURISM:

Orthodox Partial Preterism tells us that:

A (Matt. 24:27-31) was fulfilled when Christ returned in AD 70 in Jesus’ “this generation” (Matt. 24:34). For the partial preterist Jesus’ statement of “this generation” (AD 30-70) connected with the NT’s imminent time texts “at hand,” “shortly,” “soon,” “quickly,” “in a very little while,” “about to,” also refer to AD 70 (cf. 1 Peter 4:5-7; James 5:7-9; Hebrews 8:13–10:37; Revelation 1:1, 3:11, 10:6-7, 22:6-7, 10-12, 20) and are the “speak more clearly” texts.  We agree with them on this point.  While ignoring the “clear” proposition of Biblical preterism and traditional amillennialism that A (Matt. 24:27-31) is equal to B (1 Thess. 4:15-17), they do affirm that both B (1 Thess. 4:15-17) and C (1 Cor. 15) are equal to each other and are the second coming and resurrection events.

Orthodox Amillennialism tells us that:

A (Matt. 24:27-31) = B (1 Thess. 4:15-17) and that both A (Matt. 24:27-31) and B (1 Thess. 4:15-17) = C (1 Cor. 15).  While ignoring the “clear” proposition of Biblical and partial preterism on the imminent time texts, the traditional amilennialist sees that the analogy of Scripture and the fact that the NT only teaches ONE second coming (not a third) as the “speak more clearly” teaching of Scripture.  We agree with them on this proposition.

THE BETTER HERMENEUITCS, LOGIC & SYNTHESIS OF BIBLICAL PRETERISM

Orthodox (“straight”) Biblical Preterism objects to the combined contradictory statements in that if

A (Matt. 24:27-31) was fulfilled in AD 70, and if A (Matt. 24:27-31) is equal to both B (1 Thess. 4:15-17) and C (1 Cor. 15), then both B (1 Thess. 4:15-17) and C (1 Cor. 15) were fulfilled at Christ’s parousia in AD 70. In other words, “Things which are equal to the same thing are also equal to one another. If equals be added to equals, the wholes are equal.”  

“If A (Matt. 24:27-43) bears some relation to B (1 Thess. 4:15 – 1 Thess. 5)” or “A=B”:

Christ returns from heaven Matt. 24:30 = 1 Thess. 4:16

With archangelic voice                                             Matt. 24:31 = 1 Thess. 4:16

With God’s trumpet                                                     Matt. 24:31 = 1 Thess. 4:16

Believers gathered/caught up with Christ  Matt. 24:31 = 1 Thess. 4:17

Believers “meet” Christ in “clouds”                 Matt. 24:30, 25:6 = 1 Thess. 4:17

Exact time unknown                                                  Matt. 24:36 = 1 Thess. 5:1-2

Christ comes like a thief                                           Matt. 24:43 = 1 Thess. 5:2

Unbelievers caught unaware                                Matt. 24:37-39 = 1 Thess. 5:3

Birth pains                                                                          Matt. 24:8 = 1 Thess. 5:3

Believers are not deceived                                      Matt. 24:43 = 1 Thess. 5:4-5

Believers told to be watchful                                 Matt. 24:42 = 1 Thess. 5:6

Exhortation against drunkenness                    Matt. 24:49 = 1 Thess. 5:7

The Day, sons of light, sons of the day[3] Matt. 24:27, 36-38 = 1 Thess. 5:4-8

The same 1^st. Cent. audience “you” “we”     Matt. 24:2…, 34 = 1 Thess. 4:15-17

AND “…B bears the same relation to C…” or “B=C”:

All agree that B (1 Thess. 4:15-17) bears the same relation to C (1 Cor. 15) or “B=C” and is referring to the second coming and resurrection events:

Those asleep will be raised                                     1 Thess. 4:13-14 = 1 Cor. 15:12-18

The living will be “caught up” “changed”    1 Thess. 4:15-17 = 1 Cor. 15:51-52

At the sound of a “trumpet”                                   1 Thess. 4:16 = 1 Cor. 15:52

At Christ’s coming (Greek parousia)              1 Thess. 4:15 = 1 Cor. 15:23

“Encourage” “Stand firm”                                       1 Thess. 4:18 = 1 Cor. 15:58

Same contemporary audience “we”                1 Thess. 4:15-17 = 1 Cor. 15:51-52

THEREFORE, “…then A (Matt. 24:27-31) bears it to C (1 Cor. 15)” or “A=C”:

Christ comes (Greek parousia)                             Matt. 24:27 = 1 Cor. 15:23

To “gather” or “change” His people                    Matt. 24:31 = 1 Cor. 15:52

With a “trumpet”                                                              Matt. 24:31 = 1 Cor. 15:52

To bring “the end” (Greek telos)                           Matt. 24:3, 14 = 1 Cor. 15:24

Deliver up & fulfill “kingdom” promises         Luke 21:30-32 = 1 Cor. 15:24

The fulfillment of all OT prophecy                     Luke 21:22 = 1 Cor. 15:54-55

Stones of temple & “the Law” destroyed          Matt. 24:1, 15 = 1 Cor. 15:55-56

Same contemporary audience “you” “we”    Matt. 24:2…, 34 = 1 Cor. 15:51-52

PREMISE #1:  The parousia/coming of Christ in Matthew 24 took place in AD 70 (according to partial preterists and Biblical preterists)

PREMISE #2:  The parousia/coming of Christ in Matthew 24 is the same coming of Christ in 1 Thessalonians 4-5 and 1 Corinthians 15 (according to traditional amillennialists and Biblical preterists)

CONCLUSION:  The parousia/coming of Christ in 1 Thessalonians 4-5 and 1 Corinthians 15 took place in AD 70.

Preterists unite the two clear premises (1. the imminent time texts = AD 70 & 2. the analogy of Scripture supports only one second coming) of futurists and thus we “…speak more clearly” and consistently in our debate with futurists.  The divided corporate Reformed “House” contains the two premises (which we assume are true) and we are simply uniting the two valid premises into one new House.  We’re validating the Reformed and Sovereign Grace House by accepting both of it’s competing premises, and then uniting them, further honoring the Reformed and Sovereign Grace House.  This has and will continue to appeal to Reformed and Sovereign Grace believers as Biblical preterism spreads throughout their churches.   We are making a motion to revise the creeds to make them more “orthodox” (straight) with the “more clear” teaching of Scripture–”Sola Scriptura” and “Semper Reformanda”–selah.

If A = B and B = C, then A = C. Things which are equal to the same thing are equal to each other.

A (Matt. 24:27-31, 34 fulfilled in AD 70) = B (1 Thess. 4:15-17 fulfilled in AD 70)  = C (1 Cor. 15 fulfilled in AD 70).

It is exciting to see (through emails and phone calls) that students of Reformed eschatology are properly learning their ABC’s of biblical prophecy through exegetical, full or consistent preterism–selah.

[2] J.I. Packer, The Interpretation of Scripture, from ‘Fundamentalism’ and the Word of God (Inter-Varsity Press, 1958), pp. 101-114. http://www.bible-researcher.com/packer1.html

[3] If we translate astrape in Matthew 24:27 as the sun, (instead of lightning) coming from the east and shining to the west, then these parallels are also possible.

The Abandonment of the Analogy of Scripture

The Westminster Confession of Faith states that “the infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.”[1] J. I. Packer understands this to mean “that we must give ourselves in Bible study to following out the unities, cross-references and topical links which Scripture provides.”[2] There is nothing controversial within the Reformed community about the above principles. Reformed believers all strive to be faithful to the principle of “the analogy of Scripture.”  This being the case, why then are there so many differing opinions within the Reformed community when it comes to the question of how to form a sound eschatology? There are perhaps as many differing interpretations of eschatological texts as there are denominations. Clearly, there is a need to bridge the gap and bring healing to this eschatological division within Reformed and Protestant churches.

What is the cause of the division?  It is widely assumed that the cause is the enigmatic nature of the texts in question. While I agree that there are difficult eschatological texts, I submit in this article that the problem lies not in the vagueness of Scripture but rather in our unwitting betrayal of the principle of the analogy of Scripture.

Reformed eschatology has a strong Preterist tradition, which argues that the New Testament’s eschatological statements of imminence must be taken literally because there are no contextual indicators leading us to interpret them in any other way. As Gary DeMar states, “any student of the Bible who does not interpret these time texts to mean anything other than close at hand is in jeopardy of denying the integrity of the Bible.”[3] To put a finer point on it,  R. C. Sproul suggests that any eschatology which denies a literal interpretation of the New Testament’s time texts has adopted a liberal or neo-orthodox view of God and time:  “When F. F. Bruce speaks of faith making the time be ‘at hand,’ this sounds all too much like Rudolf Bultmann’s famous theology of timelessness, which removes the object of faith from the realm of real history and consigns it to a super temporal realm of the always present hic et nunc [here and now].”[4] Sadly, this same view is so commonly articulated among Reformed and Evangelical believers[5] that few seem to recognize its liberal and mystical implications or its exegetical lack of support. In the interest of preserving eschatological futurism, many have compromised the principle of scriptural analogy by sweeping away the plain and obvious meaning of the imminence texts. In so doing, conservatives are unwittingly handling the Scriptures like Bultmann.

In an effort to mitigate this liberalism, some have become partially Preterist, suggesting two returns of Christ, one in AD70 and another yet-future final coming and resurrection. The obvious problem with this view is that “Paul looked for one climactic future event, the return of Jesus Christ, the blessed hope.”[6] The Partial Preterist side of our  “house divided” understands that in the AD 70 return of Christ (accomplished in His generation) God “gathered” and “redeemed” His church. Jesus was straightforward and clear that “all these things” were going to take place in His generation. Thus, Partial Preterists swim bravely against a strong tide of “newspaper exegesis.”

On the other hand,  Evangelical and Reformed theologians who reject Partial Preterism are nevertheless faithful to the principle of the analogy of Scripture when they link the imminent “gathering” in Matthew 24:31 and Mark 13:27 to Paul’s “gathering” and “catching away” (“rapture”/resurrection) in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and 2 Thessalonians 2:1. When they tie the imminent “redemption” in Luke 21:28 to the “redemption of the Body” and of “the creation” in Romans 8:18-23, they rightly reject the exegetical breaking asunder of Scriptures that are thematically one.

The remainder of this article offers a brief examination of these texts as well as a response to the “house divided” approach of Keith Mathison and his co-authors in their critique of “Hyper-Preterism” titled When Shall These Things Be? (hereafter WSTTB?).[7] Mathison and his co-authors are a microcosm of the Church. Though they enjoy unity in the belief of a yet-future “second coming” and resurrection of the dead, their eschatological house is divided. Some believe the eschatology of the Bible is mostly fulfilled. Others believe it is mostly or wholly unfulfilled. Their disagreements with each other are not rooted in the difficulty of the texts, but rather in the rejection of the sure foundation of sound scriptural analogy. In setting aside the plain sense of thematically congruent Scriptures, they have constructed their eschatological house on exegetical sand, and it therefore “cannot stand.”

Restoring the Analogy of Scripture

“Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near” (Luke 21:27-28). Appealing to the principle of the analogy of Scripture, John Murray and other Reformed theologians understood Paul, in Romans 8, to be building upon the “redemption” that Jesus discussed in the Olivet discourse:  “Now in Luke 21:28 . . . [t]his word ‘redemption’ (apolutrosin), when used with reference to the future, has a distinctly eschatological connotation, the final redemption, the consummation of the redemptive process (cf. Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 1:30; Eph 1:14; 4:30). Hence analogy would again point to the eschatological complex of events.”[8] We cannot brush off Murray’s comments lightly when he connects these texts to the resurrection and redemption of Romans 8, but is it exegetically sound to say that the redemption of Romans 8:18-23 occurred in Jesus’ generation?

According to most Reformed eschatological paradigms, Romans 8 is teaching a biological resurrection and molecular transformation of our corpses and of the entire universe during the return of Christ at “the end of time.”  However, when we consider the Preterist side of Reformed and Evangelical eschatology with regard to the restoration of creation in the various related texts (Matt 5:17-18; 24:29, 35; Eph 1:10; 2 Pet 3; 1 John 2:17-18 and Rev 21:1), we soon discover that, in context, these passages are referring to the temple’s destruction or to the civil and religious worlds of men—either Jews or Gentiles.[9] The civil and religious rulers of the Old Covenant system or world, along with the temple, were the “sun, moon, and stars,” which made up the “heaven and earth” of the world that perished in AD 70.[10]

In context, the time was “at hand” for the “elements” to be burned and for the world of righteousness to take its place (1 Pet 1:4-12; 4:5, 7, 17; 2 Pet 3). Peter was describing a change of covenantal worlds. As John Owen and John Lightfoot taught, Peter was not referring to a future return of Christ for the purpose of destroying the planet.[11] He was describing a transformation that was to be accomplished at Christ’s Parousia in AD 70. Kenneth Gentry and James Jordan also understand the passing of the “world” and the first heavens and earth (1 John 2:17-18; Rev 21:1) as referring to Christ’s return to end the Old Covenant system in AD 70. It is also understood within Reformed and Evangelical theology that the “times of fulfillment” to reconcile things in “heaven and on the earth” (Eph 1:10) is referring not to the planet earth and angels, but to the union of Jews and Gentiles in Christ. This was the “mystery” of the gospel in which the “whole family” of God, in heaven and on earth, would participate. When we combine the exegesis from some of the best Reformed and Evangelical theologians, we quickly see that none of the New Testament de-creation passages are dealing with planet earth, but are references to the Old Covenant or its people.[12]

Lightfoot associated the “earnest expectation of the creature” and the “whole creation groaning” with the mind and heart of man, and not with planet Earth—not even poetically.[13] He referenced the “vanity” and “decay” of the creation (Rom 8:20) to the groaning from the “corruption” of sin found in the hearts and minds of mankind (2 Pet 1:4; 2 Cor 11:3; 15:33).[14] Lightfoot is on solid ground here; not only is there lexical evidence to interpret “vanity,” “corruption,” and “decay” as  ethical and moral putrefaction in the heart and mind of man, but contextually the passage has nothing to do with hydrogen or oxygen molecules, or with squirrels longing for a better day when they won’t get hit by cars.

Still, one might object that the “redemption” associated with the coming of Christ in Luke 21:27-28 has a clear time text (“this generation”) associated with it (v. 32), but the “redemption of the body” in Romans 8 does not; therefore, one might conclude the two passages are not necessarily parallel. Those who argue this way suggest that the redemption in Luke 21 might simply refer to relief from persecution and nothing more. The premise of their objection, however, is false. There is an imminence text associated with the redemption of the body in Romans 8.  Verse 18 reads, “For I reckon that the sufferings of the present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory about to be revealed in us” (YLT; cf. NSRV, AV, & WEY: “soon to be manifested”). It is important to note that the Greek word corresponding to the phrase “about to be” is mello. Reformed Partial Preterists such as R. C. Sproul and Kenneth Gentry understand the word mello in the book of Revelation to refer to Christ’s return in AD 70. Sproul also writes that it is not unreasonable to apply the imminence indicators found in Romans 13:11-12 (“. . . for now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed. The night is almost gone, and the day is at hand. Let us therefore lay aside the deeds of darkness. . . .”) to earlier chapters in Romans that do not have explicit time texts.[15]

If mello is a time indicator that needs to be honored, and if we can apply the time texts in Romans 13:11-12 to earlier chapters, then we cannot ignore this approach in Romans 8. Moreover, claims that the teaching of “the” judgment and resurrection of the living and the dead were not given with imminence indicators tied to them directly are simply not true. Acts 24:15, 25 reads, “Having hope toward God, which they themselves also wait for, that there is about to be a rising again of the dead, both of righteous and unrighteous. . . . But when he dealt with the subjects of justice, self-control, and the judgment which is soon to come, Felix became alarmed . . .” (cf. Acts 17:31, YLT/WEY; WUESTNT; emphases added).[16]

In WSTTB? (p. 200), Mathison expresses willingness to concede that the imminence in Romans 13:11-12 was fulfilled in AD 70.

. . . it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed. The night is almost gone, and the day is at hand . . . .

Yet The Reformation Study Bible, of which Mathison is an editor, harmonizes Romans 13:11 with Romans 8:23, correctly teaching that “salvation” in that verse is not merely deliverance from persecution (as Mathison theorizes in WSTTB):  “salvation. Here in the sense of future, final redemption (8:23).”[17] The connection between these two passages is made even stronger when we allow the Greek word mello in Romans 8 to be translated the way it is predominately used in the New Testament.

In regard to the phrase “the sufferings of this present time,”—and as much as I can relate to R. C. Sproul, Jr., losing his hair and gaining some weight around his midsection (WSTTB? p. ix)—his appeal to the “sufferings” and “the redemption of the body” in our text have nothing to do with those kinds of issues. The context of the “groaning” of these first-century Christians can be found in the previous chapter. The sufferings Paul had in mind here were eschatological—the birth pains that were to precede Christ’s return in AD 70 (Matt 24:8; Rom 8:22). They had to do with man groaning under the inescapable tyranny of sin brought about by being condemned in Adam under the Law of God. For Paul, this produced a “death” but it was not a physical death—for how is it that a dead man writes a complex legal treatise such as Romans? Death in these chapters (Rom 5-6) had nothing to do with the idea of the fleshly corpse of man dying biologically as a result of Adam’s sin.[18] “Bondage,” according to the immediate context, had to do with spiritual death and groaning under the condemnation of the Law (cf. Rom 7:2, 7, 15). The sufferings in Romans 8, then, referred to the eschatological persecutions that preceded Christ’s return (Dan 7:21-22; Matt 24:9, 27-31; 10:17-23) and not to present day Christians suffering the traumas of birth defects, aging, cancer, etc.

Conclusion

The “salvation” and “redemption” associated with Christ’s Second Coming in AD 70 entailed much more than a physical flight to the wilderness of Pella, as some commentators have proposed. Christ’s Parousia in AD 70 was a redemptive and soteriological event that occurred “in” and “within” the minds, consciences and hearts of the Church, when God consumed by fire the Adamic world of Satan, Sin, Death and Condemnation, consummately purging His church of sin through the Cross of Christ (Rom. 8:18-23; 11:26-27; 13:11-12; Heb. 8-10). The “redemption” of Luke 21:28 is the “redemption of the body” in Romans 8:18-23. Both the imminence of the time texts and the spiritual nature of their fulfillment require this interpretation.

[2] J. I. Packer, “The Interpretation of Scripture” in  ‘Fundamentalism’ and the Word of God (Inter-Varsity Press, 1958), pp. 101-114.  http://www.bible-researcher.com/packer1.html

[3] Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church, 4^th edition (Atlanta: American Vision, 1999), p. 393; emphasis added.

[4] R.C. Sproul, The Last Days according To Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998), pp. 108-109; emphasis added.

[5] For example, see Anthony Hoekema, The Bible and the Future (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979), p. 126.

[6] Kim Riddlebarger, A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2003), p.130; emphasis added.

[7] Keith A. Mathison, Kenneth L. Gentry, Charles E. Hill, Richard L. Pratt Jr., Simon J. Kistemaker, Douglas Wilson, and Robert B. Strimple, When Shall These Things Be? A Reformed Response to Hyper-Preterism (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2004). David Green, Edward Hassertt, Sam Frost and I have  co-authored a response to this book, House Divided Bridging the Gap in Reformed Eschatology A Preterist Response to When Shall These Things Be? that is available on my “store” link.

[8] John Murray, Collected Writings of John Murray 2:  Systematic Theology (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Publications, 1977) , p.389. Unfortunately Murray was inconsistent when it came to Jesus’ teaching that all things in His discourse would be fulfilled in His generation. Had Murray faithfully followed the analogy of Scripture in this regard, he would have seen two things:  (1) Christ’s coming on the clouds and the de-creation language in the discourse was metamorphic language describing the fall of religious and civil powers, as John Owen and other reformed theologians have understood; and (2) the coming of Christ, the passing away of “heaven and earth,” the redemption, the resurrection of the dead and the judgment were all “about to be” fulfilled in Jesus’ generation (Rom 8:18-23; Acts 17:31, 24:15 YLT WEY).

[9] John Brown, Discourses and Sayings of Our Lord Jesus Christ, 3 vols. (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Publications, [1852] 1967), Vol. 1, pp. 170-174. H. T. Fletcher-Louis in Eschatology in Bible & Theology:Evangelical Essays at the Dawn of a New Millennium, K. E. Brower and Mark W. Elliot, eds. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997), pp. 145-169.

[10] Fletcher, ibid., pp. 145-169; DeMar, ibid., pp. 141-154.

[11] John Owen, The Works of John Owen (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Publications, 1972), Vol. 9, pp. 134-135; John Lightfoot, Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2003), Vol. 3, p. 452.

[12] John Owen, ibid., Volume 9, pp. 134-135; John Lightfoot, ibid., Vol.3, p. 452; John Brown, Discourses, Vol. 1, pp. 170-174; John Locke, A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St Paul, Volume 2 (Oxford University Press, 1987), pp. 617-618; R. C. Sproul, The Last Days according to Jesus; Kenneth Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion (Tyler TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1992), pp. 363-365; Kenneth Gentry in Four Views on the Book Of Revelation, C. Marvin Pate, ed. (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 1998), p. 89 (cf. 43 for 1 Jn. 2:17); Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness, pp. 68-74, 141-154, 191-192; James B. Jordan, Through New Eyes Developing a Biblical View of the World (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt Publishers, 1998), pp. 269-279; H. T. Fletcher-Louis in :Evangelical Essays at the Dawn of a New Millennium, K. E. Brower and Mark W. Elliot, eds. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997), pp. 145-169; Peter J. Leithart, The Promise of His Appearing: An Exposition of Second Peter (Moscow, ID:  Canon Press, 2004); Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope (Phillipsburg, NJ:  P & R Publishing, 1999), pp. 114, 157-158; N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996), pp. 345-346; N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003), p. 645, n. 42; Hank Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2007), pp. 84-86.

[13] “. . . this vanity is improperly applied to this vanishing, changeable, dying state of the creation. For vanity, doth not so much denote the vanishing condition of the outward state, as it doth the inward vanity and emptiness of the mind.  The Romans to whom this apostle writes, knew well enough how many and how great predictions and promises it had pleased God to publish by his prophets, concerning gathering together and adopting sons to himself among the Gentiles:  the manifestation and production of which sons, the whole Gentile world doth now wait for, as it were, with an out stretched neck.” John Lightfoot, Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica, Volume 4, p. 157;  emphasis added.

[14] Lightfoot, ibid., pp. 158-159.

[15] Sproul, The Last Days according to Jesus, pp. 99, 138-140.

[16] Gentry argues that “when used with the aorist infinitive—as in Revelation 1:19—the word’s predominant usage and preferred meaning is: ‘be on the point of, be about to.’ The same is true when the word is used with the present infinitive, as in Rev.3:10. The basic meaning in both Thayer and Abbott-Smith is: ‘to be about to.”  (Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation [Tyler, TX: Institute for Biblical Economics, 1989], pp. 141-142; emphasis added.)  Gentry is correct. The problem, however, is that when the word mello refers to the resurrection and judgment of the living and dead in Acts 24:15 and 24:25, it is used with the present infinitive. So Gentry boldly ignores the word in those texts.

[17] The Reformation Study Bible, R. C. Sproul, General Editor, and Keith Mathison, Associate Editor (Lake Mary, FL:  Ligonier Ministries, 2005), pp.  1, 636.

[18] Tom Holland, Contours in Pauline Theology (Fearn, Scotland, UK:  Christian Focus Publications, 2004),  pp.85-110.  Holland is a Reformed theologian who sees Paul’s “body” of flesh, sin, and death not referring to our physical flesh but to the corporate body of Adam as contrasted to the corporate Body of Christ—the Church. He counters Gundry’s individual views of soma in Paul’s writings. He also argues for “consistency” in Paul’s use of corporate terms. I recommend this book to any serious student of Reformed theology.

17  For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

God’s creation and maturing of His new heavens and new earth arrived with the imminent return of Christ to end the “last days” of the old covenant age in AD 70 – according to (2 Peter 3 – being a “reminder” of 1 Peter 1:4-12; 4:5-7, 17 and Revelation 21-22: 6-7, 10-12, 20).  This is when the curse of the Adamic and Mosaic “the law,” “the sin,” and “the death,” creation was “about to be” completely removed for the Church (Romans 5-8). 

Some Postmillennial Partial Preterists such as Kenneth Gentry and Keith Mathison teach that Christ did in fact come in AD 70 which caused the “first” heavens and earth to pass away with God replacing it with His Church as the New Creation.  But eisegetically, they also try and maintain (at the same time) that the text is teaching a passing away of the first heavens and earth which involves a 2000 plus years and counting to the earth’s literal destruction/renewal.  This is supposed to be the “physical phase” of the passing of the Genesis 1-2 creation associated with the Second (third) Coming of Jesus.[1]  Gentry oddly interprets John’s use of Isaiah 65-66 as fulfilled in AD 70 in Revelation 21:1, but because 2 Peter 3 mentions “the beginning” of Genesis 1:1-2, he gives Isaiah 65-66 an “expanded” literal interpretation unlike some of his other partial preterist colleagues which place this as fulfilled in AD 70.[2]  His reasoning is more than odd, since the “first” heavens and earth of Revelation 21-22 is no less Genesis 1-3 material than 2 Peter 3 is.  The NT writers do not develop that there are thousands or millions of years associated with a “not yet”/ “ongoing” “literal phase” of fulfillment – in developing the restoration of creation motif of the OT prophets!             

18  But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create: for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy.  19  And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying.

According to the parallelism here, Jerusalem is equivalent to the “new heavens and new earth” or at the very least is inseparably connected with it in its prophetic spiritual substance.  So why are the inhabitants of Jerusalem and the “heavens” and “earth” rejoicing?  Because Jacob has been redeemed and glorified within Her (cf. Isa. 44:23).  Again, this redemption and glorification of the creation (Romans 8:18-23) was “about to” take place in AD 70.  There is no more weeping, because God’s people have been forgiven of their sins.  For all Partial Preterists and futurists, my interpretation is somehow “Gnostic.”  However, this is the NT’s eschatological goal of redemption, and we must reject their “literal phases” propped up with their invented “not yet” and “ongoing fulfillments” which the NT authors know nothing of.            

20  There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed.

The “infant” and “old man” filling out their long days yet “die” is symbolic of eternal life (John 11:25-26).  But the “sinner” being “accursed” is symbolic of everlasting condemnation (cf. Dan. 12:2-3; Matt. 13:40-43)[3] and those without the City of Revelation 21-22 who die the second death in rejection of Christ (the Tree of Life).  Again, I see no literalization of “ongoing” or “not yet” teachings coming from Jesus in the Gospels, Daniel or John in the book of Revelation in addressing this Genesis 1-3 material. 

21  And they shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them.  22  They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands.

This is the same concept as can be found in the joy of verses 18-19 of the inhabitants of “Jerusalem.”  Is “Jerusalem” there literal or the NC Jerusalem “from above” (Gals. 4)?  Under the OC everything was temporal and subject to being taken over by the times of the Gentiles.  Under the NC, this building, planting, and fruit are likewise equivalent to the spiritual “Jerusalem” and spiritual “new heavens and new earth” previously discussed. 

Through the preaching of the gospel by the apostles and the power of the transforming power of the Holy Spirit, God was forming “dwelling places” (the side rooms of the Temple structure) for the Church in which He would be in His people and they in Him (John 14:2-3, 23; Gal. 4:19).  The building and dwelling places or houses that are eternally secure for the child of God, have to do with the building up of the NC Temple/the Church.  No man can plunder the riches of this heavenly Temple/Most Holy Place of God (Rev. 21:16).  God through Moses exercised dominion over Egypt and spoiled their gold which was used to beautify the Tabernacle. God did the same through David and Solomon to build the Temple in which even the floor was even made of gold.  However, one greater than Solomon (Jesus) has come to redeem His Temple/People with His precious blood which is more valuable than gold (Psalm 49:6-9; 1 Peter 1:18-19, 23-25).  It is the wealth of God given faith which adorns this Temple and comes through Her gates (Isaiah 60; 1 Peter 1:7-9).  He is the eternal Precious Corner Stone and through faith in Him, we become precious living stones and the jewels which adorn the New Creation (1 Peter 2; Revelation 21:18ff.).    

The “planting of vineyards” and eating of its “fruit” has reference to the planting of God’s Church (the NC Israel of God) whereby the apostles and the Holy Spirit labored and watered it continually so that it never ceases to bear fruit to God (Isaiah 27:2-6; 35, 44; Matthew 21:41-43; John 15; 1 Cor. 3; Gal. 5).  They enjoy long the works of their hands, because after they die they do not go to a waiting place, but “their works/fruit do follow them” (cf. Rev. 14:13).

Some Postmillennial Partial Preterists suggest that a part of the “ongoing” and “literal phase” of the restoration of the creation motif of the prophets, involves men beginning to live longer than they had a hundred years ago and that this is “proof” that we will live to be 950 years old one day – “as the days of a tree are the days of my people.”  The Church/New Man in union with Christ (The Tree of Life) has already lived for a thousand years in and unto the NC eternal age (Revelation 20-22).[4]  As John Gill suggests, “The Targum, Septuagint, and Arabic versions, render it, “as the days of the tree of life;” “…The allusion may be to the tree of life in paradise, and may be expressive of the long life of good men in this state; and as the tree of life was typical of Christ, who is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon him, it may denote that eternal life his people have by him.” (emphasis added).

The average long life of man is still 70-80 years just as Moses said (Psalm 90:10).  There is no exegetical or scientific evidence that would suggest that man is going to live to be a literal 900-1000 years old and that this is an “ongoing” or “not yet” fulfillment for the Church to enjoy as a fulfillment for the “healing of the nations.”       

23  They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the LORD, and their offspring with them.

Paul and the first century churches temporary eschatological “labour” (pains, persecutions in preaching the gospel, and groaning under “the death” of Adamic sin), were not in vain (1 Cor. 15:58; Romans 5-8; Gal. 4:19; 2 Cor. 3-5:5).  Their temporary labour pain would result in a nation being brought forth in one day – Zion/Jerusalem (Isa.  66:8). The “seed” and “offspring” are Christian converts – the true seed of the Abrahamic covenant (Isa. 53:10–Isa. 56:4ff./Acts 8; Gal. 3:29).              

24  And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear.

The prayers of the saints for vindication and redemption/rewards of the New Creation were soon answered (Luke 17-18; Rev. 6:10-11; 20-22:10-12).   

25  The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent’s meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD.

Because many simply assume that the physics of the planet changed along with the dietary habits of lions and wolves after Adam sinned, it is also falsely assumed that all this needs to be restored as it once was as an “ongoing fulfillment.”  Therefore, many Evangelicals and Postmillennial Partial Preterists believe this “physical effect” of the fall will be restored (along with literal 900 year old ages).  I beg to differ. 

Older commentators understood these peaceful animal passages such as (Isaiah 11:6-9) to be a description of the peace the gospel produces among men – Jew and Gentile.  They had it right!  But because of their futurism and faulty presuppositions in Genesis, they also were forced into literalizing these passage of literal animals with “ongoing,” “physical phases,” when God’s creation would be finally restored.  The passage has nothing to do with “lion tamers” or lions becoming vegetarians as an ongoing reversal of the physical effects of the fall.    

Beloved, do not be deceived, Postmillennial Partial Preterism is not Biblical Preterism.  It is carnal futurism both in the timing and nature of fulfillment – plain and simple.  The “first” heavens and earth have passed away, the new is here, the healing of the nations is taking place, and it won’t be realized in an “not yet” of 900 year old naked men (fig leaves were a “physical effect” of Adam’s sin – right?) running around taming vegetarian lions and watching their children playing with poisonous snakes!            

[2] Kenneth Gentry, HE SHALL HAVE DOMINION A POSTMILLENNIAL ESCHATOLOGY, (Draper, VA: 2009 THIRD EDITION:  REVISED & EXPANDED), 305. 

[3] Gentry, DOMINION, Ibid., 538.  James Jordan, THE HANDWRITING ON THE WALL A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, (Powder Springs, GA:  American Vision 2007) 618-628.  Leithart, PROMISE, Ibid., 95.  

[4] See my chapter and response to Keith Mathison in, House Divided Bridging the Gap in Reformed Eschatology a Preterist Response to When Shall These Things Be?” (Ramona, CA:  Vision Publishing, 2009), 122-123.

By: Michael J. Sullivan

It is my purpose in this article to tackle an issue that I struggled with a lot as a young Christian–namely 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 and the abiding or cessation of the miraculous gifts of tongues and prophecy. Are they for today or have they ceased? As a young Christian my Pastor was Chuck Smith (Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa), but I also briefly attended an Assembly of God College and as well began attending John Wimber’s church (The Vineyard). So in my walk with the Lord, I have had a wide range of “experience” within Pentecostal and Charismatic churches and institutions. As I began to grow in my understanding of God’s Word and His grace in my life, I became more Reformed or Sovereign Grace in my thinking. As I moved more into Reformed and Sovereign Grace circles, the less I saw “tongues” being spoken. Yet at the same time, I was not getting the exegetical evidence from Acts 2, 1 Corinthians 13, and Matthew 28:18-20/Mark 16:15-20 that I needed to be 100% convinced that these gifts had ceased. I had experienced the same frustration while briefly attending John MacArthur’s church (Grace Community) and The Master’s College. After many years of prayer over this subject, God led me to the preterist view of Bible prophecy to settle my mind and heart on this issue once and for all. Therefore, it is my purpose in this article to comfort and help others with the comfort God has given me through a correct understanding of His Word.

My proposition is simple — Christ promised to return within the lifetime and generation of the first century Church (Mt. 10:22-23, 16:27-28; Lk. 21:20-32) and He in fact did keep that promise. The New Testament inspired authors bore witness to the testimony of their Lord’s teaching (Romans 13:11-12, 16:20; 1 Peter 4:5-7; James 5:7-9; Hebrews 8:13-10:37; Revelation 1:1, 3:11; 10:6-7, 22:6-7, 10-12, 20) that He would in fact return in a “very little while” and would “not tarry.” Therefore, in this article, I will defend that “that which is perfect” and the “face to face” “knowledge” of 1 Corinthians 13:10-12, are references to Christ’s return and the arrival of the new heavens and earth by AD 70 (cf. Revelation 22:4). In so defending this position, it is my sincere prayer to help those ensnared in the false teachings of Charismatic and Pentecostal doctrine. This would also include those within the Reformed community such as John Piper and the churches that have been planted through his ministry.

Let’s begin with how Reformed and Evangelical Charismatic’s and Pentecostal’s understand and interpret 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 and then we will move into how others have sought to teach that the gifts have ceased for us today. Does either party make exegetically credible claims? Is it possible that both parties can be both right and wrong at the same time? If so, what pieces of this exegetical puzzle are missing to bridge the gap in this debate?

Charismatic Reformed Theologians

John Piper is both Reformed and a Charismatic. Most within Reformed circles consider this a “contradiction,” but is it really a contradiction to be charismatic if one is a futurist at the same time? I don’t believe it is– it is just unbiblical to be a futurist and a Charismatic. Piper graciously mocks the attempts of his fellow Reformed futurist colleagues such as Richard Gaffin who claims the gifts have ceased,

“There is no text in the New Testament that teaches the cessation of these gifts. But more important than this silence is the text that explicitly teaches their continuance until Jesus comes, namely, 1 Corinthians 13:8-12.

So the key question is: When does the “perfect” come which marks the end of the imperfect gifts like prophecy? The answer is plain in the text if we follow Paul’s line of reasoning. Verse 8 says, “Love never ends; as for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away” (RSV). Why are these gifts temporary? The answer is given in verse 9: “For our knowledge is imperfect and our prophecy is imperfect.” So the reason these spiritual gifts are temporary is their incompleteness or imperfection.

How long then are they to last? Verse 10 gives the answer: “When the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away.” But when is that? When does the perfect come? The answer is given in verse 12: “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood.” The “now” of incompleteness and imperfection is contrasted with the “then” of seeing face to face and understanding even as we are understood.

“So the answer to the question of when the perfect comes and when the imperfect gifts pass away is the “then” of verse 12, namely, the time of seeing “face to face” and “understanding as we are understood.” When will this happen?

Both of these phrases (“seeing face to face” and “understanding as we have been understood”) are stretched beyond the breaking point if we say that they refer to the closing of the New Testament canon or the close of the apostolic age. Rather, they refer to our experience at the second coming of Jesus. Then “we shall see him as he is” (1 John 3:2) The phrase “face to face” in the Greek Old Testament refers to seeing God personally (Genesis 32:30; Judges 6:22). Thomas Edwards’ hundred-year-old commentary is right to say, “When the perfect is come at the advent of Christ, then the Christian will know God intuitively and directly, even as he was before known of God” (First Epistle to the Corinthians, p. 353, italics added).

This means that verse 10 can be paraphrased, “When Christ returns, the imperfect will pass away.” And since “the imperfect” refers to spiritual gifts like prophecy and knowledge and tongues, we may paraphrase further, “When Christ returns, then prophecy and knowledge and tongues will pass away.”

Here is a definite statement about the time of the cessation of spiritual gifts, and that time is the second coming of Christ. Richard Gaffin does not do justice to the actual wording of verse 10 when he says, “The time of the cessation of prophecy and tongues is an open question so far as this passage is concerned” (Perspectives on Pentecost, p. 111). It is not an open question. Paul says, “When the perfect comes [at that time, not before or after], the imperfect [gifts like prophecy and tongues, etc.] will pass away.”

Wayne Grudem

Another Charismatic with a Reformed background would be Wayne Grudem, who paraphrases the context of 1 Corinthians 13:10 this way,

“But when Christ returns, prophecy and tongues (and other imperfect gifts) will pass away. Thus we have in 1 Corinthians 13:10 a definite statement about the time of the cessation of imperfect gifts like prophecy: they will “be made useless” or “pass away” when Christ returns. And this would imply that they will continue to exist and be useful for the church, throughout the church age, including today, and right up to the day when Christ returns.”

Evangelical Charismatics

Chuck Smith

Another one of my former Pastor’s Chuck Smith is a charismatic whom offers some good comments on identifying “that which is perfect” as Jesus’ Second Coming. He correctly considers men like Kenneth Gentry’s attempts at exegesis on this text to be “expositional dishonesty” and “prejudicial blindness-not at all scholarly or conclusive” and on this point I would agree:

“The idea that the Greek word teleios, translated “perfect,” referred to the full Canon of Scripture did not occur to some of the greatest of all Greek scholars from the past century. It is more of an invention or creation of recent vintage to counteract the modern tongues movement. Thayer, in his Greek-English Lexicon, says of teleios as used in 1 Corinthians 13:10, “The perfect state of all things to be ushered in by the return of Christ from heaven.” Alford, in his New Testament for English Readers, says of it, “At the Lord’s coming and after.” When the only Scriptural basis for rejecting the validity of speaking in tongues rests on such a questionable and tenuous interpretation of the Greek word teleios, which was wrested from the context in which it is used, one has to sincerely challenge the expositional honesty of such scholarship. To be kind, I will say that, at best, it is prejudicial blindness-not at all scholarly or conclusive”

Donald Lee Barnett

Unfortunately since Charismatic’s offer a better exegesis than Gentry and the rest of our futurist Reformed brothers, I will allow them to make our case on “that which is perfect”:

“There is not a single verse in the Bible where the Greek adjective teleios (“that which is perfect”-1 Cor. 13:10) refers to the completed New Testament.” “The related noun, … telos refers to an end, perfection, or consummation. Here again, as with the related adjective teleios, not one instance refers to the completion of the written Scriptures. But significantly, there are several passages where telos does refer to the end of this age, when Christ shall return. And even more significantly, two uses of telos refer to Christ Himself, the “end” or “consummation” of God’s plan.” The writer goes on to quote:

1) Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end [telos] come.

2) 1 Corinthians 1:8 Who shall also confirm you unto the end [telos], that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

3) 1 Peter 4:7 But the end [telos] of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

4) Revelation 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega , the beginning and the end [telos].

“The related… verb form of teleios is teleioo, “to perfect.” It is used 24 times in the New Testament. And, as with its companion word teleios, not one usage of teleioo refers to the completed New Testament. In fact, the only instance that is even remotely connected with the Scriptures is John 19:28: “After this, Jesus knowing that all things were not accomplished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled [made complete or perfect], saith, ‘I thirst’.” This verse is not talking about completing the Scriptures by writing them, but rather by fulfilling them. To be ‘completed’ in this sense, the New Testament will have to be fulfilled. This will not happen until the kingdom of God is fully ushered in…”

These Charismatic arguments connecting teleieos with “the end of the age” and the Second Coming of Jesus elsewhere in Scripture are valid and powerful. Likewise, Barnett makes a valid point when he says that the fulfillment of Scripture at the “end” is the issue and not the writing of it. However, we must point out that the Olivet discourse is about the destruction of the temple which marks the end to the Old Covenant age in AD 70, and not the age we are currently in or the end to the planet earth (Mt. 24:1-3, 34). As Milton Terry wrote in his classic work on hermeneutics,

“The ‘end of the age’ means the close of the epoch or age—that is, the Jewish age or dispensation which was drawing nigh, as our Lord frequently intimated. All those passages which speak of ‘the end,’ “the end of the age,’ or “the ends of the ages,’ refer to the same consummation, and always as nigh at hand. In 1 Cor. 10:11, St. Paul says, ‘The ends of the ages have stretched out to us;’ implying that he regarded himself as his readers as living near the conclusion of an aeon, or age.”

The immediate context is only dealing with the destruction of the temple and eschatological events that would be fulfilled in Jesus’ “this generation.” Therefore, it is abundantly clear that He is predicting the end of the Old Covenant age in AD 70 and no other! When we take a combined look at some of the best theologians within the Reformed and Evangelical communities, we find a preterist interpretation of every eschatological de-creation prophecy in the Bible. Combined, John Owen, John Locke, John Lightfoot, John Brown, R.C. Sproul, Gary DeMar, Kenneth Gentry, James Jordan, Peter Leithart, Keith Mathison, H.T. Fletcher-Louis, Hank Hanegraaff, and N.T. Wright teach that the passing away of heaven and earth (Matt. 5:17-18; 24:3, 29, 35; 1 Cor. 7:31, 10:11; II Peter 3; I Jn. 2:17-18; Rev. 21:1) refers to the destruction of the temple or to the civil and religious worlds of men —either Jews or Gentiles; and that the rulers of the old-covenant system or world, along with the temple, were the “sun, moon, and stars,” which made up the “heaven and earth” of the world that perished in AD 70.

I also concur with the Charismatic argument that the issue is not when all things were written, but rather when all things would be fulfilled! And once again Scripture is clear that all prophecy would be fulfilled within Jesus’ “this generation” (Luke 21:22; 1 Corinthians 10:11; 1 Peter 1:4-12; Revelation 1:1, 10:6-7, 22:6-7, 10-12, 20). This brings an abrupt AD 70 “end” to the Charismatic futurist assumptions and their arguments on teleios.

Reformed cessationists

Richard Gaffin

So how has the Reformed community sought to respond to such basic and straightforward Charismatic and Pentecostal interpretive claims as these? Oddly the Reformed community thought Richard Gaffin’s interpretation of 1 Corinthians 13 would help,

“Such knowledge will not cease until the arrival of “perfection” (v.10), at Christ’s return; only then, in contrast, will full “face to face” knowledge be ours (v.12).” “To argue, as some [Kenneth Gentry] cessationists do, that “the perfect” has in view the completion of the New Testament cannon or some other state of affairs prior to the Parousia is just not credible exegetically.”

Obviously, there are some problems with how Reformed futurists defend that1Corinthians 13 teaches the cessation of the gifts while at the same time admitting that the text refers to a future Second Coming!

Kenneth Gentry

One of our opponents Kenneth Gentry, gives this interpretation of our text,

Gentry’s interpretations of the “end of the age” in the Gospels and his interpretations of 1 Corinthians 13:10 along side that of the 70 weeks of Daniel 9:24-27 are confusing to say the very least. He claims the 70 weeks of Daniel 9:24 and 1 Corinthians 13:10 involves the revelatory process and yet also teaches in his book, He Shall Have Dominion, that the first 69 weeks ended 3 ½ years after the cross and that the end to the 70^th week is not so clear. He claims the redemptive aspects of Daniel 9:24 were fulfilled in the cross or perhaps 3 ½ years after this event. So were the Scriptures (the revelatory process) completed by AD 35? He also seems to want to claim that “the end of the age” in the Olivet discourse is both a reference to AD 70 and the end of the planet (see my article “KENNETH GENTRY’S PROPHETIC CONFUSION AND THE ANALOGY OF SCRIPTURE”). He fails to admit that the New Covenant age was breaking in and being revealed “bi-by-bit” while the Old Covenant age would “soon pass away” at Christ’s Second and final redemptive Coming (Heb. 8:13-10:37). It was this event associated with the abomination of desolation which would bring an “end” and cause “vision and prophecy” to be “sealed up”–fulfilled.

It is the fulfilling of “all things [Dan. 9:24-27] which are written” associated with Christ’s one and final Second Coming that is the issue of the texts in question, not the “mode of revelation” (Mt. 24:15/Lk. 21:22-27). Jerusalem “filled up” or “finished transgressions” against God and His Messiah within Jesus’ “this generation” (Mt. 23:31-38; Dan. 9:24a). Christ put an “end to sin” at His imminent Second Coming (Heb. 9:26-28/10:37; Rom. 11:26-27/13:11-12; Dan. 9:24b.). At Christ’s return in AD 70, He brought in “everlasting righteousness” or a “world of righteousness” as even John Owen and John Lightfoot would agree with us in 2 Peter 3. Christ anointed and consummated the New Covenant Church as His Most Holy Place and Bride in AD 70 (Ex. 20, 29-31, 40; cf. Hebrews 8:6-10; Revelation 11:18-19, 19-21:16). Therefore, all the eschatological promises made to Israel concerning vision and prophecy were fulfilled and sealed up by AD 70. Gentry is confused as usual and there most definitely is a clear “end” to the 70^th week in the NT – ie. AD 70! The abomination of desolation brings an “end” to the entire complex of redemptive events in Daniel 9:24-27!

Gentry and his fellow partial preterist colleagues end up teaching TWO New Testament: last days, comings of Jesus, “end of the age(s),” great commissions, judgments, and resurrections (one in AD 70 and one at the end of time); whereas the New Testament only teaches ONE. Therefore, the partial preterist position fails miserably to exegetically deal with the cessation of tongues and prophecy.

So far, Reformed futurist theologians are divided with Richard Gaffin stating that Gentry’s exegesis is not “exegetically credible” all the while giving the farm away to the Charismatics by admitting the text in question finds it’s fulfillment at a future second coming. Go figure.

Evangelical cessationists

John MacArthur

John MacArthur used to be my Pastor and College President and is a well known 5 point Calvinist but unfortunately remains a Dispensationalist. He has also written a lot on the cessation of tongues and the gift of healing. Unfortunately, MacArthur is better at mocking Pentecostal and Charismatic extreme practices instead of being able to give an exegetical refutation of their doctrine. His progressive dispensationalism has caused even more problems with this text and the “last days” passage of Acts 2. Here is MacArthur’s view of what the “perfect” is not referring to and then what it is:

“The Perfect” is Not the Rapture

MacArthur argues with his dispensational and futurist colleagues that “the perfect” here could not be referring to the rapture, because knowledge and prophecy are in use during the tribulation and millennial period. Since he understands the Church will be “raptured” before the tribulation, and that there will be two witnesses (Rev. 11:3) “prophesying” during the tribulation period, the rapture cannot be “the perfect,” “…they [knowledge and prophecy] appear to be operative in both the Tribulation and the millennial Kingdom.”

“The Perfect” is Not the Maturing of the Church

“A relatively new interpretation is that the perfect refers to the maturing, or completion, of the church. It is true that perfect often has the meaning of maturity or completion. But such a completion would amount to the rapture, which this view eliminates.”

“The Perfect” is Not the Second Coming

“Some believe the perfect refers to Christ’s second coming. But perfect is neuter in the Greek (teleion), eliminating the possibility that it relates to a person.”

“The Perfect” is the New Creation

MacArthur reasons that since the New Creation follows the “rapture” and a future “Second [third] Coming,” this is what Paul has identified as “the perfect.” It is at this point we see God’s face (Revelation 22:4).

There are several problems with MacArthur’s observations – mainly his dispensationalism and futurist assumptions that he reads into the texts in question.

First, “Prophecy” in Scripture is dealing with divine revelation, not preaching the word. And again, all prochecy would be fulfilled through Christ and the Church in Jesus’ “this generation” and or “shortly” by AD 70 (Luke 21:22; 1 Peter 1:4-12; 1 Corinthians 10:11; Revelation 1:1, 3:11, 10:6-7, 22:6-7, 10-12, 20).

Secondly, the scripture does not distinguish between a “rapture” coming and then the actual “Second [third?] Coming” of Jesus (see my exegesis of 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17).

Thirdly, again, the Tribulation and Second Coming events were predicted to take place within Jesus’ “this generation” and in fact did (cf. Matthew 24 & Luke 21).

Fourthly, the two witnesses in Revelation 11 are not Moses and Elijah as MacArthur speculates. MacArthur refuses to accept the very clear testimony of Jesus that Elijah had already come in the person of John the Baptist (Matthew 17:10-13) to prepare the way of the Great and Dreadful Day of the Lord–which again, would take place within the first century “this generation” (Malachi 3-4; Acts 2:20-40). The two witnesses represent the Old Testament prophets and the Churches witness against Old Covenant Jerusalem for rejecting and killing their Messiah and the prophets which had been sent to her (cf. Matthew 23:30-38).

Fifthly, the Bible does not teach that the “Kingdom” is something future for ethnic Israel to receive in an alleged literal 1,000 year period. Rather, the Kingdom was “at hand” and would be manifested “within” individuals at Christ’s return in their “this generation” (Matthew 3:2-12; 4:17; 21:33-43; Luke 17:20-37/21:27-32). The 1,000 years of Revelation 20 is a figurative or symbolic number communicating the fullness and completeness of the transitionary period before Christ would return “soon” in AD 70.

Sixthly, the “knowledge” of the Messiah and His New Covenant salvation was successfully preached into the entire world before AD 70 (see chart further in this article).

And lastly, “The Perfect” is a reference to all of the following: a) the maturity of the Church by AD 70, b) the Second Coming, and c) the New Creation. Jesus is described as “that Holy thing” and the New Creation (Luke :35/Gen. 1:2). Therefore, when Jesus’ parousia (presence) was completely formed within the Church, this was the maturing and consummating process of the New Creation (Galatians 4:19; 2 Corinthians 5:17/Isaiah 65-66). Through the Churches faith and being united “In Christ,” we share in the promise of being God’s New Creation (2 Cor. 1:20/Isaiah 65-66). So quite simply put, when Jesus’ Second Coming came in AD 70, Jesus’ redemptive work in performing and maturing His Church/Bride had been fully accomplished. As the perfect High Priest, He came out of Zion a “second time” and completely took away Her sin (Hebrews 9:26-28/Romans 11:26-27). Redemptively speaking, we are “perfect” in God’s eyes and we are “known” and ought to seek to continue to “know” and commune with Him in this humbled and thankful way, no matter how we might feel from time to time. You may not feel like precious stones and pure gold, but that is what you are in His eyes (Rev. 21:10-11).

If MacArthur could reconcile the above 7 accurate propositions with what he says of God coming in judgment in AD 70, he would have a consistent and exegetical position to defend against the “Charismatic Chaos” troubling many Christians today. For example what he says of Paul quoting Isaiah 28 as being fulfilled in AD 70 is right on target,

“The second evidence that the gift of tongues ended with the apostles is that its purpose as a judicial sign of Israel’s judgment ceased to apply at that time. Paul reminds the Corinthians that “In the Law it is written, ‘By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers I will speak to this people, and even so they will not listen to Me,’ says the Lord” (1 Cor. 14:21; cf. Isa. 28:11-12). In other words, because Israel refused to listen and believe when God spoke to them in clear language, the prophet said the day would come when He would speak to them in a language they could not understand, as a testimony against their rejection of Him.

Tongues were not given as a sign to believers “but to unbelievers” (1 Cor. 14:22), specifically unbelieving Jews. With the destruction of the Temple by the Roman general Titus in A.D. 70, Judaism ended except as a shadow religion.”

On this passage, MacArthur is spot on, but his futurism causes him to not be consistent in allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture when an imminent AD 70 coming of Jesus and reception of the kingdom is clearly in view. MacArthur constantly refers to tongues ceasing at the “end of the Apostolic age,” and yet there is NO verse mentioning this. There is the phrase “this age” (which the first century Jew understood as the Old Covenant age), and the “age about to come” (which the Jew understood to be the New Covenant or Messianic age). The Old passed while the New arrived in its mature and full state in AD 70. This all took place at Christ’s return in the judgment MacArthur alludes to above.

The Great Commission of Mark 16:15-20/Matthew 28:18-20

We should probably digress a little from our text and quickly cover a common Charismatic point involving the Great Commission and the miraculous sign gifts. It is claimed that the miraculous gifts such as tongues and healings are necessary for the Church in order to fulfill the Great Commission. What they fail to realize, is that the Bible clearly teaches that the Great Commission had been (past tense) fulfilled before AD 70:

PROPHECY FULFILLMENT

The Great Commission within the context of the imminent “end of the [this] age” judgment in Matthew 13:40, 24:3ff., and 28:18-20 is again–discussing the end to the Old Covenant age in AD 70. The Bible describes the Church or New Covenant age as an age “without end” (Ephs. 3:20-21).

The Marriage Motif “Face to Face”

In 1 Corinthians 13:10, Paul develops the marriage motif as he has done in some of his other letters. His expression of “knowing” God and “being fully known” by Him is clearly an intimate knowing leading to that expression in the marriage union. Reformed theologians correctly understand this Greek word (ginosko) in this way when it comes to being “foreknown” of God in election and predestination (Rms.8:28-29). This is not a knowledge of all facts, but an “experiential” knowledge as in affection leading to the consummation of that affection and love in a marriage relationship. The illustration being, “Now Adam knew Eve and she conceived and bore Cain,…” (Gen.4:1). Strong’s gives ginosko a meaning of, “the Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse between a man and a woman.” Paul and John in Revelation, are echoing Isaiah’s teaching that when Israel sees their God “eye to eye” (thus “face to face”) is when the New Jerusalem (“the Bride” Rev.21:2) will be “redeemed” and the new-covenant temple completed or “glorified” (Isa.52:8-9; Ephs. 2 & 5/Isa.60; Isa.65-66; 1Cor.13:10; Rev.21-22:4).

When Israel sees God “eye to eye” is when the New Creation has fully come, the marriage consummated, and Israel is completely established and restored. The message of (1Cor.13:10-12/Rev.17-22:4) is that the New Jerusalem is the New Creation and Bride of the Lamb which comes down to earth AFTER the first and Old Covenant Jerusalem/Harlot Bride/Heavens and Earth have passed away in the judgment of A.D. 70.

The 1 Corinthians 13/2 Corinthians 3-5:17 Connections

All futurist positions (Charismatic or not) are very reluctant to connect this “face to face” seeing in (1Cor.13:12) with the transformation and seeing God through a mirror in (2Cor.3-4). Why? The reason is that the contrast of the covenants and the passing of the old (which demands an A.D. 70 fulfillment) and the spiritual and metaphorical seeing of God is not a literal or biological seeing in (2Cor.3-4). Charismatics are just as afraid to make the connections as are reformed cessationalist’s. One would think that the exegete and student of hermeneutics would want to find similar themes and language elsewhere used by Paul (especially in letters to the same church) in order to understand what kind of “seeing” is involved here.

In 1Corinthians 13:8-11 prophecy, knowledge, and tonuges are described as supernatural gifts that were “in part” (not fulfilled), a child maturing into manhood, and would thus be done away when that which is perfect comes to fulfill and complete that which was “in part” and would thus bring to maturity the child state. This “in part,” (unfulfilled) and child like state of maturing, is described as “For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face.” Therefore, the child was growing into maturity and manhood by viewing the “face” or image of this “perfect thing” in a mirror (1Cor.13:12). This Greek word for “perfect” is teleios and means to bring to maturity, to reach the goal, bring to its end, finished. These miraculous gifts were brought about by the Holy Spirit in Israel’s old covenant “last days” to reveal it’s near end, maturity, and fulfillment as found “in Christ” the mediator of the new and better covenant. The old covenant’s “in part” status had a “goal” and “maturity” process that needed to be fulfilled by the new covenant work of Christ in His redemption performed in the cross and parousia. It is not enough to say that “that which is perfect” is the complete written word of God, because it is the fulfillment of that perfect Word that is in view. This will get clearer as we deal with related texts.

In 2 Corinthians 3 & 4, the Old Covenant glory is described as the fading glory of Moses face. The Old Covenant glory in and of it’s self was incomplete in that it could only bring death (2 Cor.3:6). Therefore, “the glory” of this system was “passing away” (2 Cor.3:11) because the glory of the New Covenant system was in the process of fulfilling the old. It is only at the end of this overlapping of covenantal ages that the old glory is done away by the new fulfilling and completing it. The mirror theme is likewise present here,

“But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.” (2Cor.3:8)

In context it is clear what the early church was beholding in a mirror:

“For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” (2Cor.4:6)

This transformation from “glory to glory” and beholding the Lord’s face has to do with the transformation of the Old and New Covenants and this transformation has nothing to do with a fleshly resurrection/transformation finding it’s fulfillment when our alleged physical corpses are united to our spirits at the end of time! It is addressing a period in which the Old and New Covenants are existing side by side and we know when the Old would pass and all of the promises to Israel would be fulfilled – AD70. What many fail to recognize is that this passage is teaching the same identical thing as 1 Corinthians 13:8-12. The gifts of tongues, knowledge, and prophecy were a part of giving divine revelation and clarity for the Church in order to bring Her to maturity and fulfill the Old Covenant’s “in part” status with the return of Christ. But how would Christ’s glorious face be seen? Well, the same way it was being seen in 2 Corinthians 3-4! Thus, it is obvious why so many futurists (Charismatics and those seeking to prove the gifts have ceased) avoid the correlation between these two passages! To equate these two passages is to describe the nature of seeing God’s face as spiritual and not literal and to equate these two passages is to find a clear “end” to the “passing” of the Old Covenant age in AD 70. The only one I have seen that attempts to make the correlation is Budgen in quoting Judisch. He does make the correlation to seeing “face to face” with “seeing Christ face to face” in 2 Corinthians 3-4:

“Those who want “the complete thing” of verse 10 to be the state of eternal glory argue that the first clause of verse 12 is referring to seeing Christ in a dim way throughout this life and that the second clause speaks of seeing Christ face to face in a literal sense in heaven. Such as interpretation is dubious, however, for two reasons. First, it takes the “dimly” (ainigmati) of the first clause figuratively, but the “face to face” (prosopon pros prosopon) of the second clause literally; a more consistent approach to the intended contrast seems preferable. If we thought that the object of the verb blepomen (“see”) were Christ, we should note that the concept of seeing Christ face to face occurs elsewhere in the Corinthian letters in a figurative sense (2Cor. 3:18; 4:6).”

Gentry apparently is afraid to bring up 2 Corinthians 3-4 in seeing Christ’s face in this text. He not only doesn’t cite the passage, but tries to lightly brush off the idea,

“The most that can be said is that God as the object of seeing must be inferred”

My friend David Green, has some excellent comments on the harmony of the two passages and connecting them to other related New Testament texts:

“In both passages Paul speaks of certain things being nullified and other things remaining: In II Cor. 3:7-14, he tells us that the old-covenant world was in progress of being nullified (done away), and in I Cor. 13:8-11 he predicts the nullification (doing away) of the revelatory gifts. Is it unlikely, in view of this initial comparison, that the “childish” (I Cor. 13:11; cf. Gal. 4:1-7) revelatory gifts were nullified at the same time that the prophetic old-covenant age was nullified in A.D. 70?

In I Cor. 13:13, “faith, hope and love” are said to remain or abide. In II Cor. 3:11 it is the New Covenant that remains or abides. The New Covenant in Christ’s blood is the very fulfillment and establishment of God’s “faith, hope and love” among mankind.

Note also the striking parallel between I Cor. 13:12 and II Cor. 3:18: In I Cor. 13:12, Paul says that the Church of his day was seeing (God) “in a mirror,” but that when “That which is perfect” (mature) would come (cf. Eph. 4:13), then the Church would see (Him) “face to Face.” (Rev. 22:4 reveals that the face-to-Face Presence of God is that which the saints in Christ realized in the New-Covenant world in A.D. 70.)

In II Cor. 3:18, Paul reiterates what he said in I Cor. 13:12, saying that the church of his day, though worshiping God with “unveiled face,” was yet seeing Him only “as in a mirror,” and was in progress of being transformed into His Image. There should be little question that the predicted seeing of God “face to Face” in I Cor. 13:12 should parallel the consummated transformation into His Image (cf. I Cor. 15:49) which the church realized in A.D. 70.

Now when we attempt to harmonize the teachings of I Cor. 13:8-13 and II Cor. 3:6-18, we find that the two passages are in truth complimentary dissertations on a common New-Testament theme; and that theme is covenantal transformation:

One can see the difference between the traditional Reformed position offered by Kenneth Gentry and his inability to allow Scripture to interpret Scripture and our view in refuting Charismatic and Pentecostal false teaching.

We shall now examine another text in which the same Greek word is used for “perfect” in 1 Corinthians 13:10 and note some parallel themes once again:

“And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect (Greek teleios as in 1Cor.13:10) man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;” (Ephs.4:11-13)

This “perfect” thing is to be the goal, maturity, and fulfillment of something that is described as developing into manhood—1 Corinthians 13:11. The “perfect” and “stature of the man” is the bringing to maturity the body of Christ – the Church. This same concept is described as the “unity of the faith.” Both in 1Corinthians (1Cor.10:16-17; 1Cor.12:13; & 1Cor.15:28) and throughout Ephesians (Ephs.1:22-23; Ephs.2:11-16; Ephs.3:3-6) the maturing and bringing to fullness the New Covenant Body of Christ is described as the unity of Jew and Gentile – when God would be “all in all.” Paul both describes this Jew / Gentile unity as “the unity of the faith” and earlier in the context as “the mystery” (Ephs.3:6-9). The fulfillment of “the mystery” was the fulfillment of the Great Commission, which was a near sign of Christ’s parousia which Paul defines as “Christ in you the hope of glory”:

“if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister. I now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up in my flesh what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ, for the sake of His body, which is the church, of which I became a minister according to the stewardship from God which was given to me for you, to fulfill the word of God, the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but now has been revealed to His saints. To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.” (Cols.1:23-27)

This maturity process of the “perfect man” (the Church – Body of Christ) was the “mystery of Christ” in which both Jews and Gentiles would become fellow citizens and be mutually built up as the New Covenant Temple:

“Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being joined together, grows into a HOLY TEMPLE in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.” (Ephs.2:19-22).

In 2 Corinthians 6:16 Paul quotes and refers to Ezekiel 37:25-28 as seeing Israel’s New Covenant “millennial” temple being built up spiritually as the Body of Christ – the Church. Peter likewise taught this in fulfillment of the Psalms and prophets as did the Jerusalem council witnessing the Gentiles being baptized into the Holy Spirit and thus partaking of Israel’s promises (Acts 4:11/1Pet.2:4-10; Acts 15:8, 16-17). As the Holy Spirit was poured out and enabled the Israelites to erect the tabernacle in the wilderness, the Holy Spirit was poured out in a miraculous way in order to build up the Church into a living temple, tabernacle, or dwelling place of God whereby He would be “all” (all of the promises of God) and “in all” (Jew & Gentile)” (Ephs.1:13-14; 22-23; 1Cor.15:28). It is not only inconsistent but not exegetically sound to say that the Church is still in its maturing infant state and at the same time claim that the gifts have ceased. Nor is it proper to claim that the Church has reached maturity by the completion of the cannon. In Paul’s theology, it is not the writing of prophecy of “that which is perfect” or the bringing to maturity of the “perfect man,” through the giving of the Scriptures, but rather it is the fulfilling of those prophecies and Scriptures that brings the maturing man to his face to face completion. All of these concepts of the maturing of the Perfect Man/Church and seeing “face to face” point us to the second coming of Christ where Christ would dwell in His people in the temple and new Jerusalem. In studying our word “perfect” and staying with this theme of the temple we shall now cover one last passage in the NT where telios is used.

“And the lesson which the Holy Spirit teaches is this—that the way into the true Holy place is not yet open so long as the outer tent still remains in existence. And this is a figure—for the time now present—answering to which both gifts and sacrifices are offered, unable though they are to give complete freedom from sin to him who ministers. For their efficacy depends only on meats and drinks and various washings, ceremonies pertaining to the body and imposed until a time of reformation. But Christ appeared as a High Priest of the blessings that are soon to come by means of the greater and more perfect (Greek telios) Tent of worship, a tent which has not been built with hands—that is to say does not belong to this material creation” (Heb. 9:8-11WEY).

Once again we encounter the “perfect” (Greek telios) in the context of contrasting the Old Covenant with the New. In this particular context in Hebrews, the Old Covenant represents the Holy Place while the New Covenant is represented by the Most Holy Place – in which complete access was soon to come. Also the theme of seeing God’s face is implied since when access into the Most Holy Place would be granted, is when this perfect face to face experience would be realized. A futurist interpretation of this contrast can be found in the comments of the JFB commentary,

“the first tabernacle—the anterior tabernacle, representative of the whole Levitical system. While it (the first tabernacle, and that which represents the Levitical system) as yet “has a standing” (so the Greek, that is, “has continuance”: “lasts”), the way to heaven (the antitypical “holiest place”) is not yet made manifest (compare Heb 10:19, 20). The Old Testament economy is represented by the holy place, the New Testament economy by the Holy of Holies.”

Some Greek scholars do support that this text is teaching that the Old Covenant had an “imposed” “legal” “standing” (symbolized by the presence of the Holy Place) until the time of reformation which would “soon” be upon the Hebrew audience. This validates the earlier context of the validity and readiness of the passing of the law (Heb.8:13) and what Jesus taught concerning the legal validity of all the jots and tittles of the Mosaic Law to be in force until all had been fulfilled (Mt.5:17-19). The veil or the “elements” which separated the two covenant worlds or compartments would soon be completely taken away and the New Covenant Most Holy Place or spiritual New Covenant Creation would be left having the final resurrection standing. This is what we see in Revelation 21:15-16 through chapter 22) in that the New Jerusalem/Bride is the City described as a perfect cube–The Most Holy Place.

Reformed theologian O. Palmer Robertson is not a preterist, and does not even attempt to tackle 1 Corinthians 13:10-12 in his book in seeking to refute Charismatic theology, but he does give a helpful illustration that I can develop while here in Hebrews and Revelation. He writes,

“In accepting this new state of things, the people of God should not mourn out of a sense of loss because of the end of the special gifts of revelation any more than the children of Israel should have mourned when the manna stopped as they entered the land of Canaan. They had arrived at their goal! They were in the land flowing with milk and honey! They had the advantage of a full feast from the produce of the land! Should they begin moaning because they had to plow in the morning rather than simply collect the manna? There were, after all, real advantages related to the manna in the wilderness over the produce of the land. Manna was present in adequate supply every morning without fail. But would it have been appropriate for the Israelites to complain over the cessation of the manna because of the work involved in fulfilling God’s command to ‘subdue the earth’ once they had eterend the land of promise?

The church’s relation to the miraculous gifts may be paralleled to Israel’s experience with the manna. Should the church complain that the miraculous gifts of tongues, prophecy and the ability to work wondrous signs have ceased as a result of the coming of the consummate revelation in the person of Jesus Christ? Obviously not. It would be nothing but childish immaturity for God’s privileged people today to complain about the cessation of the spectacular means to the end when the end itself has arrived.”

Having already examined “the end” or “goal” elsewhere in the NT, we correctly see or understand this term to refer to Christ’s return in AD 70 to fulfill the law and the prophets, not the writing of–or the cannon of Scripture itself. The book of Hebrews describes a second exodus under the New Covenant in which Christ’s second coming is likened to the inheritance and “rest” for God’s people. The “another day” and “day” of “rest” and inheriting “the heavenly country” (cf. Heb. 3-4, 12) throughout Hebrews is discussing Christ’s “in a very little while” second coming that would “not tarry” (Heb. 9:26-28, 10:25-37). When Christ came “soon” to cloth and reward the Church with the New Creation/World of Righteousness, She received the “hidden manna” and beheld Her Lord and Husband’s Face (Rev. 2:17/22:4, 12). Apart of the Churches mission in the New Heavens and Earth is laboring in the work of evangelizing the nations (Isaiah 65/Rev. 22:17). We simply do not need the miraculous and immature gifts when we have God’s presence today being “all” (His wonderful attributes) “and in all” (the Church consisting of all kinds of men) today!

Before concluding, I would like to answer one objection on 1 Corinthians 13:10-12 that Keith Mathison has given,

“If the “perfect” has come and we now see face-to-face rather than in a glass darkly (1 Cor. 13:10, 12), why do we have to grow in our understanding of doctrine? In the full-preterist system, it seems that the transitional period when Christ was away was more doctrinally stable than the present perfect age when Christ is here in fullness. Why did the coming of Christ in 70 lead to such a rapid doctrinal decay and confusion?”

First, the passage is not dealing with a perfect intellectual knowledge of all things (ie. all doctrine).

Secondly, the transitionary stage was not more “doctrinally stable” (ex. read 1&2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, etc). It was actually less because the draw of the Old Covenant world through Satan’s influence was still present.

Thirdly and lastly, the “fullness” or maturity of “knowledge” and “face-to-face” is what Daniel said would “increase” and that is a knowledge of Messiah and His Kingdom. Or simply put, it is New Covenant knowledge of His redemptive work in contrast to not looking at Him through the mirror of the Old Covenant world any longer. God and His Church do not have a relationship to each other based upon the Old Covenant order – it, (along with our sins) are “no longer remembered” because that Covenant has “vanished” (Heb. 8:13). Thus, the Church is not in a state of “doctrinal decay” or “confusion” on this matter! The Greek tense of Mark 8:38-9:1 indicates that the Church would know and understand that the Kingdom had “already come” as a result of Christ returning in power (ie. upon Jerusalem in AD 70 – Mark 13). Mathison maintains in the same book, that the coming of Jesus in Matthew 13 happened in AD 70 and that the Church has organically grown in this understanding (ie. postmillennial partial preterism). Therefore, the Church for the most part has understood that the Old Covenant kingdom passed away through the cross and or AD 70 and that the New Covenant Kingdom has come and is here now. The Church understands that She does not “know” Christ based upon Old Covenant standards. Realizing this is the CORE ISSUE of the text, then it can be easily seen how the Church has come to a “face to face” understanding Post AD 70. Is there room to grow in understanding the beauty of the New Covenant world of righteousness and what Jesus has done for us? “Yes.” After all, we are talking about “eternal life” and therefore, we will always be growing in our understanding of His grace and glorious Kingdom.

CONCLUSION

In AD 70 Christ returned within the first century “this generation” and placed His glory within His Church—thus forming and consummating God’s New Creation (2 Cor. 1:20; Cols. 1:27; Jn. 14:2-3, 23; Lk. 17:20-37/Lk. 21:20-32). The boy/child has reached manhood/maturity and is actively laboring in the work of evangelizing the nations of the world. The Church is God’s glorified New Creation bringing healing to the Nations (Rev. 22:17).

As I stated in my introduction, I was once a Charismatic as a young Christian. It was apart of God’s sovereign plan in my life to attend John Wimber’s church (the Vineyard) and Chuck Smith’s church (Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa, CA) so that I could eventually help and comfort Christians coming out of this false teaching. I was extremely zealous and when everyone else was laying hands on the people with headaches and backaches, I was laying my hands on the people in wheelchairs. Nothing ever happened and I saw how others manipulated the people in the wheelchairs with a guilt trip, “you must have someone in your life you haven’t forgiven—please visualize that you forgiving that person etc.” And for a while I was very disturbed that I couldn’t speak in “tongues.” But eventually practically everyone gives in from the peer-pressure and learned behavior of these churches and begins “speaking in tongues.” If you listen, you will find those “speaking in tongues” are usually repeating 3-10 words at the most and they are NOT known foreign languages of nations as was the case of Acts 2. There is no “miracle” here only learned behavior. Nor is there any “demonic” activity taking place causing these people to do this. Just really bad Bible teaching and in many cases a sincere desire to worship God the best they know how—selah. But now you know better J

Many non-Charismatics have claimed that when Pentecostals and Charismatics speak in “tongues” that it must be demonic. After all, the Roman Catholics and Mormon’s even speak in these “tongues,” they reason. Yet again, this is only learned behavior and Satan was crushed and destroyed “shortly” at Christ’s return in AD 70 (Romans 16:20; Revelation 20-22:6-7, 10-12, 20). I recently watched a video of a Charismatic giving a lecture on the influence of demons upon Christians. He went on for about an hour describing every kind of demon possible: demon of lust, demon of bitterness/un-forgiveness, demon of alcohol/nicotine/caffeine, etc. There were even demons you had in you that were passed down from the sins of your long dead ancestors! In other words the entire audience was CONDITIONED to believe they had a demon in them right then and now! So after this “Bible teaching,” he then “prayed” for god to deliver his people from these spirits. Well, everyone and their grandmother (literally) didn’t want a demon in them and surely wanted to get rid of lust, bitterness, etc., so after a little coaching from the more experienced Charismatics (of flailing and spitting demons into handkerchiefs), they began to follow suit!

There simply is no speaking in tongues, no approaching God through an Old Covenant mirror/partial knowledge, no new divine revelations being given to the Church today, etc. Christ as our Perfect New Creation has come and our sins have been forgiven. If this isn’t exciting enough for you, go buy a Hal Lindsey book and watch TBN. But if you do, you will not be worshiping God in spirit and in truth and you will continue to place your hope on things which can be seen and not on those things which cannot be seen.

God had created the Old Covenant with Israel to include “signs and wonders.” God’s miraculous signs demonstrated to the other Nations that Jehovah’s divine revelation and unfolding of Himself and His redemptive plan through Israel’s prophets was true and could be trusted unlike the false gods and prophets of the other Nations. The purpose of miraculous healings in the New Testament were to demonstrate that Jesus (as God) could forgive sin (cf. Mark 2:1-12). Once Messiah finished fulfilling Israel’s promises of redemption for His people, by “putting away the sin” of His people forever (the Church/the transformed Israel of God), the immature and temporal state of these gifts ceased. This is the reason the miraculous gifts have not continued into the New Covenant Church age or the NT’s “age about to come.” To teach otherwise is not exegetical and it brings emotional damage upon professing and even real immature Christians.

It has been my prayer and desire that this article will get widely read and eventually brings healing to Charismatics and non-Charismatics alike. But if real and lasting healing is truly desired and sought after from the reader, it can only come from a solid exegetical treatment of 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 and the related texts. The Biblical Preterist position is the ONLY position that does this.