Acts 1:3–11 and the AD 70 Parousia: Jesus’ 40 Days and the New Covenant Second Exodus 40 Years Generation

Introduction

As Full Preterists, we stand on the shoulders of exegetes like John Lightfoot, John Gill, Milton Terry, and Keith Mathison to explore Acts 1:3, 8–11. This article argues that Jesus’ 40-day post-resurrection ministry inaugurated a New Covenant second exodus (AD 30-70), fulfilled in AD 70, as anticipated by the Song of Moses (Deut. 32:5, 20). Peter applies this to his “perverse and crooked generation” (Acts 2:40), echoing Jesus and Paul, who frame their eschatology around Moses’ prophecy of judgment and a new covenant nation (Matt. 17:17; Phil. 2:15).  Lightfoot and Gill connect the “forty days” of Acts 1:3 to a 40-year Messianic transition (AD 30–70), rooted in the first exodus (Num. 13–14) and Jewish expectations of a second exodus, moving from the Old Covenant “this age” to the New Covenant “age to come” (cf. Dr. A. Cohen). This culminated in Christ’s cloud-coming via the Roman armies in AD 70 (Matt. 24:30).

Mathison applies all gospel references to the Son of Man’s coming (e.g., Matt. 10:22–23; 16:27–28; 24:27–30; 25:31; 26:64; Luke 17:20-37) to AD 70, and we concur that the cloud coming of Christ in Revelation 1:7 was also “shortly” fulfilled at this time (Rev. 1:1–22:7). We agree with Mathison that the Great Commission’s fulfillment in Acts 1:8 triggers Christ’s return in Acts 1:11, just as Matthew 24:14’s Great Commission fulfillment marked the cloud-coming in AD 70 (Matt. 24:30; Rom. 10:18).  But how does the Great Commission and AD 70 cloud of Christ in the gospels get changed to an end of world history Great Commission and physical coming of Jesus on clouds in Acts 1:8-11?

Unlike Mathison, Lightfoot, and Gill, Partial Preterist Milton Terry harmonized Matthew 24:30, Revelation 1:7, and Acts 1:11 to be one and the same AD 70 cloud coming of Christ event.

This article argues, based on theological sources, that Acts 1:3, 8–11 depicts a second exodus spanning 40 days, mirrored by a 40-year generation (AD 30–70), culminating in Christ’s AD 70 Parousia, marked by His cloud coming. Luke’s omission of the Great Commission “sign” in Luke 21 is addressed in Acts 1:8, fulfilling the “sign” of Matthew 24:14 and Mark 13:10 before AD 70, signaling the imminent consummation (Acts 1:11; 2:20–40; 17:31 YLT; 24:15 YLT). The Old Covenant promised land prefigured the “heavenly land” and “City” anticipated by Abraham and the prophets, which the Church inherited in AD 70, within an imminent timeframe (Heb. 10:1–13:14; Rev. 3:11–12; Gal. 4:26). At the Parousia, Christ enveloped His Church in His glory-cloud, fulfilling 1 Thessalonians 4:15–17, John 14:2–3, 23, and Luke 17:20–37, enabling believers to dwell eternally in God’s presence (Rev. 21:3, 22).

Acts 1:3 the “Forty Days” and Second Exodus Generation (AD 30 – 70)

John Lightfoot wrote of these 40 days:

“Being seen of them forty days. It is a tradition. On the evening of the Passover they hanged Jesus.” “It is a tradition. R. Elizer saith, ‘The days of the Messiah are forty years,” according as it is said, ‘Forty years shall I be grieved with this generation.’ The Gloss is, “Because it is (in the future tense) it is a sign the prophecy is concerning the time to come.” It is ingenuously done, however, of these Jews, that they parallel that faithless generation that was in the days of the Messiah with that perverse and rebellious generation that had been in the wilderness: for they will, both of them, prove a loathing and offense to God for the space of forty years. And as those forty years in the wilderness were numbered according to the forty days in which the land had been searching; so also may those forty years of the Messiah be numbered according to the forty days wherein he was conversant amongst mankind after his resurrection from the dead.[1]

The Biblical Significance of the Forty Days 

John Gill, following John Lightfoot, emphasized the typological importance of the “forty days” in Acts 1:3:

“This number of ‘forty days’ is a remarkable one in Scripture. The flood was forty days upon the earth; and so long Moses was in the mount with God; such a number of days the spies were searching the land of Canaan; so many days Goliath presented himself to the armies of Israel; and so long a time Elijah went in the strength of the meat the angel provided for him; and for such a length of time the prophet Ezekiel was to bear the iniquity of the house of Judah; and such a term of time was given out by Jonah for the destruction of Nineveh; and so many days Christ fasted, and was tempted in the wilderness.”[2] 

Gill’s enumeration of these Old Testament patterns underscores the forty days as a period of divine preparation, testing, or transition, setting the stage for Christ’s post-resurrection ministry as the inauguration of a new covenant exodus.

Jewish Traditions and the Messianic Expectation

Gill continues, addressing Jewish traditions about the Messiah:

“The Jews pretend, that forty days before Jesus was put to death he was led forth, and a crier went before him, declaring, that whoever would, had liberty to testify to his innocence if they could, but no man appeared for him: but this is false; the truth of the matter is, that for forty days after his resurrection he showed himself to his disciples, and by proving the truth of his resurrection, he proved his own innocence and uprightness. If the testimony of Rabbenu Hakadosh, as cited by Galatinus, could be depended on, the Jews had a notion of this forty days’ conversation of the Messiah with his disciples, after his resurrection; who say, ‘the Messiah, after his resurrection, shall converse with the righteous, and they shall hear his precepts “forty days”, answerable to those forty days in which he shall be in the wilderness to afflict his soul, before they shall kill him; and these being finished, he shall ascend to heaven, and sit at the right hand of God, as it is said, Psalm 110:1.’ But this seems rather to be the pious fraud of some Christian, than the words of a Jew.”[3]

Gill critiques these traditions, noting their unreliability while acknowledging their reflection of a Messianic expectation tied to a forty-day period, which aligns with the post-resurrection ministry in Acts 1:3.

The Typological Second Exodus (AD 30–70)

Gill concludes by connecting the forty days to a forty-year Messianic period:

“However, they do say, that ‘the days of the Messiah are “forty days”, as it is said, Psalm 95:10 “forty years long was I grieved”; or, as they interpret it, “shall I be grieved with this generation”: intimating, that the generation of the Messiah, and of the wilderness, would be much alike, and equally grieving to God, and reckoning a day for a year, as the Lord did with that generation, Numbers 14:33. These forty days Christ was with his disciples, may be an emblem of the forty years which were to run out from his death, to his coming again to take vengeance on the Jewish nation; for so long time was there from thence to the destruction of Jerusalem.”[4] 

These insights from Lightfoot and Gill establish the typological significance of the forty days in Acts 1:3, mirroring the forty-year second exodus generation (AD 30–70). Rooted in Old Testament patterns, this motif is further illuminated by Jesus’ role as the Passover Lamb and the fulfillment of the exodus narrative in Luke and John, culminating in the AD 70 Parousia.

The Inauguration of Christ’s “Exodus” and the Passover Lamb (Luke 9:30–31; John 6)

In Luke 9:26–27, Jesus declared that some disciples would witness His second coming in glory and judgment. Eight days later, the Transfiguration (Luke 9:28–36) revealed its nature, as Moses and Elijah, representing the Law and Prophets, appeared in glory and spoke of His “exodus”:

“[They] appeared in glory and spoke of his exodus that he was going to accomplish in Jerusalem” (Luke 9:31 NAB). 

Scholars such as Tabb, Walton, Estelle, Watts, Fitzmyer, Talbert, Carson, and Moessner affirm that Luke’s “exodus” (9:31) signifies a second exodus motif, encompassing Jesus’ death, resurrection, and ascension as a new act of deliverance. This exodus achieved liberation from sin and spiritual death, fulfilling the anti-type redemptive pattern of the original exodus.

The Transfiguration prefigures Christ’s second coming in AD 70, when He fulfilled “all that was written” in the Law (Moses) and Prophets (Elijah) within His generation (Luke 21:22, 32). The fading glory of Moses and Elijah symbolized the temporary Old Covenant, while Christ’s increasing glory heralded the New Covenant (2 Cor. 3:7–18). The Father’s rejection of Peter’s proposal to build three tents (Luke 9:33–35) underscored the Old Covenant’s transience, which vanished in AD 70, urging disciples to heed Christ’s enduring words of the New Covenant revelation (cf. Matt. 5:17–18; 24:35).

As the Passover Lamb, crucified on the day of preparation (John 19:14, 31), Jesus presented Himself in John 6 as the Bread from heaven, promising eternal life: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you” (John 6:53). He clarified that His words are “spirit and life” (John 6:63), emphasizing spiritual participation in the New Covenant through faith, not literal consumption or sacramentalism, refuting Roman Catholic and other interpretations.

The typology of the sacrificial lamb is simple to understand.  The sinner or High Priest would lay his hand on the lamb symbolically transferring the sins of the person or nation to the lamb.  The lamb would then be slain and put upon the alter and the cloud ascending to heaven was a sweet aroma to the Lord.  The lamb died taking the sin and spiritual separation of the sinner or nation upon it.  The hope was that when Messiah came, He would take away the sin and spiritual separation of the sinner so that they could be in God’s presence forever.  While the animal took on the sin and separation for the sinner, the concept of the cloud arising from the sacrifice to heaven was understood as the sinner’s soul now rising to be accepted to God.  So the smoke arising from the sacrifice not only represents the prayers from the souls/spirits of man (or corporate Israel or the corporate church), but the separation of the physical body and the soul/spirit at death.  Some have pointed out this process demonstrates Israel’s concept of the afterlife in the ancient world.[5]  I would tend to agree with that observation.  Robert Johnston observes that the smoke/cloud ascending to heaven not only represents the prayers to God but the soul’s ascent to heaven awaiting acceptance and access to God’s presence:

“When the blood of the animal is poured on the base of the altar of the earth, its soul is sanctified and is released to appear at the base of the altar of God in heaven. This depicts what happens to each individual soul who has committed his or her life to God when they die. The Apostle John saw this and testified, ‘And when he had opened the 5th seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held’” (Rev. 6:9).[6]

Likewise, Jesus, as the ultimate Passover Lamb, bore our sins (2 Cor. 5:21), enduring spiritual separation from the Father (Matt. 27:46) to secure eternal fellowship with God. His atonement addressed the spiritual death that came through Adam, not physical death. It deals with physical death in the sense that after men died in sin under the Old Covenant and prior to AD 70, their souls or spirits were held in Hades or Abraham’s bosom awaiting Christ’s redemptive work and deliverance. Christ did not physically die so we won’t physically die.  But Christ did die a certain kind of death (separated from the Father) so we won’t have to.  Defining His substitutionary work as preventing physical death leads to an untenable conclusion: if physical death were the “last enemy” (1 Cor. 15:26), Christ’s redemption would appear ineffective, as believers continue to die physically. However, the Wuest New Testament accurately translates 1 Corinthians 15:26 as the “death” (spiritual death through Adam), which was “being destroyed” through Christ’s work and fully vanquished at His AD 70 Parousia positionally for those “in Christ.” Jesus’ promise that believers “will never die” (John 8:51; 11:26) refers to spiritual life and not a biological reality for us just as “never thirst” or “never hunger” are spiritual realities.   Consider the following texts:

1). Matthew 27:46: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”—reflecting Christ’s bearing of spiritual separation. 

2). Romans 5:12–21: Sin and spiritual death entered through Adam, but Christ’s righteous act brought justification and spiritual eternal life. 

3). 2 Corinthians 5:21: “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” 

4). John 8:51; 11:26: Believers who keep Christ’s word “will never see death,” referring to spiritual life in God’s presence.

The following chart clarifies this contrast:

Adam’s One Trespass

Christ’s One Righteous Act

Sin entered the world Righteousness entered the world
Spiritual death and separation reigned Eternal life and fellowship with God reign
Condemnation through Adam’s disobedience Justification through Christ’s obedience
Many made sinners in Adam Many made righteous in Christ

Through Adam, spiritual death and separation from God reigned; through Christ, believers receive grace, righteousness, and eternal life (Rom. 5:17–21). Christ became sin to satisfy God’s wrath, enabling believers to “become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:21). His redemptive work, completed at the AD 70 Parousia, ushered in the New Covenant creation, where believers are “born of God” and “cannot” commit the “sin leading to death” (1 John 3:9; 5:16–18). As John once again affirms in Revelation 3:12, those in the New Jerusalem remain in God’s presence, never returning to the spiritual death and darkness that is outside the New Jerusalem (cf. Rev. 21-22).

In the Sovereign Grace Full Preterist view, Christ’s substitutionary atonement is fully accomplished and applied, achieving its complete purpose. Believers are “in Christ,” clothed in His righteousness, and will “never die” spiritually (John 11:26). Through His cross and “soon” second coming (1 Cor. 13:10–12; Rev. 22:4–7, 10, 20), we stand perfect before the Father, unashamed beholding His face in the New Covenant creation.

Physical Death and Resurrection of Christ also Served as a “Sign”

His physical resurrection fulfilled Old Testament prophecy that His flesh would not see corruption (Psa. 16:10; Acts 2:25-31), serving as a miraculous “sign” in first-century Jewish culture, where decay began after three days.  Since “signs” point to something, what was Jesus physical resurrection (and that of Lazarus) a sign of and what did it point to?  Per John 20:24-31it pointed to belief in Christ so that men could have eternal spiritual “life.”  Jesus’ miracles—making the lame walk (Matt. 9:1-8), giving sight to the blind (John 9), feeding thousands (John 6:1-15, 35), and raising Lazarus (John 11:1-44)—were “signs” that pointed to deeper spiritual realities: forgiveness, spiritual sight, eternal sustenance, and resurrection from spiritual death.

Critics who insist that human personhood requires a physical body and therefore the resurrection couldn’t have been fulfilled in AD 70, or that Jesus must retain one to serve as our “eternal high priest” (Heb. 7:24-25), are refuted by Scripture’s depiction of disembodied yet fully human identities. Samuel’s spirit, described as an “old man” (1 Sam. 28:14), retains his personhood without a physical body while retaining a spiritual recognizable body fit for the afterlife, and Jesus’ promise to the thief, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43), affirms their personal identities in the spiritual realm. Similarly, the claim that Jesus’ priesthood depends on a physical body falter, as His three-day death would imply a lapse in His “eternal” priesthood (Heb. 7:16). The idea that Jesus was not the eternal God-man or High Priest for 3 days is rank heresy for sure.  Instead of embracing this heresy, it should be clear that His divine-human nature engulfed in the glory cloud and ascended to heaven (Acts 1:9) ensures unbroken eternal fellowship with the Father and intercession, fulfilling the spiritual second exodus.  Per Hebrews 9-10 Christ was the first trailblazer that would bring the rest of His Church into the New Covenant heavenly Most Holy Place at His “in a very, very little while” High Priestly second appearing to consummate the second exodus in AD 70.

The sacrificial cloud imagery illuminates Acts 1:9. After forty days, Jesus was the “first” to cross into the heavenly promised land, or heavenly Most Holy Place returning to the Father’s pre-incarnate glory (John 17:5). His physical form was temporary, as seen in Old Testament theophanies where God appeared in human form but returned to His spiritual state—in one case ascending in the fire and smoke/cloud of a sacrifice (Gen. 18; 32:24-30; Judg. 13:20). Jesus remains fully human in His soul and spirit, integrated into the Logos, interceding eternally (Heb. 7:25).

Post-resurrection, Jesus recapitulated exodus provisions: teaching the kingdom (Acts 1:3), providing miraculous sustenance (John 21:1–14), imparting enlightenment (Luke 24:27, 44–49), and 10 days later giving the Holy Spirit for guidance and protection (Acts 2; John 14; Exod. 16; 19-20; 13:21-22). This sets the stage for the Great Commission and His promised return as the High Priest would appear a “second time” from the Temple to the eagerly awaiting congregation.

Jesus’ forty days also mirrors the second exodus motif in that Moses functioned as Israel’s High Priest and fasted for forty days and ascended into God’s glory cloud.  Jesus is the New Covenant Moses that is an eternal High Priest that would bring all of His people into the glory cloud on top of the heavenly Mount Zion in AD 70.  Perhaps on this note we need to take a brief rabbit trail to 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17.

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 = Acts 1:11

Since I made the typological connection between Moses fasting for 40 days and ascending to the top of Mount Sinai, entering the glory cloud with God, and Christ ministering to His disciples for 40 days before ascending to heaven into the Most Holy Place, I should unpack that a bit. The brief take is that after 40 days Moses ascends to the Most Holy Place glory cloud presence of the Father to mediate the old covenant while after 40 days Jesus ascends in the glory cloud in the heavenly Most Holy Place to intercede and mediate the new covenant.  He returns in AD 70 in the glory cloud and establishes His kingdom and presence “within” His Church.  We should make these connections especially since many equate the coming of Christ in Acts 1:11 with 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17. Let’s briefly unpack 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, focusing on the typology.

A day was approaching when Christ would deliver believers from their persecutions and pour out His wrath upon their persecutors (1 Thess. 1:10; cf. 2 Thess. 1:6–7). When that day came, the Lord descended from heaven with a word of command (or “a shout”), with an archangelic voice, and with a trumpet call of God; and the dead in Christ rose.  Then the living in Christ and the dead in Christ were simultaneously “caught up” in “clouds” to “a meeting of the Lord in the air.”

Since the cloud-covered mountain is not literal, but is heavenly, neither then was the meeting that took place in the heavenly mountain (i.e., in the clouds in the air) literal.  Therefore, the shout, voice, trumpet, mountain, cloud, and meeting of 1 Thessalonians 4:16 are all spiritual antitypes of the literal shout, voice, trumpet, mountain, cloud, and meeting of Exodus 19 and 20 (Heb. 12:18–22).

Since Exodus 19-24 serves as a type of the trumpet gathering or chatting away of Matthew 24:30-31 and 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, we notice a number of important points.  According to James Jordan in his book, Through New Eyes, Mount Sinai served as Israel’s tabernacle or temple and served as a model for the structure of the tabernacle and temple.

The Courtyard – In the tabernacle / temple area, the courtyard was where the average Jew could offer sacrifices at the bronze altar and worship.  It corresponds to the area where the Israelites gathered at Mount Sinai’s base.

The Holy Place – The average priest had access not only to the courtyard, but also to the Holy Place.  Despite being able to advance to this area, he was unable to enter the Most Holy Place.  We see the seventy elders of Israel eating and dining with God here, amid the mountain but not at the top. 

The Most Holy Place – The Most Holy Place was only accessible to the High Priest once a year.  The glory cloud presence of God rested above the ark of the covenant in this location. When Moses ascended to the top of the mountain to meet with God face to face and receive the revelation of the old covenant law, he was acting as Israel’s High Priest.

In 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 and 2 Corinthians 3, Paul is communicating that this was a type.  At the top of the cloud-covered mountain, Moses was able to enter the Most Holy Place, where God was present.  The old covenant system, however, provided him and Israel with a temporary glory. Between AD 30 – 70 there was an “increasing” new covenant age of glory and the old covenant veil of the old covenant age was gradually being lifted away from God’s people.  As a corporate body of new covenant kings and priests, we have ascended into God’s presence and the Most Holy Place on Mount Zion. Christ and His kingdom have manifested themselves on our hearts through the revelation of the new covenant.  The Church has been raised and was feasting with God at His wedding feast at Christ’s parousia in AD 70.

What we have then in 1 Thessalonians 4:15–17 is the “rapturously” metaphorical language of a prophet who is speaking of antitypical, spiritual realities —the transcendent profundities of Christological glory in and among the saints in the consummation of the ages.  If this sounds like an over-spiritualization, it shouldn’t. The Lord Jesus Himself was opposed to a literal removal of the church out of the world:

“I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one” (John 17:15).

The “rapture” passage is no more literal than the prophecy of Ezekiel 37:4–14.  In that passage, God caused a valley full of dry bones to come together.  He attached tendons to them and put skin on them. Then He caused the bodies to breathe and they stood on their feet as a vast army. The bones represented the house of Israel.  They were hopelessly cut off from the land, and were said to be in “graves.” As God had done for the dry bones, He was going to do for the house of Israel.

In the same way, in 1 Thessalonians 4:15–17, God raised up His church —the first fruits of the resurrection harvest— which was anxiously longing for the consummation of redemption and atonement.  As a mighty warrior, the Lord issued forth his shout of command and sounded the trumpet of God. Then His spiritual army arose by His power.  They met Him on His way to His temple to judge the enemies in His kingdom (Mal. 3:1). That is when God afflicted the persecutors of His church, when He gave His people relief and glorified Himself in them (2 Thess. 1:8–10).

Being revealed with Christ in glory (Col. 3:4) and becoming like Him and seeing Him in His Parousia (1 Jn. 3:2) had nothing to do with escaping physical death or with being literally caught up into the literal sky or with being biologically changed.  It had to do with God’s people, living and dead, being “gathered together” to become His eternal tabernacle, His spiritual body, the new man, the heavenly Mount Zion, and the New Jerusalem in the Spirit. “This mystery is great” (Eph. 5:32), and is therefore communicated in the accommodative “sign language” of prophetic metaphor.

Since our Lord came “with His saints” and destroyed the earthly temple in AD 70 (Heb. 9:8), the church of all ages lives and reigns in glory with Him forever (Rom. 6:8; 2 Cor. 13:4; 2 Tim. 2:11–12). Now whether we are alive or asleep, we “live together with Him” (1 Thess. 5:10).  This was not the case in the OT, when to die was to be cut off from the people of God.  As Paul says in Romans 14:8–9, “…whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s.  For to this end Christ died and rose and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.”  

Acts 1:8, 11 and The Great Commission and Cloud Coming of Christ

 Partial preterists like Keith Mathison admit that fulfilling the Great Commission of Acts 1:8 triggers Christ’s coming in Acts 1:11:

“The time frame [of Christ’s Second Coming] is hinted at in the preceding context. The disciples are given a commission to be Christ’s witnesses ‘in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth’ (Acts 1:8). The implication is that Christ’s visible return will follow the completion of the mission to the remotest part of the earth.”[7]

I agree that Acts 1:8’s fulfillment precedes Acts 1:11’s cloud coming. Mathison uses Romans 10:18 to prove Matthew 24:14’s Great Commission was fulfilled pre-AD 70, thus Matthew 24:30’s cloud coming occurred then. Romans 10:18 employs both Greek terms for “world”—ge (land/earth) and oikumene (inhabited world)—confirming that both commissions (Matt. 24:14; Acts 1:8) were fulfilled by AD 70, so both cloud comings (Matt. 24:30; Acts 1:11) occurred then.  This should be especially apparent since in Luke 21 he omits the sign of the Great Commission because he will use it in Acts 1:8 as an outline for the rest of the book of Acts.

The gospel’s proclamation (Matt. 24:14; oikoumenē, Roman world) was fulfilled by AD 62, as Paul declared it “proclaimed in all creation” (Col. 1:23; ekērychthē, aorist) and “to all nations” (Rom. 16:26; ethnē). Acts 1:8 outlines Acts 2–28, tracing the gospel’s spread to the Roman Empire’s ends. The following charts align Matthew 24:14 with Acts 1:8.

Great Commission Fulfillment

Prophecy Fulfillment Context/Notes
“Gospel… preached in all the world [oikoumenē]… then shall the end come” (Matt. 24:14) “…Their sound has gone out to all the earth… ends of the world [oikoumenē]” (Rom. 10:18) Oikoumenē: Roman Empire (Luke 2:1). Fulfilled by AD 57–58.
“Gospel must first be published among all nations [ethnos]” (Mark 13:10) “…My gospel… made known to all nations [ethnos]…” (Rom. 16:25–26) Ethnos: Gentile peoples (Acts 10:35). Fulfilled by AD 57–58.
“Go into all the world [kosmos]…” (Mark 16:15) “…Gospel… in all the world [kosmos]…” (Col. 1:5–6) Kosmos: Roman sphere. Fulfilled by AD 62.
“Proclaim the gospel to the whole creation [ktisis]” (Mark 16:15) “…Gospel… preached to every creature [ktisis]…” (Col. 1:23) Ktisis: Humanity. Fulfilled by AD 62.
“Witnesses… in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, end of the earth [gē]” (Acts 1:8) Jerusalem: Acts 2; Judea: Acts 8:1; Samaria: Acts 8:5; End: Acts 10–28; “…to all the earth [gē]” (Rom. 10:18) Gē: Roman Empire. Fulfilled by AD 62; Rev. 14:6 (AD 65–66) symbolizes completion.

 Acts 1:8 Commission Fulfillment and Outpouring of Holy Spirit on Each Group

Region / Acts 1:8

Scriptural Fulfillment People Groups Reached

Holy Spirit Outpouring

Jerusalem Acts 2:1–41: At Pentecost, 3,000 convert (2:41). Acts 3–5: Further growth (4:4). Jews/proselytes from various nations (Acts 2:5–11). Acts 2:1–4: Tongues; Acts 4:31: Boldness.
Judea Acts 8:1, 4: Preaching in Judea. Acts 8:26–39: Ethiopian eunuch. Jews, Gentile proselytes in Judea (Acts 8:1, 8:36–39). Acts 8:29: Spirit guides Philip.
Samaria Acts 8:5–25: Philip’s preaching, many believe (8:12). Samaritans (Acts 8:5). Acts 8:14–17: Spirit received.
End of the Earth Acts 10:1–48: Cornelius’ household. Acts 13–28: Paul’s missions to Rome; “…to all the earth [gē]” (Rom. 10:18). Gentiles, Jews in Roman Empire (Acts 10:35; 13:46–48). Acts 10:44–48; 19:6: Tongues, prophecy.

These charts confirm Jesus’ gospel mandate was fulfilled within the Roman oikoumenē by AD 62, as evidenced by the Spirit’s outpouring. The Greek terms—oikoumenē (Roman world, Luke 2:1), ethnē (people groups, Acts 10:35), and gē (land/region, Luke 21:23)—reflect a first-century scope, fulfilling the Great Commission before the “end of the [Old Covenant] age” (Matt. 24:14; 28:19–20; Acts 1:8) and thus within Jesus’ and Paul’s contemporary “this generation” (Matt. 24:34).

Thus, Paul’s statement in Romans 10:18 demonstrates that both Matthew 24:14 and Acts 1:8 were fulfilled, triggering Christ’s AD 70 cloud coming (Matt. 24:30; Acts 1:11), as detailed below:

Element

Matt. 24:14, 30 Acts 1:8, 11

Fulfillment in Romans 10:18

Great Commission “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world [oikumene] as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.” (Matthew 24:14) “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 [ge].” (Acts 1:8) “But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: ‘Their sound has gone out to all the earth [ge], and their words to the ends of the world [oikumene].’” (Romans 10:18)
Cloud Coming “Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven… and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” (Matthew 24:30) “This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.” (Acts 1:11) Both commissions use ge and oikumene, showing pre-AD 70 fulfillment (e.g., Colossians 1:23 for oikumene; Acts’ progression: Jerusalem [Acts 2], Samaria [Acts 8], Judea/Gentiles [Acts 10–19]), thus both comings in AD 70.
Scope and Sign Preached to nations (ethne) before the end/tribulation; precedes cloud coming. Witnesses to ends of earth/land; precedes cloud coming. Paul confirms world-wide reach using both terms; Jews from “every nation under heaven” (Acts 2:5) and empowered at Pentecost to fulfill it.

Ge refers to “the then known lands, regions, territories, countries, etc.…”: 1) Jerusalem (Acts 2 – Jews); 2) Samaria (Acts 8 – Samaritans); 3) Judea (Acts 10 – God-fearers); 4) The earth/land (Acts 19 – Gentiles). Partial preterists like Mathison cite Romans 10:18 to confirm Matthew 24:14’s fulfillment by AD 70, using oikumene. Since Paul also uses ge in the same verse, Romans 10:18 equally proves Acts 1:8’s fulfillment by AD 70.

Having established that the Great Commission’s fulfillment by AD 62 triggered Christ’s cloud coming in AD 70, we now examine the nature of that return in Acts 1:9-11. The cloud imagery, central to both Jesus’ ascension and His promised return, ties directly to the second exodus motif, where God’s glory cloud guided and judged Israel, now fulfilled in Christ’s spiritual presence and power exhibited in AD 70.

Acts 1:9-11 Christ Would Come Back in a Similar Way He Left

Many Futurists insist that Jesus’ physical body was seen ascending into the sky. However, Acts 1:9 states, “He was lifted up, and a cloud received Him from their eyes.” Jesus was seen before being “lifted up,” but it is unclear if He was directly seen ascending.

In Acts 1:11, the disciples were told Jesus would return “in like manner” as they saw Him enter heaven. This similarity lies in His coming in the Father’s glory-cloud (Matt. 16:27), not a physical body. Jesus was hidden in the cloud, indirectly seen entering the sky, like a son seeing his father’s plane take off without seeing his father’s body. Thus, His return “in like manner” would not involve physical visibility but a spiritual presence in the cloud, indwelling His church at the old covenant’s end (Luke 17:20–37; John 14:2–3, 23).

The phrase “in like manner” (Greek: hon tropon, Acts 1:11) denotes “in a similar way,” not “exactly the same way.” As Milton Terry notes, hon tropon in other biblical contexts implies similarity rather than identical form, emphasizing glory and purpose—here, coming on the cloud(s) with the purpose of gathering or catching Christ’s people to Himself and the Father (Matt. 24:30-31 / Acts 1:11 / 1 Thess. 4:15-17)—rather than a precise replication of His ascension. Luke could have used akribōs (meaning “precisely,” Acts 18:25) to indicate exactness, but his choice of hon tropon supports a similarity and spiritual fulfillment. Jesus did not ascend on a horse with a sword from His mouth, nor did “every eye” of the Tribes of the Land of Israel see Him leave (Rev. 19:11–15; 1:7). The argument for an “exact same way” return falters when other Second Coming passages are applied literally to His ascension.

Futurists err in claiming Jesus would return in exactly the same way as He “departed.” Scripture teaches He would return as He entered the sky—hidden in God’s glory cloud. The order of events is:

1). He was taken up (Acts 1:9).

2). A cloud received Him from their eyes (Acts 1:9).

These may have occurred simultaneously, as Partial Preterist Keith Mathison notes, suggesting the verse could read, “He was lifted up; that is, a cloud received Him out of their sight.”[8] Jesus may have been instantly hidden in the cloud.

3). The disciples saw Him going into the sky, gazing intently as He ascended in the cloud (Acts 1:10–11).

In the Old Testament, God’s glory was never literally seen during judgments or salvation (Exod. 13:21; Isa. 19:1). Jesus, hidden in the glory cloud, was “taken up in glory” (1 Tim. 3:16) and would return as the Ancient of Days (Dan. 7:13 OG LXX; Rev. 1:7-17).

God became flesh, seen and touched as Jesus (John 1:14; 1 John 1:1), but this was temporary (Heb. 5:7), tied to the old covenant’s types and shadows (Gal. 4:4; Rom. 5–8; 2 Cor. 3; Heb. 8:13). Though no longer in the flesh, Jesus retains His human nature, as do saints in heaven, who remain human without physical bodies. Neither Jesus nor believers are “nonhuman,” contrary to some Futurist claims.

The angels’ question, “Why do you stand here looking into the sky?” (Acts 1:11), implies Jesus would not return in physical form. Longing for His earthly form was futile; He had returned to His pre-incarnate glory. His return would mirror His ascent—hidden in the Father’s glory cloud- that would also engulf His Church in a spiritual and permanent indwelling (John 14:23; Luke 17:20-37; Heb. 12:22–24).  Most commentators and cross-references align Acts 1:11’s “in like manner” coming with the cloud comings or coming of Christ in Matthew 16:27–28, 24:30–31, 26:64–68; Luke 21:27; and Revelation 1:7, which Partial Preterists see as all fulfilled by AD 70. While the Partial Preterist system agrees these passages were fulfilled in AD 70 most inconsistently exempt Acts 1:11 to support Futurist creeds, despite admitting Christ was figuratively “seen” coming on the clouds in AD 70. Partial Preterist Milton Terry, however, harmonized these texts:

“Whatever the real nature of the Parousia, as contemplated in this prophetic discourse, our Lord unmistakably associates it with the destruction of the temple and city, which he represents as the signal termination of the pre-Messianic age. The coming on clouds, the darkening of the heavens, the collapse of elements, are, as we have shown above, familiar forms of apocalyptic language, appropriated from the Hebrew prophets. 

Acts i, 11, is often cited to show that Christ’s coming must needs be spectacular, “in like manner as ye beheld him going into the heaven.” But (1) in the only other three places where [“in like manner”] occurs, it points to a general concept rather than the particular form of its actuality. Thus, in Acts vii, 28, it is not some particular manner in which Moses killed the Egyptian that is notable, but rather the certain fact of it. In 2 Tim. iii, 8, it is likewise the fact of strenuous opposition rather than the special manner in which Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses. And in Matt. xxiii, 37, and Luke xiii, 34, it is the general thought of protection rather than the visible manner of a mother bird that is intended. Again (2), if Jesus did not come in that generation, and immediately after the great tribulation that attended the fall of Jerusalem, his words in Matt. xvi, 27, 28, xxiv, 29, and parallel passages are in the highest degree misleading. (3) To make the one statement of the angel in Acts i, 11, override all the sayings of Jesus on the same subject and control their meaning is a very one-sided method of biblical interpretation. But all the angel’s words necessarily mean is that as Jesus has ascended into heaven so he will come from heaven. And this main thought agrees with the language of Jesus and the prophets.”[9]

Terry’s hermeneutic is solid in that he shows where “in like manner” is used elsewhere (Matt. 23:37; Acts 7:28; 2 Tim. 3:8) to not be referring to the exact same way but in a similar way.  It is also rooted in the analogy of faith (Scripture interprets Scripture), confirming that Matthew 24:30–31, Acts 1:11, and Revelation 1:7 describe the same AD 70 cloud coming event.

Even before Terry there was prominent English theologian and scholar Zachary Pearce who likewise interpreted Acts 1:11 as fulfilled in AD 70:

“i.e. with marks of divine power; though not the same marks, yet as strong ones. It is not said, that they should see him come, as they saw him go: we may therefore suppose, that only Jesus’s coming to visit the Jewish nation in their destruction is here meant by the angels.” (Gary DeMar in his article Still Looking for that Slam Dunk Verse referencing Zachary Pearce, A Commentary, with notes, on the Four Evangelists and the Acts of the Apostles, 2 vols. (London: 1777), 2:4: https://bit.ly/3NX1N6W).

Acts 1:9-11 and the Second Exodus Inheritance Generation 

Lightfoot and Gill noted that the forty days of Acts 1:3 and the forty years (AD 30–70) mirror the first exodus, where twelve spies scouted the land for forty days, leading to a forty-year wilderness period (Num. 13-14; 32:11-13). Most spies doubted God’s promise, so that generation perished, while a remnant (Joshua and Caleb) and a new generation entered the promised land. Similarly, in the second exodus, most of Israel rejected Jesus as the Bread of heaven (John 6:35-41), crucifying Him. A remnant believed, entering a forty-year period (AD 30–70) where unbelievers perished, culminating in AD 67–70, while the remnant entered the “heavenly land” and “city” Abraham sought (Heb. 11:10, 16; 13:14).

Hebrews 3–4 and 10 parallel Israel’s wilderness generation with the new covenant generation awaiting its “rest.” Hebrews 10:25–37, citing Deuteronomy 32, declares this “Sabbath rest” was “drawing near,” with Christ’s coming “in a very little while” (Heb. 10:37), ushering in the heavenly inheritance.

First Exodus / Second Exodus Parallels

First Exodus / Types & Prophecies

Second Exodus / Anti-type & Fulfillments

1) Moses sent after 400 years of Israel’s groaning in Egyptian slavery 1) Jesus sent after 400 years of prophetic silence and humanity’s slavery under sin
2) Threatened at birth, flees until wrath of king passes 2) Threatened at birth, flees until wrath of king passes
3) Moses fasted 40 days in wilderness; received Law on a mountain 3) Jesus fasted 40 days in wilderness; gave Sermon on the Mount
4) Moses appointed 70 elders over 12 tribes 4) Jesus called 12 and sent 70 with authority
5) 3,000 die at giving of Law 5) 3,000 saved at giving of Spirit
6) Fading Old Covenant glory on Moses’ face, gone by AD 70 6) Enduring New Covenant glory in Christ’s face
7) Delivered Israel from physical slavery in Egypt 7) Delivered from spiritual slavery—OC Jerusalem as “spiritual Egypt” seeking to use the “administration of death” as a means to enslave through works-based salvation instead of grace.
8) After 40 years, Moses disqualified from entering land 8) After 40 years, Jesus brought His people into heavenly hand and city inheritance
9) Miracles proved Moses was God’s prophet sent to deliver from physical slavery 9) Miracles proved Jesus could deliver from sin and death – “so that you might know the Son of Man has power to forgive sin, pick up your mat and walk”
10) Spirit empowered skilled workers for Tabernacle during 40 years 10) Spirit given for 40 years to build and mature NC Temple until OC’s “end”
11) Feasts as “types and shadows” of Messiah’s coming work 11) Messiah was “about to” fulfilled the Law and feasts, removing the old system
12) Moses foretold “last days” generation facing judgment and Messiah’s reign 12) Jesus foretold “this generation” would see Israel’s end and His kingdom
13) Trumpet at Sinai, God descended in cloud to marry Israel 13) Trumpet at Zion, Christ gathered Church in glory cloud to marry her
14) Exodus through Red Sea birthed Israel as heaven and earth 14) Deliverance from Law and tribulation birthed Church as new creation

The first exodus provided the pattern: deliverance after 400 years, 40 years of testing, covenant at a mountain, divine glory, miraculous provision, trumpet blasts, and a promised inheritance. Moses foretold a “perverse and crooked generation” facing judgment at an appointed time, when God would judge, avenge His servants, and raise His people (Deut. 32:5, 20, 35, 39).

Lightfoot and Gill, echoing rabbinic tradition, noted Jewish expectations of a 40-year Messianic transition, as Dr. Cohen explains and includes this to be a period between the two worlds or ages:

“Many Rabbis believed that the period of the Messiah was to be only a transitionary stage between this world [age] and the world [age] to come, and opinions differed on the time of its duration. How long will the days of the Messiah last? R. Akibs said, Forty years, as long as the Israelites were in the wilderness.”[10]

Jesus fulfilled this precisely:

  • AD 30–70 was the 40-year “this generation” of testing and covenant transition.
  • His 40-day fast paralleled Moses’ Sinai ascent; His 70 disciples pointed to the gospel reaching the 70 nations (Gen. 10–11; Rom. 10:18).
  • Pentecost reversed Sinai’s judgment, building the new covenant Temple.
  • The trumpet call of Matthew 24:31 and 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 gathered the elect into heavenly Zion (Heb. 12:22; Rev. 10-11, 14), consummating the marriage covenant in AD 70 (Rev. 21–22).

Deuteronomy 32:5, 20 and Israel’s Last Days Second Exodus

The second exodus motif, rooted in the Old Testament patterns of deliverance and judgment, finds further expression in the Song of Moses (Deut. 31:29–32:43). Peter, Jesus, and Paul draw on Deuteronomy 32:5, 20, identifying their first-century generation as the “perverse and crooked” one facing imminent judgment and the rise of a new covenant nation. This section explores how their eschatology fulfills Moses’ prophecy, culminating in the AD 70 Parousia.

Peter and the Song of Moses

Peter’s Pentecost sermon in Acts 2 frames the Spirit’s outpouring as the “last days” inauguration, citing Deuteronomy 32:5, 20: “Save yourselves from this crooked generation” (Acts 2:40). He links this to Joel 2:28–3:14 (LXX) and Deuteronomy 31:29, portraying his generation as the terminal one facing the “day of the Lord” (Acts 2:14–21, 40). In 1 Peter 2:4–8, Christ is the rejected “Rock” or “Cornerstone” (Deut. 32:4–5, 15, 18; Isa. 28:16; Ps. 118:22), with Judaizers as “blots and blemishes” (2 Pet. 2:1–13; Deut. 32:5), facing imminent judgment in AD 70. Peter forms a new “holy nation” (1 Pet. 2:9–10; Deut. 32:21; Hos. 2:23), with salvation “ready to be revealed” at the “appointed time” (1 Pet. 1:4–5, 20; 4:5, 7, 17; Deut. 32:35 LXX). Scoffers deny the “end” (2 Pet. 3:3–4; Deut. 32:28–29), but the old covenant’s “heavens and earth” burn in de-creation judgment (2 Pet. 3:5–13; Deut. 32:22), fulfilled in AD 70. Vengeance comes as a “thief” (2 Pet. 3:10; Deut. 32:35, 43), vindicating believers and raising the new covenant body (Acts 2:20–21; 3:23).

Jesus and the Song of Moses

Jesus echoes Deuteronomy 32:5, 20, calling His contemporaries a “faithless and perverse generation” (Matt. 17:17; Deut. 31:29). In Matthew 21–25, He develops Moses’ themes: rejecting the “Rock” (Matt. 7:24–27; 21:42–45; Deut. 32:4–5), filling up blood guilt (Matt. 23:29–36; Deut. 32:23, 34), and failing to discern the “end” (John 12:37–40; Matt. 24:3, 13-14; Deut. 32:28–29). The kingdom transfers to a new “nation” (Matt. 21:43; Deut. 32:21), with de-creation judgment on the old covenant “heaven and earth” (Matt. 22:7; 24:29, 35; Deut. 32:22). Vengeance arrives at the “appointed time” (Luke 21:8, 20–32; Deut. 32:35 LXX), and the elect are gathered spiritually in AD 70 (Matt. 24:30–31; Deut. 32:39). Jesus’ Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25) blends Moses’ warnings with Daniel’s visions, affirming AD 70 as the “end” (Dan. 9:26–27; 12:4 LXX), fulfilling the Law and Prophets in “this generation” (Matt. 24:34; Luke 21:22–32).

Paul and the Song of Moses

Paul identifies his generation as the “crooked and twisted” one (Phil. 2:15; Deut. 32:5, 20), facing the “end of the ages” (1 Cor. 10:11; Deut. 32:29). In Romans 9–11, he cites Deuteronomy 32:21 (Rom. 10:19), showing Gentiles provoke Israel to jealousy, forming a new covenant “Nation” or “Israel of God” (Rom. 10:19; Gal. 6:16; Deut. 32:21). Christ is the rejected “Rock” (1 Cor. 10:4; Rom. 9:30–33; Deut. 32:4–5), with blood guilt filling up (1 Thess. 2:14–16; Deut. 32:23, 34). The old covenant world passes in de-creation (1 Cor. 7:29–31; Deut. 32:22), with vengeance on persecutors (2 Thess. 1:5–10; Deut. 32:35, 43) and corporate resurrection (1 Cor. 15; Rom. 8:18–23; Deut. 32:39) in AD 70. Paul’s “near” “appointed time” or kairos (Rom. 13:11–12; 1 Cor. 7:29–31) and “about to be” redemption (Rom. 8:18–23 YLT) echo Moses’ prophecy of a coming “appointed time” in which the fulfillment would be “near” (Deut. 32:35 LXX).

Summary of Deuteronomy 32’s Fulfillment

Peter, Jesus, and Paul unify Deuteronomy 32’s motifs—rejection of the Messiah, terminal generation, de-creation, vengeance, and resurrection—fulfilled in AD 70. The following chart summarizes their application:

Theme (Deut. 31–32) Jesus’ Development Peter’s Development

Paul’s Development

Rejection of the Messiah – the Rock (Deut. 32:4–5, 15, 18) Christ as rejected “Cornerstone” (Matt. 7:24–27; 21:42–45). Fulfilled: AD 70 kingdom transfer. Christ as rejected “Cornerstone” (1 Pet. 2:4–8). Judaizers as “blemishes” (2 Pet. 2:1–13). Fulfilled: AD 70 judgment. Christ as rejected “Rock” (1 Cor. 10:4; Rom. 9:30–33). Fulfilled: AD 70 stumbling/judgment.
Terminal Generation (Deut. 32:5, 20) “Perverse generation” sees all fulfilled (Matt. 17:17; 24:34). Fulfilled: AD 70 end. “Crooked generation” (Acts 2:40). Fulfilled: AD 70 judgment. “Crooked generation” (Phil. 2:15). Fulfilled: AD 70 end.
Last Days and End (Deut. 31:29; 32:29) Judgment/end in “this generation” (Matt. 23–25). Fulfilled: AD 70. Salvation “ready” in “last time” (1 Pet. 1:4–5, 20). Fulfilled: AD 70. “End of ages” arrived (1 Cor. 10:11). Fulfilled: AD 70.
New Covenant Nation (Deut. 32:21) Kingdom to new people (Matt. 21:43). Fulfilled: AD 70 Church. Church as “holy nation” (1 Pet. 2:9–10). Fulfilled: AD 70. Gentiles provoke jealousy (Rom. 10:19). “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16). Fulfilled: AD 70.
De-creation Language (Deut. 32:22) Old covenant “heaven/earth” passes (Matt. 24:29, 35). Fulfilled: AD 70. Old “heavens/earth” burn (2 Pet. 3:5–13). Fulfilled: AD 70. World’s “form” passes (1 Cor. 7:29–31). Fulfilled: AD 70.
Covenantal Wrath (Deut. 32:23, 34) Blood guilt filled (Matt. 23:29–36). Fulfilled: AD 70. Judgment not delayed (2 Pet. 2:3). Fulfilled: AD 70. Sins “fill up”; wrath “to the end” (1 Thess. 2:14–16). Fulfilled: AD 67–70.
Lack of Discernment (Deut. 32:28–29) Blind to spiritual kingdom (John 12:37–40). Fulfilled: AD 70. Scoffers deny end (2 Pet. 3:3–4). Fulfilled: AD 70. Hardened, veiled (2 Cor. 3:13–16). Fulfilled: AD 70.
Vengeance and Repayment (Deut. 32:35, 43) Coming repays (Matt. 24:30). Fulfilled: AD 70. Coming as “thief” (2 Pet. 3:10). Fulfilled: AD 70. Repays persecutors (2 Thess. 1:5–10). Fulfilled: AD 70.
Resurrection and Gathering (Deut. 32:39) Elect gathered (Matt. 24:31). Fulfilled: AD 70. Salvation “near” (1 Pet. 1:4–5). Fulfilled: AD 70. Dead raised (1 Cor. 15). Fulfilled: AD 70.
Appointed Time (Kairos) (Deut. 32:35) Kairos “near” (Luke 21:8, 32). Fulfilled: AD 70. Kairos “near” (1 Pet. 4:7, 17). Fulfilled: AD 70. Kairos “near” (Rom. 13:11–12). Fulfilled: AD 70.

Peter, Jesus, and Paul collectively affirm that their generation fulfilled Moses’ Song, marking the old covenant’s end and the new covenant’s rise within a 40-year second exodus timeframe culminating in AD 70. Their inspired imminence—“near,” “at hand,” “about to”—points to this historical reality, which futurists often seek to twist and reinterpret to fall in line with unbiblical traditions.

Conclusion

Jesus’ 40-day post-resurrection ministry in Acts 1:3, 8–11 inaugurated the New Covenant second exodus, fulfilling Jewish Messianic expectations (Lightfoot, Gill, Dr. Cohen) and Moses’ prophecy of a “perverse and crooked generation” (Deut. 32:5, 20). Peter, Jesus, and Paul applied this to their first-century generation (Acts 2:40; Matt. 17:17; Phil. 2:15), marking AD 30–70 as the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, culminating in Christ’s AD 70 cloud-coming, as can be harmonized by Partial Preterists like Lightfoot, Gill, and Terry.

The glory-cloud that received Jesus at His ascension returned to envelop His Church, fulfilling John 14:2–3, 23: “I will come again and receive you to Myself… We will come to him and make Our home with him.” Hebrews 10–13:14 confirms believers are to dwell in the heavenly Jerusalem, and Revelation 21:3, 22 declares God’s tabernacle is with the Church at the “in a very little while” or “soon” second coming is AD 70. This Full Preterist perspective refutes futurist objections, affirming that human personhood and Christ’s eternal priesthood (Heb. 7:16, 24–25) require no physical bodies in the afterlife or resurrection, as seen in Samuel’s spiritual identity (1 Sam. 28:14) and Jesus’ promise to the thief (Luke 23:43).  The resurrection in Revelation 20 entails the emptying of Hades of souls or spirits to be raised into God’s presence and to inherit eternal life or eternal torment.  There is no mention of physical bodies or these souls being incomplete humans without such.

Christ’s spiritual return in AD 70 completed the second exodus, fulfilling Deuteronomy 32’s judgment, vengeance, and resurrection (Deut. 32:35, 39, 43). The Church, raised from Adamic death and Hades, inherited the “better” and “true” “heavenly land” and “city” longed for by Abraham and the prophets (Heb. 10:1–13:14; Rev. 21–22). The Parousia was the climactic establishment of God’s presence with His people, who now live forever in the glory-cloud or Most Holy Place / New Jerusalem (perfect square Rev. 21:16) inviting sinners to come through her open gates to be spiritually healed and receive eternal life (Rev. 22:2, 17).

[1] John Lightfoot, COMMENTARY ON THE NEW TESTAMENT FROM THE TALMUD AND HEBRAICA, Vol. 4 Matthew – 1 Corinthians(Oxford Press, 1859, Hendrickson Publishers, 2003)  p. 9

[2] John Gill, John Gill’s Exposition on the Entire Bible, Biblehub.com

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Tony Badillo, The Portrayal and Ascension of the Immortal Soul or Spirit in the Levital Offerings, http://www.templesecrets.info/spsoul.html).

[6] Robert Johnston, Leviticus:  Visions Beyond the Wilderness, p. 129

[7] Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism An Eschatology of Hope (Phillipsburg, NJ:  1999), p. 117

[8] Keith A. Mathison, FROM AGE TO AGE THE UNFOLDING OF BIBLICAL ESCHATOLOGY, (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2009),  p. 459

[9] Milton S. Terry, A Study of the Most Notable Revelations of God and of Christ (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988), pp. 246-247

[10] Rev. Dr. A. Cohen, Everyman’s TALMUD, (New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., Inc., 1949), p. 356. Emphasis MJS.

Matthew 24-25 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 3: (Matthew 24:15-22/Luke 21:20-24) The Flight from Jerusalem, the Great Tribulation, All OT Fulfilled, and the Appointed Times of the Gentiles

Introduction

In the Olivet Discourse, Jesus prophesies the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, signaling the fulfillment of all Old Testament (OT) prophecies, including the Great Tribulation, resurrection, and Second Coming (Matt. 24; Luke 21). Here in part 3 of our series on the Olivet Discourse we explore Matthew 24:16–24 and Luke 21:20–24, focusing on the urgent call to flee Jerusalem, the Great Tribulation, the “times of the Gentiles,” and the fulfillment of “all that is written” within the “appointed times” (kairos/kairoi) foretold in Daniel 7:13-27, 9:24–27, and 12:4, 7 (LXX). By examining these passages alongside OT prophecies (e.g., Daniel, Isaiah, Ezekiel), historical accounts from Josephus and Eusebius, and NT affirmations by John, Paul, and Peter, who also use kairos to denote the imminent consummation (Rev. 1:3; 22:10; 1 Cor. 7:29–31; Rom. 13:11-12; 1 Pet. 4:5–7, 17), we argue that these events were fulfilled in AD 70 during the Roman siege of Jerusalem. This interpretation offers a unified understanding of the Olivet Discourse, challenging various Partial Preterist views that separate its verses into past and future fulfillments, and invites readers to recognize the precision of Jesus’ words in their first-century context, as the divinely appointed time of Israel’s covenantal end converged with the establishment of the Messianic kingdom.

The Urgency of Flight – “Conjunction Unction, What’s Your Function”?

“So, when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let the one who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house, and let the one who is in the field not turn back to take his cloak. And alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath. For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short” (Matt. 24:15–22).

“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. Alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! For there will be great distress upon the earth and wrath against this people. They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled” (Luke 21:20–24).

The conjunctions “for,” “then,” and “and” in these passages connect ideas, establishing a sequence and cause-and-effect relationship that points to a first-century fulfillment. Some interpretations divide the Olivet Discourse, assigning certain verses to AD 70 and others to a future fulfillment, leading to varied and often contradictory conclusions. However, Jesus clearly identifies the “abomination of desolation” from Daniel 9 and 12 as the moment Roman armies surround Jerusalem, urging first-century Jewish Christians to flee immediately.

This command reflects a first-century Jewish setting: flat rooftops with external staircases allowed quick escapes, but Sabbath restrictions limited travel to a “Sabbath day’s journey” of three-quarters of a mile, far short of the distance to Pella. Jesus instructs them to pray their flight avoids winter’s harsh conditions or the Sabbath, when religious rulers enforced strict observance, potentially hindering escape.

The Great Tribulation and Distress

Matthew’s “great tribulation” (thlipsis, severe affliction) and Luke’s “great distress” (ananke, intense hardship) describe the same event, as confirmed by their synonymy in the Abbott-Smith Lexicon.[1] Both accounts begin with “For,” linking the tribulation/distress to Jerusalem’s desolation and the call to flee Judea for the mountains (Matt. 24:16–21; Luke 21:21–24).

Jesus emphasizes the severity of this period, stating, “And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short” (Matt. 24:22). Here, “no human being” is Hebraic hyperbole, exaggerating the near-total destruction of Jerusalem’s population to underscore the tribulation’s intensity, not a global extinction. The “elect” refers to Jewish Christians, God’s chosen remnant who believed in Christ.

“Cutting short” reflects divine mercy, some suggest thus was fulfilled through Cestius Gallus’ mysterious retreat in AD 66, which provided a window for Christians to flee to Pella, or more probable the Romans’ focus on Jerusalem, sparing those who escaped and not hunting down Christians who fled to Pella. Historical records confirm that Christians heeded Jesus’ warning, fleeing to Pella during Gallus’ retreat before the siege resumed under Vespasian and Titus in AD 70.

Josephus records that “many of the most eminent of the Jews swam away from the city.”[2] Similarly, Eusebius writes, “The whole body, however, of the Church at Jerusalem, having been commanded by a divine revelation, given to men of approved piety there before the war, removed from the city, and dwelt at a certain town beyond the Jordan, called Pella. Here those that believed in Christ, having removed from Jerusalem, as if holy men had entirely abandoned the royal city itself, and the whole land of Judea; the divine justice, for their crimes against Christ and his Apostles finally overtook them, totally destroying the whole generation of these evildoers form the earth.”[3]

Luke specifies this as God’s “wrath” against “this people” (the Jews) in their “land,” echoing John the Baptist’s warning of a “wrath about to come” upon them in their lifetimes (Matt. 3:7, 10–12 GNT, SLT).

The tribulation’s intensity and divine timing, as described by Jesus, are deeply rooted in the prophetic language of Daniel. The Greek term kairos, used in Luke 21:8 and 21:24, connects the false claims of the end with the true appointed time of Jerusalem’s desolation, fulfilling Daniel’s visions of judgment.

The Tribulation and Resurrection

Daniel explicitly connects the Tribulation to the resurrection, stating: “…there shall be a time of trouble, such as never has been since there was a nation till that time. But at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone whose name shall be found written in the book. And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt” (Dan. 12:1–2). He further ties the “appointed times” (kairos/kairoi, LXX) of the three-and-a-half-year war, during which the “holy people” are shattered, to the fulfillment of “all these things,” encompassing the Tribulation, resurrection, and the “time of the end” (Dan. 12:1–7).

In alignment with Daniel, Jesus links the “appointed time” (kairos, Luke 21:8, 24) of the Tribulation, His Second Coming, and the end-of-the-age trumpet gathering/resurrection event to “all these things” fulfilled within His generation (Matt. 24:3–34; Luke 21:20–32). 

John, in Revelation, similarly situates the “appointed time” (kairos, Rev. 11:18) for the judgment of the dead during Jerusalem’s three-and-a-half-year trampling by the Gentiles, when the 144,000 firstfruits saints, having endured the Tribulation, inherit God’s presence on Mount Zion (Rev. 7:1–8; 11:1–18; 14:1–5).

Kairos in Luke 21:8 and Luke 21:24: Echoes of Daniel’s Appointed Time(s)

In Luke 21, Jesus employs the Greek term kairos (and its plural kairoi), drawing directly from the prophetic language of Daniel 9:26–27 and 12:4, 7 in the Septuagint (LXX), where kairos appears, and Daniel 7:25 in the Aramaic, where the equivalent term ʿiddān (עִדָּן) is used. In Luke 21:8, Jesus warns, “Take heed that you are not led astray; for many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am he!’ and, ‘The time [kairos] has drawn near!’ Do not go after them.” Here, kairos refers to a falsely proclaimed “appointed time” of the end, which deceivers claim to herald. In contrast, Luke 21:24 states, “They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times [kairoi] of the Gentiles are fulfilled.” This plural kairoi denotes the divinely ordained period of Gentile dominion, culminating in Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70. Both uses of kairos find their roots in Daniel’s prophecies, where kairos/kairoi (LXX) and ʿiddān (Aramaic) signify critical junctures in God’s redemptive plan, particularly the “time of the end” (Dan. 12:4, 7 LXX), the desolation of Jerusalem (Dan. 9:26–27 LXX), and the Second Coming of the Messiah with the saints’ inheritance of the kingdom (Dan. 7:13–27).

The connection between Luke 21:8 and 21:24 lies in their shared reliance on Daniel’s framework, where kairos/ʿiddānmarks pivotal moments of judgment, persecution, and fulfillment. In Daniel 9:26–27 LXX, the prophecy describes a “prince” who will destroy the city and sanctuary, with desolations decreed until the “consummation” (sunteleia), a period marked by kairos in the broader context of Daniel’s “seventy weeks” (Dan. 9:24–27). Similarly, Daniel 12:4, 7 LXX uses kairos and its plural kairoi to describe the “time of the end” when the “shattering of the holy people” occurs after a period of “a time, times, and half a time” (three and a half years, kairos, kairoi, kai hēmisu kairou). In the Aramaic text of Daniel 7:25, the equivalent term ʿiddān (and its plural ʿiddānīn, עִדָּנִין) appears in the same phrase, “a time, times, and half a time” (ʿiddān, ʿiddānīn, ūpalḡaṯ ʿiddān), rendered in the LXX as kairos kai kairoi kai hēmisu kairou, describing the period of persecution by the “little horn” (Herods / Idomeans / Zealots / Jewish leadership) against the saints, fulfilled in the AD 67–70 Roman siege. This aligns directly with the kairoi of Luke 21:24, where the “times of the Gentiles” denotes the same three-and-a-half-year period of Gentile trampling. In Daniel 7:22, the phrase “the time came” (wəzimanāʾ māṯāʾ, from zəman, זְמַן) is translated in the LXX as ho chronos ephthasen (using chronos, not kairos), referring to the appointed moment when the saints inherit the kingdom. Despite the use of chronos, the eschatological context of divine judgment and kingdom transfer aligns conceptually with kairos, reinforcing the connection to Luke’s framework.

Daniel 7:15–25 provides an interpretive expansion of the earlier vision (7:1–14), clarifying that the “little horn” will persecute the saints for this appointed period (ʿiddānīn, 7:25; kairoi in LXX) before the Messiah, the Son of Man, comes on the clouds (7:13) to judge and deliver the kingdom to the saints (7:22). This Second Coming, depicted in Daniel 7:13, connects directly to Jesus’ self-description in Matthew 24:30 and Luke 21:27, fulfilled in AD 70 when God’s judgment through the Roman armies shattered Jerusalem and established the Messianic kingdom. The persecution period (ʿiddānīn/kairoi, 7:25) precedes this climactic event, marking the “times” of tribulation that culminate in the “time” (zimanāʾ/chronos, 7:22) of kingdom inheritance, tying the kairoi of Luke 21:24 to the eschatological fulfillment of Daniel’s vision.

Jesus, in Luke 21:20–24, identifies the specific sign of this kairos—the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem—as the true indicator that the “appointed time” of desolation, foretold in Daniel, is near. This contrasts with the false claims of kairosin Luke 21:8, where deceivers misrepresent the timing of the consummation. In Luke 21:8, Jesus cautions against premature declarations of the “time” (kairos), emphasizing that certain signs (e.g., false messiahs, wars, and commotions) do not signal the imminent end. This warning echoes Daniel 12:4 LXX, where the “time of the end” (kairos synteleias) is sealed until the appointed moment, urging discernment to avoid deception. By contrast, Luke 21:20–24 provides the definitive sign: “When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near” (v. 20). This desolation, linked to the “times of the Gentiles” (kairoi ethnōn, v. 24), fulfills Daniel’s prophecy of a three-and-a-half-year period of desolation (Dan. 9:27; 12:7; 7:25), historically corresponding to the Roman siege from AD 67–70. The kairoi of Luke 21:24 thus represents the authentic, divinely appointed period of judgment, contrasting with the deceptive kairos of Luke 21:8.

This interplay reflects a deliberate theological contrast: false prophets misuse kairos to mislead, while Jesus clarifies the true kairos through the visible sign of Roman armies, fulfilling Daniel’s timeline. The three-and-a-half-year “times of the Gentiles” aligns with Daniel 12:7 and 7:25’s “time, times, and half a time,” a period of intense tribulation and persecution culminating in the “shattering of the holy people” and the destruction of Jerusalem. Historical accounts, such as those from Josephus, confirm the Roman campaign’s duration (AD 67–70), during which Jerusalem was “trampled underfoot,” with massive loss of life and captivity (Luke 21:24; cf. Josephus, The Jewish War).  Christians outside of Israel were also persecuted during this time frame as well.  The kairos of Luke 21:8 and kairoi of Luke 21:24 thus serve as bookends: the former warns against false timing, while the latter confirms the true appointed time of Daniel’s prophecies, fulfilled in AD 70.

This connection underscores Jesus’ precision in the Olivet Discourse. By grounding both verses in Daniel’s kairos/ʿiddān, Jesus ties the false claims of the end to the authentic fulfillment of Jerusalem’s judgment, ensuring His disciples recognize the true sign (Roman armies) and act (flee to the mountains). The linkage to Daniel 7:13–25 further solidifies this, as the persecution of the saints (ʿiddānīn/kairoi, 7:25) precedes the Second Coming of the Son of Man (7:13), when the “time” (zimanāʾ/chronos, 7:22) arrives for the saints to inherit the kingdom. This Second Coming, fulfilled in AD 70, aligns with the kairoi of Luke 21:24, as the Roman desolation of Jerusalem marks the consummation of Daniel’s eschatological vision, encompassing not only the city’s fall but also the resurrection and kingdom inheritance (Dan. 12:2–3; 7:13–14, 22; Matt. 24:27–31; 25:31-46; Luke 21:27–32). Thus, the kairos/ʿiddān framework unifies Luke 21:8 and 21:24 with Daniel’s prophecies, revealing God’s sovereign timing in the events of AD 70.

Hebraic Hyperbole in Context

Matthew’s phrase, “such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be” (Matt. 24:21), employs Hebraic hyperbole, a common literary device to emphasize an event’s severity within Israel’s history. For example, Ezekiel 5:9 describes the Babylonian judgment of Jerusalem in 586 BC: “And because of all your abominations I will do with you what I have never yet done, and the like of which I will never do again.”

Similarly, Solomon (1 Kings 3:12) and Josiah (2 Kings 23:25) are hailed as unparalleled great kings, without implying contradiction. This hyperbolic language in the Olivet Discourse underscores the unprecedented destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, paralleled by the Babylonian judgment.

This judgment included:

  • A “Day of the Lord” through a Gentile army (Babylonians/Romans).
  • God’s figurative coming on the clouds (Ezek. 30–32; Matt. 24:30).
  • De-creation imagery, such as darkening of the sun and moon (Ezek. 32:7–8; Matt. 24:29).
  • Imminent language like “near” or “this generation” (Ezek. 7:7; Matt. 24:34).
  • Hyperbole emphasizing the judgment’s severity (Ezek. 5:9; Matt. 24:21).

As shown in Chart 1, these parallels between the Babylonian and Roman desolations confirm the Olivet Discourse’s first-century fulfillment.

Chart 1: Parallel Comparison of Babylonian and Roman Desolations of Jerusalem

Aspect Babylonian Desolation (589–586 BC) Roman Desolation (AD 67–70)
Duration Approximately 2–3 years (from Nebuchadnezzar’s siege in 589 BC to Jerusalem’s fall in 586 BC). Approximately 3.5 years (from Roman military campaigns in AD 67 to Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70).
Invading Gentile Army Babylonians, led by Nebuchadnezzar, besieged and destroyed Jerusalem (2 Kings 25:1–10). Romans, led by Vespasian and Titus, besieged and destroyed Jerusalem (Josephus, The Jewish War).
Divine Judgment Described as God’s “Day of the Lord” judgment for Judah’s sins (Ezek. 7:7–12; 33:21). Described as God’s “wrath” and “days of vengeance” against the Jews (Luke 21:22–23).
Imminent Language “Near” and “without delay” (Ezek. 7:7; 12:25; 30:3), fulfilled within the prophet’s generation. “Near” and “this generation” (Matt. 24:34; Luke 21:32), fulfilled within Jesus’ generation.
De-Creation Imagery Darkening of heavens, sun, moon, and stars (Ezek. 32:7–8). Sun and moon not giving light (Matt. 24:29).
Hebraic Hyperbole “What I have never yet done, and the like of which I will never do again” (Ezek. 5:9). “Such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now” (Matt. 24:21).
Outcome Jerusalem destroyed, temple burned, Jews exiled to Babylon (2 Kings 25:8–17). Jerusalem destroyed, temple burned, Jews killed or taken captive (Luke 21:24; Josephus).
Scriptural Reference Ezekiel 5:9; 7:7; 32:7–8; 2 Kings 25. Matthew 24:15–34; Luke 21:20–32; Revelation 11:2. 

Historical Fulfillment: Sword, Captivity, and Trampling

Luke describes the Jews “fall[ing] by the edge of the sword and [being] led captive among all nations” (Luke 21:24). Adam Clarke gives a good description of this fulfillment as documented by John Bray:

“The number of those who fell by the sword was very great. Eleven hundred thousand perished during the siege. Many were slain at other places, and other times… Besides those many of every age, sex, and condition were slain in the war, who are not reckoned, but, of those who are reckoned, the number would have appeared incredible, if their own historian had not so particularly enumerated them. See Josephus, WAR, book li. C. 18,20; book iii. c. 2,7,8,9; book iv. c. 1,2,7,8,9; book vii. c. 6,9,11; and Bp. Newton, Vol. li. P. 288-290.”[4]

“Many were also led away captives into all nations. There were taken at Jotapa, 1,200. At Tarichea, 6,000 chosen young men, who were sent to Nero; others sold to the number of 39,400, besides those who were given to Agrippa. Of the Gadarenes were taken 2,200. In Idumea above 1,000. Many besides these were taken in Jerusalem; so that, as Josephus says, the number of the captives taken in the whole war amounted to 97,000. Those above seventeen years of age were sent to the works in Egypt, but most were distributed through the Roman provinces, to be destroyed in their theatres by the sword, and by the wide beasts; and those under seventeen years of age were sold for slaves.”[5]

The “times of the Gentiles,” when Jerusalem is “trampled underfoot” (Luke 21:24), refers to the Roman siege from AD 67–70, lasting approximately 3.5 years, as paralleled in Revelation 11:2 and Daniel 12:7. Pat Robertson interprets the “times of the Gentiles” as something began in 586 BC and culminating in an alleged sign that took place in 1967, marking out 40 years until the rapture must take place, i.e. 2007:

“The year 586 B.C. was the time that Nebuchadnezzar took over Jerusalem, and that condition lasted…until the Six Day War that took place not too long ago. When did it happen? 1967. …The Jews took over Jerusalem for the first time since Nebuchadnezzar took it. What is the significance of all this? …At this point of time, a clock began to tick. A generation is 40 years, and a clock began to tick that said there’s 40 years from 1967.”[6]

Lamentations 1:15 [and the Targum referred to] is looking back at a past event [Babylon’s military desolation of Jerusalem in 586/587BC] as an “appointed time” when the Lord had “trodden” down Jerusalem like grapes crushed in a winepress in which her blood flowed and she was “shattered.” This is talking about a very specific and limited time of military treading down of the city, not a protracted period of hundreds or thousands of years.

Babylon surrounded Jerusalem and the military campaign of treading her down lasted roughly 2–3 years (from 589 BC to 586/587BC). Revelation 11 and Daniel 12 describe the trampling of Jerusalem by Rome (the 4th Gentile Empire in Dan. 2 and 7) as a period of 3 ½ years which would be a “complete shattering of the holy people.”

Therefore, when we compare Scripture with Scripture and honor this event to take place when Jerusalem would be “surrounded by armies” in Jesus’ contemporary generation, the 3 ½ year war (Dan. 9:26–27/12:7) between AD 67–AD 70 is what Jesus prophesied about—nothing else, not 1967 nor any other event! John Gill points out these would be the known dimensions of the land of Palestine:

“…the measure of the land of Israel, and the common notion of it among the Jews, who make it to be the square of four hundred parsoe: hence they often speak of the land of Israel shaking and moving four hundred ‘parsoe’, upon some extraordinary occasions; and a ‘parsa’ contained four miles, so that four hundred ‘parsoe’ made a thousand and six hundred miles; and if miles and furlongs are the same, in which sense only the land of Israel could be so large, here is the exact space; for Jerom, who was an inhabitant of it, says, it was scarce 160 miles in length, to which agrees R. Menachem; and it may be observed, that the Arabic version renders the words, ‘by the space of a thousand and six hundred miles.’”[7]

Chart 2 illustrates how Lamentations 1:15, its Targum, and Revelation 14:18–20 use vineyard imagery to depict Jerusalem’s trampling and shattering.

Chart 2: Targum, Lamentations, and Revelation: Trampling and Shattering Jerusalem as a Vineyard

Source Text / Description Trampling / Shattering Imagery Connection to Jerusalem’s Judgment
Lamentations 1:15 “The Lord has rejected all my strong men… He has trodden as in a winepress the virgin daughter of Judah.” God “treads” Jerusalem like grapes in a winepress, causing blood to flow. Refers to the Babylonian destruction (586 BC) as a divine judgment, with Jerusalem “trodden” and “shattered.”
Targum on Lamentations 1:15 Adds: “…established a time to shatter… defile the virgins of the House of Judah until their blood… was caused to flow like wine from a winepress when a man is treading grapes.” Emphasizes “shattering” and blood flowing like wine during treading. Enhances the imagery of Jerusalem’s destruction as a violent, bloody judgment, akin to crushing grapes.
Revelation 14:18–20 “Put in your sickle and gather the clusters from the vine of the earth… and threw it into the great winepress of the wrath of God. And the winepress was trodden outside the city, and blood flowed… for 1,600 stadia.” Angel’s “tread” the winepress, producing blood flow across Palestine’s dimensions. Depicts AD 70 judgment, with Jerusalem’s “shattering” and trampling by Romans, blood flowing as in a winepress.
Shared Themes All describe Jerusalem’s judgment as a winepress treading, with blood flow symbolizing destruction. “Trampling” and “shattering” reflect military conquest and divine wrath. Both events (586 BC and AD 70) are localized to Jerusalem/Israel, fulfilling specific “appointed times” (Lam. 1:15; Rev. 11:2).

Fulfilling All OT Prophecy

Luke’s claim that these events fulfill “all that is written” (Luke 21:22) encompasses all OT prophecy, including the Second Coming, redemption, and resurrection. Some Partial Preterists, such as Keith A. Mathison and Kenneth Gentry, argue that Luke 21:22 refers only to Jerusalem’s destruction, citing Luke 18:31, where Jesus says, “all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of Man will be accomplished.”[8] They point out that “all things” in this context does not include all eschatological promises, reasoning that “all that is written” in Luke 21:22 refers only to OT passages about Jerusalem’s fall. This argument assumes, without proof, that OT prophecies separate Jerusalem’s judgment from the Second Coming, resurrection, and judgment of the dead. However, OT texts like Isaiah and Daniel explicitly connect Jerusalem’s desolation to the “appointed time of the end,” resurrection, and the consummation of all prophecy.

Gentry argues that Luke 21:22 primarily refers to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, limiting the scope of “all that is written” to OT prophecies concerning Israel’s judgment, while relegating other eschatological events to a future fulfillment.[9]

In Isaiah 25:2–9, when Jerusalem is made a “heap of rubble,” the eschatological wedding and resurrection occur. Jesus cites the “trumpet,” “gathering,” and “harvest” of Isaiah 27 in Matthew 24:31, tied to Jerusalem’s judgment when altars become “chalkstone” (Isa. 27:9–13). Similarly, Daniel links the resurrection (Dan. 12:2–3) to the “tribulation” and “three-and-a-half-year” war (Dan. 12:1–7), culminating in the “shattering of the holy people” in AD 70, as foretold in Daniel 9:24–27 and 7:13–25. The NT reiterates these OT prophecies, not introducing new events, as Jesus came to fulfill “all the Law and the Prophets” (Matt. 5:17–18) and Paul taught only what was found in the OT (Acts 26:22).

To illustrate the interconnectedness of these prophecies, Chart 3 below compares Daniel 7, Daniel 9, Daniel 12, and Matthew 24–25 (with parallels in Luke 21 and Mark 13). It demonstrates that the “appointed times” (kairos/kairoi in the LXX, ʿiddān in Aramaic for Dan. 7:25) of judgment, desolation, resurrection, and the Second Coming converge in the AD 67–70 Roman siege, fulfilling all OT prophecy within Jesus’ generation.

Chart 3: Eschatological Fulfillment in Daniel and the Olivet Discourse

Theme Daniel 7 Daniel 9 Daniel 12 Matthew 24–25 & Parallels (Luke 21, Mark 13)
Timeframe “Time, times, and half a time” (3½ years, AD 67–70; Aramaic ʿiddān/ʿiddānīn, LXX kairos/kairoi, 7:25); judgment of the “little horn.” “Time” of kingdom inheritance (zimanāʾ, LXX chronos, 7:22). “Half a week” (3½ years, AD 67–70); “appointed time” (kairos, LXX) for judgment and end of 490 years (vss. 24–27). “Time, times, and half a time” (3½ years, AD 67–70); “appointed time of the end” (kairos/kairoi, LXX) for judgment (vss. 4, 7). “Times of the Gentiles” (3½ years, AD 67–70); Jerusalem trampled by Romans (kairoi, Luke 21:24; cf. Rev. 11:2). False claims of “time” (kairos, Luke 21:8; Mark 13:33).
Judgment of Israel “Little horn” (Herods / Idumeans / Zealots / Jews) judged for boasting against God and persecuting Messiah’s followers (vss. 21, 25–26). “Your people” (Jews) and “holy city” (Jerusalem) face “abomination” and “desolation” in “the war” (vss. 24–27). “Power of the holy people” (Jews) “completely shattered”; tied to “abomination” and “desolation” in tribulation (vss. 1, 7, 11). “Wrath” against “this people” (Jews) and “land” (Israel); “tribulation,” “abomination,” and “desolation” when Roman armies surround Jerusalem (Matt. 24:15–21; Luke 21:20–24).
Judgment and Resurrection Judgment with books opened and Ancient of Days on throne; eschatological “end” (vss. 9–10, 26). Judgment at the eschatological “end” of the 490 years (vss. 24–27). Judgment and resurrection of the dead at the “appointed time of the end” (vss. 1–4 LXX). Judgment and resurrection; Christ on throne at the eschatological “end” (Matt. 24:3, 14, 31; 25:31–46; Luke 21:27).
Messiah’s Coming and Kingdom Messiah (Son of Man) comes on clouds; kingdom inherited (vss. 13–14, 27). Messiah/Prince sends another “prince” (Titus) and armies to desolate Jerusalem (vss. 26–27 LXX). Implied: “appointed time of the end” and resurrection require Messiah’s coming and kingdom (vss. 1–7). Jesus (Messiah/Son of Man) comes on clouds; kingdom inherited (Matt. 24:27–31; Luke 21:27–32).
Historical Context Events during the fourth (Roman) empire (vss. 7–27). Events within 490 years, culminating in Roman period (vss. 24–27). Vision sealed as “far off” from Daniel’s time, fulfilled in Roman era (vss. 4, 9; cf. 8:26). All events fulfilled in Roman Empire within Jesus’ “generation” (Matt. 24:34; Luke 21:22, 32).

This chart demonstrates that the Olivet Discourse fulfills Daniel’s prophecies within the Roman Empire’s timeframe (AD 67–70), aligning the “appointed times” (kairos/kairoi in the LXX, ʿiddān in Dan. 7:25) of judgment, desolation, resurrection, and the Second Coming with the destruction of Jerusalem. The use of kairoi in Daniel 7:25 (LXX) for the three-and-a-half-year persecution period parallels the kairoi of Luke 21:24, while the chronos of Daniel 7:22 (LXX) underscores the appointed moment of kingdom inheritance, both fulfilled in AD 70. This unified fulfillment counters Partial Preterist views by showing that OT prophecies, reiterated in the NT, encompass all eschatological events, not merely Jerusalem’s fall.

The old saying rings true, “OT is the NT concealed, and the NT is the OT revealed.” There are no major new NT prophetic events that cannot be found in the OT. Matthew 24:27–31, widely recognized as the Second Coming and trumpet resurrection event, is thus fulfilled in AD 70, aligning with Daniel 9:24–27, 12:1–7, and 7:13–27. Revelation, as John’s Olivet Discourse, confirms that “all things written” would be fulfilled “shortly” with the message of the prophets having “no more delay” (Rev. 1:1, 3, 19 YLT; 10:6–7; 22:6–10). John also uses kairos, stating that the “appointed time” of Christ’s coming in vengeance, prophesied by Moses and Daniel, was “near” (Deut. 32:35–43 LXX; Dan. 7:13–27; 9:24–27; 12:4 LXX; Rev. 1:3; 22:10).

Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:11 is also in line with Jesus’ teaching. Here he tells his first-century audience, “Now all these things happened to them as examples [types], and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.” Paul employs kairos when teaching that the old covenant world was passing away and the “appointed time has grown very short” and the appointed time of the “Day” of salvation was “near” (1 Cor. 7:29–31; Rom. 13:11-12). Peter’s eschatology aligns with that of Jesus, John, and Paul. He declares that the OT prophets foretold events for his first-century audience to inherit (1 Pet. 1:4–12) and that they were living in Israel’s “last days,” a “crooked and perverse generation” that Moses said would witness the “near” “end” (Deut. 32:5, 20, 35-43; Acts 2:40; 1 Pet. 4:5–7; 2 Pet. 3). Peter likewise uses kairos in 1 Peter 4:5–7, 17, noting that “the appointed time for the judgment” (v. 17) of “the living and the dead” was “ready” (v. 5) and “near” (v. 7) to be fulfilled. This consistent NT use of kairos by Jesus, John, Paul, and Peter underscores the imminent fulfillment of all OT prophecy in their generation, culminating in AD 70.

Conclusion

The Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24:16–24 and Luke 21:20–24 vividly portrays the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem as the fulfillment of all OT prophecy, marked by the “appointed times” (kairos/kairoi) foretold in Daniel 7:13-27, 9:24–27, and 12:4, 7 (LXX). Clearly, the OT did not prophesy the end of world history or the planet’s destruction, as fleeing to the mountains would be futile in such a scenario. Jesus’ urgent call to flee, the Great Tribulation, and the “times of the Gentiles” (kairoi, Luke 21:24) converge in a first-century context, supported by historical accounts from Josephus and Eusebius and scriptural parallels in Daniel. Jesus, John, Paul, and Peter consistently used kairos to signal the “near” consummation of these events, including the Second Coming and resurrection, within their generation (Luke 21:8; Rev. 1:3; 22:10; 1 Cor. 7:29–31; Rom. 13:11-12; 1 Pet. 4:5–7, 17). By employing Hebraic hyperbole and imminent language, Jesus emphasizes the gravity and timing of the Roman siege, fulfilling Daniel’s prophecies. This interpretation challenges views that limit “all things written” to Jerusalem’s fall, affirming that OT prophecies, reiterated in the NT, encompass the resurrection and Second Coming, fulfilled in the AD 70 “this generation” (Luke 21:20-32). This invites readers to trust the coherence of God’s redemptive plan, as the “appointed time” (kairos) of Israel’s old covenant “end” and Christ’s Second Coming was truly “near” in the events of AD 70.  Promise made and promise kept!

[1] G. Abbott-Smith, Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1937), 28, 208.  As cited by Gentry in THE GREAT TRIBULATION PAST OR FUTURE? Two Evangelicals Debate the Question (Grand Rapids, MI:  Kregel Publications, 1999), p. 193.

[2] Josephus The Complete Works, Chapter 9:4, https://ccel.org/ccel/josephus/complete/
complete.iii.vii.ix.html

[3] Eusebius, History of the Church 3, 5

[4] John L. Bray, MATTHEW 24 FULFILLED (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1996), pp. 91-92.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Don K. Preston, The Times of the Gentiles?  Past-Present-Or What? https://donkpreston.com/
the-times-of-the-gentiles-past-present-or-what/

[7] John Gill, John Gill’s Exposition of the Whole Bible, Ibid., free online at biblehub.com

[8] Kenneth L. Gentry, HE SHALL HAVE DOMINION A POSTMILLENNIAL ESCHATOLOGY THIRD EDITION (Draper, VA:  Apologetics Media, 2009), pp. 342-344

[9] Ibid., pp. 342-344

 

Matthew 24-25 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 2: (Matthew 24:4-15) Birth Pains and Signs of the Near End of the Age and Christ’s Coming

Introduction

In the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24:4–15), Jesus provides a prophetic roadmap for the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, the end of the Old Covenant age, and His coming in judgment, addressing His disciples directly (“you,” Greek hymeis, Matt. 24:4, 9) and promising fulfillment within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34; genea, AD 30–70). He distinguishes preliminary “birth pains” (Matt. 24:4–8; ōdinōn, “pangs”)—false messiahs, wars, famines, pestilences, and earthquakes—from intensifying “near signs” (Matt. 24:9–15)—persecution, betrayal, false prophets, gospel proclamation, and the abomination of desolation—culminating in the “great tribulation” (thlipsis megalē, Matt. 24:21; Dan. 12:1, 7’s “three-and-a-half years,” AD 67–70) against apostate Israel, the de-creation of the Old Covenant system (Matt. 24:29), and Christ’s second coming with the resurrection of the elect (Matt. 24:30–31; Dan. 12:2–3). These signs, rooted in Daniel (2:44; 7:13–27; 9:24–27; 12:1–7) and Deuteronomy 32:5, 20–43, refine Second Temple Jewish expectations of political upheaval, temple desolation, and a Messianic age, as seen in the Qumran community’s anticipation of a Gog and Magog war (Ezek. 38–39; 1QM 1:1–7) and covenant curses (Deut. 32:20–29; CD 3:7–8), aligning with Jesus’ prophecy (Matt. 24:7b, 15) and John’s “soon” coming war (Rev. 20:7–10).[1] Unlike Qumran’s broader crisis (1QM 2:6–14), Jesus pinpointed Daniel 12:1’s “time of trouble” as AD 67–70 (Matt. 24:21, 24).[2] Jesus, Peter, and Paul identified their generation as the “perverse” one of Deuteronomy 32:5, 20, expecting God’s “vengeance” as “near” (Matt. 17:17; Acts 2:40; 1 Pet. 4:5–7; Phil. 2:15, 4:5; Luke 21:8, 20–32), fulfilled in AD 70.[3] Deuteronomy 32, significant in Qumran texts (CD 3:7–8) and the NT, forecast this judgment.[4] Some Jewish traditions, as in 4QFlorilegium (4Q174), anticipated a spiritual resurrection and a restored temple, fulfilled in the Church as the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:16).[5]

To establish the Full Preterist interpretation of Matthew 24:4–15, we first analyze the scope and timing of “these things” and “all these things,” which Jesus ties to the resurrection and His second coming within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34).

The Scope and Fulfillment of “These Things” in Matthew 24

In Matthew 24:2, Jesus predicts, “Do you not see all these things [panta tauta]? Not one stone will be left upon another,” referring to the temple’s destruction, fulfilled in AD 70.. In verse 3, the disciples ask, “When will these things [tauta] be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” expanding “these things” to encompass the temple’s fall, signs, Christ’s parousia, and the end of the Old Covenant age (synteleia tou aiōnos, Dan. 9:26–27). The singular “sign” (sēmeion) unifies these events, aligning with Second Temple expectations of a messianic transition (Melchizedek Scroll, 11QMelch II, 2–15). In verse 8, “all these [panta tauta]” denotes the preliminary “birth pains” (vv. 4–8: false messiahs, wars, famines, earthquakes), which “are not yet the end” (v. 6), fulfilled in the AD 30–60s.

In verses 33–34, Jesus declares, “When you see all these things [panta tauta], you know that he is near,” and “this generation [hē genea hautē] will not pass away until all these things [panta tauta] have taken place.” Here, panta tauta includes all events from verses 2–31: temple destruction (v. 2), birth pains (vv. 4–8), near signs (vv. 9–15: persecution, betrayal, false prophets, gospel proclamation, abomination of desolation), great tribulation (v. 21), de-creation of the Old Covenant system (v. 29, Isa. 13:10), times of the Gentiles treading down Jerusalem (Luke 21:24), Christ’s coming (v. 30, Dan. 7:13–14), and the “gathering of the elect” (v. 31), at the end of the age which is the resurrection event (Dan. 12:2–3; Matt. 13:39–43; Matt. 24:3). Historical evidence confirms fulfillment by AD 70: temple destruction (Jewish War 6.5.2), signs (Acts 7:58; Col. 1:23), tribulation (Jewish War 6.9.3), and the Church’s preservation (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3.5.3).

The NT’s imminence language reinforces this AD 70 fulfillment, with the resurrection “about to be” (Acts 24:15 YLT), Christ’s coming, judgment of the living and dead, and kingdom establishment all “about to be” fulfilled (2 Tim. 4:1 YLT; cf. Phil. 4:5; Heb. 10:37; Rev. 22:12). Epistles link these events to Jesus’ generation: persecution (1 Thess. 2:14–16), gospel spread (Col. 1:23), and temple desolation (Rev. 11:1–2). Full Preterism affirms this unified fulfillment, refuting Higher Critical claims of prophetic failure, which misread the “end” as world history’s termination; Dispensationalist misapplications to modern events, ignoring “this generation”; Amillennialism’s indefinite timeline, diluting terms like ēngiken and tachu; and Partial Preterism’s fragmented eschatology, which posits a future coming despite the singular resurrection and coming of the Son of Man (Dan. 7:13; 12:2–3; Matt. 24:3, 31). This establishes Christ’s spiritual kingdom (Luke 17:20–21; Dan. 2:44), empowering believers to confront ideological challenges confidently.

With the AD 70 fulfillment of “all these things” established, we now address how various eschatological systems misinterpret these events, leading to theological errors corrected by Full Preterism.

This chapter argues that NT writers (AD 50–66) accurately proclaimed the end’s proximity as Matthew 24:9–15’s signs unfolded, heeding Jesus’ warning against false prophets who prematurely announce the end (Matt. 24:4–6, 23–26). Historical records, scholarly exegesis, and logical arguments substantiate the Full Preterist interpretation, culminating in AD 70’s “gathering” event (Matt. 24:31). However, various eschatological systems misinterpret these signs and NT imminence, leading to significant theological errors:

Higher Critical/Liberal Scholars (e.g., Schweitzer, Bart Ehrman) correctly recognize NT imminence but erroneously claim Jesus and the NT writers were mistaken, misinterpreting the “end” as the termination of world history rather than the Old Covenant age. This undermines biblical context and inerrancy by assuming prophetic failure, ignoring the historical fulfillment of Jerusalem’s destruction (Josephus, Jewish War 6.2.1). Full Preterism corrects this by affirming that Jesus’ prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70, vindicating His context and accuracy with that of the NT writers’ authority.[6]

Dispensationalism, as promoted by figures like John MacArthur, Tim LaHaye (Left Behind series), John Hagee, David Jeremiah, Jack Hibbs, and Robert Jeffress, misapplies Matthew 24:4–15’s signs (e.g., wars, famines, pestilences, earthquakes) and NT imminence to modern events such as COVID-19, the Russia-Ukraine war, and Middle Eastern conflicts, disregarding their first-century fulfillment within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34). In works like MacArthur’s The Second Coming, LaHaye’s Left Behind series, Hagee’s Four Blood Moons, Jeremiah’s The Book of Signs, Hibbs’ sermons, and Jeffress’ Countdown to the Apocalypse, these teachers link contemporary crises to Jesus’ prophecies, suggesting an imminent rapture or apocalypse.[7] This fosters speculative fear and sensationalism, detaching the text from its historical context of the AD 30–70 period, including the Claudian famine (Acts 11:28), Jewish-Greek riots (Josephus, Jewish War 2.17.8), and the Roman siege (Luke 21:20–24).[8]

Full Preterism restores the signs’ fulfillment to the AD 30–70 timeframe, aligning with Jesus’ clear statement that “all these things” would occur within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34). Historical evidence, such as the temple’s destruction in AD 70 (Jewish War 6.5.2) and the gospel’s spread (Col. 1:23), alongside NT imminence language (e.g., Acts 24:15 YLT, “about to be”; 2 Tim. 4:1 YLT, “about to judge”), confirms that these events, including the resurrection (Matt. 24:31; Dan. 12:2–3), were fulfilled by AD 70.[9] By contrast, Dispensationalist interpretations project first-century prophecies onto modern events, ignoring the historical and biblical context and promoting fear-driven eschatology over the confidence of Christ’s established spiritual kingdom (Luke 17:20–21; Dan. 2:44).[10]

Amillennialism (e.g., Riddlebarger, Hoekema) acknowledges some AD 70 fulfillment but denies that all signs were completed by then, extending the eschatological timeline indefinitely, stating that Christ’s coming and the end is “always near.”[11] This dilutes the urgency of NT language (ēngiken, tachu), undermining the genuine imminence tied to the Old Covenant’s end. Full Preterism affirms that all signs—persecution, gospel proclamation, and the abomination of desolation—were fulfilled by AD 70, validating NT expectations.

Postmillennial Partial Preterism (e.g., Gentry, Joel McDurmon, James Jordan) rightly sees AD 70 as the Old Covenant’s end attended by a spiritual coming of Christ and resurrection event but posits a future Second Coming and resurrection, contradicting Scripture’s unified eschatology of one coming and resurrection event (Dan. 7:13–27; 12:2–4; Matt. 13:39–43; Matt. 24:3, 30–31). This fragments the prophetic narrative. Full Preterism maintains a singular AD 70 second coming of Christ, end of the Old Covenant age, and resurrection fulfillment, harmonizing OT and NT prophecies.[12]

Full Preterism resolves these errors by affirming the first-century fulfillment of Matthew 24:4–15’s signs and NT imminence, establishing Christ’s spiritual kingdom (Luke 17:20–21; Dan. 2:44) as fulfilled in AD 70, empowering believers to live confidently in the New Covenant age. The following logical arguments underscore this resolution:

NT Writers’ Prophetic Accuracy

Major Premise: Jesus warned that false prophets would prematurely declare the end before Matthew 24:9–15’s signs (persecution, rebellion, false prophets, gospel proclamation, abomination of desolation) were fulfilled (Matt. 24:4–6, 23–26).

Minor Premise: NT writers (e.g., Peter, Paul, John) proclaimed the end as “near” (1 Pet. 4:5–7; Phil. 4:5; 1 John 2:18; Rev. 1:3; 22:7, 10) only as these signs were visibly unfolding (e.g., persecution, Jewish revolt, gospel to the oikoumenē), fulfilled in AD 70.

Conclusion: The NT writers were not false prophets, as their imminence claims were grounded in the signs’ fulfillment, refuting Higher Critical and futurist errors that misjudge or attack their accuracy.[13]

Genuine Imminence of AD 70

Major Premise: NT imminence language (ēngiken, mellō, tachu) reflects a genuine expectation of Christ’s second coming within “this generation” (Matt. 24:27–34), tied to Matthew 24:9–15’s signs.

Minor Premise: Historical evidence (Acts 2–28; Col. 1:5–6, 23; Rom. 10:18; 16:25–26; Luke 21:20–24) confirms these signs were fulfilled by AD 70, within the first-century generation.

Conclusion: The NT writers’ imminence claims of Christ’s second coming and the end of the age were genuine and fulfilled in AD 70, correcting Amillennialism’s carrot-and-stick “the end is always near” indefinite timeline and Partial Preterism’s fragmented eschatology.[14]

Second Temple Jewish Expectations of Messianic Signs and Their Old Testament Roots

Before Jesus’ ministry, Second Temple Judaism (ca. 515 BC–AD 70) developed a rich eschatological framework anticipating the Messiah’s coming, shaped by OT prophecies and amplified by intertestamental literature. These expectations, rooted in texts like Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Deuteronomy, and Micah, identified specific signs heralding the Messianic age, often tied to the end of Israel’s covenantal order and the establishment of God’s kingdom. Some traditions posited a 40-year Messianic reign between “this age” (their present Old Covenant order) and the “age to come” (the eternal kingdom or Messianic age), with the resurrection—sometimes understood as a spiritual raising of souls from the body at death or from Hades at “the end” rather than a physical bodily resurrection—occurring 40 years after the Messiah’s being “cut off” (Dan. 9:26).[15] While some Jewish texts distinguished preliminary turmoil (similar to Jesus’ “birth pains”) from decisive signs of the Messiah’s imminent arrival, their interpretations varied widely, lacking the precision Jesus provides in Matthew 24:4–15. This section examines these expectations, their OT foundations, and their alignment or divergence with Jesus’ prophetic roadmap, which culminates in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, fulfilling Daniel’s “end,” “appointed time of the end,” or “hour of the end” (Dan. 9:24-27; 12:4, LXX, OG LXX / Matt. 24:3, 13–14).

The Preliminary Birth Pains: The Appointed Time of the End is Not Yet 

“And he said, “See that you are not led astray.  For many will come in my name, saying, I am he!’ and, ‘The [appointed time – kairos] is at hand!’  Do not go after them…the end [telos] is not yet..” (Luke 21:8)

The concept of “kairos” (Greek for “appointed time” or “season”) plays a foundational role in understanding the timing and nature of the eschatological “end.” In the Greek Septuagint (LXX), Moses prophesied of a future generation that would provoke Yahweh to anger, resulting in covenantal judgment (Deut. 32:20, 29, 35). However, that judgment would not come immediately—it was reserved for the “kairos,” the divinely appointed time: 

  • Deuteronomy 32:35 LXX: “In the day of vengeance, in the time (kairos) when their foot shall slip.”
  • Deuteronomy 32:20 LXX: “I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end will be; for they are a perverse generation, children in whom is no faith.”
  • Deuteronomy 32:29: “If they were wise, they would understand this, they would discern their latter end.”

Daniel 9:26–27 builds on this, predicting the destruction of the city and sanctuary in the 70th week, tied to a decisive “end” at an appointed time:

  • Daniel 9:26 LXX: “The end of it shall be with a flood, and to the end there shall be war; desolations are determined.”
  • Daniel 9:27: “Until the consummation and that determined is poured upon the desolate.”

Daniel 12:4 instructs the prophet to “seal up the book until the time of the end (kairos),” showing again that a specific divinely ordained season was necessary before the resurrection and judgment could occur.

Jesus, speaking in Luke 21:8, warns His disciples not to be deceived by premature claims that the end (telos) is “near” (Greek: ēngiken), and that the appointed time (kairos) had not yet come, because not all signs were indicators of the true end. Yet by Luke 21:20–24, when Jerusalem is surrounded by armies, that would mark the true kairos—the appointed time of vengeance and fulfillment of all things (cf. Luke 21:22).

Chart: Kairos and the Appointed End in Scripture

Passage Greek Term Meaning and Context
Deut. 32:35 (LXX) kairos Appointed time for vengeance on apostate Israel
Deut. 32:20 (LXX) eschatos The perverse generation and their final end examined
Deut. 32:29 (LXX) eschatos + kairos Latter end understood through wisdom
Dan. 9:26–27 (LXX) sunteleia/kairos End and desolation determined at an appointed time
Dan. 12:4 (LXX) kairos Seal prophecy until the appointed end
Luke 21:8 telos/ēngiken/kairos Not all signs mean the end is near; kairos not yet
Luke 21:20–24 kairos Appointed time of judgment on Jerusalem and fulfillment
Rev. 1:3; 22:10 kairos Do not seal the vision—appointed time is near; fulfills Daniel 12 

Timeline of Fulfillment (AD 30–70)

  • ~1400 BC: Deuteronomy 32 predicts judgment and atonement at a “near” kairos within a 40-year “perverse generation” (Deut. 31:29; 32:5, 35).[16]
  • ~530 BC: Daniel 7:13-27; 9:24–27; 12:1–7 (LXX) foresee Messiah’s coming in vengeance at “the appointed time of the end” during a “three-and-a-half years” war within the timeframe of the Roman Empire (Dan. 12:2–3, 7).[17]
  • ~200 BC–AD 68: DSS expect a 40-year messianic period (4Q558) and war against Rome/apostate Jews (1QM 1:3–6; 1QpHab 2:5–10).[18]
  • AD 30: Christ’s death (“cut off,” Dan. 9:26) begins the 40-year transition.
  • AD 67–70: Roman-Jewish War (three-and-a-half years) fulfills the appointed time–kairos (Dan. 12:7; Rev. 11:2–8, 18).[19]
  • AD 70: Christ comes, Temple destruction, Church’s vindication as New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:2).[20] 

Where Daniel was told to seal his prophecy because the appointed time (kairos) was still far off (Dan. 12:4), John is told the exact opposite: “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the kairos is near.” This reinforces that the prophecy of Revelation is not disconnected from Daniel’s vision but its fulfillment.

Everyone agrees Revelation is John’s version of the Olivet Discourse, therefore, framing the same kairos of judgment. The war, vengeance, resurrection, and wedding motifs are drawn from Deuteronomy 32 and Daniel, culminating in the judgment of Jerusalem and vindication of the saints in AD 70.

This pattern teaches that the “end” was not a vague or open-ended future event. Rather, it was tethered to a kairos—a specific, prophetic, and covenantal moment in history. Moses saw it from afar. Daniel sealed it up. Jesus declared that the kairos had arrived in His generation (cf. Matt. 24:34).

To rightly interpret the eschatological “end,” one must account for this kairos thread stretching from Deuteronomy 32, through Daniel 9 and 12, to Luke 21 and Revelation. The judgment, vengeance, resurrection, and kingdom transfer were not disjointed. They were unified within the appointed time that culminated in AD 70.

This also undermines futurist claims of an always-pending “end.” If we track the logic and wording of the prophetic texts, there is a consistent storyline: God revealed an appointed time of judgment that climaxed with the destruction of Jerusalem and vindication of His people—just as foretold in the Song of Moses. 

Second Temple Jewish texts sometimes distinguished between preliminary turmoil and decisive signs, though less explicitly than Jesus’ clear division in Matthew 24:4–15. The concept of “messianic woes” or “birth pangs of the Messiah” (ḥevel ha-mashiach), found in later rabbinic texts (e.g., b. Shabbat 118a; b. Sanhedrin 98b), likely reflects earlier traditions.[21] These “birth pangs” included wars, famines, and social upheaval, seen as general precursors to the Messianic age, akin to Jesus’ “birth pains” (Matt. 24:4–8; ōdinōn). Texts like 1 Enoch 99:4–5, Jubilees 23:13–21, and Deuteronomy 32:20–25 describe escalating chaos—wars, moral decay, and natural disasters—as setting the stage for divine intervention, but not necessarily signaling its immediacy.[22]

More definitive signs, such as intense persecution, temple desolation, the Messiah’s appearance, and the resurrection, were often tied to Daniel’s timeline (Dan. 12:1–7, 11–12). The Qumran community (e.g., 1QpHab 2:5–10) expected a final “time of distress” and a “teacher of righteousness” to usher in the end, resembling Jesus’ “near signs” (Matt. 24:9–15), culminating in the Gog and Magog war against Rome and apostate Jerusalem (1QM 1:1–7) and covenantal curses (CD 3:7–8; Deut. 32:5, 20–29).[23]

Jesus opens the Olivet Discourse by describing events He terms “the beginning of birth pains” (Matt. 24:8; Greek ōdinōn, “pains” or “pangs”), emphasizing: “See that you are not alarmed, for this must take place, but the end is not yet” (v. 6). These birth pains, spanning AD 30 through the 60s, were significant but insufficient to indicate the end’s immediate arrival, serving as early warnings for the decisive signs to follow.

1). False Messiahs (Matt. 24:4–5)

False messiahs, claiming divine authority, deceived many (Matt. 24:4–5), fulfilling Jesus’ warning of preliminary “birth pains” that precede the end (Matt. 24:6). This sign aligns with Second Temple Jewish expectations, rooted in OT texts like Deuteronomy 13:1–5, which warns against false prophets performing signs to lead Israel into idolatry. Such prophets must be rejected if they promote a false messiah or God contrary to the Torah. Jesus, as the greater prophet foretold in Deuteronomy 18, performed greater miracles than Moses and fulfilled Daniel’s prophecy of the Messiah also being God and therefore “worshiped” by the nations (Dan. 7:14). This also aligning with Jewish views of the “Two Powers of Heaven.”  Unlike, false prophets, His doctrine was pure, fulfilling the Law and the Prophets by AD 70, as He correctly interpreted it (Luke 21:22, 32; Matt. 5:17–18; Matt. 5–7). The leadership and false messiahs leading up to the years of AD 70 twisted the law and prophets and made the temple and the cultus system an idol.

Second Temple literature, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls (CD 6:10–11) and 1 Enoch 99:4–5, interpreted these texts as foretelling deceivers exploiting eschatological hopes before the Messiah’s coming, aligning with Jesus’ prophecy.[24]Historical examples include Theudas (ca. AD 44–46), who promised miraculous deliverance but led followers to ruin (Acts 5:36); Judas of Galilee (AD 6), who incited rebellion against Roman taxation (Acts 5:37); and Simon Magus (ca. AD 30s), who captivated Samaritans with claims of divine power (Acts 8:9–11). Josephus records other “impostors” in the 60s, such as a false prophet luring crowds to the temple with promises of divine rescue.[25] These figures reflect the Jewish expectation of false prophets as a sign of the end, which Jesus situates within the “birth pains” leading to the decisive “near signs” fulfilled by AD 70.

2). Wars and Rumors of Wars (Matt. 24:6–7a)

Jesus’ prophecy of “wars and rumors of wars” (Matt. 24:6–7a) aligns with Second Temple Jewish expectations of escalating conflicts as precursors to the Messianic age. The War Scroll (1QM 1:1–7) from Qumran anticipates a climactic war against the “Kittim” (often identified with Rome), rooted in OT prophecies like Ezekiel 38–39 (Gog and Magog) and Daniel 2:31–44; 7:2–27 (successive empires culminating in God’s kingdom).[26] These texts foresaw minor wars and rumors of conflict as “birth pains” leading to the final eschatological battle.

The pre-AD 70 era was marked by widespread unrest, fulfilling Jesus’ warning. Notable examples include Jewish-Greek riots in Alexandria (AD 38–40), sparked by Caligula’s attempt to place his statue in the Jerusalem temple, leading to violent clashes.[27] In Judea, a Passover riot in Jerusalem (ca. AD 49) under procurator Cumanus resulted in thousands of deaths, escalating tensions.[28] The Zealot movement, gaining traction after Judas of Galilee’s revolt (AD 6, Acts 5:37), fueled rumors of rebellion against Roman rule, while reports of Roman military movements heightened fears of retaliation. Yet, Jesus urged calm: “See that you are not alarmed, for this must take place, but the end is not yet” (Matt. 24:6). These conflicts were preliminary signs, symptoms of a world under divine judgment, pointing to the Roman-Jewish War (AD 66–70). Jesus later describes this war as the moment when “armies surround Jerusalem” (Luke 21:20) and the “times of the Gentiles” when Rome would trample the city (Luke 21:24).

Second Temple literature, such as 4 Ezra 13:31–32 and 2 Baruch 27:1–15, reflects similar expectations of turmoil before the Messiah’s victory, reinforcing Jesus’ prophecy.[29] Historical figures like the Egyptian prophet (ca. AD 50s, Acts 21:38) and anonymous agitators promising divine deliverance exploited these hopes, inciting unrest.[30] These “wars and rumors of wars” were not the end but preparatory signs, culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, which Jesus frames as divine judgment and a precursor to His return (Matt. 24:30–31).

3). Famines and Pestilences (Matt. 24:7b)

Jesus’ prophecy of “famines and pestilences” (Matt. 24:7b; cf. Luke 21:11) reflects Second Temple Jewish expectations of divine judgments as covenant curses signaling the Messianic age. The Damascus Document (CD 1:14–17) and Pesher on Habakkuk (1QpHab 9:3–7) explicitly cite Deuteronomy 28:20–24, which details curses for covenant unfaithfulness, including famine, pestilence, and drought, as divine punishments preceding restoration.[31] Deuteronomy 32:23–25, the Song of Moses, further amplifies these curses, predicting “wasting famine,” “pestilence,” and “destruction” for Israel’s apostasy, which Second Temple texts interpreted as eschatological signs pointing to Messianic fulfillment. For example, the Dead Sea Scrolls’ 4QTestimonia (4Q175) quotes Deuteronomy 18:18–19 alongside Deuteronomy 33:8–11, linking the covenant curses to the expectation of a prophet like Moses who would usher in God’s judgment and redemption.[32]Similarly, 4QDeuteronomy^j (4Q37) preserves Deuteronomy 32:23–25, emphasizing covenant curses as precursors to divine intervention, aligning with Qumran’s expectation of a Messianic figure to restore Israel after judgment.[33] Second Temple literature, such as 2 Baruch 62:4–6, connects famine and pestilence to God’s judgment on Israel, anticipating a Messianic renewal following these tribulations.[34]

Historical records confirm these prophetic signs in the pre-AD 70 era. Acts 11:28 documents a widespread famine under Claudius (ca. AD 46–47), prompting relief efforts by the early church, as noted in Romans 15:25–28 and 1 Corinthians 16:1–5. Josephus records severe famines in Judea, particularly during the Roman siege of Jerusalem (AD 67–70), where starvation led to horrific conditions, including cannibalism.[35]  Pestilences, often linked to malnutrition and overcrowding, accompanied these famines, fulfilling Deuteronomy’s curses and Jesus’ “birth pains” (Luke 21:11, 20–24). The Qumran community’s Pesher on Habakkuk interprets such calamities as divine judgment on the “wicked” of Israel, signaling the imminent arrival of the Messianic age (1QpHab 9:3–7).[36] These famines and pestilences were not the final “end” but preparatory signs, culminating in the “near signs” of Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70, which Jesus framed as divine judgment and a precursor to His return (Matt. 24:30–31; Luke 21:20–24).

4). Earthquakes (Matt. 24:7c)

Jesus’ prophecy of earthquakes as part of the “birth pains” (Matt. 24:7c; Luke 21:11) aligns with Second Temple Jewish expectations of cosmic upheavals signaling divine judgment and Messianic fulfillment. In the Old Testament, earthquakes often accompany God’s intervention or judgment, as seen in Isaiah 29:6 and Ezekiel 38:19–20, which describe seismic activity as part of eschatological turmoil. The Dead Sea Scrolls, particularly the Pesher on Nahum (4QpNah 3–4 i 5–6), interpret seismic imagery in Nahum 1:5–6 as divine judgment on the nations, anticipating the Messianic age.[37]Similarly, 1 Enoch 1:5–7 describes earthquakes and cosmic disturbances as signs of God’s wrath and the coming of the “Holy One,” reinforcing Jewish expectations of such events before the Messiah’s arrival.[38]

Historical records confirm seismic activity in the pre-AD 70 era, fulfilling Jesus’ prophecy. An earthquake in Philippi (ca. AD 50s) freed Paul and Silas from prison, demonstrating divine intervention (Acts 16:26). Josephus records significant earthquakes in Judea during the 60s, including one in AD 68 that struck Jerusalem and its environs, intensifying fears of divine judgment amid the Roman-Jewish War.[39] Tacitus also notes seismic disturbances in the Mediterranean region during this period, such as in Crete and Asia Minor.[40]  These events, while not uncommon in the seismically active eastern Mediterranean, were interpreted by Jews and early Christians as signs of God’s impending judgment, as R.T. France notes, viewing them as “typical first-century phenomena” amplified by their eschatological significance in Jesus’ discourse.[41] Craig S. Keener further argues that earthquakes in the New Testament often symbolize divine presence or judgment, aligning with OT and Jewish apocalyptic traditions.[42]

These earthquakes, as part of the “birth pains,” were not the final “end” but preparatory signs pointing to the “near signs” of Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70 (Luke 21:20–24). Jesus frames these events as covenant judgments, fulfilling Deuteronomy’s curses and culminating in His return (Matt. 24:30–31), a perspective echoed in the Qumran community’s expectation of cosmic upheaval ushering in the Messianic kingdom (War Scroll (1QM) 1:11–12).[43]

Contemporary Misuse of Birth Pain Signs

Contemporary Evangelicals and self-acclaimed “prophecy experts” often misapply Jesus’ “birth pains” signs—false messiahs, wars, famines, pestilences, and earthquakes (Matt. 24:4–7; Luke 21:11)—to modern events, claiming they signal an imminent rapture or the end of the age. Dispensationalist teachers like John MacArthur, David Jeremiah, and Jack Hibbs frequently cite global conflicts (e.g., the Russia-Ukraine war since 2022, Israel-Iran tensions, or Middle East conflicts), pandemics (e.g., COVID-19 in 2020–2022), natural disasters (e.g., the 2010 Haiti earthquake or 2023 Turkey-Syria earthquakes), and religious movements (e.g., New Age groups or cults like the Branch Davidians) as evidence of an approaching apocalypse. For example, MacArthur’s The Second Coming links modern wars and natural disasters to Matthew 24, suggesting they indicate the “last days,” while Jeremiah’s The Book of Signs frames global pandemics and geopolitical unrest as fulfillments of these prophecies.[44] Similarly, Hibbs has cited COVID-19 and recent Middle Eastern conflicts as signs of an imminent rapture, urging believers to prepare for the end.[45]

This approach disregards Jesus’ explicit warning that these “birth pains” are not signs of the end: “See that you are not alarmed, for this must take place, but the end is not yet” (Matt. 24:6). The Greek term genea in Matthew 24:34, meaning “generation,” underscores that Jesus expected these signs to be fulfilled within the lifetime of His hearers, pointing to the AD 30–70 period culminating in Jerusalem’s destruction. Second Temple Jewish expectations, as seen in texts like the Dead Sea Scrolls (War Scroll 1QM 1:1–7) and 1 Enoch 99:4–5, anticipated such signs (wars, famines, earthquakes) as precursors to Messianic judgment within a specific historical framework, not as open-ended prophecies for distant future generations.[46] The historical record confirms this: false messiahs like Theudas (Acts 5:36), wars like the Jewish-Greek riots in Alexandria (AD 38–40), famines under Claudius (Acts 11:28), and earthquakes in Judea all occurred before AD 70, fulfilling Jesus’ prophecy within the first-century context.

The dispensationalist misapplication stems from a hermeneutical error: ignoring the historical and literary context of Matthew 24 in favor of a futurist eschatology that decouples these signs from their first-century fulfillment. Scholars like N.T. Wright and R.T. France argue that Jesus’ Olivet Discourse primarily addresses the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 as a divine judgment, not a distant end-time scenario.[47] By projecting these signs onto modern events, “prophecy experts” sensationalize global crises, fostering fear rather than the calm Jesus urged (Matt. 24:6). For instance, Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth (1970) and Tim LaHaye’s Left Behind series popularized this approach, linking Cold War tensions and later global events to Matthew 24, despite the text’s focus on the “abomination of desolation” (Matt. 24:15; cf. Dan. 9:27) fulfilled in the Roman siege.[48]

This misreading also fails to account for Deuteronomy 32:20–25, which portrays wars, famines, and pestilences as covenant curses upon Israel for its unfaithfulness—judgments that Jesus said would befall that generation (Luke 21:20–24). It further overlooks that Jesus identified his own contemporaries as the “perverse generation” destined to witness his coming in judgment and vengeance (Deut. 32:5, 20, 35–43; cf. Matt. 17:17; Luke 21:27–32). Likewise, the Qumran community’s Pesher on Habakkuk (1QpHab 9:3–7) interpreted similar historical calamities as divine judgments within their own time, not as recurring signs meant to forecast distant end-times.[49]

Moreover, contemporary misuses often exploit the universal nature of these signs—wars, disasters, and false teachers are perennial—to create urgency and sell books or media, ignoring Jesus’ emphasis on their limited, pre-AD 70 scope. For example, claims that COVID-19 fulfilled Luke 21:11’s “pestilences” disregard the first-century context of diseases during Claudius’s reign and the Jerusalem siege. By contrast, a faithful reading of Matthew 24:4–7 recognizes these as preparatory signs leading to the “times of the Gentiles” (Luke 21:24), fulfilled between AD 67–70 and within Jesus’ predicted “this generation” (Luke 21:32). Rather than fueling speculative end-time predictions and expecting to fly off the earth at any moment, this understanding calls believers today to cultivate enduring faith, engage meaningfully in culture and politics, and develop long-term strategies to confront the ideological and spiritual enemies of Christianity—such as Islam, Talmudic Judaism/Zionism, Marxism, and Globalism.

Signs of the Near End: The Intensifying Crisis

Jesus transitions to signs that signal the end’s nearness (Matt. 24:9–15), intensifying from the mid-50s to early 60s and culminating in Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70, fulfilling Daniel’s “end,” “appointed time of the end,” or “hour of the end” Daniel 9:24-27; 12:4 (LXX, hōra tou telous). These signs—persecution, betrayal, false prophets, gospel proclamation, and the abomination of desolation—prompted NT writers to declare Christ’s coming and the end of the Old Covenant age as genuinely imminent (e.g., Heb. 10:37; 1 Pet. 4:7; 1 John 2:18; Rev. 1:1, 3—22:6-7, 10, 20). Far from promoting a vague, perpetually “hope delayed” (Prov. 13:12) carrot and stick “always near” eschatology that futurism’s unfulfilled expectations have sustained for two millennia, the NT writers’ proclamations were grounded in the concrete fulfillment of Jesus’ signs, confirming Jesus’ coming in the AD 70 judgment as the true and final close of the Old Covenant age.

1). Persecution and Martyrdom (Matt. 24:9)

Persecution (Matt. 24:9; thlipsis, tribulation) escalated with Stephen’s martyrdom (AD 34–36; Acts 7–8), James’ execution (AD 44; Acts 12:1–2), Paul’s arrests (AD 50s–60s; Acts 16:22–24), and James the Just’s martyrdom (AD 62), who declared the Son of Man’s coming was “about to” take place.[50] The Neronian persecution (AD 64–66) fulfilled “hated by all nations.”[51]

Argument: Daniel, Matthew 10 and Matthew 24 Describe One End and AD 70 Coming

The unity of Jesus’ teachings in Matthew 10:17–23 and Matthew 24:4–15, rooted in Daniel’s prophecies, supports the AD 70 fulfillment. The following chart illustrates the parallels between these passages, showing how Daniel provides the Old Testament context for the signs and persecutions before Christ’s coming in AD 70.

Parallels Between Matthew 10:17–23, the Olivet Discourse, and Daniel

Matthew 10:17–23 Olivet Discourse Daniel Parallels Fulfillment (AD 30–70)
(1) Delivered up to local councils and synagogues (Matt. 10:17) (1) Delivered up to local councils and synagogues (Mark 13:9) Dan. 7:25: Saints persecuted by the little horn during 4th kingdom (Rome/Israel) Persecutions of Stephen, James, and Paul (Acts 7:58–8:3; 12:1–2; 24–26; AD 34–62).
(2) Brought before governors and kings as witnesses to the Gentiles (Matt. 10:18) (2) Brought before governors and kings as witnesses to the Gentiles (Mark 13:9) Dan. 9:26: Messiah’s testimony. Paul’s trials before Felix, Festus, Nero (Acts 24:10–27; 25:6–12; 28:17–31; AD 58–62); Neronian persecution (AD 64–66).
(3) Holy Spirit would speak through them (Matt. 10:19–20) (3) Holy Spirit would speak through them (Mark 13:11) Dan. 12:3–4: Wise spread & increase in knowledge; Dan. 7:27: Kingdom given to saints. Spirit-empowered preaching (Acts 2:4; 10:44–48; 19:6; AD 30–62).
(4) Family betrayal and persecution; he who endures to “the end” will be “saved” (Matt. 10:22) (4) Family betrayal and persecution; he who endures to “the end” will be “saved” (Mark 13:12–13) Dan. 7:21–27: Persecution before the end. Jewish divisions, Christian ostracism (Josephus, Wars 4.3.8; AD 66–70).[52]
(5) Disciples would not exhaust cities of refuge as they preached before the “end” and the Son of Man’s coming (Matt. 10:22–23) (5) Preach gospel to the world before “the end” and the Son of Man’s coming (Matt. 24:14; Mark 13:10) Dan. 2:44: Kingdom established in Roman Empire. Dan. 7:13-27; 9:26–27; 12:2-4: During Roman Empire – knowledge of Messiah increases before His coming in judgment, to raise the dead, and Kingdom is inherited–at “the end.” Gospel spread (Acts 2–28; Rom. 10:18; Col. 1:23; AD 30–62); flight to Pella (Eusebius, Eccl. Hist.3.5.3).[53] 

Major Premise: Daniel 2:44, 7:13–27, 9:24–27, and 12:1–7 prophesy a singular end and coming of Christ upon the clouds during the Roman Empire, preceded by persecution and the kingdom’s establishment, fulfilled by the time of the end.

Minor Premise: Matthew 10:17–23 and Matthew 24:3–15 draw on Daniel, describing the same events to be fulfilled within the disciples’ lifetime and thus emphasizing Christ’s coming at the “end” of the Old Covenant age in AD 70 (Matt. 10:22–23; 24:3–34).

Conclusion: Matthew 10:17–23 and Matthew 24:3–15 refer to the AD 70 second coming of Christ in judgment to bring an end to the Old Covenant age, not a future event, confirmed by NT imminence texts and historical fulfillment.

This chart and argument, synthesizing Jesus’ teachings with Daniel’s prophecies, underscore a unified eschatological framework: one coming, one judgment, one “end” fulfilled within the disciples’ lifetime. Jesus’ promise in Matthew 10:23—that the disciples would not exhaust Israel’s cities of refuge before the Son of Man’s coming—ties directly to the persecution and gospel proclamation detailed in both passages. As B.M. Metzger notes, the Greek of Matthew 10:23 suggests that Jesus assured His disciples that as they preached the gospel, He would provide ongoing refuge within Israel until the end of the Old Covenant age, a promise fulfilled as Christians finally fled to Pella during Jerusalem’s siege.[54]

2). Betrayal and National Rebellion (Matt. 24:10)

Betrayal and rebellion (Matt. 24:10) primarily refer to national divisions within Israel, anticipating the Jewish revolt coming over the horizon in the events of (AD 66–70), rather than widespread Christian apostasy, though Christians faced temptation to join emerging factions. The Greek skandalizō (“fall away”) and paradidōmi (“betray”) suggest societal breakdown, as Jews turned against each other and Christians were ostracized for refusing to join the revolt. Josephus documents factionalism between Zealots, Sicarii, and moderates in the 50s–60s, with the Sicarii assassinating leaders as early as AD 54.[55]  Tacitus notes “mutual hatreds” among Jewish groups.[56] Christians faced pressure to align with these factions, as seen in Hebrews 10:25–26’s warning against “forsaking the assembly” (ca. AD 60–65), possibly reflecting temptation to join Zealots. This parallels 2 Thessalonians 2:3’s apostasia (rebellion), which F.F. Bruce interprets as the Jewish revolt, with the “restrainer” removed in AD 66, fulfilling Daniel 9:27’s desolation. Bruce writes:

“The ‘rebellion’ (apostasia) here is not so much a defection from faith as a political revolt, the kind of uprising which was characteristic of Jewish resistance to Roman rule in the period leading up to A.D. 66–70. The term could well describe the Jewish War, which culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.”[57]

3). False Prophets (Matt. 24:11)

Jesus warned that “many false prophets will arise and lead many astray” (Matt. 24:11), a prediction fulfilled within the apostolic generation. Judaizers (Gal. 1:6–7; 2 Cor. 11:13) and antichrists (1 John 2:18) emerged promoting law-based salvation. Their deception prompted the NT writers to proclaim it was “the last hour” and that Christ’s coming in judgment was “about to” occur (1 John 2:17–18; 2 Tim. 4:1, YLT).

This warning aligns with expectations in Second Temple literature, which anticipated a rise in deceptive figures prior to divine intervention. The Damascus Document (CD 6:10–11) warns of leaders who misinterpret the law and lead others astray—a theme mirrored in Jesus’ rebuke of scribes and Pharisees who “shut the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces” (Matt. 23:13).[58] The Dead Sea Scrolls’ 1QpHab 2:1–10 identifies false teachers within Israel who pervert the law for personal gain, paralleling Paul’s description of deceitful workers masquerading as apostles of Christ (2 Cor. 11:13–15).[59]

These texts reflect a broader Qumran worldview that understood false prophecy as a covenantal threat warranting divine judgment. The Community Rule (1QS 5:20–6:1) excluded those who “speak in rebellion against the commandments of God,” showing an early expectation that eschatological deception would arise from within Israel before the Day of the Lord.[60]

In the NT, such figures were not merely theological aberrants—they were eschatological signs. Hymenaeus and Philetus (2 Tim. 2:17–18) falsely claimed that the resurrection had already occurred, a distortion which Paul saw as dangerous because it undermined true eschatological hope coming in AD 70. Their error, far from being an isolated heresy, was a fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy about those who would distort the timing of the end.

Thus, both Jesus and the apostles framed these false prophets as harbingers of covenantal judgment and as clear indicators that the end of the age was near (cf. 2 Tim. 4:1 YLT). Their emergence prior to AD 70 confirms the coherence between Jesus’ Olivet Discourse, Second Temple Jewish expectations, and apostolic eschatology.

4). Gospel Proclamation to All Nations (Matt. 24:14)

The gospel’s proclamation (Matt. 24:14; oikoumenē, Roman world) was fulfilled by AD 62, as Paul declared it “proclaimed in all creation” (Col. 1:23; ekērychthē, aorist) and “to all nations” (Rom. 16:26; ethnē). Acts 1:8 functions as an outline for Acts in which chapters 2–28 traces its spread to the ends of the Roman Empire. The following charts illustrate this, aligning Matthew 24:14 with Acts 1:8.

Great Commission Fulfillment

Prophecy Fulfillment Context/Notes
“Gospel… preached in all the world [oikoumenē]… then shall the end come” (Matt. 24:14) “…Their sound has gone out to all the earth… ends of the world [oikoumenē]” (Rom. 10:18) Oikoumenē: Roman Empire (Luke 2:1). Fulfilled by AD 57–58.
“Gospel must first be published among all nations [ethnos]” (Mark 13:10) “…My gospel… made known to all nations [ethnos]…” (Rom. 16:25–26) Ethnos: Gentile peoples (Acts 10:35). Fulfilled by AD 57–58.
“Go into all the world [kosmos]…” (Mark 16:15) “…Gospel… in all the world [kosmos]…” (Col. 1:5–6) Kosmos: Roman sphere. Fulfilled by AD 62.
“Proclaim the gospel to the whole creation [ktisis]” (Mark 16:15) “…Gospel… preached to every creature [ktisis]…” (Col. 1:23) Ktisis: Humanity. Fulfilled by AD 62.
“Witnesses… in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, end of the earth []” (Acts 1:8) Jerusalem: Acts 2; Judea: Acts 8:1; Samaria: Acts 8:5; End: Acts 10–28; “…to all the earth []” (Rom. 10:18) : Roman Empire. Fulfilled by AD 62; Rev. 14:6 (AD 65–66) symbolizes completion.

 Acts 1:8 Commission Fulfillment and Outpouring of Holy Spirit on Each Group

Region (Acts 1:8) Scriptural Fulfillment People Groups Reached Holy Spirit Outpouring
Jerusalem Acts 2:1–41: At Pentecost, 3,000 convert (2:41). Acts 3–5: Further growth (4:4). Jews/proselytes from various nations (Acts 2:5–11). Acts 2:1–4: Tongues; Acts 4:31: Boldness.
Judea Acts 8:1, 4: Preaching in Judea. Acts 8:26–39: Ethiopian eunuch. Jews, Gentile proselytes in Judea (Acts 8:1, 8:36–39). Acts 8:29: Spirit guides Philip.
Samaria Acts 8:5–25: Philip’s preaching, many believe (8:12). Samaritans (Acts 8:5). Acts 8:14–17: Spirit received.
End of the Earth Acts 10:1–48: Cornelius’ household. Acts 13–28: Paul’s missions to Rome; “…to all the earth []” (Rom. 10:18). Gentiles, Jews in Roman Empire (Acts 10:35; 13:46–48). Acts 10:44–48; 19:6: Tongues, prophecy.

These charts demonstrate the fulfillment of Jesus’ gospel mandate within the Roman oikoumenē, confirmed by the Spirit’s outpouring. The Greek terms—oikoumenē (Roman world, Luke 2:1), ethnē (people groups, Acts 10:35), and (land/region, Luke 21:23)—reflect a first-century scope. By AD 62, the gospel had reached the “ends of the known world,” fulfilling the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19–20; Acts 1:8) within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34).

Some early church leaders understood the commission of Matthew 24:14 being fulfilled by AD 70: 

Origen (c. 185–254 AD):  “And the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached in all the world, as a testimony to all the Gentiles, and this too has been fulfilled, as the apostles went forth into all the world.”[61]

Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 263–339 AD):  “Thus, under a celestial commission, and through the divine favor, the doctrine of the Saviour, like the rays of the sun, quickly irradiated the whole world. And straightway, in accordance with the divine Scriptures, the voice of its inspired evangelists and apostles went forth through all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world [Psalm 19:4, cf. Romans 10:18].”[62]

John Chrysostom (c. 347–407 AD):  “And what is more, the gospel was preached in all the world before the fall of Jerusalem, as the apostles went forth and proclaimed it to all nations, and this was fulfilled as Christ said, ‘This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come’ [Matthew 24:14].”[63]

Argument: The Great Commission and Christ’s Coming in AD 70

Major Premise: If the Great Commission of Matthew 24:14 and Acts 1:8, and the coming of Christ in Matthew 24:30 and Acts 1:11, are the same events (as most futurists correctly interpret using the analogy of faith), their fulfillment is unified.

Minor Premise: And if Matthew 24:14 was fulfilled by AD 62 (Rom. 10:18; Col. 1:23; Acts 28:14–31), and Matthew 24:30 was fulfilled in AD 70, within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34) (as partial preterists correctly interpret seeking to honor the analogy of faith and “this generation”).

Conclusion: Then Acts 1:8 and Acts 1:11 (along with Matt. 24:14-30) were fulfilled in AD 70, with the gospel reaching the Roman world and Christ returning in judgment (as full preterists seek to completely honor the analogy of faith, and Jesus’ use of “this generation”).

Challenges: MacArthur calls Paul’s claims hyperbolic, labeling kēryssō (Col. 1:23) as “prophetic.”[64] Riddlebarger and Hoekema view it as partial, suggesting a future global mission must be fulfilled before Christ comes.[65]

Response: The aorist (ekērychthē, Col. 1:23; exēlthen, Rom. 10:18) denotes completed action, and oikoumenēand confirm a Roman scope, fulfilled by AD 62 (Acts 28:14–31).

5). Abomination of Desolation (Matt. 24:15)

The “abomination of desolation” (Matt. 24:15; bdelygma tēs eremōseōs) was fulfilled when Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem, as described in Luke’s parallel account (AD 66–70; Luke 21:20, 24), prompting Christians to flee to Pella. Consequently, the “holy place” here most likely refers to the holy land (2 Macc. 1:7), as the Roman presence in the holy land was an “abomination” to the Jews, leading to Jerusalem’s “desolation” in AD 70.[66] The Dead Sea Scrolls, particularly the War Scroll (1QM) and the Melchizedek Scroll (11QMelch), provide crucial context for understanding this event as the culmination of the eschatological war anticipated in Second Temple Judaism, aligning with the New Testament’s depiction of the end of the Old Covenant age.[67]

The “End” of the Old Covenant Age War 

Jesus’ reference to the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20 connects directly to the eschatological war described in Daniel 9:24–27, Isaiah 2–3, and Ezekiel 38–39, which Second Temple Jewish texts, including the Dead Sea Scrolls, interpreted as a final conflict between God’s people (the children of light) and their enemies (Romans and apostate Jerusalem). This war, termed “Armageddon” or “Gog and Magog” in Revelation, was expected to occur “shortly” (Rev. 1:1, 3) in the events of AD 67–70. The Dead Sea Scrolls, particularly the War Scroll (1QM), reflect a similar expectation of an imminent eschatological battle, often interpreted as a conflict involving Rome and apostate elements within Judaism, culminating within the first-century generation.[68]

The War Scroll (1QM) outlines a cosmic and eschatological conflict between the “Sons of Light” (the Qumran community) and the “Sons of Darkness,” identified as the “Kittim” (often understood as Romans) and apostate Jews who collaborated with foreign powers. This aligns with the New Testament’s portrayal of the Roman-Jewish War (AD 67–70) as the fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy, where Rome destroys Jerusalem and the temple. Scholars such as John J. Collins note that the War Scroll’s depiction of the Kittim as a dominant Gentile power reflects Second Temple expectations of a climactic war involving Rome, paralleling the “armies” surrounding Jerusalem in Luke 21:20.[69] Similarly, the Melchizedek Scroll (11QMelch) anticipates the arrival of a messianic figure in the tenth jubilee to bring judgment and redemption, aligning with Jesus’ ministry and the subsequent judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70.[70]

In Matthew 24 and Luke 21, Jesus interprets Daniel’s prophecy as fulfilled in the Roman siege, while Revelation’s “the war” (Rev. 11:7; 16:14; 19:19; 20:8) echoes the War Scroll’s imagery of a final battle involving demonic forces and earthly powers. I agree with G.K. Beale arguing that Revelation’s war motif recapitulates Daniel’s prophecies, with the “three-and-a-half years” of tribulation (Rev. 11:2; Dan. 12:7).[71]  Except I do not spiritualize this period but see it fulfilled between AD 67-70. The Dead Sea Scrolls’ expectation of a priestly messiah and a final war against the Kittim (Rome) thus parallels the New Testament’s portrayal of Christ’s coming in judgment against apostate Jerusalem by means of the Romans.

a). Isaiah 2–3

Isaiah 2–4 predicts Jerusalem’s “last days” and “Day of the Lord,” where the “mighty” would “fall by the sword” in “the war” (Isa. 2:1–3:25). During this war, men flee to caves and holes in the ground, and God comes in “majesty,” shaking Jerusalem’s “earth/land” or kingdom (Isa. 2:10–19). The War Scroll (1QM) similarly describes a cosmic shaking and divine judgment, with the “Sons of Light” prevailing over their enemies in a battle that mirrors the “Day of the Lord” in Isaiah (1QM I, 10–11).[72] This imagery is echoed in Jesus’ prophecy in Luke 23:28–30, where he warns the “daughters of Jerusalem” of coming judgment, citing Isaiah 2:19: “Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us,’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’”

Scholars like Craig A. Evans highlight that Jesus’ use of Isaiah 2–3 in Luke 23 connects the Roman-Jewish War to the “last days” judgment, fulfilling the expectations of Second Temple texts like the War Scroll, which anticipated divine intervention against corrupt Jerusalem.[73] The Dead Sea Scrolls’ emphasis on a final war against apostate Israel and foreign oppressors thus provides a backdrop for Jesus’ prediction of Jerusalem’s desolation in AD 70.

Furthermore, Isaiah 4:4 states that through this “war” and “Day of the Lord,” God would purify the remnant in Jerusalem from the corporate guilt and defilement of her “bloodguilt” by a “spirit of judgment and a spirit of burning.” This bloodguilt refers to the sins of apostate Jerusalem, particularly the shedding of innocent blood (e.g., the prophets, Matt. 23:31–37). The remnant, identified in the New Testament as the faithful Christians who fled to Pella is preserved through this judgment.[74] This theme of bloodguilt is central to Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 23:31–39, where he declares that Jerusalem’s judgment for shedding the blood of the prophets would occur in “this generation,” leaving their “house” (temple) desolate in AD 70. The War Scroll’s depiction of a purified remnant emerging from the eschatological war (1QM XIV, 7–8) parallels the New Testament’s portrayal of the Christian remnant spared from Jerusalem’s destruction.[75]

Dispensationalists like Thomas Ice concede that Luke 21:20–24, Luke 23:28–30, and Matthew 23:31–38 were fulfilled in AD 70, yet fail to connect these events to Isaiah’s “last days” war or to Daniel’s prophecies. This oversight undermines their futurist framework, as the Dead Sea Scrolls and New Testament consistently point to AD 70 as the fulfillment of the eschatological war.

Major Premise: The “last days” war and “Day of the Lord” in Isaiah 2–4, causing men to hide in caves from Christ’s majestic presence, is the war of Armageddon or Gog and Magog, linked to the Second Coming.

Minor Premise: Jesus and many commentators identify the hiding in caves as fulfilled in the AD 70 judgment.

Conclusion: The “war” and “Day of the Lord” causing men to flee to caves was Armageddon or Gog and Magog fulfilled in the events of AD 67–70, aligning with the expectations in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second Temple literature.

b). Daniel 9:24–27 – Jesus Interprets Daniel’s Three-and-a-Half-Years War

There is a conservative scholarly consensus that Daniel 2, 7, 9, and 12 employ recapitulation, describing the same eschatological events differently while adding additional information. The Melchizedek Scroll (11QMelch) interprets Daniel’s seventy weeks as ten jubilee periods (490 years), culminating in the arrival of a messianic figure to bring judgment and redemption (11QMelch II, 2–15).[76] This aligns with Jesus’ announcement in Luke 4:18–21 that he fulfills the eschatological jubilee of Isaiah 61, initiating the final seven years of Daniel 9.

In Daniel 7:13–27, the Messiah, described as “one like the Son of Man,” comes during the fourth world power (Rome) to establish an eternal kingdom. The Old Greek Septuagint (OG LXX) portrays the Son of Man coming “as the Ancient of Days” (Dan. 7:13–14), a motif John adopts in Revelation 1:7–17, depicting Christ’s coming in AD 70. Daniel 9:26–27 describes the Messiah’s cutting off, followed by the “people of the prince” (Romans) destroying Jerusalem and the sanctuary, fulfilling the “abomination of desolation.” The War Scroll (1QM) similarly anticipates a messianic victory over the Kittim, interpreted by scholars like Géza Vermes as a reference to Rome.[77]

Jesus’ ministry (ca. AD 27–30) fulfills the first half of Daniel’s final seven years, ending with his crucifixion (“cut off”). The subsequent “already and not yet” transition period (AD 30–70) climaxes in the last three-and-a-half years (AD 67–70), when Rome desolates Jerusalem. The War Scroll’s depiction of a forty-year war cycle (1QM I, 12) mirrors this timeline, with the final battle against the Kittim occurring in the eschatological “end of days.”[78] Jesus’ reference to the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20 directly ties Daniel’s prophecy to the Roman siege, supported by the War Scroll’s expectation of a climactic war against Rome and apostate Jews.

c). Daniel 12:1–7, 11 – The Three-and-a-Half-Years War & Complete Shattering

Daniel 12:7 describes a “time, times, and half a time” (3½ years) when the “power of the holy people” is shattered, corresponding to the war in Daniel 9:26. The War Scroll (1QM II, 6–9) similarly envisions a three-and-a-half-year period of tribulation, culminating in divine victory over the Kittim.[79] Jesus connects this period to the “times of the Gentiles” in Luke 21:24, fulfilled in the Roman trampling of Jerusalem (AD 67–70). The Melchizedek Scroll further ties Daniel’s timeline to the liberation of God’s people and judgment on their enemies, interpreted by scholars like Florentino García Martínez as a first-century expectation.[80]

The New Testament’s Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24; Luke 21) and Revelation 11:1–8 align with these expectations, depicting the Roman-Jewish War as the fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecies. The “1,290 days” and “1,335 days” in Daniel 12:11–12 likely refer to the duration of the siege and its aftermath, paralleling the War Scroll’s detailed battle chronology (1QM XV–XIX).[81]

d). Revelation 11:1–8

Revelation 11:1–2 describes the temple’s Most Holy Place being measured (symbolizing the protection of new covenant Christian worshipers) while the outer court is trampled by Gentiles for “forty-two months” (3½ years), echoing Luke 21:24’s “times of the Gentiles.” G.K. Beale notes that this period recapitulates Daniel 9:27 and 12:7, identifying it as the same eschatological event, though he spiritualizes the timeframe to extend over thousands of years.[82] In contrast, Kenneth Gentry’s partial preterist view correctly identifies this period as AD 67–70, aligning with the War Scroll’s expectation of a final battle against the Kittim.[83] The author agrees with Beale that the “three-and-a-half years” in Daniel 9:24–27, Daniel 12:7, and Revelation 11:1–2 refer to the same eschatological war, but follows Gentry in placing its fulfillment in the historical events of AD 67–70, consistent with the Full Preterist synthesis. The War Scroll’s depiction of the temple’s sanctity amidst war (1QM VII, 4–6) parallels Revelation’s imagery, with the Qumran community expecting divine protection for the faithful remnant, akin to the Christians’ flight to Pella.[84]

Major Premise: The “three-and-a-half years” war of Daniel 9:24–27 is the eschatological war described in Daniel 12:4–7, Revelation 11:1–8, and other passages, culminating in Christ’s “soon” second coming event (Beale).[85]

Minor Premise: This war in Revelation 11:1–8 and Luke 21:24–32 was fulfilled in AD 67–70 at Christ’s “soon” coming in AD 70 (Gentry).[86]

Conclusion: The “three-and-a-half years” war of Daniel, Revelation, being the “times of the Gentiles” (Luke 21:24) was fulfilled in AD 67–70, with Christ’s “soon” second coming occurring in AD 70 (Sullivan).

e). Revelation 16

Revelation 16:14–16 describes the gathering for “the war” at “Armageddon,” aimed at judging “Babylon” (Jerusalem, Rev. 11:8). The War Scroll’s cosmic battle imagery, involving angelic hosts and demonic forces (1QM XII, 8–9), parallels Revelation’s demonic spirits gathering kings for battle.[87] Scholars like Richard Bauckham argue that Revelation 16 draws on Ezekiel 38–39 and Second Temple expectations of a final war, with Jerusalem as the focal point.[88] The Dead Sea Scrolls’ emphasis on a divine judgment against apostate Israel aligns with Revelation’s portrayal of Jerusalem’s destruction for her bloodguilt (Rev. 16:19; 17:6).

The imagery of islands fleeing and mountains vanishing (Rev. 16:20) echoes Isaiah 2:10–19 and the War Scroll’s description of cosmic upheaval (1QM I, 11), reinforcing the AD 70 fulfillment.[89]  Jesus’ coming “like a thief” (Rev. 16:15) connects to Matthew 24:43, indicating an imminent judgment within “this generation.”

f). Revelation 19

Revelation 19:19 depicts “the war” against Christ and his army, targeting Jerusalem (Babylon). The War Scroll’s portrayal of a messianic leader defeating the Kittim (1QM XI, 8–12) parallels Christ’s victory in Revelation 19:11–21.[90] I should note that many liberals like Bart Ehrman and futurists misinterpret “Babylon” the “Great City” as Rome instead of Jerusalem where its designation first begins in Revelation 11:8 as the “Great City” “where the Lord was crucified.”  The Dead Sea Scrolls’ expectation of a priestly messiah aligns with Revelation’s depiction of Christ as the divine warrior, fulfilling Daniel 7:13–14. The imagery of birds feasting on the flesh of God’s enemies (Rev. 19:21) echoes Ezekiel 39:17–20 and Matthew 24:28, further tying Revelation to AD 70 and an imminent eschatology found Second Temple eschatology.

g). Revelation 20:8

The Gog and Magog battle in Revelation 20:8 recapitulates the war of Revelation 16–19, drawing on Ezekiel 38–39. The War Scroll’s depiction of a final battle against the “nations” (1QM I, 4–6) parallels Revelation’s gathering of nations against the “camp of the saints” (the Church).[91]  Scholars like James L. Kugel suggest that Second Temple texts used Gog and Magog as a symbol for eschatological enemies, often linked to Rome.[92] The “land” (ge) in Revelation 20:8 refers to Palestine, consistent with the War Scroll’s localized battle setting.

The view that Gog and Magog was initially or partially fulfilled in Esther’s time (Gary DeMar) or under Antiochus Epiphanes (William Hendriksen) supports a typological interpretation, with John applying this imagery to the Roman-Jewish War.[93] The War Scroll’s use of ancient weaponry (1QM VI, 1–3) aligns with Ezekiel 39:9 and Revelation’s symbolic language, fitting the AD 67–70 context better than modern warfare scenarios.[94]

The vindication of the martyrs in Revelation 20, occurring “shortly” or in a “little while” at Christ’s “soon” coming to avenge and repay (Rev. 1:1; 6;10-11; 22:7-12), aligns with the War Scroll’s expectation of divine judgment on behalf of the faithful (1QM XI, 13–15).[95] Jesus’ promise in Matthew 23:36 and Revelation 6:10–11 that the martyrs’ blood would be avenged within “this generation” or a “very little while” connects to the Dead Sea Scrolls’ hope for eschatological justice. The imprecatory prayers of the saints (Rev. 6:10-11; 8:1–8) mirror the War Scroll’s calls for divine vengeance (1QM XIII, 12), culminating in Jerusalem’s judgment in AD 70.[96]

Here is a list of early writers that understood the abomination of desolation and or “the end” of Daniel 9:24-27 was referring to AD 70:

Josephus (c. 37 BC-100 AD):  “And these misfortunes our nation did in fact come to, by the madness of some of every rank whatsoever, and by God’s just judgment upon them for their sins; for the prophecy of Daniel was fulfilled, when he said, that upon the destruction of the city and sanctuary, the end should come with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined; for the Romans did desolate our country, and destroyed the city of Jerusalem, and the holy house therein, in the very same manner as Daniel had foretold.”[97] 

Epistle of Barnabas (c. 75–130 AD) Teaching: “Moreover, concerning the temple, I will tell you, how these wretched men, being led astray, set their hope on the building, and not on their God who made them, as being a house of God… For it is written, ‘And it shall come to pass, when the week is being fulfilled, the temple of God shall be built gloriously in the name of the Lord.’ I find, then, that there is a temple. How, then, shall it be built in the name of the Lord? Learn ye. Before we believed on God, the abode of our heart was corrupt and weak, a temple truly built by hands… Behold, therefore, what is written: ‘Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, and I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah’ [Jer. 31:31].”[98]

Justin Martyr (c. 100–165 AD): “And in the midst of the week, he says, the sacrifice and the libation shall be taken away, and the abomination of desolation [shall be brought] into the temple: even unto the consummation of the timeshall the desolation be complete. Now what is the consummation of the time, but that which is at the end of the world? But we have already shown that these things have been fulfilled, for the temple is desolate, and the sacrifices have ceased, as you yourself know.”[99]

Justin Martyr, writing in Greek in Dialogue with Trypho, engages a Jewish opponent familiar with the Septuagint (LXX), including Daniel 9:27, which forms the backdrop for his discussion of the temple’s destruction in 70 AD. In Dialogue (Ch. 32), Justin uses the Greek term aiōn (αἰών, age) in the phrase ἡ συντέλεια τοῦ αἰῶνος (sunteleia tou aiōnos, end of the age) when stating, “Now what is the consummation of the time, but that which is at the end of the world? But we have already shown that these things have been fulfilled, for the temple is desolate, and the sacrifices have ceased.” This phrase mirrors Matthew 24:3, where the disciples ask about the sunteleia tou aiōnos (end of the age), and echoes the sunteleia (consummation) in Daniel 9:27 (LXX), which Justin ties to the “abomination of desolation” fulfilled in 70 AD.  His use of aiōn and telos (end) in Dialogue (Ch. 47), where he declares that Christ’s covenant “has put an end to the previous one,” further aligns with Matthew 24:14.  By emphasizing the historical fulfillment of the temple’s desolation and the new covenant’s establishment, Justin clearly identifies the “end of the age” as the termination of the Old Covenant age in 70 AD, not the end of world history.

Tertullian (c. 160–220 AD): “For Daniel says, ‘And one week will make a covenant with many, and in the midst of the week sacrifice and drink-offering shall be taken away;’ and that the ‘abomination of desolation shall be brought into the temple,’ and that ‘unto the end the desolation shall continue.’ These things, I say, have been fulfilled; for when the city was taken by the Romans, the temple was destroyed, and the sacrifices were taken away.”[100]

Origen (c. 185–254 AD): “And so when we see ‘the abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place, then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains… For these things came to pass when the Romans, having taken Jerusalem, set up their own standards in the temple, and the prophecy was fulfilled.”[101]

Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 263–339 AD): “Thus were the things fulfilled which had been foretold by the prophets and by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself… when the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stood in the holy place, whoso readeth let him understand, and the city and the temple were overthrown together by the Romans.”[102]

John Chrysostom (c. 347–407 AD): “For this it seems to me that the abomination of desolation means the army by which the holy city of Jerusalem was made desolate… For the war and the miseries of the Jews, which came to pass not long after, fulfilled these things.”[103]

Timeline of Signs (AD 30–70)

Sign (Matt. 24) Type Timeframe NT Evidence Historical Fulfillment
False Messiahs (24:4–5) General Birth Pain AD 30–60s Acts 5:36–37 Theudas, Simon Magus (Josephus, Ant. 20.5.1)
Wars (24:6–7a) General Birth Pain AD 38–66 Acts 5:37 Jewish-Greek riots, Zealot uprisings (Jewish War 2.17.8)
Famines (24:7b) General Birth Pain AD 46–70 Acts 11:28 Claudius famine, Jerusalem siege (Jewish War6.9.3)
Earthquakes (24:7c) General Birth Pain AD 50s–68 Acts 16:26 Judea earthquake ( Jewish War4.4.5)
Persecution (24:9)

 

Sign of the Near End & Coming of Christ AD 34–66 Acts 7:58; Heb. 10:32–34 Stephen, James, Peter, Paul, Nero’s persecution (Tacitus, Annals15.44)
False Prophets (24:11) Sign of the Near End & Coming of Christ AD 50s–66 Gal. 1:6–7; 2 Tim. 2:17–18; 1 John 2:18 Judaizers, Hymenaeus, antichrists (Josephus, Jewish War 6.5.2)
Gospel Proclamation (24:14) Sign of the Near End & Coming of Christ AD 30–62 Col. 1:23; Rom. 10:18; Acts 1:8–28 Gospel spread to Roman world (Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 2.3.1; Col. 1:23)
Abomination (24:15) Sign of the Near End & Coming of Christ AD 66–70 Luke 21:20 Roman siege, flight to Pella (Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 3.5.3)

The Abomination of Desolation and the Resurrection

In Daniel 12:11–13, Daniel is told he will be raised at the “end” of the “days,” referring to the three-and-a-half-year period of the abomination of desolation. This reinforces the connection between the resurrection and the war and tribulation from AD 67–70, as outlined in Daniel 12:1–7. The “appointed time of the end” or “end of the age,” which the disciples asked about and Jesus addressed (Matt. 24:3, 13–14; Luke 21:8, 20, 24), corresponds to the “end” or “appointed time of the end” in Daniel 9:26–27 (LXX) and Daniel 12:1–4 (LXX). The fulfillment of this “near” end, marked by the abomination of desolation, was the climactic event that ushered in Christ’s second coming and the resurrection at the close of the Old Covenant age in AD 70.

The Signs Created Real NT Imminence Pointing to AD 70

The New Testament epistles (AD 50–66) connect the signs of Matthew 24:9–15—persecution, rebellion, false prophets, gospel proclamation, and the abomination of desolation—to the imminent expectation of Christ’s coming, fulfilled in AD 70 with Jerusalem’s destruction, marking the end of the old covenant age. Below, key epistles are analyzed, including 1 and 2 Thessalonians, where implied nearness ties to these signs, establishing a cause-and-effect relationship. 

1 Thessalonians (ca. AD 50–51): Paul notes persecution by Jews (1 Thess. 2:14–16), aligning with Matthew 24:9’s “hated by all nations” (ethnē), seen in Thessalonian riots (Acts 17:5–9). “We who are alive” (4:15–17) and “the day of the Lord” (5:2–4) imply imminent parousia, with persecution signaling the coming “wrath” and “end” (2:16) fulfilled in AD 70.[104] 

2 Thessalonians (ca. AD 51–52): The Thessalonians were already experiencing false prophets Jesus warned about who were teaching that Christ’s coming had “already” been fulfilled (2 Thess. 2:1-2).  The “rebellion” (apostasia, 2 Thess. 2:3–8) prefigures the Jewish revolt, with the “man of lawlessness” (possibly Phannias)[105] and “restrainer” (possibly Ananus)[106] as figures that were “now” alive when Paul’s wrote (2 Thess. 2:7). This with the coming “relief” (anapausis, 1:7) for the first century Thessalonians at Christ’s coming to bring trouble upon their Jewish persecutors and countrymen (1:5–10; Acts 17) all point to a first century fulfillment in AD 70.  

1 Corinthians (ca. AD 55–56): “Present distress” (thlipsis, 7:26; Acts 18:12–17) and gospel preaching (9:16–23; cf. Col. 1:23) fulfill Matthew 24:9, 14. Terms like “eagerly wait” (apekdechomai, 1:7), “the appointed time is short” (synestalmenos, 7:29), and “end of the ages” (telē, 10:11) signal AD 70’s imminence, per Gordon Fee and a host of other scholars.[107]  The Pulpit Commentary states the following on Paul’s imminence in 1 Corinthians as referring to Christ’s “second coming” being fulfilled in AD 70:

“St. Paul, however, only uses parousia six times in 1 and 2 Thessalonians, and once in 1 Cor. 15:23. All Christians alike expected the return of Christ very soon, and possibly in their own lifetime (1 Thess. 1:9, 10, etc.; ch. 15:51; Jas. 5:8, 9; 1 Pet. 4:7; 1 John 2:18; Rev. 22:20, etc.). Their expectation was founded on the great eschatological discourse of our Lord (Matt. 24:29, 30, 34), and on his express promise that that generation should not pass away before his predictions were fulfilled. They were fulfilled in the fall of Jerusalem and the close of the old dispensation,…”[108]

And,

“The old dispensation, then so rapidly waning to its close, was called “this age” (olam hazzeh); the next or Messianic age was called “the age to come” (olam habba). The Messianic age had dawned at the birth of Christ, but the old covenant was not finally annulled till his second coming at the fall of Jerusalem.”[109] 

James (ca. AD 55–62): Persecution (James 1:2–4; 5:1–6) reflects Jewish-Christian tensions. “The Lord is at hand” and “the Judge…at the door” (5:8–9, ēngiken) tie to Matthew 24:32–34, signaling Christ’s coming in AD 70, as John Gill notes.[110] 

2 Timothy (ca. AD 62–64): False teachers (2:17–18) and persecution (3:12) fulfill Matthew 24:9, 11. Christ “about to judge” (mellō krinein, 4:1, YLT) points to AD 70.

1 Peter (ca. AD 62–64): The “fiery trial” (4:12–17) and “end…at hand” (telos…ēngiken, 4:7) with “the appointed time for the judgment” (kairos, 4:17) signal the old covenant’s end and Christ’s coming in AD 70 as Kenneth Gentry notes:

“In 1 Peter 4:7, the phrase ‘the end of all things is at hand’ (telos…ēngiken) employs the same imminent language as Matthew 24:34, pointing to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, which marked the end of the old covenant order. The ‘fiery trial’ (4:12) and ‘appointed time for the judgment’ (4:17) describe the suffering of Christians and God’s judgment on apostate Israel, fulfilling Jesus’ Olivet Discourse.”[111]

Of course, Gentry offers no explanation as to how (4:5) was fulfilled in this AD 70 judgment when God was “…ready tojudge the living and the dead.” Perhaps because this is a creedal statement Gentry doesn’t want to touch it along with 2 Timothy 4:1 YLT where Paul is in lockstep with Peter when he writes that Christ was “about to judge the living and the dead at his appearing and kingdom.”

1 John (ca. AD 60–65): The appearances of “Antichrists” (2:18–22) proving it was the “last hour” (eschate hōra, 2:18) tie to Jesus’ “day and hour” (Matt. 24:36) and Daniel 12:4’s “hour of the end” (OG) LXX, pointing to AD 70 as John A.T. Robinson points out:

“The ‘last hour’ in 1 John 2:18 and the ‘day and hour’ in Matthew 24:36, alongside Daniel 12:4’s ‘time of the end,’ reflect the expectation of an imminent crisis, fulfilled in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, which ended the old covenant order.”[112] 

Hebrews (ca. AD 60–65): Persecution (10:32–34) signals “the Day” (engizō, 10:25; mellō, 6:5), with Habakkuk 2:3–4 (“a little while,” 10:37) linked to Christ coming in vengeance in AD 70, per R.C. Sproul:

“The ‘Day’ in Hebrews 10:25, described as approaching, and the ‘little while’ in 10:37, quoting Habakkuk, refer to the judgment on Jerusalem in A.D. 70, which marked the end of the temple and the old covenant system.”[113]

Revelation (ca. AD 63–66): Persecution (2:10; 6:9–11), false prophets (13:11–18), gospel proclamation (14:6), and temple desolation (11:1–2) fulfill Matthew 24:9–15. The book of Revelation being fulfilled “shortly” with Christ’s second coming “soon” (en tachei, 1:1, 3; tachu, 22:12) confirms the AD 70 fulfillment.  Gentry correctly observes:

“Revelation’s imminent language, such as ‘shortly’ (en tachei, 1:1, 3) and ‘soon’ (tachu, 22:12), points to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. The persecution in 2:10 and 6:9–11 reflects the suffering of Christians under Jewish and Roman hostility (Matthew 24:9). The false prophets in 13:11–18 parallel Matthew 24:11, the gospel proclamation in 14:6 fulfills Matthew 24:14, and the temple’s desolation in 11:1–2 corresponds to Matthew 24:15’s ‘abomination of desolation.’”[114]

Conclusion: The NT epistles link Matthew 24:9–15’s signs to the imminent expectation of Christ’s coming, fulfilled in AD 70’s destruction of Jerusalem, ending the old covenant age.

Major Premise: The NT epistles (AD 50–66) explicitly connect the signs of Matthew 24:9–15 (persecution, rebellion, false prophets, gospel proclamation, abomination of desolation) to the imminent expectation of Christ’s coming, signaling the end of the old covenant age. 

Minor Premise: These signs were actively fulfilled in the first century, culminating in AD 70’s destruction of Jerusalem, as evidenced by historical events (e.g., Jewish revolt, temple desolation) and epistolary language of nearness (ēngiken, mellō, tachu), aligning with Jesus’ “this generation” (Matt. 24:34). 

Conclusion: Therefore, the signs’ fulfillment in AD 70 confirms Christ’s coming as the judgment marking the end of the old covenant age, consistent with the epistles’ imminent expectations.

Conclusion 

The Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24:4–15) provides Jesus’ prophetic framework for the destruction of Jerusalem, the end of the Old Covenant age, and His second coming in judgment, all fulfilled within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34, AD 30–70). By delineating preliminary “birth pains” (Matt. 24:4–8) from intensifying “near signs” (Matt. 24:9–15), Jesus clarified Second Temple Jewish expectations, grounding them in Old Testament prophecies (Dan. 2:44; 7:13–27; 9:24–27; 12:1–7; Isa. 2–4; Ezek. 38–39; Deut. 32:5, 20–43) and aligning with texts like the Dead Sea Scrolls’ War Scroll (1QM) and Melchizedek Scroll (11QMelch). Historical evidence—Josephus, Tacitus, Eusebius—confirms the fulfillment of these signs, from false messiahs and famines to the gospel’s spread and the Roman siege, culminating in AD 70’s “great tribulation” (Matt. 24:21; Luke 21:20–24). NT writers, including Peter (1 Pet. 4:7), Paul (Phil. 4:5), and John (Rev. 1:1, 3; 22:10), rightly declared Christ’s coming “near” as these signs unfolded, avoiding the false prophetic errors Jesus warned against (Matt. 24:4–6).

Full Preterism uniquely harmonizes these prophecies, solving theological errors in other systems. Higher Critical scholars misinterpret the “end” as the world’s termination, wrongly claiming Jesus failed. Dispensationalists misapply first-century signs to modern events, fostering fear. Amillennialism dilutes NT imminence with an indefinite timeline, while Postmillennial Partial Preterism fragments Scripture’s unified eschatology by positing a future coming. Full Preterism affirms the singular AD 70 fulfillment of Christ’s coming, establishing His spiritual kingdom (Luke 17:20–21; Dan. 2:44). This empowers believers to reject speculative eschatology and engage confidently with contemporary challenges—such as Islam, Talmudic Judaism/Zionism, Marxism, and Globalism—through faithful, long-term strategies rooted in Christ’s AD 70 victory (Heb. 12:28; Dan. 7:27). 

NT Writers’ Prophetic Accuracy

Major Premise: Jesus warned against false prophets prematurely declaring the end before the signs of Matthew 24:9–15 were fulfilled (Matt. 24:4–6).

Minor Premise: NT writers declared the end “near” only as these signs were fulfilled by AD 70 (1 Pet. 4:7; Col. 1:23; Luke 21:20).

Conclusion: The NT writers were not false prophets, as their claims were validated, refuting Higher Critical and futurist errors.

Genuine Imminence of AD 70

Major Premise: NT imminence language (ēngiken, tachu) reflects a genuine expectation of Christ’s “near” coming within “this generation” (Matt. 24:32-34).

Minor Premise: Historical and NT evidence confirms these signs were fulfilled by AD 70 (Acts 2–28; Col. 1:23).

Conclusion: The NT’s imminence claims were fulfilled in AD 70, correcting Amillennialism’s vague timeline and Partial Preterism’s divided eschatology.

[1] For the Olivet Discourse’s connection to Dniel and Deuteronomy, see Daniel 2:44, 7:13–27, 9:24–27, 12:1–7; Deuteronomy 32:5, 20–43. On Second Temple Jewish expectations, see War Scroll (1QM 1:1–7), which anticipates a messianic war, and Damascus Document (CD 3:7–8), which interprets Deuteronomy’s covenant curses. Jesus’ prophecy aligns with these texts, specifying AD 67–70 as the fulfillment period; cf. Matthew 24:7b, 15; Revelation 20:7–10. For Qumran’s Gog and Magog expectations, see War Scroll (1QM 2:6–14).

[2] Daniel 12:1’s “time of trouble” is linked to the “great tribulation” (Matt. 24:21). For historical fulfillment in AD 67–70, see Josephus, Jewish War6.2.1 (on Jerusalem’s destruction) and Tacitus, Histories 5.13 (on Roman sieges). Jesus’ specificity contrasts with Qumran’s broader crisis; cf. War Scroll (1QM 2:6–14).

[3] On the “perverse generation” (Deut. 32:5, 20), see Matthew 17:17; Acts 2:40; Philippians 2:15, which prompted the appointed time of Christ’s coming and judgment to be near Luke 21:8, 20–32; 1 Peter 4:7; Phil. 4:5. Peter and Paul’s use of Deuteronomy reflects their expectation of imminent judgment, fulfilled in AD 70.

[4] Deuteronomy 32’s prominence in Qumran and NT texts is evident in Damascus Document (CD 3:7–8) and NT citations (e.g., Rom. 12:19-13:11-12; Heb. 10:30-37). It forecasts covenant judgment, fulfilled in AD 70.

[5] For Jewish expectations of spiritual resurrection and a restored temple, see 4QFlorilegium (4Q174), which interprets 2 Samuel 7:10–14 messianically. The NT fulfills this in the Church as the New Jerusalem; cf. Revelation 21:16; Hebrews 12:22–24.

[6] Higher Critical scholars like Albert Schweitzer (The Quest of the Historical Jesus, 1910, pp. 357–360) argue Jesus expected a cosmic end that failed to occur, undermining inerrancy. Full Preterism counters that the “end” was the Old Covenant age, fulfilled in AD 70; cf. Josephus, Jewish War6.2.1; Luke 21:20–24.  Bart D. Ehrman, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction (Oxford University Press, 2004), 234-238, suggests that Jesus’ predictions of an imminent end reflect a misunderstanding of historical outcomes.

[7] Hummel, Daniel. “4 Snapshots of Dispensationalism Today.” The Gospel Coalition, February 28, 2024. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/4-snapshots-dispensationalism-today/.

[8] Josephus, Flavius. The Jewish War. Translated by G.A. Williamson. Penguin Classics, 1981.

[9] Eusebius. Ecclesiastical History. Translated by Kirsopp Lake. Loeb Classical Library, 1926.

[10] “Dispensationalism.” Wikipedia, February 22, 2003, last modified 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalism.

[11] Anthony A. Hoekema, THE BIBLE AND THE FUTURE, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979), 126.

Amillennialists like Kim Riddlebarger (A Case for Amillennialism, 2003, pp. 142–145) see partial AD 70 fulfillment but extend eschatology indefinitely, diluting NT imminence (e.g., ēngiken, Matt. 24:34). Full Preterism affirms all signs fulfilled by AD 70 pointing to real imminent fulfillment.

[12] Postmillennial Partial Preterists like Kenneth L. Gentry (Before Jerusalem Fell, 1998, pp. 278–280; HE SHALL HAVE DOMINION, Third Edition, pp. 538-540; Joel McDurmon Jesus v. Jerusalem, pp. 41-49; James B. Jordan, HANDWRITING ON THE WALL A COMMENTARY ON DANIEL, pp. 618-628; MATTHEW 23-25, pp.180-181) affirm the “end” of the old covenant age and or resurrection was fulfilled in AD 70 but posit a future Second Coming and resurrection, fragmenting Daniel 12:2, Matthew 13:39-43; Matthew 24:30–31. Full Preterism sees a unified AD 70 fulfillment of those passages as the foundation to Paul’s eschatology in 1 Thess. 4-5; 1 Cor. 15; Rev. 11:18; 20:12-13.

[13] Jesus’ warning against false prophets (Matt. 24:4–6, 23–26) contrasts with NT writers’ validated imminence claims (1 Pet. 4:7; Phil. 4:5; 1 John 2:18), tied to fulfilled signs (Col. 1:23; Acts 2–28); cf. Josephus, Jewish War6.2.1.

[14] NT imminence (ēngiken, mellō, tachu) reflects a first-century expectation (Matt. 24:34), fulfilled by AD 70; cf. Acts 2–28; Colossians 1:23; Luke 21:20–24; Josephus, Jewish War 6.5.3.

[15] Collins, The Scepter and the Star, 102–104. Lester L. Grabbe: His works (An Introduction to First Century Judaism and A History of the Jews and Judaism) discuss diverse Jewish afterlife beliefs, including soul-based immortality in some texts, which could align with a spiritual resurrection concept. Check these texts for specific references, as the search results are not conclusive. Murray Harris: In Raised Immortal and From Grave to Glory, Harris describes Paul’s “spiritual body” concept and notes Jewish parallels in texts like Jubilees, which emphasize soul resurrection. These align with a spiritual resurrection idea but are framed in a Christian context. Dr. A. Cohen: Likely refers to Abraham Cohen’s Everyman’s Talmud, which summarizes Talmudic debates, including Sanhedrin 99a’s mention of a 40-year Messianic reign. This is the closest match, but Cohen may not explicitly endorse this view. Nickelsburg, Sysling, and Lapide provide evidence of spiritual resurrection concepts in Second Temple Judaism, while Talmudic and Kabbalistic texts (Sanhedrin 99a, Zohar) support a transitional Messianic reign, sometimes tied to 40 years.

[16] Deuteronomy 31:29; 32:5, 35

[17] Daniel 9:24–27; 12:2–3, 7

[18] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 500–01 (4Q558); 532–34 (1QM 1:3–6); 478–79 (1QpHab 2:5–10).

[19] Daniel 12:7; Revelation 11:2–8

[20] Revelation 21:2; Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, trans. Kirsopp Lake (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926), 3.5.3.

[21] Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 118a; Sanhedrin 98b, in The Babylonian Talmud: A Translation and Commentary, ed. Jacob Neusner (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2011).

[22] R.H. Charles, ed., The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, vol. 2 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913), 1 Enoch 99:4–5; Jubilees 23:13–21.

[23] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 163–165; Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated, 100–101.

[24] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 156–157; Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, 1 Enoch 99:4–5.

[25] Flavius Josephus, The Jewish War, trans. G.A. Williamson, rev. E. Mary Smallwood (London: Penguin Books, 1981), 6.5.2.

[26] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 163–165.

[27] Philo, On the Embassy to Gaius, trans. F.H. Colson, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1962), 30–31.

[28] Josephus, The Jewish War, 2.12.1.

[29] G.K. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983), 4 Ezra 13:31–32; 2 Baruch 27:1–15.

[30] Josephus, The Jewish War, 2.13.4–5.

[31] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 128–129; Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated, 100–101.

[32] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 578–579.

[33] Ibid., 580–581.

[34] Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2 Baruch 62:4–6.

[35] Josephus, The Jewish War, 6.3.3–4.

[36] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 510–511.

[37] Ibid., 496–497.

[38] Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, 1 Enoch 1:5–7.

[39] Josephus, The Jewish War, 4.4.5.

[40] Tacitus, Histories, trans. Clifford H. Moore, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1931), 4.38.

[41] R.T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 904–905.

[42] Craig S. Keener, The Gospel of Matthew: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 565–566.

[43] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 163–165.

[44] John MacArthur, The Second Coming: Signs of Christ’s Return and the End of the Age (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1999), 45–47; David Jeremiah, The Book of Signs: 31 Undeniable Prophecies of the Apocalypse (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2019), 123–125.

[45] Jack Hibbs, “Is This the End?,” sermon, Calvary Chapel Chino Hills, March 15, 2020, accessed October 10, 2025, https://calvarycch.org/sermons/is-this-the-end/.

[46] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 163–165; Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, 1 Enoch 99:4–5.

[47] N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 339–343; France, The Gospel of Matthew, 889–892.

[48] Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1970); Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins, Left Behind: A Novel of the Earth’s Last Days (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1995).

[49] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 510–511.

[50] Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, trans. William Whiston (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1987), 20.9.1.

[51] Tacitus, Annals, trans. John Jackson, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1937), 15.44.

[52] Josephus, The Jewish War, 4.3.8.

[53] Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, trans. Kirsopp Lake, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1926), 3.5.3.

[54] Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994), 28–29.

[55] Josephus, The Jewish War, 2.17.6–9.

[56] Tacitus, Histories, 5.12.

[57] F.F. Bruce, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1982), 167–168.

[58] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 156–157.

[59] Ibid., 510–511.

[60] Ibid., 104–105.

[61] Commentary on Matthew, Book X, Chapter 16, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 9, edited by Allan Menzies (Buffalo: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1896), p. 422.

[62] Ecclesiastical History, Book II, Chapter 3, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 1, p. 108.

[63] Homilies on Matthew, Homily 75, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 10, edited by Philip Schaff (New York: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1888), p. 456.

[64] MacArthur, The Second Coming, 47–48.

[65] Kim Riddlebarger, A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2003), 135–137; Anthony A. Hoekema, The Bible and the Future (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), 148–150.

[66] Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3.5.3.

[67] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 163–165; Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated, 139.

[68] Collins, The Scepter and the Star, 124–126.

[69] Ibid.

[70] Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated, 139.

[71] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 558.

[72] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 163–165.

[73] Craig A. Evans, Jesus and His Contemporaries: Comparative Studies (Leiden: Brill, 1995), 316.

[74] Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3.5.3.

[75] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 174–175.

[76] Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated, 139.

[77] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 163.

[78] Ibid., 163–165.

[79] Ibid., 165–166.

[80] Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated, 139.

[81] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 176–178.

[82] Beale, The Book of Revelation, 558.

[83] Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1989), 243.

[84] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 170–171.

[85] Beale, The Book of Revelation, 558.

[86] Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 243.

[87] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 172–173.

[88] Richard Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy: Studies on the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993), 210.

[89] Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, 163–165.

[90] Ibid., 171–172.

[91] Ibid., 163–165.

[92] Kugel, The Ladder of Jacob, 182.

[93] Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1999), 315–320

[94] Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 6.5.3

[95] Josephus, Wars, 4.3.8.

[96] Josephus, Wars, 4.5.2.

[97] Flavius Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, Book X, Chapter 11, Section 7, in The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged, translated by William Whiston (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1987), p. 275.

[98] Epistle of Barnabas, Chapter 16, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Buffalo: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885), p. 146.

[99] Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 32, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Buffalo: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885), p. 211.

[100] Against Marcion, Book III, Chapter 23, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 3, edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Buffalo: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885), p. 341.

[101] Commentary on Matthew, Book X, Chapter 14, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 9, edited by Allan Menzies (Buffalo: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1896), p. 421.

[102] Ecclesiastical History, Book III, Chapter 5, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 1, edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (New York: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1890), p. 138.

[103] Homilies on Matthew, Homily 76, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol. 10, edited by Philip Schaff (New York: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1888), p. 459.

[104] Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 6.5.3; Acts 17:5–9.

[105] Josephus, Wars, 4.3.8.

[106] Josephus, Wars, 4.5.2.

[107] Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 38, 321, 413.  See also Peter J. Leithart, REVELATION 1-11 Vol., 1 (New York, Bloomsbury T&T Clark Publishing, 2018), pp. 25-26

[108] H. D. M. Spence-Jones, ed., 1 Corinthians, The Pulpit Commentary (London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909), pp. 3-4.

[109] Ibid., p. 7.

[110] John Gill, Exposition of the Entire Bible, James 5:8–9 (London: 1746–48).

[111] Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., The Last Days Madness (American Vision Lecture Series, 2005), Lecture 4, accessed via AmericanVision.org.

[112] John A.T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament (London: SCM Press, 1976), 240.

[113] R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus (Ligonier Ministries Teaching Series, 1998), Lecture 3, accessed via Ligonier.org.

[114] The Divorce of Israel: A Redemptive-Historical Interpretation of Revelation, Volume 1 (Fountain Inn, SC: Tolle Lege Press, 2023), page 89

 

 

Matthew 24-25 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 1: (Matthew 24:2-3) The Disciples’ Question Both Theologically Accurate and Pointing to the End of the Old Covenant Age

The Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24–25; Mark 13; Luke 21) is the cornerstone of New Testament eschatology, often described as the “Rosetta Stone” of biblical prophecy. It shapes the eschatological framework of Paul (1–2 Thessalonians, Romans, 1–2 Corinthians), Peter, James, Hebrews, and Revelation, which many scholars view as an expanded Olivet Discourse. Jesus draws on Old Testament prophets like Daniel and Isaiah, making the Discourse a hub connecting Old and New Testament eschatology. As Thomas Ice notes, “A proper understanding of the Olivet Discourse is absolutely essential for anyone who wants to gain a clear picture of God’s plan for the ages. This discourse is so significant that the way a person interprets it will impact their understanding of the rest of the prophecy in the Bible.” A correct interpretation clarifies the timing and nature of Christ’s return and His kingdom, while a flawed one distorts the entire prophetic narrative.

Central to the Discourse is the disciples’ question in Matthew 24:3: “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age (sunteleia tou aiōnos)?” Futurists claim the disciples were confused, mistakenly linking the temple’s destruction (Matt. 24:1–2) with Christ’s coming (parousia) and the “end of the age,” which they assume refers to the end of world history or the Christian age. However, textual, historical, and theological evidence—rooted in Old Testament prophecy, Jesus’ teachings, and Second Temple Jewish eschatology—demonstrates that the disciples were theologically coherent. Their question accurately connected the temple’s fall in AD 70 with Christ’s coming and the end of the Old Covenant age, not a future global apocalypse. This chapter argues that the “end of the age” in Matthew 24:3 refers to the Old Covenant era, fulfilled in AD 70, and refutes claims of the disciples’ confusion.

The Disciples’ Question: Context and Meaning

The disciples’ question follows Jesus’ prediction that the Second Temple would be destroyed (Matt. 24:1–2; Mark 13:1–2; Luke 21:5–6). In Matthew 24:3, they ask about three elements: the timing of “these things” (the temple’s destruction), the sign of Christ’s coming, and the “end of the age.” Mark 13:4 and Luke 21:7 focus on the timing and signs of the temple’s fall, omitting “end of the age.” This variation reflects audience differences: Matthew, writing for Jews familiar with the Old Covenant’s “this age” (Matt. 13:39–43), includes the phrase, while Mark and Luke, addressing broader audiences, streamline the question to emphasize the temple’s destruction. The accounts are consistent, with Matthew’s “end of the age” aligning with the temple’s fall in AD 70, marking the Old Covenant’s end.

The phrase “end of the age” (sunteleia tou aiōnos) appears in Matthew 13:39–43, where Jesus describes a judgment and harvest at the “end of this age,” tied to the Old Covenant’s culmination. Partial preterist Joel McDurmon comments on this passage:

“It is clear that Jesus did not have in mind the end of the world, nor did He mean the final judgment. Rather, Matthew 13:24–30, 36–43 describe the judgment that would come upon unbelieving Jerusalem.”[1]

He notes that the righteous are gathered into God’s “barn” (protected), while the wicked face judgment, fulfilled when Christians fled Jerusalem before its destruction in AD 70 (Matt. 24:16–22). McDurmon further connects Jesus’ “this age” (Old Covenant) and “age to come” (New Covenant) to Pauline eschatology (Eph. 1:21; Col. 1:26; 1 Cor. 10:11; Heb. 9:26), concluding:

“These two periods, being hinged upon the coming and work of Christ, pertain obviously to the Old and New Covenant administrations.”[2]

Gary DeMar reinforces this, stating:

“The disciples’ question involves three interrelated, contemporary events: (1) the time of the temple’s destruction; (2) the sign that will signal Jesus’ coming related to the destruction of the temple; and (3) the sign they should look for telling them that ‘the end of the age’ has come. These questions are related to the destruction of the temple and the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system and nothing else.” He clarifies: “Notice that the disciples did not ask about the end of the ‘world’ (kosmos), as some Bible versions translate the Greek word aiōn. In context, with the temple and city as their primary focus, they asked about the end of the ‘age.’” Citing George Hill, DeMar explains: “Time was divided by the Jews into two great periods, the age of the law and the age of the Messiah. … The ‘end of the age’ refers to the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system with its attendant sacrifices and rituals.”[3]

The Jewish and Old Testament Eschatological Context

First-century Jewish theology distinguished “this age” (olam hazeh), the Old Covenant era of Moses and the temple, from the “age to come” (olam ha-ba), the Messianic era of covenantal renewal. The Qumran community anticipated “this age” ending with the Messiah’s triumph (1QS 4:16–17; 4Q521 2 II 11–12).[4] The Mishnah (Sanhedrin 10:1) described olam ha-ba as eternal, for the righteous. Jubilees 23:26–31 and 1 Enoch 71:15–17 envisioned a spiritually renewed age, not cosmic destruction.[5] Alan F. Segal notes that Pharisees and Qumran sectarians saw olam ha-ba as a renewed covenantal order.[6] John J. Collins describes this as “restorationist eschatology,” where God’s kingdom transforms history without termination.[7] Jacob Neusner summarizes: “For most Jews of the late Second Temple period, eschatology meant not the end of the world, but the end of the age—the old order—and the beginning of the rule of God’s righteousness.”[8]

Old Testament prophets reinforced this framework. Moses prophesied Israel’s “end” in her “last days” during a “perverse and crooked generation” (Deut. 31:29; 32:5, 20, 29, 35–43), which Jesus and the apostles identified as their generation (Matt. 17:17; 24:34; Acts 2:40; Phil. 2:15). Daniel 9:24–27 ties Jerusalem’s desolation to the Messiah’s arrival and an everlasting covenant. Daniel 12:1–7 links resurrection and judgment to the temple and cities destruction, when “the power of the holy people” is “completely shattered” for “three-and-a-half years” (AD 67–70). Isaiah 25:2–9 and 27:9–13 connect judgment, atonement, and the gathering of the remnant to the Jerusalem’s fall. Malachi 3–4 foretells the Lord’s sudden coming to His temple (the second temple Jesus and the disciples are discussing) to judge and purify.

Jesus’ Teachings and the Disciples’ Understanding

Jesus’ prior teachings confirm the disciples’ question was coherent. In Matthew 13:39–43, He defines the “end of this age” as the Old Covenant’s judgment, with the righteous gathered and the wicked judged. The disciples affirmed their understanding, saying “Yes” (Matt. 13:51). Jesus also taught His coming and the eschatological “end” of Daniel 7, 9 and 12 would occur within their lifetimes: “You will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.” …But the one who endures to the end will be saved (Matt. 10:22–23); “Some standing here will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom” (Matt. 16:27–28); and in Luke 17:20–37, His coming is a spiritual kingdom “within” believers. In Matthew 26:63–65, Jesus tells Israel’s leaders they would see Him coming in judgment. These teachings frame His coming as a first-century event tied to Jerusalem’s fall.

Thematic Chart: Daniel 12, Matthew 13, and Matthew 24–25 Compared

Theme Daniel 12 Matthew 13

Matthew 24–25 & Parallels

Evangelism Before the End Knowledge and righteousness increase; prophecy sealed until the time of the end (12:3–4). Gospel spreads through the kingdom’s growth; harvest at the end of the age (13:24–30, 39–43). Gospel preached to all nations before the end of the age (24:3, 14).
Tribulation Time of distress unlike any before (12:1). (Not explicitly mentioned, but implied in judgment context.) Great tribulation, unequaled in history (24:21, 29).
Righteous Rise, Wicked Judged Righteous awake to eternal life, shine; wicked to shame and contempt (12:2–3). Righteous wheat gathered, shine like the sun; tares burned (13:30, 42–43). Righteous sheep gathered, inherit eternal life; goats to eternal punishment (24:30–31; 25:31–46).
Fulfillment at the End Fulfilled when the holy people’s power is shattered; Jerusalem and temple desolated for 3.5 years (12:4, 7; cf. 9:26–27). Fulfilled at the end of the Old Covenant age (13:39). Fulfilled at the end of the Old Covenant age in Jesus’ generation during the times of the Gentiles (24:3–34; Luke 21:20–24, 32).

The Gospels often correct the disciples’ confusion (e.g., Matt. 16:6–12; 20:20–25), but Matthew 24 contains no rebuke. Jesus affirms their question, stating “all these things” would occur within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34). Milton Terry discussing the end of the age in Hebrews 9:26-28 and Matthew 24:3 clarifies:

“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. … To suppose that he meant that it was close upon the end of the world, or the destruction of the material globe, would be to make him write false history as well as bad grammar.”[9]

Terry is correct. Jesus did appear at the end of the Old Covenant age. From birth to parousia to conclude the Old Covenant age was roughly a seventy-year period. If futurism is correct, it makes the author of Hebrews mistaken, having Jesus come at the end of the New Covenant age, which has now lasted over two thousand years, spanning longer than the Old Covenant age ever did!

Logical Arguments Supporting the Disciples’ Coherence

Logical Argument #1: Old Covenant Context
Major Premise: The “end of the age” in Matthew 24:3, as used in Matthew 13:39–43, refers to the Old Covenant’s end, tied to the temple’s destruction and Messiah’s coming, per Daniel 7:13–27; 9:24–27; 12:1–7.

Minor Premise: The disciples’ question responds to Jesus’ prediction of the temple’s fall (Matt. 24:2), a symbol of the Old Covenant, and builds on His teachings that His coming and the “end” would occur in their lifetimes (Matt. 10:22–23; 16:27–28).

Conclusion: The disciples were not confused, as their question aligns with Jesus’ teachings and Old Testament prophecy, fulfilled in AD 70.

Logical Argument #2: The Absence of Correction in Matthew 24 

Major Premise: The Gospels consistently correct the disciples’ misunderstandings with explicit rebukes orclarifications (e.g., Matt. 16:21–23; 17:4–5; 20:20–25).

Minor Premise: Jesus does not correct the disciples’ question in Matthew 24:3 linking the temple’s destruction,His coming, and the end of the age, but affirms that “all these things” will occur in “this generation” (Matt. 24:34).Furthermore, the disciples explicitly stated, “Yes,” affirming their understanding of Jesus’ teaching about the “endof the age” in Matthew 13:39–43, 51, indicating they grasped its connection to the Old Covenant’s end prior totheir question in Matthew 24.

Conclusion: The disciples were not confused, as their affirmed understanding in Matthew 13:51 and Jesus’affirmation in Matthew 24:34 indicate their question accurately reflected His teachings and Old Testamentprophecy, fulfilled in AD 70.

Logical Argument #3: New Covenant Eternality
Major Premise: The New Covenant age, inaugurated by Jesus, is eternal, per Ephesians 3:20–21: “to Him be glory in the church … throughout all generations, forever and ever.”

Minor Premise: The disciples’ question associates the temple’s destruction (Old Covenant) with the “end of the age,” not the eternal New Covenant.

Conclusion: The disciples were not confused, as their question logically pertains to the Old Covenant’s end, fulfilled in AD 70.

Logical Argument #4: Synoptic Variations
Major Premise: If “end of the age” meant the end of world history, its omission in Mark 13:4 and Luke 21:7 would be inexplicable.

Minor Premise: Mark and Luke focus on the temple’s destruction, omitting “end of the age,” as Matthew’s Jewish audience understood it as the Old Covenant’s end.

Conclusion: The disciples were not confused, as Matthew’s use of “end of the age” reflects the Old Covenant’s end, fulfilled in AD 70.

Additional Evidence: New Testament and Historical Fulfillment

The New Testament confirms the Old Covenant’s imminent end. Hebrews 8:13 states it was “obsolete” and “ready to vanish” in AD 70. Hebrews 10:37 declares Christ’s coming “in a very little while.” Paul describes the “ends of the ages” as having arrived (1 Cor. 10:11), with the “end of all things” near (1 Pet. 4:5, 7). The gospel’s spread to “all nations” before “the end” (Matt. 24:14) was fulfilled by AD 70 (Col. 1:5–6, 23; Rom. 10:18; 16:25–26).

Logical Argument #5: Fulfillment of the Great Commission Before the End of the Old Covenant Age

Prophecy

Fulfillment

(1) “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” (Matt. 24:14) (1) “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] (Rom. 10:18)
(2) “And the gospel must first be published among all nations.” [Greek ethnos] “And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations.’” [Greek ethnos] “‘. . . I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you [miracles] always, even to the end of the [old covenant] age.’” (Mark 13:10 / Matt. 28:19–20) (2) “…My gospel… has been made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures has been made known to all nations. . . .” [Greek ethnos] (Rom. 16:25–26).
(3a.) “And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world [Greek kosmos]…” (Mark 16:15) The parable of the wheat and tares: gospel goes out to “The field” which “is the world [Greek kosmos]” before the “end” of the old covenant age (Matt. 13:38–43) (3a) “…of the gospel, which has come to you, as it has also in all the world [Greek kosmos], as is bringing forth fruit. . . .” (Col. 1:5–6) *BDAG on kosmos – “the inhabited world as known to the Greco-Roman culture, i.e., the Roman Empire and its sphere of influence.”
(3b.) “And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation [Greek ktisis]” (Mark 16:15) (3b.) “…from the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature [Greek ktisis] under heaven, of which I, Paul became a minister” (Col. 1:23)
(3c.) “…And these signs will follow them that believe; in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues [Greek glossa]” (Mark 16:17) “And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues [Greek glossa], as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation [Greek ethnos] under heaven.” (Acts 2:4–5) (3c.) “And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth/land [Greek ge], and to every nation [Greek ethnos], and kindred and tongue [Greek glossa], and people” (Rev. 14:6).
(4) “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you will be witnesses to me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth/land [Greek ge]” (Acts 1:8)

*Keith Mathison says Christ’s coming upon the clouds from heaven in Acts 1:11 would be fulfilled after the gospel has been preached to “the end of the earth” of verse 8 (Mathison, Postmillennialism, p. 117)

(4) “But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: ‘Their sound has gone out to all the earth/land [Greek ge], and their words to the ends of the world’” (Rom. 10:18)

*Keith Mathison cites Romans 10:18 as evidence that the gospel had already been preached to “all the earth/land” thus anticipating the coming of Christ upon the clouds in AD 70 (Mathison, Postmillennialism, p. 113)!

Major Premise: Jesus declared in Matthew 24:14 that the gospel of the kingdom would be preached “throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come,” directly answering the disciples’ question about the “end of the age” (Matt. 24:3), which refers to the Old Covenant age culminating in the temple’s destruction in AD 70.

Minor Premise: The New Testament confirms that the gospel was preached to “all nations” and throughout the Roman world before AD 70, as evidenced by Paul’s statements in Colossians 1:5–6, 23 (“the gospel… has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven”), Romans 10:18 (“their voice has gone out to all the earth”), and Romans 16:25–26 (“made known to all nations”).

Conclusion: The Great Commission was fulfilled before the end of the Old Covenant age in AD 70, as the gospel’s global proclamation, a prerequisite for “the end” (Matt. 24:14), was accomplished within the first-century generation, aligning with Jesus’ prophecy and the temple’s destruction.

The cessation of revelatory gifts (tongues, prophecy, knowledge) in AD 70 further confirms the Old Covenant’s end. Jesus’ promise to be “with” the disciples through charismatic gifts “until the end of the age” (Matt. 28:18–20; cf. Mark 16:15–17) and Paul’s teaching that these gifts would cease when the “perfect” comes (1 Cor. 13:8–12; cf. Rev. 22:4–7) tie their duration to the Old Covenant age. Daniel 9:24–27 states prophecy would cease with the temple’s destruction, and the New Testament canon [which reiterates the promise of the Old] was completed and fulfilled by AD 70 (Luke 21:22, 32). This refutes claims of ongoing revelation (e.g., Charismatic movements, Mormonism, etc…).

Logical Argument #6: Cessation of Revelatory Gifts at the End of the Old Covenant Age

Text Event Spiritual Gifts/Miracles Temporal Context

Fulfillment in AD 70

Matt. 24:3, 14, 30–31 End of the age; Christ’s second coming. Miracles confirming “kingdom being at hand” & mission unto “the end” (Matt. 10:1–23). “End of the age” after gospel preached (24:14); “this generation” (24:34). Gospel preached (Col. 1:5–6, 23); Christ’s coming ends Old Covenant (Heb. 8:13; 10:30-37).
1 Cor. 1:5–8 Revealing of Christ at the “end” Spiritual gifts (utterance, knowledge) confirming 1st. cent. church until Christ’s coming & end “eagerly awaiting” “to the end,” awaiting Christ’s revealing. Gifts confirming and sustaining until Christ’s coming in AD 70
1 Cor. 13:8–12 Coming of “the perfect” (Christ’s return). Revelatory Gifts (prophecy, tongues, knowledge) “cease” when “the perfect” comes. When “the perfect” [telos] arrives, partial gifts end. Gifts ceased at Christ’s coming, fulfilling Old Covenant’s end (AD 70; Dan. 9:24-27; Heb. 8:13).
Matt. 28:18–20 Great Commission to all nations. Christ’s presence: “I am with you [through Holy Spirit performing miracles] to the end of the [old covenant] age” “To the end of the [Old Covenant] age.” Great Commission and Miracles (Acts 1:8; 2:4–5ff.) ceased with mission fulfilled at Old Covenant’s end (Matt. 24:3, 14; Rms. 10:18).
Mark 16:15–17 Gospel to all creation. Signs: tongues, exorcisms, healing. Implied end with mission’s completion & gospel preached o all creation (cf. Matt. 28:20; Cols. 1:5-6, 23). Signs fulfilled (Acts 2:4–5ff.; 1 Cor. 12:7–11) until AD 70 when mission of Acts 1:8 fulfilled (Rms. 10:18; Cols. 1:5-6, 23)

Major Premise: The New Testament ties the duration of revelatory gifts (tongues, prophecy, knowledge) to the Old Covenantage, with Jesus promising to be “with” the disciples through charismatic gifts “until the end of the age” (Matt.28:18–20; cf. Mark 16:15–17), and Paul stating these gifts would “cease” when the “perfect” comes, which Johnassociates with Christ’s imminent coming and the vision of God’s face “soon” at the end of the Old Covenant age (1 Cor. 13:8–12; cf. Rev. 22:4–7, 10, 20).

Minor Premise: Daniel 9:24–27 prophesies that prophecy and visions [office of prophet] would cease with the temple’s destruction in AD 70, and the New Testament canon [“the OT revealed”] was completed and fulfilled by AD 70 (Luke 21:22, 32), coinciding with the end of the Old Covenant age and Christ’s coming in judgment (Matt. 24:3, 30–34).

Conclusion: The revelatory gifts ceased in AD 70 at the end of the Old Covenant age, as their purpose was fulfilled with the completion of New Testament revelation and the termination of the Old Covenant order, rendering ongoing claims of prophecy (e.g., Charismatic movements, Mormonism) invalid.

The Literary Unity of Matthew 23–25: A Cohesive Discourse

Jesus’ reference to Psalm 118:26 in Matthew 23:39, sung at Passover, became a divine snare during the Jewish-Roman War (AD 67–70), as recorded by Josephus (Jewish War 6.9.3). Christians’ flight to Pella (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History3.5.3) fulfilled Jesus’ warning (Matt. 24:15–21).

The literary structure of Matthew 23–25 forms a chiasm, unifying the temple’s destruction, Christ’s coming, and the end of the age within a first-century timeframe, as detailed in Logical Argument 7:

A. Seat of False Authority (Matt. 23:1–12): Pharisees’ hypocritical rule.

B. Woes of Divine Judgment (Matt. 23:13–32): Condemnation of blood guilt.

C. Climax of Judgment (Matt. 23:33–35): All righteous blood required of this generation.

D. Temporal Boundary (Matt. 23:36): “All these things” come upon “this generation.”

E. Christ’s Coming and Resurrection (Matt. 23:37–24:31): Judgment and gathering or resurrection at the trumpet.

D’. Temporal Fulfillment (Matt. 24:32–36): Events fulfilled in “this generation.”

C’. Final Judgment (Matt. 24:45–25:46): Judgment of living and dead.

B’. Parables of Accountability (Matt. 24:45–25:30): Readiness for judgment.

A’. Seat of True Authority (Matt. 25:31–45): Jesus’ throne of judgment.

This chiasm, centered on the temple’s desolation (Matt. 23:38), connects the disciples’ question to a singular eschatological event. The pivot at Christ’s coming (Matt. 24:30–31) aligns with the irony of Matthew 23:39, where the Jews’ would be singing of Psalm 118:26 during one of their feasts which ended up being the Passover during the Jewish-Roman War (AD 67–70) which signaled judgment (Josephus, Jewish War 2.19.1). Jesus’ reference to Psalm 118:26 in Matthew 23:39, sung at Passover (Mishnah, Pesahim 5:7), became a divine snare (Ps. 69:22–23), as the Jewish-Roman War began at Passover in AD 67 and culminated in AD 70 (Josephus, Jewish War 6.9.3). The disciples’ question about the “sign” reflects awareness of this irony (or that Jesus is promising to come during one of their three annual feasts), answered in Matthew 24:15–21, fulfilled when Roman armies encircled Jerusalem, prompting Christians’ flight to Pella (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3.5.3).

Logical Argument #7: Chiastic Unity of Matthew 23–25 and Historical Fulfillment

Major Premise: The literary structure of Matthew 23–25 forms a chiasm that unifies the temple’s destruction (Matt. 23:38), Christ’s coming (Matt. 24:30–31), and the end of the age (Matt. 24:3) within a first-century timeframe, centered on the judgment of “this generation” (Matt. 23:36; 24:34), with Jesus’ reference to Psalm 118:26 (Matt. 23:39) signaling a divine snare fulfilled during the Jewish-Roman War (AD 67–70; Josephus, Jewish War 2.19.1, 6.9.3).

Minor Premise: The disciples’ question about and additional “sign” of Christ’s coming and the end of the age (Matt. 24:3) reflects awareness of the Passover irony in Matthew 23:39, where the Jews’ singing of Psalm 118:26 (Mishnah, Pesahim5:7) became a snare (Ps. 69:22–23), fulfilled when Roman armies encircled Jerusalem, prompting Christians’ flight to Pella (Matt. 24:15–21; Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3.5.3), aligning with the chiastic structure’s focus on AD 70.

Conclusion: The disciples were not confused, as the chiastic unity of Matthew 23–25 and the historical fulfillment of the Passover irony in AD 67–70 confirm that their question accurately linked the temple’s destruction, Christ’s coming, and the end of the Old Covenant age, fulfilled within their generation.

Refuting Inconsistent Interpretations

Futurists misinterpret “end of the age” as the end of world history, imposing a global apocalypse alien to the text. Partial preterists like Doug Wilson, Joel McDurmon, and Jeff Durbin correctly identify the “end of the age” as the Old Covenant’s end in AD 70 but inconsistently separate the resurrection and gathering (Matt. 24:31; 25:31–46) to a future event. This contradicts the unity of Daniel 12:1–7, Matthew 13:39–43, and Matthew 24–25, which tie resurrection, judgment, and the “end” to AD 70. Wilson acknowledges that the “first heavens and earth” (Old Covenant) passed in AD 70, with the “new heavens and earth” (New Covenant) arriving (Isa. 65–66; 2 Pet. 3; Rev. 21–22):

“So I take the first heavens and earth as the Judaic aeon and the new heavens and earth as the Christian aeon, and these two aeons overlapped–the latter beginning at Pentecost, the former ending with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.”[10]

This interpretation is consistent with Jewish expectations and New Testament teaching, which portray “the age to come” not as the end of world history, but as the arrival of a new covenant age—eternal, redemptive, and spiritually transformative. It is not a world/planet-ending cataclysm but an ongoing invitation to enter the New Jerusalem, receive resurrection life, and partake of the healing of the nations (cf. Rev. 22:2, 17).

Partial preterists who separate the resurrection from the end of the Old Covenant age and the arrival of the New Covenant and new creation introduce eisegesis, ignoring the inseparable connection between these events, the New Covenant’s eternality (Eph. 3:20–21), and their imminent fulfillment in the first-century context.

Event Chart: Prophecy and Fulfillment 

Event Old Testament Prophecy Jesus’ Teaching

Fulfillment in

AD 70

Temple and City Destruction Dan. 9:26–27; 12:7; Isa. 27:9 Matt. 23:38; 24:2; 24:2-34 Temple destroyed (Josephus, War 6.4–5)
Christ’s Coming Dan. 7:13; Mal. 3–4 Matt. 16:27–28; 23:39; 24:27–34 Judgment on Jerusalem (Josephus, War 6.9.3)
Appointed Time of the End or End of the Old Covenant Age Dan. 12:4–7; Isa. 25:2–9 Matt. 13:39–43; 24:3, 14 Old Covenant “soon to vanish” New Covenant Age “about to come” (Heb. 6:5 SLT; 8:13)
Judgment & Resurrection Dan. 12:1–2; Isa. 27:13 Matt. 24:31; 25:31–46 Vindication of martyrs, gathering of elect (Matt. 24:31ff.)
Gospel to All Nations Isa. 49:6 Matt. 24:14 / Mark 13:10 Gospel spread to all nations (Col. 1:5–6, 23; Rom. 10:18; 16:25-26)

Conclusion

The disciples’ question in Matthew 24:3 was not confused but biblically grounded, rooted in Jesus’ teachings (Matt. 13:39–43; 16:27–28) and Old Testament prophecies (Dan. 7:13–27; 9:24–27; 12:1–7; Isa. 25:2–9; 27:9–13). Prompted by Jesus’ prediction of the temple’s destruction, they rightly linked it to His coming and the end of the Old Covenant age, fulfilled in AD 70. Logical arguments, synoptic variations, New Testament imminent expectations (Matt. 12:32 SLT; Ephs. 1:21 SLT; Heb. 6:5 SLT; Heb. 8:13; 10:37; 1 Cor. 10:11; 1 Pet. 4:5-7, 17; etc…), and historical evidence (Josephus, Eusebius) confirm their coherence. Futurist and partial preterist interpretations introduce confusion by imposing anachronistic or arbitrary divisions, ignoring the covenantal transition from the Old to the eternal New Covenant age (Eph. 3:20–21). The Olivet Discourse, as the Rosetta Stone of eschatology, reveals God’s faithfulness in fulfilling His promises within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34), inviting believers to live as stewards of the New Covenant kingdom, proclaiming the gospel in the age that came to maturity in AD 70 (Rev. 22:2, 17).

Study Questions: Chapter 9 – Matthew 24:3, the Disciples’ Question, and the End of What Age?

  • What is the significance of the Olivet Discourse being described as the “Rosetta Stone” of biblical prophecy, and how does it connect Old and New Testament eschatology?
  • How does the disciples’ question in Matthew 24:3 demonstrate their understanding of the relationship between the temple’s destruction, Christ’s coming, and the “end of the age”?
  • Explain the meaning of “end of the age” (sunteleia tou aiōnos) in Matthew 24:3, and why it refers to the Old Covenant age rather than the end of world history.
  • How do Old Testament prophecies (e.g., Daniel 9:24–27, 12:1–7; Isaiah 25:2–9) support the interpretation that the “end of the age” in Matthew 24:3 was fulfilled in AD 70?
  • Why do the variations in the disciples’ question across Matthew 24:3, Mark 13:4, and Luke 21:7 (e.g., the omission of “end of the age” in Mark and Luke) not indicate confusion but rather audience-specific clarity?
  • How does Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 13:39–43 about the “end of this age” inform the disciples’ question in Matthew 24:3, and what does their response in Matthew 13:51 (“Yes”) reveal about their understanding?
  • What role does first-century Jewish eschatology (e.g., “this age” vs. “age to come”) play in shaping the disciples’ question and Jesus’ response in the Olivet Discourse?
  • How does the absence of a rebuke from Jesus in Matthew 24, compared to other instances of correcting the disciples (e.g., Matt. 16:6–12), support the argument that their question was coherent?
  • Analyze the chiastic structure of Matthew 23–25 and explain how it unifies the temple’s destruction, Christ’s coming, and the end of the age within a first-century timeframe.
  • How do New Testament passages (e.g., Hebrews 8:13, 10:37; Colossians 1:5–6, 23) confirm that the events of Matthew 24, including the gospel’s spread and the Old Covenant’s end, were fulfilled by AD 70?
  • Why do futurist interpretations, which view the “end of the age” as a future global apocalypse, misalign with the textual and historical context of Matthew 24:3?
  • How does the cessation of revelatory gifts (e.g., tongues, prophecy) in AD 70, as tied to the end of the Old Covenant age, refute claims of ongoing revelation in modern movements?

[1] Joel McDurmon, Jesus v. Jerusalem: A Commentary on Luke 9:51 – 20:26, Jesus’ Lawsuit Against Israel (Powder Springs, GA: The American Vision, Inc., 2011), 48-49; see entire section 43-51.

[2] Ibid., 46-47

[3] Gary DeMar, Last Days MADNESS Obsession of the Modern Church, (Powder Springs, GA: Fourth revised edition, 1999), 68.

[4] Geza Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, rev. ed. (London: Penguin Books, 2011), 413. See also 4Q521 2 II, 11–12 and 1QS 4:16–17 for the Qumran expectation of Messianic healing and the triumph over “this age.”

[5] O.S. Wintermute, “Jubilees,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, ed. James H. Charlesworth, vol. 2 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1985), 100–103.

[6] Alan F. Segal, Life After Death: A History of the Afterlife in Western Religion (New York: Doubleday, 2004), 321–322.

[7] John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016), 112–113.

[8] Jacob Neusner, Judaism and the Interpretation of Scripture: Introduction to the Rabbinic Midrash (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004), 188.

[9] Milton Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics A Treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments, (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 441-442

[10] Douglas Wilson, When the Man Comes Around A COMMENTARY ON THE BOOK OF REVELATION, (Moscow, ID: Cannon Press, 2019), 246

Matthew 21-23 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 10: (Matthew 23) – The Prophetic Condemnation of Jerusalem’s Fall and The Judgment of the Living and the Dead

Matthew 23: The Prophetic Condemnation of Jerusalem’s Fall

Matthew 23 is the hermeneutical cornerstone of Jesus’ eschatological teaching, pronouncing imminent judgment on Jerusalem’s religious leaders for rejecting the Messiah and persecuting His followers. The woes expose the Pharisees’ hypocrisy: they occupy Moses’ seat yet produce “sons of hell” (Matt. 23:15), value the temple’s gold above its sanctity (Matt. 23:16–22), and bear the cumulative guilt of slaying God’s prophets (Matt. 23:29–36). The phrase “this generation” (Matt. 23:36) ties the judgment to the first century, aligning with Jesus’ earlier statements (Matt. 11:16, 12:39, 16:4). The citation of Psalm 118:26 (Matt. 23:39), sung at feasts like Passover, suggests Christ’s coming will coincide with such an event, fulfilled historically at the onset of the Jewish-Roman War during Passover in AD 67 (Josephus, Jewish War 2.19.1, 5.3.1). As James Jordan notes, Matthew 23–25 forms a chiasmic structure, centering on the judgment of the living and the vindication of the dead within the first-century generation. This is not speculation but the clear testimony of Scripture. Thus, Matthew 23 lays the theological foundation for the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25), a unified teaching outlining the timing and nature of Jerusalem’s destruction and the judgment of the living and the dead, fulfilled in AD 70 with the temple’s fall.

The Chiasmic Structure of Matthew 23–25

Matthew 23–25 is a unified literary composition, as James Jordan’s chiasmic analysis demonstrates, integrating the woes against the Pharisees with Christ’s coming in judgment, all within “this generation” (Matt. 23:36, 24:34).[1] This structure emphasizes the judgment of the living (Pharisees) and the vindication of the dead (martyrs) at Christ’s AD 70 return, refuting interpretations that postpone fulfillment. The following chart outlines this framework:

Chart 1: Chiasmic Structure of Matthew 23–25

Section

Content

Reference

A. Seat of False Authority Pharisees exercise Moses’ seat, masking hypocrisy Matt. 23:1–12
B. Woes of Divine Judgment Eight woes denounce Pharisees’ hypocrisy, persecution, and blood guilt Matt. 23:13–32
C. Climax of Judgment All righteous blood, from Abel to Zechariah, required of this generation Matt. 23:33–35
D. Fulfilled in Jesus’ Contemporary generation All these things will come upon “this generation” Matt. 23:36
E. Christ’s Coming and Resurrection Christ comes to judge Jerusalem, gathering His elect at the trumpet Matt. 23:37–24:31
D’. Fulfilled in Jesus’ Contemporary generation Temple’s destruction and Christ’s coming fulfilled in “this generation” Matt. 24:32–36
C’. Final Judgment Judgment of the living and dead, separating sheep from goats Matt. 24:45–25:46
B’. Parables of Accountability Three parables underscore readiness for imminent judgment Matt. 24:45–25:30
A’. Seat of True Authority Jesus reigns on His throne, exercising divine judgment Matt. 25:31–45

This chiasm underscores the thematic and temporal coherence of Matthew 23–25, establishing that Jerusalem’s judgment and the martyrs’ vindication are a singular event fulfilled in AD 70.

The Irony of “Blessed is He Who Comes in the Name of the Lord”

Integral to Matthew 23’s judgment is the profound irony of verse 39: “For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’” Drawn from Psalm 118:26, this phrase was a festive acclamation sung by Jews to welcome pilgrims to Jerusalem during the great feasts—Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles. Yet, Jesus transforms this cry of anticipated salvation into a divine snare, where the Jews’ song becomes the signal for their judgment. During the Passover of AD 67, when the Jewish-Roman War began, and culminating in the AD 70 siege, they sang these words expecting divine deliverance, only to face Roman legions encircling Jerusalem, the visible sign of Christ’s coming in judgment (Matt. 23:38–39, 24:30).[2]

At Passover, Jerusalem swelled with pilgrims commemorating Israel’s exodus, singing the Hallel (Ps. 113–118), including “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord,” as a messianic welcome (Mishnah, Pesahim 5:7). Jesus, however, redefines its import. Addressing Jerusalem’s leaders (Matt. 23:13–36), He declares that their singing will herald not salvation but divine wrath. Josephus confirms this historical alignment: the Jewish-Roman War commenced during Passover in AD 67, when Jewish rebels clashed with Roman forces under Cestius Gallus, initiating the conflict (Jewish War 2.19.1, 5.3.1). By Passover AD 70, Titus’s legions besieged Jerusalem, trapping pilgrims within its walls (Josephus, Jewish War 6.9.3). The irony is stark: their song of redemption, expecting a messianic king, summoned Roman armies, fulfilling Jesus’ prophecy that “this generation” would face His judgment (Matt. 23:36).

Passover’s significance amplifies this irony. Celebrating God’s judgment on Egypt and Israel’s redemption through the lamb’s blood (Exod. 12:12–13), Passover in AD 70 became a tragic inversion: rejecting the true Passover Lamb (John 1:29, 1 Cor. 5:7), Jerusalem faced divine retribution. False prophets stoked expectations of an earthly kingdom (Matt. 24:24–26; Josephus, Jewish War 6.5.2), but their song triggered the “days of vengeance” (Luke 21:22), as Roman forces starved and slaughtered thousands (Josephus, Jewish War 6.3.3–4).

This irony embodies a “trap,” as Psalm 69:22–23 prophesies: “Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them.” The Passover table, set with the lamb, became a snare when the Jews, rejecting Christ, sang “Blessed is He who comes” in AD 67-70. Their covenantal infidelity—clinging to the Old Covenant and rebelling against Rome—ensnared them in a besieged city, where Rome, God’s instrument (Rev. 17:16), executed judgment. Paul applies this imagery in Romans 11:9–10, citing Psalm 69 to depict Israel’s stumbling over Christ, the “stumbling stone” (Rom. 9:32–33). In 1 Thessalonians 2:14–16, he warns that Jerusalem’s Jews, killing Jesus and prophets, filled their sins, incurring “wrath… to the uttermost” and to the “end” of the old covenant age—fulfilled in AD 70’s Passover trap.

This trap integrates with Matthew 23–25’s chiasm (Chart 1), where Christ’s coming (E) pivots on the Jews’ song, and with Revelation, where Jerusalem, Babylon, falls “in one hour” (Rev. 18:10) for her blood guilt (Rev. 18:24, cf. Matt. 23:31–36). The New Covenant’s marriage supper (Rev. 19:7–9) rises from this divorce and ruin, contrasting the Passover snare. The chart below maps this irony across Scripture.

Chart 2: The Irony of the Passover Song and the Trap

Theme

Matthew 23–25 Revelation

OT/NT Parallels

Song of Irony Jews sing “Blessed is He who comes” (23:39), expecting salvation, but summon judgment Babylon judged “in one hour” (18:10), tied to Jerusalem’s Passover song (11:8) Ps. 118:26: Messianic hope becomes judgment’s signal
Passover Context Judgment tied to feast when song is sung (23:39; 24:34) Jerusalem’s fall during “the war” (16:14), sparked at Passover (11:8) Exod. 12:12–13: Passover’s deliverance inverted
Trap Imagery Pharisees’ rejection traps them in judgment (23:33–39) Babylon’s defiance traps her in ruin (18:7–8) Ps. 69:22–23: Passover table a snare; Rom. 11:9–10: Israel stumbles
Blood Guilt Jerusalem guilty of prophets’ blood (23:31–36) Babylon holds blood of prophets, saints (17:6; 18:24) 1 Thess. 2:14–16: Jews’ sins bring wrath “to the uttermost”
Judgment’s Sign Roman armies encircle Jerusalem (24:15–21) Rome burns Babylon (17:16), God’s tool Isa. 10:5: Assyria as God’s rod, paralleled by Rome
Covenant Shift Old Covenant ends, kingdom comes (24:35; Luke 21:31–32) New Jerusalem rises (21:1–2) Jer. 3:8: Judah’s divorce fulfilled in AD 70

Matthew 23: Judgment of the Living and Dead in AD 70

The Passover irony of Matthew 23 transitions seamlessly into the Olivet Discourse, where Jesus delineates the scope of this judgment. He links His coming to the judgment of the living—Pharisees and leaders who reject Him—and the vindication of the dead, the martyrs whose blood demands justice (Matt. 23:35–36). This judgment will strike “this generation” with the temple’s desolation (Matt. 23:38–39), fulfilled in AD 70 when Roman armies destroyed Jerusalem. The “trumpet” of Matthew 24:31 evokes resurrection imagery (1 Cor. 15:52), connecting the martyrs’ vindication to this event, as the Son of Man gathers His elect and judges all (Matt. 24:30-31; 25:31–46).

This fulfills Daniel 12:1–7, where the righteous are delivered and the wicked judged when the Old Covenant’s “holy people” are shattered, realized in AD 70. Luke 21:20–24 describes this as the “days of vengeance” (Deut. 32:35), affecting the living (captives, slain) and avenging the dead (martyrs). Josephus documents the temple’s destruction and Jerusalem’s catastrophic loss of life, fulfilling the “great tribulation” (Matt. 24:21; Jewish War6.5.3). The chart below illustrates the thematic unity between Matthew 23 and Matthew 24–25, confirming a single judgment event.

Chart 3: Parallels Between Matthew 23 and Matthew 24–25

Theme

Matthew 23

Matthew 24–25

Hypocritical Authority Pharisees wield Moses’ seat with hypocrisy (23:2ff) Jesus judges these hypocrites from His throne (25:31, 41–45)
Corrupt Fruit Pharisees produce “sons of hell” (23:15) Disciples’ gospel yields redemption (24:14; Luke 21:28–32)
Temple’s Destruction Pharisees value temple’s gold, facing ruin (23:16–36) Jesus predicts temple’s collapse (24:1–2; 25:41–46)
Blood Guilt Pharisees fill up their sin of blood guilt for killing Jesus’ messengers (23:31–36) Wrath falls for slaying Jesus’ sent ones (Mark 13:9–13; Matt. 10:17–23)
Judgment of Living and the Dead  Living (Pharisees) and dead (martyrs) judged (23:31–36) Living slain or (captives) and dead judged (Luke 21:20–24; Matt. 24:30-31; 25:31–46)
Christ’s Coming Woes herald Christ’s coming to desolate temple (23:13-39) Rulers fall as Jesus comes to destroy temple (24:29-34)
Persecution Jerusalem resists Jesus’ gathering, kills His prophets (23:37) Leaders resist gathering, persecute His people (24:9–31; Matt. 10:17–22)
Timing Judgment in “this generation” (23:37–39) Judgment in “this generation” (24:1–2, 34; 26:62–64)

Jerusalem: The “Great City” Babylon in Revelation

The Passover trap and Matthew 23’s judgment resonate in Revelation, where Jerusalem is unequivocally identified as the “Great City,” Babylon, the covenantally unfaithful city judged in AD 70. This identification is not speculative but grounded in explicit scriptural testimony and corroborated by OT and NT texts. Revelation’s portrayal of Babylon as the persecuting harlot aligns with Jesus’ condemnation of Jerusalem in Matthew 23, integrating the Passover irony into a broader covenantal narrative that underscores Jerusalem’s unique guilt and the triumph of the New Covenant kingdom.

Revelation 11:8 decisively identifies the “Great City” as the place “where our Lord was crucified”—Jerusalem, symbolically termed “Sodom” and “Egypt” to denote its spiritual apostasy (Isa. 1:10, Ezek. 16:46–49). This designation is reinforced in Revelation 16–18, where Babylon is charged with the blood of prophets, apostles, and saints (Rev. 17:6, 18:24), directly paralleling Jesus’ accusation against Jerusalem for slaying God’s messengers across history (Matt. 23:31–36). No other city—neither Rome, Mecca, nor any modern metropolis—bears this covenantal guilt, as only Jerusalem was bound to God as His covenant wife. The term “Babylon” encapsulates Jerusalem’s unfaithfulness, echoing OT prophets who likened Judah’s idolatry and alliances to harlotry (Jer. 3:1–8, Ezek. 16:15–43). In Revelation, Jerusalem’s final betrayal is manifest in her alliance with Rome (“we have no king but Caesar,” John 19:15) and her persecution of Christ’s followers (Acts 8:1), culminating in her AD 70 judgment. The Passover song, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord,” sung as the Jewish-Roman War began in AD 67 (Josephus, Jewish War 2.19.1, 5.3.1), serves as the ironic trigger for this divine verdict, transforming a cry of hope into a summons of wrath.

To elucidate the continuity between Matthew 23–25 and Revelation, the following chart delineates their thematic and textual parallels, integrating the Passover irony with Babylon’s judgment. It demonstrates that Jerusalem’s role as the persecuting city, her blood guilt, and her imminent judgment in “this generation” are mirrored in Revelation’s depiction of Babylon’s fall, confirming a singular AD 70 fulfillment.

Chart 4: Parallels Between Matthew 23–25 and Revelation

Theme

Matthew 23–25

Revelation

Persecuting City Jerusalem’s leaders resist Jesus’ gathering (23:37) Babylon enslaves, opposes Christ’s call to freedom (16–18)
Deception Pharisees produce “sons of hell” (23:15) Babylon deceives nations with her fornication (14:8; 18:3, 23)
Blood Guilt Jerusalem slays OT/NT prophets (23:31–34) Babylon spills blood of prophets, saints, apostles (17:6; 18:24)
Sin’s Culmination Jerusalem fills the measure of sin (23:30–36) Babylon’s guilt reaches heaven (16:6–18:24)
Christ’s Coming Christ comes as a thief in “this generation” (23:36–38; 24:3–44) Christ comes as a thief “soon,” Babylon falls in an hour (16:15–19; 18:10)
Gospel’s Reach Gospel preached to Roman world before judgment (24:14; Rom. 10:18) Gospel reaches all nations before Babylon’s fall (14:6–8; Acts 2:5)
Martyrs’ Vindication Martyrs vindicated, dead judged at Christ’s return (23:30–38; 25:31–46) Martyrs avenged, dead judged at Babylon’s fall (18:20; 19:1–21)
Covenant Transition Old Covenant “heaven and earth” passes (24:35) Old Covenant “islands flee,” new creation dawns (16:20; 21:1)
Eschatological Wedding Wedding follows Jerusalem’s fall (22:7; 25:1–13) Marriage supper follows Babylon’s ruin (19:7–9)
Kingdom Established Kingdom arrives at Jerusalem’s end (Luke 21:20–32) God reigns as Babylon falls (11:15–17; 19:6)

This chart establishes that Revelation’s portrayal of Babylon’s judgment mirrors Matthew 23–25’s prophecy of Jerusalem’s fall, with the Passover trap serving as a pivotal link. The thematic parallels—persecution, blood guilt, and imminent judgment—demonstrate that both texts describe the same AD 70 event, where Jerusalem’s rejection of Christ and His messengers, epitomized by her ironic song, incurs divine wrath. To further ground this identification, we turn to the Old Testament, where Jerusalem’s covenantal unfaithfulness is consistently depicted as harlotry, providing the theological foundation for Revelation’s imagery.

The following chart connects Revelation’s portrayal of Babylon to OT depictions of Jerusalem as the unfaithful covenant wife, illustrating how Scripture consistently frames Jerusalem’s apostasy and judgment, from her prophetic indictments to her AD 70 destruction.

Chart 5: Old Testament Parallels with Revelation’s Babylon

Theme

Old Testament

Revelation

Harlotry Judah’s harlotry incurs judgment (Jer. 3:1–8) Babylon’s harlotry incurs judgment (17:1–5; 18:7)
Blood Guilt Jerusalem kills God’s prophets (Jer. 2:30, 26:20–23) Babylon slays prophets, saints (17:6; 18:24)
Betrayal by Allies Jerusalem’s lovers destroy her (Ezek. 16:35–43) Rome burns Babylon (17:16)
Widowhood Judah becomes a widow post-judgment (Lam. 1:1–2) Babylon denies widowhood, yet is judged (18:7–8)
Apostasy Jerusalem, a harlot filled with bloodshed (Isa. 1:21; 5:7; 59:7) Babylon, Sodom, Egypt, blood-guilty (11:8; 18:24)

The OT parallels underscore that Jerusalem’s identity as Babylon is not an innovation but a continuation of prophetic tradition, where Judah’s covenant infidelity—culminating in her AD 70 judgment via Rome—mirrors her historical judgments by Assyria and Babylon. This continuity is further affirmed in the New Testament, where Jerusalem’s role as the persecuting city is reiterated, aligning with Revelation’s depiction of Babylon and reinforcing the AD 70 fulfillment.

The final chart aligns Revelation’s portrayal of Babylon with NT texts that identify Jerusalem as the city opposing God’s people, demonstrating the scriptural consensus on her guilt and judgment, particularly in light of the Passover trap that sealed her fate.

Chart 6: New Testament Parallels with Revelation’s Babylon

Theme

New Testament

Revelation

Two Covenants Earthly Jerusalem vs. heavenly Jerusalem (Gal. 4:24–30) Babylon vs. New Jerusalem (3:12; 21–22)
Persecution Jerusalem’s Jews persecute the church (1 Thess. 2:14–16; Acts 17) Babylon persecutes via synagogue of Satan (2:9–10; 11:8)
Covenant Dissolution Old Covenant heavens & earth grow old and vanish (Heb. 1:10-12; 8:13; 12:26–28) Old Covenant Israel’s heavens and earth flee (6:12-17; 16:20; 20:11; 21:1)
Imminent Judgment The “appointed time” of the “end” and “Judgment of living and dead” was “near” (1 Pet. 4:5–7, 17) The “appointed time” for “the Judgment of the Dead” was “near” when Babylon / Jerusalem was judged (11:1–18; 19:1–2)

Jerusalem: The Persecuting Harlot Across Scripture

These charts collectively affirm that Jerusalem, as Revelation’s Babylon, is the sole city bearing the covenantal guilt of slaying God’s prophets and saints, from Abel to the apostles (Matt. 23:31–34; Rev. 17:6, 18:24). No other city—Rome, Mecca, or any modern contender—fits this scriptural profile, as only Jerusalem was God’s covenant wife, accountable for such bloodshed (Jer. 3:8). The Passover song, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord,” sung as the Jewish-Roman War began in AD 67 (Josephus, Jewish War 2.19.1, 5.3.1), epitomizes her defiance, transforming a cry of hope into a summons of divine judgment via Rome (Rev. 17:16). Her AD 70 fate—stoned and burned (Rev. 16:21, 18:8)—fulfills the penalty for an adulterous priest’s daughter (Lev. 21:9), enacting God’s divorce of His unfaithful bride. The persecution motif, consistent across Scripture, further cements this identification:

Matthew 10:17–23: Jesus predicts synagogue persecution, fulfilled by Jerusalem’s Jews (Acts 8:1).

Revelation 2:9–10: Apostate Jews, the “synagogue of Satan,” torment the church, echoing Galatians 4:29.

Acts 7:51–52: Stephen accuses Jerusalem of killing the righteous, paralleling Matthew 23:31.

1 Thessalonians 2:14–16: Judean Jews slay Jesus, prophets, and believers, incurring imminent wrath.

Refuting Erroneous Interpretations

To safeguard the truth, we must address competing views. Dispensationalists, such as Thomas Ice, artificially separate Matthew 23:36 (AD 70) from Matthew 24:34 (future), disregarding the consistent first-century referent of “this generation” and the historical fulfillment of the Passover trap in AD 67–70 (Josephus, Jewish War 2.19.1, 5.3.1, 6.9.3). The historical record—Jerusalem’s fall, Christian flight to Pella (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History3.5.3), and the gospel’s dissemination (Rom. 10:18)—refutes their futurism.

Amillennialists and Partial Preterist Postmillennialists overlook the connection between the judgment or vindication of the living (Pharisees) and the the dead (martyrs) in Matthew 23, which also unfolds in Matthew 24–25. Paul and Peter confirm that this judgment of the living and the dead was imminent at Christ’s appearing, described as “about to” occur (2 Tim. 4:1–2, YLT) or was “near” (1 Pet. 4:5–7, 17) in AD 70.

Similarly, skeptics like Bart Ehrman, identifying Babylon as Rome and claiming Jesus failed to return “soon,” misread Revelation’s covenantal context and apocalyptic language. Rome was neither God’s covenant wife nor guilty of OT prophets’ blood (Rev. 18:24). The Passover snare, grounded in Psalm 69 and Paul, confirms Jerusalem’s AD 70 judgment, undermining skeptical objections.

Conclusion: The Passover Song as Judgment’s Herald

Matthew 23 serves as the interpretive foundation for the Olivet Discourse, proclaiming Christ’s AD 70 coming to judge Jerusalem’s temple and leaders within “this generation.” The chiasmic structure of Matthew 23–25 (Chart 1) unifies the judgment of the living (Pharisees) and the dead (martyrs), fulfilled in the resurrection and judgment of Matthew 24–25. The profound irony of “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord” (Matt. 23:39) seals this verdict: sung at Passover to welcome pilgrims, it became a divine trap (Ps. 69:22–23, Rom. 11:9–10) in AD 67–70, as Roman legions, sparked by the war’s onset at Passover (Josephus, Jewish War 2.19.1, 5.3.1), answered the Jews’ cry with judgment. Jerusalem, Revelation’s “Great City” Babylon (Rev. 11:8), is the covenant harlot, judged for her blood guilt (Rev. 18:24, Matt. 23:31–36), as confirmed by OT (Jer. 3, Ezek. 16) and NT (Gal. 4, Heb. 12) texts. The charts demonstrate this textual harmony, corroborated by historical evidence—Jerusalem’s destruction, the gospel’s spread, and the martyrs’ vindication. This was Christ’s covenantal triumph, establishing the New Covenant kingdom. Believers today stand in the New Jerusalem’s light, called to live faithfully (Rev. 22:17). Neither dispensationalist nor skeptic can obscure this truth—Christ’s word was fulfilled, and His kingdom endures.

Study Questions for Matthew 23:

  • What is the significance of the phrase “this generation” in Matthew 23:36, and how does it establish the timing of the judgment described in the chapter?
  • How does the chiasmic structure of Matthew 23–25 (Chart 1) demonstrate the thematic and temporal unity of Jesus’ teaching on Jerusalem’s judgment?
  • In what ways do the “woes” against the Pharisees in Matthew 23:13–32 reveal their hypocrisy and contribute to the theme of divine judgment?
  • Explain the irony of the Passover song, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord” (Matt. 23:39), and how it functions as a “divine trap” in the context of AD 67–70.
  • How does the historical context of the Jewish-Roman War, particularly the events of Passover in AD 67 and AD 70, support the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 23?
  • What parallels can be drawn between the blood guilt of Jerusalem in Matthew 23:31–36 and the charges against Babylon in Revelation 17:6 and 18:24 (Chart 4)?
  • How does the article use Old Testament prophecies (e.g., Jeremiah 3, Ezekiel 16) to identify Jerusalem as the “Great City” Babylon in Revelation?
  • According to the article, how does the judgment of the living (Pharisees) and the vindication of the dead (martyrs) in Matthew 23 connect to the events described in the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25)?
  • What role does the Passover festival play in amplifying the irony of Jerusalem’s judgment, particularly in relation to the rejection of Jesus as the true Passover Lamb?
  • How does the article refute dispensationalist interpretations that separate Matthew 23:36 (AD 70) from Matthew 24:34 (future), and what evidence does it provide to support a first-century fulfillment?
  • Why does the article argue that Jerusalem, and not Rome or another city, is Revelation’s Babylon, and how do New Testament texts like Galatians 4 and 1 Thessalonians 2 support this view?
  • How does the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, as described in the article, relate to the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 and the establishment of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21–22?

[1] James B. Jordan, MATTHEW 23-25 A LITERARY, HISTORICAL, AND THEOLOGICAL COMMENTARY, (Powder Springs, GA:  American Vision, 2022), 21

[2] My friend Don Preston shared this view with me and how he came across it: “I was in a bookstore owned by a friend. I was just browsing and came across the book: Elizabeth Lattimer Judea from Cyrus to Titus, (Chicago; A. C. McClurg and Co., 1899), 123+). Here is more of her quote: 345–describing the final coming of pilgrims to Jerusalem before the siege, she says, “From the far east, from Antioch and Egypt, Asia Minor and Cyprus, thousands of Jews, confiding in the inaction of Vespasian, had flocked to Jerusalem to celebrate this last Passover. For the last time worshipers approached the temple gates singing the usual songs of Degrees; for the last time they were welcomed by the greeting ‘blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!’ and answered the priest’s welcome with the words, ‘We have wished you good luck– ye who are of the house of the Lord.’” Page 345.

Matthew 21-23 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 9: (Matthew 22:34-46) – The Enduring Love of the New Covenant In the Shadow of the Lord of Psalm 110 Coming in the Judgment of AD 70

In the charged atmosphere of Jerusalem during Holy Week, Jesus faced relentless challenges from religious leaders desperate to discredit him. Within these confrontations, recorded in Matthew 22, lies a transformative teaching that silenced his opponents, established the ethic of the new covenant, and asserted his divine authority as the Messiah and God, who would judge those breaking God’s commandments. The Greatest Commandment (Matt. 22:34-40), where Jesus declares that love for God and neighbor fulfills “all the Law and the Prophets,” contrasts sharply with the Pharisees’ and Sadducees’ legalistic debates, particularly their fixation on earthly laws like levirate marriage persisting in the resurrection. Amplified by Jesus’ divine self-identification as the judge of Psalm 110 in Matthew 22:41-46 and 26:63-65, the Pharisees’ lovelessness exposed in Matthew 23, and Paul’s emphasis on love, this teaching reveals love as the eternal foundation of God’s kingdom, enduring beyond the temple’s destruction in AD 70.

Matthew 22 unfolds as a series of intellectual duels. The Sadducees, denying the resurrection, pose a hypothetical about levirate marriage (Matt. 22:23-33), asking whose wife a woman married to seven brothers would be in the afterlife. Their question assumes that the law requiring a man to marry his brother’s childless widow would persist—a view some Pharisees, who affirmed the resurrection, shared. Jesus dismantles this, stating that in the resurrection, people “neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven” (Matt. 22:30, ESV), pointing to a transformed existence beyond old covenant laws. Observing Jesus’ triumph, the Pharisees test him with a question about the greatest commandment (Matt. 22:34-36). Jesus’ response—love God with all your heart, soul, and mind, and love your neighbor as yourself—reorients the Law around a universal principle, eclipsing legalistic debates and heralding the new covenant’s spiritual reality.

This teaching sets the stage for Jesus’ bold assertion of divine authority in Matthew 22:41-46. Turning the tables, Jesus asks the Pharisees, “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?” When they reply, “The son of David,” he cites Psalm 110:1:

“The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet.’” He challenges them: if David calls the Messiah “Lord,” how is he merely his son?

The Pharisees, stumped, fail to grasp that Jesus, the Messiah, is God. This divine identity is powerfully reaffirmed in Matthew 26:63-65, where Jesus, before the high priest and the same first-century religious leaders, conflates Psalm 110:1 with Daniel 7:13, declaring,

You will see the Son of Man [Dan. 7:13] seated at the right hand of Power [Ps. 110 – ascension in AD 30] and coming on the clouds of heaven [Dan. 7:13 second coming in AD 70].”

Their charge of blasphemy confirms their rejection of his divinity, sealing their fate. As the Lord of Psalm 110, Jesus, the divine judge, will in AD 70 “put his enemies under his feet,” destroying Jerusalem for their failure to love God—embodied in him—and their neighbors, as commanded in Matthew 22:34-40, a judgment these leaders would witness in their generation.

The Pharisees’ lovelessness is exposed in Matthew 23, where Jesus denounces their harsh legalism. He accuses them of burdening people with heavy rules while neglecting “the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness” (Matt. 23:23), a direct contrast to the love he commands. Their hypocrisy and cruelty, rejecting Jesus as God and Messiah, lead to judgment, as he declares Jerusalem’s desolation (Matt. 23:38), fulfilled in AD 70 when the Romans razed the temple, ending the old covenant’s sacrificial system.

This destruction is central. In Matthew 24:35, Jesus declares, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.” Many scholars see “heaven and earth” as symbolizing the temple, which fell within a generation (Matt. 24:34). The Greatest Commandment, part of Jesus’ enduring words, provided a timeless ethic for a post-temple world. Unlike levirate marriage or temple rituals, love required no physical structure, aligning with the new covenant’s spiritual focus. Matthew’s Gospel, written for Jewish Christians, contrasts the Pharisees’ legalism—evident in their debates about laws persisting in the new age, their harshness, and their rejection of Jesus’ divinity—with the love Jesus commands as God and Messiah.

Paul’s teachings reinforce this shift. In 1 Corinthians 13:8-13, he writes that love never ends, unlike temporary gifts like prophecy and tongues, which cease when “the perfect comes.” This “perfect” is Christ’s coming, the new creation, and the new covenant’s maturity, fulfilled in AD 70. Paul concludes, “Faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love” (1 Cor. 13:13). This echoes Jesus’ prioritization of love, suggesting that love, not earthly laws or signs, defines the new covenant age. The Pharisees’ fixation on legal specifics, like levirate marriage, mirrors the Corinthians’ obsession with gifts that “puffed up,” both corrected by love’s primacy, which the Pharisees’ rejection of Jesus as God betrays.

Matthew 22’s narrative weaves these themes. Jesus outwits traps about taxes and resurrection (Matt. 22:15-33), teaches love (Matt. 22:34-40), and asserts his divine authority (Matt. 22:41-46). In Matthew 23, he condemns the Pharisees’ loveless legalism, predicting Jerusalem’s fall (Matt. 23:38), fulfilled in AD 70, as foretold in the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24). Amid these warnings, the Greatest Commandment shines, offering a way of life that endures when the old order collapses.

Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 22:34-40, contrasted with the Pharisees’ legalism and rejection of him as God and Messiah, prepared believers for the new covenant. As the temple’s “heaven and earth” passed away in AD 70, a judgment the religious leaders witnessed, love remained, fulfilling the Law and guiding the church. Paul’s affirmation of love’s permanence reinforced this, equipping Christians to embody God’s kingdom. Today, the Greatest Commandment calls us to love, a timeless legacy of Jesus’ words, upheld by the Lord of Psalm 110 who also judges in perfect righteousness.

Scripture Event/Teaching Pharisees’ Failure

New Covenant Outcome

Matt. 22:23-33 Sadducees’ levirate marriage question; Jesus teaches resurrection transcends earthly laws. Assume old covenant laws (e.g., marriage) persist in new age; misunderstand resurrection. Resurrection life is spiritual, not legalistic, preparing for temple’s end in AD 70.
Matt. 22:34-40 Greatest Commandment: Love God and neighbor fulfills the Law. Focus on ranking laws; fail to prioritize love, clinging to legalism. Love as the eternal ethic, enduring beyond temple rituals, guides post-AD 70 faith.
Matt. 22:41-46 Jesus cites Psalm 110:1, revealing he is Messiah and God, judge of his enemies. Reject Jesus’ divinity; cannot grasp Messiah as God, leading to AD 70 judgment. Jesus, the Lord of Psalm 110, judges Jerusalem in AD 70 for rejecting love for God/him.
Matt. 23 Jesus denounces Pharisees’ harsh legalism, predicts Jerusalem’s desolation. Burden people, neglect justice/mercy; lovelessness rejects Jesus as God. Judgment in AD 70 ends old covenant; love remains as new covenant’s foundation.
Matt. 24:35 “Heaven and earth” (temple) will pass, but Jesus’ words endure. Cling to temple system, ignoring Jesus’ warnings and love command. Temple falls in AD 70; Jesus’ words, including love, sustain new covenant community.
1 Cor. 13:8-13 Love endures when “the perfect” (Christ’s coming, new creation) arrives in AD 70. Mirror Corinthians’ focus on temporary gifts; Pharisees prioritize laws over love. Faith, hope, love abide post-AD 70, with love supreme, fulfilling Jesus’ teaching.

 

 

 

Matthew 21-23 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 8: (Matthew 22:23–33) – The Resurrection Challenge: Jesus vs. the Sadducees

The confrontation between Jesus and the Sadducees in Matthew 22:23–33 is more than a clever exchange over marriage and resurrection—it reveals deep fault lines in Second Temple Jewish theology. Beneath the surface of their question lies a long-standing debate between rival Jewish sects: the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Each held sharply opposing views about the resurrection, the afterlife, and the ongoing role of the Torah in the age to come.

In this article, we will:

  • Summarize the passage and the Sadducees’ challenge.
  • Present historical and exegetical evidence about the Sadducees’ denial of resurrection and the Pharisees’ belief in its physical nature and the Torah’s permanence.
  • Develop a Preterist interpretation showing that the Sadducees misapplied an argument originally designed to trap the Pharisees, wrongly assuming Jesus held to the same views.
  • Demonstrate how Jesus properly defined the resurrection and pointed to the coming new covenant age—fulfilled in AD 70—as a spiritual reality beyond Torah and physicality.

1) Summary of Matthew 22:23–33

In Matthew 22:23–33 (cf. Mark 12:18–27Luke 20:27–40), the Sadducees—who deny the resurrection—pose a theological dilemma to Jesus. They appeal to the Torah’s levirate marriage law (Deut. 25:5–10), proposing a hypothetical scenario in which a woman is married successively to seven brothers, each dying without leaving an heir. They ask, “In the resurrection, whose wife will she be?” (Matt. 22:28). Their goal is to mock the idea of a future resurrection, assuming it entails bodily continuity and the ongoing authority of Mosaic law.

Jesus rebukes them:

“You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels in heaven.” (Matt. 22:29–30)

He then affirms the afterlife by citing Exodus 3:6—a text the Sadducees accepted as authoritative:

“I am the God of Abraham… Isaac… Jacob… He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” (Matt. 22:32)

Importantly, neither here nor in Luke’s account does Jesus describe a physical or biological resurrection. Instead, he points to a conscious afterlife and a spiritual transition—culminating at the end of the old covenant age in AD 70, when Hades would be emptied and the righteous brought into God’s presence at His “soon” second coming (Rev. 20:13–14; 21-22:6-12, 20).

2) The Beliefs of the Sadducees and Pharisees

The Sadducees, a priestly aristocratic sect, accepted only the Torah (Pentateuch) and denied the resurrection, the afterlife, and the existence of angels or spirits:

  • Matthew 22:23– “The Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection…”
  • Acts 23:8– “The Sadducees say there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit…”
  • Josephus,War 8.14 – “They take away the belief of the immortal duration of the soul…”
  • Josephus,Antiquities 1.4 – “They suppose that souls perish with their bodies.”

In contrast, the Pharisees affirmed bodily resurrection and believed the Torah would continue into the Messianic age:

  • JosephusAntiquities 1.3 – “The souls of good men are removed into other bodies and they will revive and live again.”
  • Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1– “All Israel has a share in the world to come…”
  • Pirkei Avot 4:16– Encourages Torah study as preparation for the age to come.
  • P. SandersJJS, 1999 – The Pharisees believed Torah law, including levirate marriage, would remain in force in the resurrection.
  • Levine & BrettlerJewish Annotated NT – Pharisees believed the Torah was eternal and operative in the resurrection era.

3) The Sadducees’ Argument: A Trap Once Used Against the Pharisees

The Sadducees likely repurposed this question from prior debates with the Pharisees, exposing a contradiction in their belief system:

  • Levirate Law Continues– If Torah is still binding in the resurrection, then levirate marriage applies.
  • Polyandry Dilemma– If the woman is resurrected alongside seven husbands, she would be married to all—implying polyandry, which the Pharisees rejected ( Mishnah Yevamot 4:13).
  • Reductio ad Absurdum– The scenario is designed to ridicule the Pharisees’ doctrine by revealing ethical incoherence.

4) The Sadducees’ Miscalculation: Jesus Was Neither Pharisee Nor Sadducee

In presenting this dilemma to Jesus, the Sadducees made two major errors:

Mistake #1: Assuming Torah Continuity

They assumed Jesus believed the Torah would govern the age to come. But Jesus had already been teaching that the old covenant would be fulfilled and pass away at the arrival of the new covenant age which He said was “about to come” in AD 70 (cf. Matt. 5:17–189:16–17; 12:32 SLT; cf. Heb. 8:13).

In Luke 20:34, Jesus makes this even clearer:

“The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage…”

Here, “this age” refers to the old covenant age—marked by earthly institutions such as levirate marriage, temple law, and land-based inheritance. In Jewish eschatology, history was divided into only two ages: “this age” (the Mosaic or old covenant age) and “the age to come” (the Messianic or new covenant age). Jesus places the resurrection at the end of the old covenant age, not at some distant end of world history. Moreover, both Jesus and the New Testament authors affirmed that their old covenant age was “about to” pass away, while the new covenant age was “about to” come to full maturity in AD 70 (cf. Matt. 12:32 SLT; Eph. 1:21 SLT; Heb. 6:5 SLT; 8:13).

This poses a problem for the Reformed Partial Preterist system which is increasingly admitting there was a spiritual resurrection of the dead that took place in AD 70 to close out the end of the old covenant age.  The problem is simple; Daniel places this resurrection at the “appointed time of the end” [singular] (Dan. 12:1-4) and Jesus defines this as the end of his old covenant age coming in AD 70 (Matt. 13:39-43; 24:3, 31-34; Luke 20:34).  Jesus nor any OT or NT author places the resurrection at the end of TWO ages or TWO “appointed time(s).”

Some Partial Preterists, such as Joel McDurmon, rightly concede that the “end of the age” in both Matthew 13:39–43 and Matthew 24:3 refers to the end of the old covenant age, fulfilled in AD 70. Others, however, restrict this interpretation only to Matthew 24:3, creating inconsistency. Yet the analogy of faith and the unified eschatological framework of the New Testament demonstrate that both passages speak of the same end of the old covenant age, when the eschatological gathering—that is, the resurrection and judgment—would take place:

Matthew 13

Matthew 24

end of the age, [suntelias ton aionion] (v. 39) end of the age, [suntelias ton aionion] (v. 3)
Preaching of the gospel into all the world before the end (v. 38ff.) Preaching of the gospel into all the world before the end (v. 14)
The coming of the Son of Man (vv. 39–41) The coming of the Son of Man (vv. 30–31)
The sending of the angels to gather (v. 41) The sending of the angels to gather (v. 31)
The time for separation (vv. 30, 40) The time for separation

Mistake #2: Assuming a Physical Resurrection

The Sadducees also assumed that Jesus was teaching a resurrection that involved a return to physical life. But Jesus taught a spiritual resurrection—a transition from death to life in God’s presence. This resurrection from Hades occurred when Christ returned in judgment in AD 70 (Matt. 13:39–43; 16:27–28; 24:3, 30–34).

5) Jesus’ Refutation: Defining Resurrection and the Age to Come

a) The Resurrection is Spiritual, Not Physical 

“In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels…” (Matt. 22:30)

Marriage in “this age” of the old covenant world involved physical reproduction connected to tribal affiliations connected to the land of Israel. But for the dead ones, the resurrection involved being raised from Hades and having spiritual bodies fit for inheriting eternal life and God’s presence on par with an angelic state—non-physical and spiritual.

Some scholars, such as N.T. Wright, John J. Collins, and Gabriele Boccaccini, have noted that not all Jewish groups in the Second Temple period expected a physical resurrection. Some sects (possibly including those behind Enochic texts and certain Essenes) anticipated a non-physical, spiritual resurrection of the soul into God’s presence.

Old Testament scholar Lester L. Grabbe highlights that, during the Second Temple period, interpretations of resurrection in the OT were not uniformly tied to the physical body. Some understood it as involving only the souls or spirits of individuals, either ascending to God’s presence at death or being raised at a general judgment of the dead. Grabbe notes that no evidence suggests the physical resurrection view dominated over the spiritual one. His historical insights, though detailed, provide a valuable foundation in examining our text and when we approach Matthew 24:31:

It is sometimes asserted that the resurrection of the body was the characteristic Jewish belief. This is not borne out by the data. A variety of beliefs seem to be attested about the same time in Israelite history. One of these was the resurrection of the body, but there is little reason to think that it was earlier or more characteristic of Jewish thinking than the immortality of the soul or resurrection of the spirit. And it is clear that some Jews still maintained the older belief in no afterlife. The Sadducees (see section 2.7) are one group who thought so; so did Ben Sira. Writing about 190 bce Ben Sira does not seem to think of any life beyond death, as interpreted by the vast majority of scholars. Therefore, it would be quite wrong to refer to any of these beliefs as ‘characteristically’ Jewish or the Jewish belief on the subject.[1]

The exact form of the resurrection is not always specified, but we should not expect it always to entail resurrection of the body. Sometimes only the resurrection of the spirit is in mind, as in Jubilees 23:20–22:

And at that time the Lord will heal his servants, and they shall be exalted and prosper greatly; and they shall drive out their adversaries. And the righteous shall see it and be thankful, and rejoice with joy for ever and ever; and they shall see all the punishments and curses that had been their lot falling on their enemies. And their bones shall rest in the earth, and their spirits shall have much joy; and they shall know that the Lord is one who executes judgement, and shows mercy to hundreds, and to tens of thousands, and to all that love him.

Belief in the immortality of the soul is known at least as early as the Book of Watchers (1 Enoch 1–36). The souls of the various sorts of people are preserved in hollow places after death (1 Enoch 22):

And from there I went to another place, and he showed me in the west a large and high mountain, and a hard rock and four beautiful places, and inside it was deep and wide and very smooth . . . Then Raphael, one of the holy angels who was with me, answered me and said to me, These beautiful places are intended for this, that the spirits, the souls of the dead, might be gathered into them; for them they were created, that here they might gather all the souls of the sons of men. And these places they made where they will keep them until the day of their judgement and until their appointed time – and that appointed time will be long – until the great judgement comes upon them.

As the rest of the passage indicates, the souls of the dead are already experiencing reward and punishment in their intermediate state. In this case, the existence of the soul after death seems to be combined with the idea of a final judgement. This may imply a general resurrection, though this is not stated explicitly. In other sections of 1 Enoch, a resurrection is mentioned (46:6; 51:1; 90:33; 91:10; 92:3–4).

Other sources give no indication of a resurrection at all, only the immortal soul. A good example is Wisdom of Solomon which discusses the soul (e.g., 3:1–9) without mentioning the resurrection. Scholars debate whether the text asserts that all souls are immortal or only those of the righteous. Many contend that immortality is not inherent in the soul itself but is a gift bestowed exclusively upon the righteous.

The Testament of Abraham one of the clearest descriptions of postmortem judgment (Version A 11–14; Version B 9–11). The souls are brought before a throne on which Abel sits as judge. In Version B, Enoch, the scribe of righteousness, presents the souls for judgement. Following this process, the judged souls go either through the strait gate which leads to life (for the righteous) or the broad gate to destruction (for the sinners). Although Version B (7:16) briefly hints at a general resurrection, the text primarily emphasizes that individual judgment occurs immediately after death, with the soul being judged while the body remains in the grave.

On the other hand, the immortal souls and the resurrection may be combined, as in 2 Baruch 29–30:

[30:2] And it shall come to pass at that time that the treasuries will be opened in which is preserved the number of the souls of the righteous, and they will come out, and the multitude of souls will appear together in one single assembly; and those who are first will rejoice, and those who are last will not be cast down. For each one of them will know that the predetermined end of the times has come. But the souls of the wicked, when they see all this, will be the more discomforted. For they will know that their torment is upon them and that their perdition has arrived.”[2]

Murray J. Harris, after examining the intertestamental period of Judaism, agrees:

“And there is the concept of the immortality of the soul or spirit that is gained at death or at the End [of the Mosaic age], with or without a resurrection of the [physical] body.”[3]

In Jewish tradition and exegesis there is also the view that the resurrection takes place forty years after Messiah is revealed to Israel and then would be cut off,

“Jewish writings stipulate that forty years after the coming of the Messiah there will be a resurrection of the dead, and all who are lying in dust will rise to new life.” (The 13 Principles and the Resurrection of the Dead).

The Rebbe often quotes the Zohar to the effect that the Resurrection will take place 40 years after the advent of Mashiach. (See Igros Kodesh, Vol. II, p. 75; Sefer HaSichos 5752, Vol. I, p. 274. However, there are also other references in the sichos (e.g., Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XXVII, p. 206; Sefer HaSichos 5733, Shabbos Parshas Balak, footnote 3).[4]

These Jewish interpretations and traditions that the resurrection could involve spirits rising from Hades at a coming judgment—fulfilled forty years after the Messiah’s death or during His transitional reign between the old covenant “this age” and the new covenant “age about to come”—aligns seamlessly with the teachings of Jesus and the New Testament authors.

This is also backed by Reformed Partial Preterist scholarship coming from men like James B. Jordan which sees souls being raised out of Hades into God’s presence in AD 70 according to Daniel 12:2, 13; Matthew 24:31; and Revelation 20:

“What Daniel is promised is that after his rest in Abraham’s bosom, he will stand up with all God’s saints and join Michael on a throne in heaven, as described in Revelation 20, an event that came after the Great Tribulation and in the year AD 70.”[5]

b) Levirate Marriage and Torah Laws Do Not Continue

Jesus makes it clear that Torah-based marriage laws do not apply in the resurrection. Once Jesus fulfilled all that was written in the Law and the Prophets concerning Israel—within His generation (Luke 21:22–32)—the old covenant “heaven and earth” passed away (Matt. 5:18), and temple-centered law, including levirate marriage, became obsolete (John 4:21–24; Heb. 8:13).

c) The Patriarchs Are Already Alive with God 

By citing Exodus 3:6, Jesus affirms that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are already alive. This proves the existence of a conscious afterlife before any physical resurrection. The patriarchs are living souls—awaiting spiritual resurrection at the end of the old covenant age, not physical reanimation.

This harmonizes with Luke 16:19–31, where Jesus presents Lazarus and the rich man as conscious in Hades. This teaching closely parallels 1 Enoch, which also depicts conscious souls awaiting resurrection and judgment—not physical resurrection:

Theme / Concept Jesus – Luke 16:19–31 1 Enoch (esp. chs. 22, 51, 103) Preterist Fulfillment
Location of the Dead Hades (ᾅδης): compartmentalized realm of the dead Sheol: divided into regions for the righteous and wicked Hades/Sheol = intermediate realm prior to resurrection in AD 70
Consciousness After Death Rich man and Lazarus are both conscious and responsive Souls can speak, rejoice, or lament while awaiting judgment (22:5–7; 103:3–4) Refutes soul-sleep and annihilationism; affirms intermediate consciousness
Division Within Hades “Great chasm” separates righteous and wicked (v. 26) Distinct holding places for righteous vs. wicked souls (22:9–13) Moral separation maintained in the afterlife
Awaiting Future Resurrection The rich man knows judgment is coming (vv. 27–31) Resurrection occurs at an appointed time (22:4; 51:1–2) Fulfilled at end of the old covenant age (Matt. 13:39–43; 24:3, 30–34)
No Physical Resurrection Described Resurrection assumed spiritual—no reference to bodily return Souls are raised or reassigned without biological imagery (51:1–3) Transition from Hades to God’s presence, not to fleshly existence (cf. Rev. 20:12-13)
Abraham’s Role Abraham comforts Lazarus, intercedes for the rich man Patriarchs honored and active in the intermediate state (90:33–38) Confirms “God of the living” (Matt. 22:32)
Message to the Living “They have Moses and the prophets…”—heed the warnings (v. 29) Wicked warned by righteous in Sheol (103:7–8) Message of repentance urgent before AD 70 judgment
Timing of Fulfillment Anticipated judgment within that generation Day of judgment expected soon (91:10) Fulfilled in AD 70; Hades emptied (Rev. 20:13–14), kingdom consummated

6) Conclusion

The Sadducees’ challenge in Matthew 22:23–33 was a calculated trap—previously effective against the Pharisees—but it failed against Jesus. Their assumptions collapsed: Jesus did not affirm the continued jurisdiction of Torah in the age to come, nor did he teach a physical resurrection.

Instead, he taught a spiritual resurrection—a rising out of Hades into God’s eternal presence, free from Mosaic institutions like levirate marriage laws. This resurrection event was fulfilled at the end of the old covenant age in AD 70, when the kingdom was fully established and Hades was emptied at the “soon” second coming of Christ (Rev. 20:13–14; 21—22:6-12, 20; Matt. 13:39-43; 24:3, 30-34).

In that moment, both the living and the dead entered a new age of eternal life—not through a transformation of the physical body or a return to it, but by entering into the fullness of resurrected life in God’s presence. Jesus silenced both Pharisaic literalism and Sadducean skepticism, unveiling a kingdom that is “not of this world,” but already “within” those who believe, who would inherit “eternal life” and thus “never die” spiritually (Luke 17:20–21; John 11:25–27). Jesus taught that at His coming—within the first-century generation—He would be revealed from heaven “as the light of day shining from east to west” (Matt. 24:27 Aramaic English New Testament), yet the kingdom would not be something that could be observed with physical eyes. This rules out a global, physical resurrection from the graveyards (Luke 17:20–37 A Faithful Version; Matt. 24:27–34 Aramaic English New Testament).

As we have been developing the eschatology of Matthew 21–22 leading into Matthew 24–25, it is clear that AD 70 remains the consistent focus. However, Partial Preterists such as Ken Gentry disrupt this contextual flow by removing Matthew 22:23–33 from its narrative trajectory, inserting a future, end-of-world event that is foreign to the surrounding context. In contrast, I have offered an exegesis of Jesus’ teaching that presents a spiritual resurrection occurring at the end of the old covenant age—one that aligns with the immediate literary context, with certain strands of Jewish resurrection belief, and even with the teachings of Reformed Partial Preterist scholarship that locates a resurrection of souls out of Hades into God’s presence in AD 70.

Study Questions: Matthew 22:23–33 – Resurrection, Torah, and the End of the Age

  1. What was the purpose of the Sadducees’ hypothetical scenario about levirate marriage in Matthew 22:23–28, and how does it function as a theological trap?

  2. How does Jesus’ response in Matthew 22:29–30 correct both the Sadducees’ and Pharisees’ assumptions about the resurrection and the Torah’s role in the age to come?

  3. According to Jesus in Matthew 22:30 and Luke 20:34–36, what are the defining characteristics of the resurrection life compared to “this age”?

  4. What does Jesus mean by saying, “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living,” and how does this affirm a conscious afterlife before AD 70?

  5. How does the Preterist interpretation of Matthew 22:23–33 differ from Futurist or Reformed Partial Preterist readings of this passage?

  6. What is the significance of Jesus placing the resurrection at the end of “this age” (the old covenant age) rather than at the end of world history?

  7. In what way did the Sadducees incorrectly assume Jesus was either a Pharisee or shared their own view of Torah continuity?

  8. Explain how the Sadducees’ argument may have originally been used against the Pharisees. What theological contradiction were they attempting to expose?

  9. What historical and textual evidence suggests that some Jewish groups in the Second Temple period expected a spiritual resurrection rather than a physical one?

  10. How does the teaching of 1 Enoch, Jubilees, or the Wisdom of Solomon align with Jesus’ view of resurrection in Matthew 22? Give examples.

  11. According to even a Partial Preterist interpretation, what happened to Hades at the second coming of Christ in AD 70, and how is this supported by Revelation 20:13–14?

  12. Compare and contrast Jesus’ parable of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16) with 1 Enoch’s vision of the afterlife. How do both support a conscious intermediate state?

  13. Why is the doctrine of Torah continuity into the resurrection age (as held by the Pharisees) incompatible with Jesus’ teaching on the new covenant and levirate marriage?

  14. How do Partial Preterists like Joel McDurmon and James B. Jordan agree with elements of this article, and where do they stop short? What inconsistency does this reveal?

  15. Reflecting on this passage, how does Jesus’ teaching reshape our understanding of the resurrection—not as a future physical event, but as a spiritual transformation realized in the AD 70 judgment and new covenant kingdom?

[1] Lester L. Grabbe, An Introduction to Second Temple Judaism: History and Religion of the Jews in the Time of Nehemiah, the Maccabees, Hillel, and Jesus, (London: T&T Clark Publishing, 2010),  93–96. Emphasis added.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Murray J. Harris, From Grave to Glory: Resurrection in the New Testament, Including a Response to Norman L. Geisler (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990), 70.

[4] Historical Jewish Sources, Preterist Archives, accessed March 23, 2025. https://preteristarchives.org/historical-jewish-sources/.

[5]  James B. Jordan, THE HANDWRITING ON THE WALL A COMMENTARY ON THE BOOK OF DANIEL, (Powder Springs, GA: 2007), 628

Matthew 21-23 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 6: (Matthew 22:1-14) – The Parable of the Wedding Feast & The Resurrection of Isa. 25 & 1 Cor. 15

This parable aligns with the ministry of John the Baptist (the greatest and last of the OT prophets) and Jesus’ apostles, who called Israel to the kingdom during a pivotal period leading to AD 70. The kingdom of heaven is depicted as a wedding feast for the King’s Son, with two groups of servants issuing invitations. First, the King (God the Father) sends servants—John (the friend of the Groom) and the apostles—to invite Israel’s leaders, but “they would not come” (vv. 1–3). A second wave of servants is sent, yet Israel’s response is mixed: some ignore the call, while others seize, shame, and kill the messengers (vv. 4–6). Enraged, the King sends his armies—widely recognized as the Romans—to destroy the murderers and burn their city, a clear reference to Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70 (v. 7).

Verse 8’s “then” or “at that time” does not shift to a post-AD 70 era. Instead, it recapitulates the same pre-AD 70 period, focusing on a broader invitation. The servants, still the apostles, now call the—lowly Jews (sinners, tax collectors, prostitutes) and Gentiles—resulting in a filled wedding hall (vv. 8–10). This is not a new mission but an expansion of the gospel call before the feast’s consummation in AD 70. The man without a wedding garment, cast into “outer darkness” with “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (v. 13), mirrors and parallels the judgment and timing of verse 7, reinforcing that this is the same AD 70 event described differently.

Matthew 8:10–12 – Gentiles at the Feast

Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 8:10–12 clarifies the parable’s dynamics. After marveling at a Gentile centurion’s faith—greater than any in Israel—Jesus declares:

“Many will come from east and west [Gentiles] and recline at [the wedding feast] table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven [fulfilled in AD 70], while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness [fulfilled in AD 70]. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (vv. 11–12).

Here, the wedding feast invitation meets resistance from faithless Jews, corresponding to the unresponsive leaders in Matthew 22:3–6. Meanwhile, believing Gentiles, like the centurion, and lowly and remnant Jews and Gentiles, as seen in Acts, embrace the gospel, filling the feast.

The parallel language of judgment in Matthew 8:12 and Matthew 22:13 underscores AD 70’s significance:

Matthew 8:12

Matthew 22:13

“The sons of the kingdom [old covenant Jews] will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” “…he saw there a man who had no wedding garment [a Jew trusting in his own works]. …Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot and cast him into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’”

Partial Preterists, like Kenneth Gentry, acknowledge that this “casting out” into outer darkness refers to AD 70,[1] when the kingdom was stripped from Israel and given to the Gentile church. The burning of the city (Matt. 22:7) and the casting out of the unworthy (Matt. 22:13) both point to this judgment, proving that Matthew 22:1–14 does not contrast pre- and post-AD 70 evangelism but recapitulates the gospel’s reach to Gentiles in Acts.

Isaiah 25, the Wedding Feast, and the Defeat of “The Death” in AD 70

Framing the Discussion

Isaiah 25:2, 6–9 offers one of the most remarkable prophetic portraits in Scripture — a city reduced to rubble, a lavish banquet prepared for all peoples, “the death” swallowed up forever, and God’s people rejoicing in His salvation. Jesus drew directly on this imagery in His parables of the wedding feast (Matt. 8:10–12; 22:1–14) and in His Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25), where He tied the destruction of Jerusalem, the wedding feast, the trumpet gathering of the elect, and His parousia all to fulfillment within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34).

The apostle Paul, likewise, connects Isaiah’s prophecy to the resurrection victory of 1 Corinthians 15:54–56, identifying “the death” to be destroyed as the sin-death empowered by the Law — and placing that victory at Christ’s parousia in the lifetime of his contemporaries.

Major Premise:  If the “death” and “disgrace” of Isaiah 25:7–8 refer not to physical death but to spiritual sin-death and shame introduced in Adam (Gen. 2:17; Rom. 5:12–14) and perpetuated and magnified under the Mosaic Law (1 Cor. 15:56), then the resurrection Isaiah envisions occurs when that death is swallowed up through the fulfillment and then the passing away of that Law’s “heaven and earth” world (Matt. 5:17-18; 24:35; Heb. 8:13; 12:26-28).

Minor Premise:  Paul, in 1 Corinthians 15:23–24, 26, 51, 55–56, teaches that the defeat of “the death” would take place at Christ’s parousia within the lifetime of some first-century believers, when “the law” would be overcome [and fulfilled Isa. 25 & Hos. 13]—an event coinciding with the end of the old covenant age in AD 70 (Matt. 24:3–34).

Conclusion:  Therefore, the “death” swallowed up in Isaiah 25:7–8 is covenantal/spiritual death that was magnified under the Law, and its defeat occurred at Christ’s parousia in AD 70, fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy in conjunction with the wedding feast and judgment scenes of Matthew 8:10–12, 22:1–14, and 24–25.

Watt’s Identification of “The Death”

John Watt clarifies:

“The death is the most substantive of them all (the shroud, the shadow, the death and the disgrace – all have the definite article) while the disgrace of the people is the most relevant in the context. The thought is that this refers to ‘death’ per se ignores the definite article. A specific ‘death’ is to be swallowed up. A specific ‘disgrace’ is to be removed. This death and this disgrace comprise the shroud and the shadow over all the peoples, the very ones that had been invited to the feast. They are the peoples whose disgrace he will remove from the land.”[2]

Watt’s observation dismantles the assumption that Isaiah 25 refers to the end or defeat of physical death. Covenantally and spiritually dead people are invited to the wedding feast.  The definite article points to “the death” unique to Israel’s covenantal condition — a death that began in Adam the day he sinned (Gen. 2:17) and was magnified by the Mosaic Law’s condemnation (Rom. 5:12–21; 1 Cor. 15:56).

The WuestNT on “The Death” Being Destroyed

Kenneth Wuest translates 1 Corinthians 15:26 as:

“As a last enemy, death is being reduced to inactivity.”[3]

This translation highlights an important point often overlooked: Paul uses the present tense — death is being reduced to inactivity — not “will someday be destroyed.” The verb here points to an ongoing process, not a single, far-off event.

If Paul were speaking of biological death, then Christ has been “failing” to abolish it for nearly two thousand years. Instead, the “death” in view is covenantal or sin-death — the very death Adam incurred “in the day” he sinned (Gen. 2:17) and which was magnified under “the administration of death” (2 Cor. 3:7) in the Mosaic Law. From the cross (AD 30) onward, this death was already in the process of being dismantled, and that process would culminate in the destruction of the old covenant order at Christ’s parousia in AD 70 — the very end of the “age” in Matthew 24:3, 13–14, 34; the “then comes the end” of 1 Corinthians 15:23–24, 51–56.

This covenantal death existed within the framework of the old covenant “heavens and earth” — the world order governed by Torah — which was itself “being dissolved” (2 Pet. 3:11 LEB) and “passing away” (1 Cor. 7:29–31; 1 John 2:17–18) during the transitional forty years between the cross and the parousia. As that old order was progressively dismantled, so too was the reign of sin-death.

At the same time, the new creation — the New Jerusalem — was “coming down” (Rev. 3:11–12 NIV), bringing the reality of Revelation 21:4, where “the death will be no more.” This descent of the New Jerusalem was not postponed to some distant millennium but was bound up with the “soon” (Rev. 22:6–7, 12) second coming of Christ in AD 70, when the curse of sin-death was fully removed and the new covenant kingdom stood unveiled in its fullness.

Parallel Processes Between AD 30–70

The Old Creation (OC) – Passing Away The New Creation (NC) – Arriving
“The death” (spiritual sin-death) reigns in Adam and under Moses (Gen. 2:17; 2 Cor. 3:7) The life of Christ revealed (John 11:25–26; 2 Tim. 1:10) — those believing would “never die” (John 11:26), referring not to biological death but deliverance from spiritual sin-death
“Heavens and earth” of the old covenant in process of “being dissolved” (2 Pet. 3:11) New Jerusalem “coming down” from heaven (Rev. 3:11–12 NIV)
OC world “passing away” (1 Cor. 7:29–31; 1 John 2:17–18) Kingdom being received (Heb. 12:28) and saints being transformed into Christ’s image and righteousness (2 Cor. 3:18)
The Law’s condemnation still active until its removal (Matt. 5:18; Heb. 8:13) Full forgiveness and eternal life manifest at parousia (Heb. 9:28; Rev. 21:4; Rom. 11:25-27)
Sin-death “being reduced to inactivity” (1 Cor. 15:26) “The death” is no more; curse removed (Rev. 21:4)
Ends at AD 70 with Temple destruction being the OC age “heaven and earth passing away”(Matt. 24:2-3, 35) Fully revealed at AD 70 in the NC order (Rev. 21:1–6)

Summary Points:

  1. The death in 1 Corinthians 15 is spiritual sin-death, not biological death.

  2. Its destruction was a process beginning at the cross and completed at the parousia in AD 70.

  3. The dissolution of the old covenant order and that was passing away and the arrival of the new creation that was increasing and being received happened concurrently over the AD 30–70 transition period.

  4. The “never die” promise of Christ refers to freedom from spiritual death, not the postponement of biological death.

  5. Revelation 21:4’s “no more death” was realized when the curse of Adam spiritual death was removed and the New Jerusalem was fully revealed.

A crucial thread running through each of these passages is the wedding motif — and more specifically, the ancient Jewish betrothal process. The “feast” of Isaiah 25 is developed by Jesus in Matthew 22 and 25 into parables about a wedding banquet and wise virgins. Paul’s description of the trumpet, the gathering, and meeting the Lord in 1 Thessalonians 4 echoes the very stages of this betrothal period, from the Father’s timing to the trumpet announcement, the coming of the groom, and the consummation feast.

In the first-century Jewish context, betrothal was a binding covenant — the groom would go to prepare a place for his bride (John 14:2–3), while only his father could decide the exact day and hour of the wedding. At the appointed time, the father would send the groom’s procession to gather the bride with a trumpet blast, leading her to the prepared home for the feast. This covenantal sequence saturates the prophetic imagery of Isaiah, Jesus, and Paul.

The next chart shows how Isaiah 25, Matthew 8 & 22, Matthew 24–25, 1 Corinthians 15, and 1 Thessalonians 4–5 all converge to depict this covenant-closing wedding celebration in AD 70.

Master Chart: Isaiah 25, Matthew 8 & 22, Matthew 24–25, 1 Corinthians 15, and 1 Thessalonians 4–5

Isa. 25 Matt. 8 & 22 Matt. 24–25 1 Cor. 15

1 Thess. 4–5

25:2 – Jerusalem made a “heap” of rubble. 22:7 – City burned by the King’s armies. 24:2 – Temple destroyed; city left desolate.
25:6 – Wedding feast on God’s mountain. 8:11; 22:2–4 – Gentiles & lowly Jews recline at the table. 25:10 – Wise virgins enter the wedding feast.
25:7–8 – “The death” and “the disgrace” removed. 22:11–13 – Unworthy cast into outer darkness. 24:30–31 – Elect gathered at the trumpet. 15:26, 54–56 – Death destroyed; the Law overcome. 4:16 – Trumpet; dead in Christ rise; “meet” the Lord (wedding greeting).
24:27 – Parousia like the light of day; 24:36 – Only the Father knows the “day and hour” (wedding motif). 15:23–24 – Parousia; at end of the old covenant age when victory over “the law” of Moses is given. 5:10 – Living & dead “dwell together” with the Lord (Rev. 21:3; “God all in all”).

 The master chart above shows how Isaiah 25, the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 8, 22, and 24–25, and Paul’s eschatology in 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4–5 all converge on a unified theme — the destruction of “the death,” the great gathering, and the wedding feast of the Lamb.

Yet to truly see the richness of this harmony, we must look more closely at the specific wedding customs that Jesus and Paul draw upon. Their audience would have instantly recognized these images as betrothal-to-wedding language. The following chart lists the key stages of a Jewish wedding and shows how each is directly paralleled in Matthew 24–25.

Jewish Wedding Customs and Matthew 24–25

Jewish Custom

Matthew 24–25 Fulfillment

Only the Father of the groom knew the day and hour of the wedding. Matt. 24:36 – “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels… but the Father only.”
When the Father decided, he would send the groom’s party with a trumpet to gather the bride. Matt. 24:31 – “He will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect.”
The groom would come like the morning light, often suddenly. Matt. 24:27 – “For as the light of day comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the parousia of the Son of Man.”
The bride had to remain ready with her lamp trimmed. Matt. 25:1–13 – Parable of the ten virgins.
The feast would follow immediately after the arrival. Matt. 25:10 – “…those who were ready went in with him to the marriage feast, and the door was shut.”

By linking these wedding customs to the timing indicators in Matthew 24–25, the entire prophetic drama comes into focus. What Isaiah foretold, Jesus promised, and Paul proclaimed was not a scattered collection of unrelated events but a single, covenant-closing wedding celebration between Christ and His bride. This connection naturally leads into the broader theological synthesis that Full Preterism offers — bringing together Partial Preterist and Amillennial strengths into one coherent fulfillment framework.

Conclusion – Full Preterism’s Harmonization

Partial Preterists rightly recognize that the wedding feast and judgment of Matthew 8, Matthew 22, and Matthew 24-25 were fulfilled in AD 70. Classic Amillennialists rightly connect Isaiah 25’s banquet and resurrection victory with those passage along with 1 Corinthians 15. Yet both camps separate what Scripture unites: the resurrection with the wedding and feast take place together when Jerusalem was desolated and judged in AD 70.

Full Preterism alone preserves the integrity of the prophetic tapestry:

  • Isaiah 25 foretold Jerusalem’s destruction (v. 2), a lavish feast for all peoples (v. 6), and the removal of “the death” for those coming in Zion through faith (vv. 7–8).
  • Jesus wove this imagery into Matthew 8, 22, and 24–25, anchoring it in His generation (Matt. 24:34).
  • Paul applied it to the parousia and resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15, fulfilled when the Law — “the sting of sin” “and the power of sin is The Law” — was overcome in AD 70 (vv. 54–56).
  • 1 Thessalonians 4–5 adds the relational goal: that the living and the dead “dwell together” with the Lord forever (5:10), a reality paralleled in 1 Corinthians 15:28 (“God all in all”) and consummated in the New Jerusalem where we dwell with God and the curse of Adamic “death is no more” (Rev. 21:3-4).

Christ’s parousia in AD 70 was not a failed or partial victory — it was the full removal of the Adamic sin-death, the end of the Mosaic covenant and her age, and the inauguration of our eternal dwelling with God. The home He prepared (John 14:2–3) is the matured new covenant New Jerusalem (or Paul’s “Jerusalem above” Gals. 4) we now inhabit with the Father, Son, and Spirit, and where “the curse” of “the death is no more” (Rev. 21:3-4).  The curse of spiritual death and shame per Isaiah 25 and Revelation 21-22 is removed only for those dwelling in the Kingdom pictured as being on Mount Zion or in the New Jerusalem.  We invite the nations out of their darkness and death to be healed and drink of the living waters of eternal life and partake in God’s perpetual glory, light and eternal day (Rev. 22:2, 17).

Study Questions

  1. How do Matthew 8:10–12 and Matthew 22:1–14 echo the imagery of Isaiah 25:6–9?
  2. In what way does John Watt’s observation about “the death” and “the disgrace” challenge a physical death interpretation of Isaiah 25 which Paul quotes in 1 Corinthians 15?
  3. How does WuestNT’s translation of 1 Cor. 15:26 support a spiritual view of death?
  4. Explain the role of the Mosaic Law as being overcome in 1 Cor. 15:55-56 and does this fit a pre-AD 70 context or an alleged “end of world history” context?
  5. How do Matthew 24:27-31, 36, 25:1-13 reflect first-century Jewish wedding customs?
  6. Compare the eschatological “trumpet” in Matthew 24:31, 1 Cor. 15:52, and 1 Thess. 4:16.
  7. How does 1 Thess. 5:10’s “dwell together” parallel 1 Cor. 15:28’s “God all in all” and the eschatological gathering in Matt. 24:31?
  8. Why does Full Preterism claim to harmonize Partial Preterist and Amillennialist strengths when it comes to harmonizing the time of the wedding and feast as the time of the resurrection?
  9. What is the significance of tying the wedding feast and resurrection to AD 70 for a Christian realized hope (Prov. 13:12) today?
  10. How does Revelation 21–22 depict our present positional reality in Christ after AD 70?

[1] Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology (Draper, VA: Apologetics Group Media, 2009), 175, 342.

[2] John D. W. Watts, Isaiah 1-33, vol. 24, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1985), 331.  Special thanks to my good friend Don K. Preston for sharing this quote with me!

[3] Kenneth S. Wuest, The New Testament: An Expanded Translation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961), 431.

Matthew 21-23 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 5: (Matthew 21:33-45) – The Parable of the Tenants

The Parable of the Tenants: Jesus’ Indictment of Israel’s Leadership and the Coming Judgment Matthew 21:33–46 / Mark 12:1–12 / Luke 20:9–19

The Parable of the Tenants, recorded in Matthew 21:33–46, Mark 12:1–12, and Luke 20:9–19, stands as one of Jesus’ most pointed critiques of Israel’s religious leadership. Delivered during His final week in Jerusalem, this parable unveils God’s patience, Israel’s rebellion, and the inevitable judgment that would culminate in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. As a parallel account across the Synoptic Gospels, the parable shares a consistent core: a landowner entrusts his vineyard to tenants, sends servants to collect the harvest, and faces violent rejection. When he sends his son, the tenants kill him, triggering divine judgment. Jesus concludes by quoting Psalm 118:22–23, identifying Himself as the “stone the builders rejected” and foreshadowing the transfer of the kingdom to a new covenant people. This article explores the parable’s meaning, its historical and theological context, and its fulfillment in the first century, drawing on Scripture and scholarly insights to illuminate its enduring significance.

Variations Across the Synoptic Gospels

Though the parable’s essence remains consistent, each Gospel writer tailors the account to their audience, emphasizing distinct details:

Matthew (21:33–46) underscores the Pharisees’ realization that the parable targets them (v. 45). It mentions multiple servants, symbolizing the prophets sent to Israel, and explicitly ties the judgment to the kingdom being given to others (v. 43).

Mark (12:1–12) offers the most concise version, vividly describing the vineyard’s features—a wall, tower, and winepress—evoking Isaiah 5:1–7, where Israel is God’s vineyard.

Luke (20:9–19) highlights the crowd’s horror at the judgment (“God forbid!” v. 16) and emphasizes the tenants’ rejection of the son. Luke uniquely notes the landowner’s absence for “a long time” (v. 9), a detail central to the parable’s timeline.

These variations reflect the authors’ theological priorities but do not alter the parable’s core message. Scholars argue that the accounts likely stem from a single teaching event, with differences arising from the evangelists’ editorial choices to address their communities. The parable’s context—Jesus’ confrontations with the religious leaders following John the Baptist’s ministry—frames it as a continuation of His indictment against their failure to bear fruit (Matt. 21:12–32; Luke 20:1–8).

The Parable’s Symbolism and Historical Context

The parable’s imagery is rich with Old Testament echoes, particularly Isaiah 5:1–7, where Israel is depicted as God’s vineyard, expected to yield righteousness but producing injustice. The landowner represents God, the tenants symbolize Israel’s leaders, and the vineyard is the covenant nation. The servants sent to collect the harvest signify the prophets, repeatedly mistreated or killed (cf. Matt. 23:34–37). The son, the landowner’s heir, is unmistakably Jesus, whose death outside Jerusalem’s gates fulfills the parable’s climax.

The “long time” of the landowner’s absence (Luke 20:9) is pivotal. It reflects God’s longsuffering during the period from John the Baptist’s ministry (circa AD 27) to the destruction of Jerusalem (AD 70). This roughly 40-year span, often termed “Israel’s last days,” aligns with Jesus’ warnings about that generation (Matt. 24:34). Gary DeMar, in his analysis of Matthew 24–25, provides clarity on this phrase:

“Notice that the evil slave says, ‘My master is not coming for a long time’ (Matt. 24:48). The evil slave then proceeds to ‘beat his fellow-slaves and eat and drink with drunkards’ (24:49). But to the surprise of the ‘evil slave,’ the master returned when he least expected him (24:50). The master did not return to cut the evil slave’s distant relatives in pieces (24:51); he cut him in pieces. The evil slave was alive when the master left, and he was alive when the master returned. In this context, a ‘long time’ must be measured against a person’s lifetime.”[1] 

DeMar’s insight underscores that the “long time” in the Parable of the Tenants, like in the Parables of the Talents (Matt. 25:19) and the Ten Virgins (Matt. 25:1–13), refers to a period within the lifetime of Jesus’ audience—approximately AD 27 to AD 70. This harmonizes with New Testament usage of “a long time” as an extended but not indefinite period (e.g., Luke 8:27; Acts 14:3). During this window, God sent John the Baptist and his disciples, followed by Jesus and His apostles, calling Israel to repentance. Yet, the leaders’ rejection of John (Matt. 21:25–32) and their role in Jesus’ crucifixion fulfilled the tenants’ rebellion.

Psalm 118: The Rejected Cornerstone and AD 70

The parable’s conclusion cites Psalm 118:22–23, where Jesus identifies Himself as the “stone the builders rejected” that becomes the cornerstone. This is the second reference to Psalm 118 in Matthew 21 (cf. v. 9, during the Triumphal Entry). Sung during Passover, Psalm 118 celebrated God’s deliverance, proclaiming that the rejected stone would triumph (Ps. 118:6–7, 22).

Ironically, as Josephus records, it was during Passover in AD 70, while Jerusalem’s inhabitants sang this psalm to welcome pilgrims, that Roman armies began encircling the city. The song of joy became an unwitting herald of judgment, fulfilling Jesus’ prophecy that they would “see” Him coming in judgment (Matt. 23:39; Ps. 118:26).

Paul and Peter further develop this imagery. In Ephesians 2:14–22, Paul cites Psalm 118:22 to depict the Church as a new temple, built on Christ the cornerstone, uniting Jews and Gentiles. Similarly, Peter in 1 Peter 2:4–8 describes believers as “living stones” forming a “spiritual house,” with Christ as the cornerstone, while those who reject Him are “destined” to stumble. These apostolic interpretations confirm that the parable’s judgment—the transfer of the kingdom to a new people—found fulfillment in the establishment of the Church as God’s covenant community post-AD 70.

Deuteronomy 32: God Rejected as Rock, Israel’s End, and the New Nation

Jesus also draws on Deuteronomy 32, the Song of Moses, to frame the parable’s judgment. In Matthew 21:41, the tenants’ fate is sealed: God will “put those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons.” This echoes Jesus’ declaration in verse 43: “The kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits.” The Pharisees rightly discerned that the parable targeted them (v. 45).

Deuteronomy 32:20–43 prophesies a “perverse generation” that would reject God as their “Rock,” leading to their “end” through fire and the rise of “another Nation” (Deut. 32:4–5, 15–22, 29–43). Peter applied this to his generation, urging them to be saved from it (Acts 2:40; cf. Deut. 32:5) and identifying the Church as the new “nation” built on Christ (1 Pet. 2:4–9; cf. Deut. 32:20-22). The judgment of AD 70, when Roman armies burned Jerusalem (cf. Matt. 22:7), marked the culmination of this prophecy.

The parable not only indicts the religious leaders but also redefines the kingdom as open to all who bear fruit, regardless of ethnicity. Similarly, the parable’s subversive edge: by portraying the tenants’ audacity in killing the son, Jesus exposes the absurdity of rejecting God’s ultimate messenger. There is economic and power hungry imagery—tenants seizing the vineyard reflects the leaders’ desire to retain power over God’s covenant people, a theme already seen with Jesus’ temple cleansing (Matt. 21:12–17) and the leadership questioning Jesus’ authority due to the insecurity of theirs among the people (Matt. 21:23-27).

Implications for Today

The Parable of the Tenants transcends time; it challenges us to examine our response to the gospel. Jesus’ cursing of the fig tree (Matt. 21:18–19), symbolizing Israel’s fruitlessness, serves as a warning: God demands the fruit of faith when the gospel comes. If God would harden his covenant people and bring them to her final “end” like a corpse the vultures gorged upon for rejecting his Son, what will he do with those who reject the Spirit and the Bride who say “come” (Rev. 22:2, 17)?

The judgment of AD 70 decisively ended old covenant Israel’s role as the kingdom’s steward, a reality that undermines premillennialist claims, whether Historic Premillennialism or Dispensational Zionism. Assertions that modern Israel’s formation in 1948 fulfills prophecy distort Scripture’s clear teaching: post-AD 70, the kingdom belongs to the Church, the new covenant “nation” (Matt. 21:43; 1 Pet. 2:9).

As I’ve argued, Jesus is unequivocal: old covenant Israel would “never” bear fruit in its former form (Matt. 21:19). The myriad Old and New Testament texts misused to prop up Zionist eschatology blatantly distort this reality. The Parable of the Tenants calls us to embrace our role as faithful tenants in God’s vineyard, bearing fruit for His glory as we abide in Christ-the True Vine / Israel of God. We rest in the unshakable truth that Jesus, the rejected cornerstone, reigns as the foundation of His eternal kingdom which we have graciously been called to partake in.

Below is a chart that illustrates the parallels between Jesus’ teaching on His rejection as the Cornerstone and the coming judgment in AD 70 (as presented in the Parable of the Tenants, Matthew 21:33–46, Mark 12:1–12, Luke 20:9–19), Peter’s teachings in Acts 2:40 and 1 Peter 2:4–10, and Moses’ prophecy in Deuteronomy 32. The chart organizes key themes—rejection of the Messiah (as Cornerstone/Rock), judgment on Israel, and the establishment of a new covenant nation.

Chart: Parallels in the Rejection of the Messiah, Judgment in AD 70, and the New Covenant Nation

Theme

Jesus: Parable of the Tenants (Matt. 21:33–46, Mark 12:1–12, Luke 20:9–19) Peter: Acts 2:40, 1 Peter 2:4–10; 4:5-7, 17

Moses: Deuteronomy 32 (esp. vv. 4–5, 15–22, 20–43)

Rejection of the Messiah (Cornerstone/Rock) Jesus cites Psalm 118:22–23, identifying Himself as the “stone the builders rejected” (Matt. 21:42). The tenants (Israel’s leaders) kill the son (Jesus), symbolizing their rejection of Him as the Cornerstone (Matt. 21:39). Peter calls his generation “perverse” (Acts 2:40, echoing Deut. 32:5) for rejecting Christ. In 1 Pet. 2:4–8, he cites Psalm 118:22, portraying Christ as the “living stone” rejected by men but chosen by God, with unbelievers destined to stumble. Israel rejects God as their “Rock” (Deut. 32:4, 15–18), a title applied to the Messiah. This foreshadows the rejection of Christ by the “perverse generation” (v. 20), leading to their downfall.
Judgment on Israel (AD 70) The tenants face judgment: God will “put those wretches to a miserable death” (Matt. 21:41) and give the vineyard to others (v. 43). This points to Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70 by Roman armies (Matt. 22:7), fulfilling Jesus’ prophecy of seeing Him in judgment (Matt. 23:39; Ps. 118:26). Peter urges his audience to “be saved from this perverse generation” (Acts 2:40/Deut. 32:5), implying imminent judgment at Christ’s second coming in (Acts 2:20-21). In 1 Pet. 2:8, those who reject Christ are “destined” to stumble, aligning with the AD 70 judgment on Israel for rejecting the Cornerstone.  Peter follows this with God being “ready to judged” and the “end of all things” being “near” at the “appointed time”  (1 Pet. 4:5-7, 17). Deuteronomy 32:21–22, 29–43 predicts Israel’s “end” through fire and divine vengeance for rejecting the Rock. This is fulfilled in AD 70 when Jerusalem is burned, marking the culmination of the “perverse generation’s” judgment (v. 20).  Messiah / Jesus would come in “vengeance” and the “appointed time” would be “near” for God to “repay” and judge (Deut. 32:35-43 LXX).
New Covenant Nation Established The kingdom is taken from Israel’s leaders and given to a “people producing its fruits” (Matt. 21:43), referring to the Church as the new covenant nation, fulfilling the transfer of stewardship post-AD 70. Peter identifies believers as a “holy nation” and “royal priesthood” (1 Pet. 2:9), built on Christ the Cornerstone (1 Pet. 2:4–6). This new nation replaces old covenant Israel, fulfilling the promise of a fruit-bearing people (cf. Matt. 21:43). Deuteronomy 32:21, 43 foresees “another Nation” rising as God’s people, provoked by Israel’s rebellion. This is fulfilled in the Church, which emerges as the new covenant nation post-AD 70, bearing fruit for God (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9).
Key Imagery Vineyard (Israel), tenants (leaders), son (Christ), cornerstone (Ps. 118:22). Judgment is tied to rejecting the son, leading to the kingdom’s transfer. Cornerstone (Christ), living stones (Church), perverse generation (Israel’s leaders). The Church is built as a spiritual house on Christ (1 Pet. 2:5). Rock (God/Messiah), perverse generation, fire of judgment, new Nation. Israel’s rejection leads to a new people under God’s covenant.
Fulfillment Context AD 70: Jerusalem’s destruction ends old covenant Israel’s role. The Church becomes the new covenant people, bearing fruit (Matt. 21:19, 43). AD 70: Peter warns of Christ’s coming and judgment on his generation (Acts 2:20-40; 1 Pet. 4:5-7, 17) and establishes the Church as the new nation (1 Pet. 2:9), post-AD 70. AD 70: Deuteronomy 32’s prophecy of Israel’s “end” (v. 29) and the rise of a new Nation (v. 21) is fulfilled in Jerusalem’s fall and the Church’s establishment.

Study Questions for The Parable of the Tenants

  1. Understanding the Parable’s Core Message: What is the central message of the Parable of the Tenants as presented in Matthew 21:33–46, Mark 12:1–12, and Luke 20:9–19? How does Jesus use the parable to critique Israel’s religious leadership?
  2. Synoptic Variations: Compare the accounts of the parable in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. How do the unique details in each Gospel (e.g., Matthew’s focus on the Pharisees, Mark’s vineyard description, Luke’s “long time”) enhance our understanding of the parable’s purpose?
  3. Old Testament Echoes: The article highlights Isaiah 5:1–7 as a key background for the parable’s vineyard imagery. How does this Old Testament passage shape the parable’s portrayal of Israel as God’s vineyard, and what does it reveal about God’s expectations?
  4. Symbolism in the Parable: Identify the key symbols in the parable (e.g., landowner, tenants, servants, son, vineyard). How do these symbols reflect the relationship between God, Israel’s leaders, the prophets, and Jesus?
  5. The “Long Time” and Historical Context: The article interprets the “long time” (Luke 20:9) as the period from John the Baptist’s ministry (circa AD 27) to Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70. How does Gary DeMar’s analysis of Matthew 24–25 support this interpretation, and why is this timeline significant?
  6. Psalm 118 and the Cornerstone: Jesus quotes Psalm 118:22–23 to identify Himself as the “stone the builders rejected.” How does the article connect this to the events of AD 70, particularly the irony of Passover in Jerusalem as described by Josephus?
  7. Deuteronomy 32 and the Song of Moses: According to the article, how does Deuteronomy 32:20–43 parallel the parable’s themes of rejecting the Messiah as the “Rock” and the rise of a new covenant nation? How does Peter apply this prophecy in Acts 2:40 and 1 Peter 2:4–10?
  8. The New Covenant Nation: The parable concludes with the kingdom being given to a “people producing its fruits” (Matt. 21:43). How do the article and the chart demonstrate that this refers to the Church, and what role do Paul (Ephesians 2:14–22) and Peter (1 Peter 2:4–9) play in confirming this?
  9. Judgment in AD 70: The article argues that the parable foreshadows Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70. Using the chart, explain how Jesus, Peter, and Moses (in Deuteronomy 32) all point to this judgment, and what does this reveal about God’s justice?
  10. Theological Implications: The article notes the parable’s “subversive edge” in exposing the absurdity of rejecting God’s Son. How does the imagery of the tenants’ power-hungry actions (e.g., seizing the vineyard) relate to the leaders’ behavior in Matthew 21:12–17 and 21:23–27?
  11. Contemporary Application: The article warns that the Parable of the Tenants challenges us to bear fruit through faith in response to the claims of Christ and the Gospel. How does Jesus’ cursing of the fig tree (Matt. 21:18–19) and the judgment in AD 70 impact the call to the nations today to believe and come through the gates of the city in Revelation 22:2, 17?
  12. Challenging Premillennialism: The article strongly critiques premillennialist views, particularly the claim that modern Israel’s formation in 1948 fulfills prophecy. Using the parable and the chart, explain why the author argues that old covenant Israel “never” bears fruit post-AD 70, and how does this impact eschatological debates?

[1] Gary DeMar, Is the Rapture Found in Matthew 24? https://christianfamilystudycentre.home.blog/ 2020/12/07/is-the-rapture-found-in-matthew-24/

Matthew 21-23 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 4: (Matt. 21:23-27) – Comparing John and Jesus’ Doctrine & the Parable of the Two Sons

In Matthew 21:23-27, a tense confrontation unfolds in the temple courts of Jerusalem, where the chief priests and elders challenge Jesus’ authority to teach, perform miracles, and disrupt temple activities. This passage, set during Jesus’ final week before his crucifixion, follows his triumphal entry as the “Son of David” (Matt. 21:9) and his bold cleansing of the temple (21:12-17), actions that provoked the religious elite. By questioning, “By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?” (21:23, NIV), the leaders aim to undermine Jesus’ legitimacy, exposing their own hypocrisy and spiritual blindness. Jesus’ response—a counter-question about the origin of John the Baptist’s baptism—reveals the divine source of his authority and aligns his ministry with John’s prophetic mission. This article harmonizes the doctrinal continuity between John and Jesus, demonstrating how Jesus’ teachings fulfill and extend John’s message of repentance, judgment, and messianic hope.

Literarily, Matthew 21:23-27 is part of a series of conflict stories (Matt. 21–23) that contrast Jesus’ divine authority with the leaders’ human-derived power. Paralleled in Mark 11:27-33 and Luke 20:1-8, the passage employs a rabbinic debate style, with Jesus’ counter-question serving as both defense and indictment. R.T. France highlights Matthew’s emphasis on the Kingdom of God, noting that this confrontation sets the stage for Jesus’ parables (e.g., 21:28-46), which critique Israel’s unfaithfulness and anticipate the inclusion of Gentiles in God’s plan.

Exegesis and Doctrinal Continuity

The chief priests and elders’ question is not a genuine inquiry but an attempt to discredit Jesus, who lacked formal rabbinic credentials or Sanhedrin approval. Their hypocrisy is evident, as their own authority often stemmed from political alliances rather than divine appointment. Jesus responds strategically: “I will also ask you one question. If you answer me, I will tell you by what authority I am doing these things. John’s baptism—where did it come from? Was it from heaven, or of human origin?” (21:24-25). Far from evading the issue, Jesus’ question establishes his authority by linking his ministry to John the Baptist’s divinely ordained mission.

The doctrinal alignment between John and Jesus is central to understanding this passage. John’s ministry, as a forerunner to the Messiah, prepared the way through a message of repentance and eschatological urgency. Jesus’ teachings build upon and fulfill this foundation, as evidenced by the following parallels:

Repentance and the Kingdom: Both John and Jesus preached, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 3:2; 4:17), signaling the imminent arrival of God’s reign and calling for spiritual renewal.

Messianic Preparation and Fulfillment: John’s role as the voice “preparing the way” (Matt. 3:3; Isa. 40:3; Matt. 11:10; Mal. 3:1) pointed to Jesus as the Messiah who would bring salvation and judgment. Jesus fulfilled this by proclaiming himself as the one coming “on the clouds” to judge and redeem in the first-century generation (Matt. 16:27-28; 24:27-34; cf. Isa. 40:10; Mal. 4:1-2).

Imminent Judgment: John warned of a “wrath about to come” upon Israel’s leaders (Matt. 3:7, GNT), while Jesus prophesied a “wrath” against “this people” within his generation, culminating in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem (Luke 21:23-32).

Eschatological Harvest: John depicted judgment as an imminent harvest (Matt. 3:12), a metaphor Jesus extended to describe the end of the old covenant age (Matt. 13:39-43), realized in AD 70 when the temple system collapsed and He separated the righteous from the wicked.

Baptism with Spirit and Fire: John testified that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire (Matt. 3:11). Jesus fulfilled this by sending the Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 1:5; 2:1-4) and, in judgment, allowing Jerusalem’s destruction by Roman forces, symbolized as fire (Matt. 22:7).

Atonement and Sacrifice: John declared Jesus the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). Jesus presented himself as the Passover Lamb, laying down his life for his sheep (Matt. 26:26-28; John 10:11).

Divine Testimony and Authority: At Jesus’ baptism, the Father’s voice proclaimed, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Matt. 3:17), affirming Jesus’ divine authority. Jesus later claimed unity with the Father (John 8:18ff.), grounding his exousia in divine endorsement, which John’s ministry authenticated.

By invoking John’s baptism, Jesus forces the leaders into a dilemma. Admitting John’s divine authority would validate Jesus’ ministry, as John testified to him as the Messiah. Denying it would alienate the crowd, who revered John as a prophet (21:26). Their response, “We don’t know” (21:27), reveals their cowardice and refusal to engage with truth, prompting Jesus to withhold a direct answer: “Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things.” As John Calvin notes, Jesus’ appeal to John is sufficient proof of his divine commission, exposing the leaders’ hypocrisy and affirming his authority from the Father.

Theological Themes

Matthew 21:23-27 underscores several theological themes, harmonizing scholarly insights with the emphasis on John’s legacy:

Divine Authority: Jesus’ authority, rooted in the Father and affirmed by John, contrasts with the leaders’ human-derived power. Jesus’ question implies a shared divine source with John, challenging the leaders to acknowledge God’s work.

Hypocrisy and Rejection: The leaders’ refusal to answer reflects their spiritual blindness, a recurring motif in Matthew (e.g., 23:13-36). R.T. France sees this as part of Matthew’s critique of Israel’s leadership, preparing for the transfer of the Kingdom to a new people (21:43).

John’s Prophetic Role: John’s ministry bridges the Old Testament prophets and Jesus’ messianic mission. His baptism, a call to repentance, authenticates Jesus’ authority, as Heinrich Meyer observes.

Eschatological Fulfillment: The passage’s focus on judgment aligns with the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, fulfilling John’s and Jesus’ urgency and warnings. 

Matthew 21:23-27 is a pivotal moment in Jesus’ ministry, where his divine authority, rooted in the Father and affirmed by John the Baptist, confronts human hypocrisy. The doctrinal continuity between John and Jesus—centered on repentance, judgment, and messianic hope—underscores Jesus’ fulfillment of John’s prophetic mission, culminating in the AD 70 judgment. By harmonizing scholarly exegesis with a focused analysis of this continuity, this passage challenges readers to discern true authority and respond to God’s Kingdom call.

Jesus will now connect a parable of response of the leaders and their unbelief to John and Jesus’ ministry with those who were believing their message was from God or heaven.

The Parable of the Two Sons: A Continuation of Jesus’ Indictment (Matt. 21:28-32)

Immediately following the confrontation over his authority (Matt. 21:23-27), Jesus transitions to the Parable of the Two Sons (Matt. 21:28-32), a pointed illustration that builds on the leaders’ refusal to acknowledge John’s divine mission and, by extension, Jesus’ own authority. This parable flows seamlessly from the preceding dialogue, intensifying Jesus’ critique of the chief priests and elders while affirming the doctrinal unity between his ministry and John’s. By presenting a story of obedience and disobedience, Jesus exposes the leaders’ hypocrisy, underscores the necessity of repentance, and anticipates the inclusion of the marginalized in God’s Kingdom—a theme rooted in John’s call and fulfilled in Jesus’ mission.

Narrative and Thematic Continuity

The Parable of the Two Sons is the first of three parables (followed by the Parable of the Tenants, 21:33-46, and the Wedding Feast, 22:1-14) that Jesus delivers in response to the leaders’ challenge to his authority. Literarily, it serves as a direct application of the confrontation in 21:23-27, where the leaders’ refusal to answer Jesus’ question about John’s baptism reveals their spiritual cowardice and rejection of God’s messengers. The parable’s setting—a vineyard, a common biblical symbol for Israel (Isa. 5:1-7)—and its focus on obedience align with the eschatological and covenantal themes of Matthew 21, particularly the transfer of the Kingdom from unfaithful Israel to a new people (21:43).

In the parable, a father asks his two sons to work in his vineyard. The first son refuses but later repents and obeys, while the second son agrees but fails to act (21:28-30). Jesus poses the question, “Which of the two did what his father wanted?” (21:31), to which the leaders respond, “The first.” Jesus then delivers a stinging rebuke: “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you. For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him” (21:31-32, NIV).

Exegesis of the Parable

The parable’s meaning is clear in light of the preceding confrontation. The first son represents the tax collectors and sinners who initially rejected God’s call but repented in response to John’s preaching, embracing the “way of righteousness” (21:32). The second son symbolizes the religious leaders who outwardly professed allegiance to God but failed to act on John’s message or recognize Jesus as the Messiah. By invoking John’s ministry, Jesus reinforces the continuity between their messages: John’s call to repentance (Matt. 3:2) is fulfilled in Jesus’ proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt. 4:17), and both demand genuine obedience over empty promises.

The phrase “way of righteousness” (21:32) is significant, echoing John’s role as a prophet who prepared Israel for the Messiah through repentance and moral renewal (cf. Matt. 3:3; Isa. 40:3). The leaders’ failure to believe John mirrors their rejection of Jesus, as both ministries required a heart-level response to God’s authority. The parable underscores Matthew’s theme of “reversal,” where the outcasts—tax collectors and prostitutes—enter the Kingdom ahead of the self-righteous elite, fulfilling John’s and Jesus’ warnings of judgment on unrepentant Israel (Matt. 3:7-12; 23:13-36). 

Doctrinal and Eschatological Connections

The Parable of the Two Sons extends the doctrinal parallels outlined in Matthew 21:23-27, particularly the themes of repentance, judgment, and divine authority:

Repentance and Kingdom Access: Just as John and Jesus preached repentance as the prerequisite for entering the Kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 4:17), the parable contrasts genuine repentance (the first son) with hypocritical profession (the second son). The inclusion of sinners reflects John’s success in reaching the marginalized (Matt. 3:5-6) and Jesus’ mission to the lost (Matt. 9:12-13), culminating in the new covenant community post-AD 70.

Judgment on Unfaithful Israel: The parable’s indictment of the leaders aligns with John’s warning of imminent wrath (Matt. 3:7) and Jesus’ prophecy of Jerusalem’s destruction (Matt. 24:1-34). The leaders’ failure to repent ensures their exclusion from the Kingdom, fulfilled in the AD 70 judgment when the old covenant system was dismantled.

Divine Authority Affirmed: By linking the parable to John’s ministry, Jesus reaffirms that his authority, like John’s, comes from God. The leaders’ rejection of both prophets underscores their rebellion against divine revelation, a theme that resonates with the eschatological harvest imagery of John (Matt. 3:12) and Jesus (Matt. 13:39-43).

Inclusion of the Marginalized: The parable’s elevation of tax collectors and prostitutes fulfills John’s preparatory role (Mal. 3:1) and Jesus’ messianic mission to redeem the outcasts (Isa. 61:1-2; Matt. 11:5). This anticipates the Gentile inclusion in the Kingdom (Matt. 21:43), realized after AD 70 as the gospel spread beyond Israel.

Theological and Eschatological Significance

The Parable of the Two Sons serves as a narrative bridge between the confrontation in 21:23-27 and the subsequent parables, which further develop the theme of Israel’s unfaithfulness and the Kingdom’s transfer. Theologically, it reinforces the necessity of repentance as the response to divine authority, a message central to both John and Jesus. Eschatologically, it points to the AD 70 judgment as the culmination of Israel’s rejection of God’s messengers, fulfilling the warnings of both prophets. The parable’s focus on John’s “way of righteousness” ties Jesus’ authority to the prophetic tradition, exposing the leaders’ hypocrisy and heralding the inclusion of the repentant in God’s redemptive plan.

Here is a chart demonstrating parallels between John’s authoritative teaching and Jesus’ and how the parable of the two sons is contextually connected:

Theme John the Baptist’s Teaching

Jesus’ Teaching and Fulfillment

Repentance and Kingdom Preached “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 3:2). Echoed John’s call: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 4:17).
Messianic Preparation Came to “prepare the way” for the Messiah’s salvation and judgment (Isa. 40:3-10; Mal. 3:1—4:2; Matt. 3:3; 11:10). Fulfilled as the Messiah, coming to bring salvation and judgment (Isa. 40:10; Matt. 16:27-28; Mal. 3:1—4:2; Matt. 24:27-34).
Imminent Judgment Warned of a “wrath about to come” upon Israel’s leaders (Matt. 3:7, GNT). Prophesied “wrath” against “this people” in his generation, fulfilled in AD 70 (Luke 21:23-32).
Eschatological Harvest Depicted judgment as an imminent harvest (Matt. 3:12). Described judgment as a harvest at the end of the old covenant age, fulfilled in AD 70 (Matt. 13:39-43).
Baptism with Spirit and Fire Testified Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire (Matt. 3:11). Fulfilled by sending the Spirit at Pentecost and sending Romans to burn Jerusalem (Acts 1:5; Matt. 22:7).
Atonement and Sacrifice Declared Jesus the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). Presented himself as the Passover Lamb, laying down his life (Matt. 26:26-28; John 10:11).
Divine Testimony and Authority Witnessed the Father’s declaration from heaven at Jesus’ baptism: “This is my beloved Son” (Matt. 3:17). Claimed unity with the Father, grounding his authority in divine endorsement (John 8:18ff.).
Obedience and Repentance Called for repentance and righteousness, reaching sinners (Matt. 3:5-6; 21:32). Illustrated true obedience through repentance (Parable of the Two Sons, Matt. 21:28-32), rewarding sinners who repented while condemning hypocritical leaders.

Conclusion

Matthew 21:23-27 and the Parable of the Two Sons (21:28-32) form a cohesive unit, where Jesus’ divine authority, rooted in the Father and affirmed by John, confronts human hypocrisy and calls for genuine repentance. The confrontation exposes the leaders’ refusal to acknowledge God’s messengers, while the parable illustrates the consequences of their disobedience, contrasting it with the repentance of sinners. Together, these passages underscore the doctrinal continuity between John and Jesus—centered on repentance, judgment, and messianic hope—culminating in the AD 70 judgment and the inclusion of the marginalized in God’s Kingdom.

Study Questions for Matthew 21:23-32: Jesus’ Authority, the Doctrine of John the Baptist, and the Parable of the Two Sons

  1. Contextual Understanding: How do the events preceding Matthew 21:23-27 (e.g., the triumphal entry and temple cleansing in Matt. 21:1-17) set the stage for the chief priests and elders’ challenge to Jesus’ authority? Why might these actions have threatened the religious leaders?
  2. Exegetical Analysis: Why do the chief priests and elders question Jesus’ authority (Matt. 21:23), and what does their question reveal about their motives and spiritual condition? How does their lack of divine appointment contrast with Jesus’ authority?
  3. Jesus’ Rhetorical Strategy: In Matt. 21:24-25, Jesus responds with a counter-question about John’s baptism. How does this approach demonstrate his wisdom, and why is it effective in exposing the leaders’ hypocrisy?
  4. Doctrinal Continuity: The article lists eight parallels between John the Baptist’s and Jesus’ teachings (e.g., repentance, imminent judgment, obedience). Choose one of these parallels and explain how Jesus fulfills John’s message, citing relevant scriptures from the chart.
  5. Eschatological Significance: How does the article connect John’s and Jesus’ warnings of judgment to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem? What does this fulfillment reveal about the urgency of their messages in the first-century context?
  6. Theological Theme of Authority: How does the article demonstrate that Jesus’ authority is divinely sourced, particularly through John’s testimony and the Father’s declaration (Matt. 3:17)? How does this contrast with the human-derived authority of the religious leaders?
  7. Hypocrisy and Spiritual Blindness: The religious leaders respond, “We don’t know” (Matt. 21:27), to Jesus’ question. What does this response indicate about their spiritual condition, and how does it relate to Matthew’s broader critique of Israel’s leadership (e.g., Matt. 23:13-36)?
  8. John’s Prophetic Role: According to the article, how does John the Baptist serve as a bridge between Old Testament prophets and Jesus’ messianic mission? Provide examples from the chart (e.g., messianic preparation, divine testimony) to support your answer.
  9. Contemporary Application: The article suggests that Matthew 21:23-27 challenges readers to discern true authority. How can modern believers apply this principle when evaluating spiritual or societal leaders? Jesus didn’t go through their schools, yet He won every debate. The disciples were also looked down upon as “un-educated,” yet they “were with Jesus,” taught by Him, and knew the Scriptures better than the established leaders. Most Preterists I know are more educated in the Scriptures than those who have degrees from religious Futurist institutions. Are there any lessons here? What lessons can be drawn from the leaders’ refusal to acknowledge truth and perhaps from Futurist gatekeepers trying to demean Preterists?
  10. Parable of the Two Sons – Narrative Connection: How does the Parable of the Two Sons (Matt. 21:28-32) directly flow from the confrontation in Matt. 21:23-27? In what ways does it build on the leaders’ refusal to acknowledge John’s divine authority, and how does it reinforce the article’s theme of doctrinal continuity between John and Jesus?
  11. Repentance and Obedience in the Parable: In the Parable of the Two Sons, Jesus contrasts the repentance of sinners (tax collectors and prostitutes) with the hypocrisy of the religious leaders (Matt. 21:31-32). How does this parable illustrate the necessity of genuine repentance as taught by both John (Matt. 3:2) and Jesus (Matt. 4:17)? What does it reveal about the “way of righteousness” (Matt. 21:32) and its role in accessing the Kingdom?
  12. Eschatological and Theological Implications of the Parable: The Parable of the Two Sons highlights the inclusion of the marginalized and the exclusion of unrepentant leaders, anticipating the AD 70 judgment and the transfer of the Kingdom (Matt. 21:43). How does this align with John’s and Jesus’ warnings of judgment (e.g., Matt. 3:7; 24:1-34), and what does it suggest about God’s redemptive plan for the repentant, including Gentiles, in the post-AD 70 era?

Matthew 21-23 Fulfilled in AD 70 Part 3: (Matthew 21:17-22) The Cursing of Israel as Fig Tree and Mountain

Introduction

The New Testament reveals a covenantal shift from Old Covenant Israel to the New Covenant people of God—those united in Christ, not ethnicity. This transition is prophetically framed in Jesus’ curse on the fig tree (Matt. 21:18–21) and John’s vision of a burning mountain thrown into the sea (Rev. 8:8). These passages together portray the covenantal termination of apostate Israel and the rise of the matured New Covenant kingdom / nation / people, fulfilled in the events of AD 70.

The Withered Fig Tree: Israel’s Fruitlessness and Judgment (Matthew 21:18–19)

Jesus’ symbolic act of cursing the fig tree for bearing no fruit is more than an object lesson in faith—it is a prophetic indictment against Old Covenant Israel. This tree, leafy but barren, mirrors Israel’s outward religiosity and inner corruption.

“May no fruit ever come from you again.” — Matt. 21:19

Old Testament passages like Jeremiah 8:13, Hosea 9:10–16, and Micah 7:1–6 consistently use the fig tree or vineyard as symbols for Israel’s covenant obligation to bear fruit. Their failure, especially in rejecting the Messiah, culminates in covenantal judgment.

This episode occurred during Passion Week, reinforcing its link with imminent judgment. As others have observed, the fig tree’s withering forecasts Jerusalem’s destruction and the definitive end of the Old Covenant order.

The Transfer of the Kingdom (Matthew 21:43–45)

“The kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing its  fruit.” — Matt. 21:43

Jesus speaks plainly here. The kingdom is taken from ethnic Israel and given to the New Covenant Church, described in 1 Peter 2:9–10 as a chosen nation and royal priesthood—fulfilling Israel’s intended identity (cf. Exod. 19:5–6). Paul calls this body “the Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16), where Jew and Gentile are united by faith (Eph. 2:11–22).

Jesus’ curse is final—”no fruit ever again”—directly contradicting Dispensational Zionist expectations of a future national restoration and fruit-bearing. Instead, God’s promises pass to a spiritual body defined not by blood, but by belief.

The Mountain Cast into the Sea: Imprecatory Prayer and Covenant Collapse (Matthew 21:20–22)

Jesus follows the fig tree curse with a declaration about moving mountains:

“If you say to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and cast into the sea,’ it will happen.” — Matt. 21:21

 “This mountain” likely refers to the Temple Mount—the symbolic and literal center of Israel’s religious system. As in Jeremiah 51:25 and Zechariah 4:7, mountains represent kingdoms or nations. Jesus authorizes His disciples to pray imprecatory prayers of covenantal judgment, just as the psalmists and prophets once did.

These prayers echo into Revelation:

“How long, O Lord… will You not judge and avenge our blood?” — Rev. 6:10

“The smoke of the incense… with the prayers of the saints, went up… and the angel took the censer… and threw it to the earth…” — Rev. 8:3–5

The prayers of the persecuted church—especially under Jewish persecution (cf. Acts 7:58–8:3; 1 Thess. 2:14–16)—become a catalyst for the trumpet judgments that follow. 

Revelation 8:8 – A Burning Mountain Cast into the Sea

“The second angel sounded, and something like a great mountain burning with fire was thrown into the sea…” — Rev. 8:8

This vivid image recalls Matthew 21:21, but also draws from Jeremiah 51:25 where Babylon, a “destroying mountain,” is cast down in fiery judgment. Jerusalem is the new Babylon (cf. Rev. 11:8; 17:5–6), guilty of persecuting the saints and rejecting the Lamb.

Deuteronomy 32:20–24, the “Song of Moses,” not only foretells a fiery judgment and scattering for Israel’s rebellion in her last days, but a new “nation” emerging from it. Revelation, by invoking this imagery, affirms the end of the Old Covenant order.

And he said, “I will hide my face from them; I will see what their end will be,
for they are a perverse generation, children in whom is no faithfulness. They have made me jealous with what is no god; they have provoked me to anger with their idols.   So I will make them jealous with those who are no people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation. For a fire is kindled by my anger, and it burns to the depths of Sheol, devours the earth/land and its increase, and sets on fire the foundations of the         mountains. “‘And I will heap disasters upon them; I will spend my arrows on them; they shall be wasted with hunger, and devoured by plague and poisonous pestilence; I will send the teeth of beasts against them, with the venom of things that crawl in the dust.

Symbol Old Testament Reference New Testament Application Fulfillment in AD 70
Fig Tree with no fruit Jer. 8:13; Hos. 9:10; Mic. 7:1 Matt. 21:18–19 – Israel’s fruitlessness Withering = removal of covenant role
Mountain cast into sea Jer. 51:25; Zech. 4:7 Matt. 21:21 – Judgment on Jerusalem Temple destroyed, city cast into judgment
Burning mountain into sea Jer. 51:25; Deut. 32:22 Rev. 8:8 – Jerusalem as Babylon Roman siege, Temple and city burned
Kingdom taken and given Dan. 7:18, 22, 27 Matt. 21:43; 1 Pet. 2:9; Rms. 9:6—11:27 – Church inherits kingdom Church as spiritual Israel after AD 70
Imprecatory prayers for justice Ps. 79, 83; Deut. 32:43 Rev. 6:10 – prayer would be fulfilled in a “little while” and described Rev. 8:3–5,8 Judgment falls on persecuting Jerusalem leadership

Conclusion: The New Covenant Fruit-Bearing Nation

The judgment scenes of Matthew 21 and Revelation 8 dramatize the same covenantal reality: Israel, once chosen, has rejected the Messiah and is judged. Its leadership, Temple, and sacrificial system are swept away in AD 70, just as Jesus and the prophets warned. But out of that judgment arises a new people/nation—those in Christ, who bear fruit by faith, not lineage.

The old covenant national fig tree will not bear forth fruit “ever again.” The old covenant mountain has been thrown down. The fire has consumed the old order. And the New Jerusalem—the Church—Mount Zion has been established and the nations steam to her for eternal life.

Study Questions

  1. What does the fig tree symbolize in the context of Matthew 21:18–19, and how do Old Testament texts (Jer. 8:13, Hos. 9:10, Mic. 7:1–6) help interpret Jesus’ prophetic action?
  2. Why is Jesus’ declaration—“May no fruit ever come from you again”—so significant in the context of covenant theology and eschatology? What implications does it have for Dispensational expectations of a future restored national Israel?
  3. How does Matthew 21:43’s transfer of the kingdom relate to Daniel 7:18, 22, 27 and 1 Peter 2:9–10? Who are the “people” or “nation” to whom the kingdom is given?
  4. In Matthew 21:21, Jesus speaks of a mountain being cast into the sea. What does “this mountain” refer to, and how does this connect with the judgment imagery of the Temple and Jerusalem?
  5. What is the significance of imprecatory prayer in this context (cf. Matt. 21:22; Rev. 6:10; Rev. 8:3–5)? How does the New Testament depict the early church participating in God’s covenantal judgment through prayer?  How long until they would be answered per Revelation 6:10-11?
  6. Compare Jeremiah 51:25 (Babylon as a “destroying mountain”) with Revelation 8:8. How does the Preterist interpretation understand Jerusalem becoming the new “Babylon”?  What exegetical evidence can you gather from within Revelation itself and Matthew 23 that Babylon is old covenant Jerusalem?
  7. How does the imagery of the burning mountain in Revelation 8:8 parallel the prophecy of Deuteronomy 32:20–24? What does this tell us about the consistency of covenant judgment from Moses to Revelation?
  8. According to Galatians 6:16; Ephesians 2:11–22; Romans 9-11 how is the definition of “Israel” redefined in the New Covenant? Why is this important in understanding God’s ongoing redemptive plan post-AD 70?
  9. In what way does the judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70 fulfill Jesus’ words in Matthew 24:34 and the time indicators in Revelation (1:1; 6:10-11; 22:6-10, 20)? Why is this timing central to understanding Matthew 21:18-22?
  10. How does the final image of a fruit-bearing New Covenant people challenge modern views of prophetic fulfillment? What practical and theological applications arise from understanding the Church as the New Jerusalem?

Matthew 21-23 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 2: (Matthew 21:12-17) – The High Priest Inspects the Temple and Declares it Unclean Doomed for Destruction

In Matthew 21:12–17, Jesus enters the temple as the true High Priest, confronting its corruption and pronouncing its impending judgment. His actions echo the prophetic warnings of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, fulfilling the priestly inspection ritual of Leviticus 14:33–53 and signaling the end of the old covenant temple system. By quoting Isaiah 56:7 and Jeremiah 7:11, Jesus condemns the temple’s defilement while pointing to its intended purpose as a “house of prayer for all nations.” Through His healings and the children’s praise (vv. 14–17), He establishes true worship, fulfilling Isaiah 56:3–8’s vision of a Messianic Temple that includes Gentiles and outcasts. This passage marks a pivotal transition from the corrupt physical temple, destroyed in AD 70, to the new covenant “spiritual house” (1 Pet. 2:4–5), where God dwells among His people.

The Context of Corruption

Under Caiaphas, the High Priest, the temple’s Court of the Gentiles had been transformed into a marketplace for sacrificial animals, displacing its role as a space for Gentile prayer and worship. This commercialization, moved from the Kidron Valley to the temple courts, symbolized the leadership’s hypocrisy and exclusionary practices, prioritizing profit over God’s universal purpose. Jesus’ actions in Matthew 21:12–17 directly challenge this corruption, asserting His authority as the true High Priest who will judge the old system and gather a righteous remnant, including Gentiles, into the Messianic Temple.

The Debate Over Two Cleansings

Scholars have long debated whether Jesus cleansed the temple once or twice in the Gospels. Some argue that John’s account (John 2:13–17) is placed early in Jesus’ ministry for theological reasons, suggesting a single cleansing. Others, including James B. Jordan, contend that Jesus performed two cleansings: one at the beginning of His ministry (John 2:13–17, ca. AD 30) and another at its end (Matt. 21:12–17; Mark 11:15–19; Luke 19:45–48, ca. AD 33). Jordan’s insight, rooted in Leviticus 14:33–53, provides a compelling explanation: Jesus acts as the High Priest inspecting a house for “leprous disease” (corruption). The first cleansing (John 2) is the initial inspection, removing corrupt elements (money changers, merchants). The second cleansing (Matt. 21) is the follow-up, finding persistent corruption and declaring the temple unfit, fulfilled in its destruction in AD 70.[1]

Leviticus 14: The Priestly Inspection

Leviticus 14:33–53 outlines a priest’s procedure for inspecting a house suspected of leprosy (likely mold or corruption). The priest examines the house, removes affected materials, and returns after seven days. If the corruption persists, the house is declared unclean and torn down stone by stone. Jordan interprets the temple as the “house” and Jesus as the High Priest. In John 2:13–17, Jesus’ first cleansing removes the corrupt merchants, inspecting the temple’s spiritual state. In Matthew 21:12–17, His second cleansing confirms ongoing corruption, pronouncing judgment (Matt. 24:2: “not one stone will be left upon another”), fulfilled when the Romans leveled the temple in AD 70.

Matthew 21:12–13: Judgment on the Corrupt Temple

In Matthew 21:12–13, Jesus enters the temple, drives out the buyers and sellers, and overturns the tables of the money changers, disrupting the exploitative commerce that defiled the Gentile courts. He quotes Isaiah 56:7—“My house shall be called a house of prayer”—to recall the temple’s purpose as a place of universal worship, and Jeremiah 7:11—“but you have made it a den of robbers”—to condemn its corruption. These citations frame Jesus’ actions within a prophetic and eschatological context.

Isaiah 56 Context: Isaiah 56:3–8 envisions a new covenant era where Gentiles and outcasts, such as eunuchs and the disabled, are welcomed into the Messianic Temple, fulfilling its role as a “house of prayer for all nations.”  Eunuchs, previously excluded from temple worship (cf. Deut. 23:1), will not only gain access but receive a “lasting legacy” through spiritual children, produced by preaching the gospel and inviting others into the new covenant temple (Rev. 21:16; 22:2, 17). This vision may have informed the discussion between Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8:26–39, where Isaiah 53–56’s promises of inclusion are realized. However, this salvation follows God’s judgment on Jerusalem’s false shepherds (Isa. 56:9–12). Jesus’ quotation of Isaiah 56:7 in Matthew 21:13 signals His initiation of this eschatological inclusion while pronouncing judgment on the corrupt temple system, paving the way for the new covenant “spiritual house” (1 Pet. 2:4–5).

Jeremiah 7 Context: Jeremiah’s “Temple Sermon” (Jer. 7:1–15, ca. 609–605 BC) warned Judah of the temple’s destruction for idolatry, injustice, and hypocrisy, calling it a “den of robbers” (Jer. 7:11). Despite their false trust in the temple’s presence, God destroyed it through the Babylonians in 586 BC (2 Kings 25:8–17). Jesus’ use of Jeremiah 7:11 links the Second Temple’s corruption under Caiaphas to the First Temple’s, foreshadowing its destruction in AD 70 by the Romans under Titus.

Jesus’ actions in verses 12–13, as High Priest, fulfill the Leviticus 14 pattern: He inspects the temple, finds it unclean, and symbolically declares its doom, aligning with the typological judgment of 586 BC. 

Matthew 21:14–17: Restoration of True Worship

Following the cleansing (vv. 12–13), Jesus immediately enacts the temple’s true purpose in verses 14–17, shifting from judgment to restoration. These verses contrast the corrupt leadership’s exclusionary practices with Jesus’ inclusive ministry, fulfilling Isaiah 56:3–8 and establishing the new covenant kingdom/temple.

Healing the Blind and Lame (v. 14): Jesus heals the blind and lame in the temple courts, welcoming those often excluded from full temple access due to ritual purity laws (cf. Lev. 21:17–23). This act fulfills Isaiah 56:3–8, which promises that outcasts (e.g., eunuchs, foreigners) will be included in God’s house. By healing in the Gentile courts, Jesus restores the temple’s purpose as a “house of prayer for all nations,” directly countering Caiaphas’ commercialization that marginalized Gentiles. The healings signify Jesus’ messianic authority to create a space where all can encounter God, prefiguring the new covenant community where physical and social barriers are removed (Gal. 3:28).

Children’s Praise (vv. 15–16): The children’s cries of “Hosanna to the Son of David” recognize Jesus as the Messianic King, prompting indignation from the chief priests and scribes. Jesus defends their praise by quoting Psalm 8:2: “Out of the mouth of babes and infants, you have established strength.” This affirms the purity of worship offered by the lowly, contrasting the religious leaders’ rejection. The children’s praise fulfills Isaiah 56:3–8’s vision of a remnant worshiping in the Messianic Temple, pointing to the new covenant community where true worshippers honor God (John 4:23–24).

Contrast with Leadership: The chief priests’ objection (v. 15) mirrors the hypocrisy condemned in Jeremiah 7:11, as they reject Jesus’ authority just as Judah’s leaders ignored Jeremiah’s warnings. The inclusion of outcasts (blind, lame) and children contrasts sharply with the temple’s “den of robbers” state (v. 13), highlighting Jesus’ role as the true High Priest who purifies worship and gathers the righteous remnant and Gentiles.

Eschatological Fulfillment: Verses 14–17 enact Isaiah 56:3–8’s eschatology, where the Messianic Temple becomes a perfect cubed Most Holy Place (Rev. 21:16) through the gospel’s spread (Rev. 22:2, 17). The healings and praise prefigure the new covenant kingdom/temple, where God dwells in His people post-AD 70, replacing the unclean physical temple (Lev. 14:33–53). This shift fulfills the judgment of Jerusalem’s false shepherds (Isa. 56:9–12) and the gathering of all nations into God’s house.

The flow from verses 12–13 (judgment, cleansing) to verses 14–17 (restoration, inclusion) demonstrates Jesus’ dual role as High Priest: He condemns the old temple’s corruption and establishes true worship in the new covenant community. The Leviticus 14 framework underscores this transition: the temple, found persistently unclean, is marked for destruction (AD 70), while verses 14–17 point to the “spiritual house” where God’s presence dwells (1 Pet. 2:4–5).

Typological Parallels: 586 BC [Jewish Calendar 420 BC] and AD 70

Jesus’ actions in Matthew 21:12–17 parallel the prophetic warnings and judgments of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Isaiah, linking the Babylonian destruction of the First Temple (586 BC) to the Roman destruction of the Second Temple (AD 70). The following chart summarizes these typological connections, highlighting the continuity of divine judgment and the establishment of true worship:

586 BC / 420 BC [Jewish Calendar] (Babylonian Judgment)

AD 70 (Roman Judgment)

(1) Jeremiah’s sermon warns of judgment for idolatry, injustice (Jer. 7:1–15; 609–605 BC). (1) Jesus’ cleansing, Jer. 7:11 quote warn of judgment for corruption (Matt. 21:12–17; AD 30–33).
(2) Idolatry, oppression, false trust defile temple (Jer. 7:4–11). (2) Exploitation, hypocrisy by leaders corrupt temple (Matt. 21:12–13).
(3) Temple named “den of robbers” for moral decay (Jer. 7:11). (3) Jesus calls temple “den of robbers” for abuse (Matt. 21:13).
(4) God uses Babylonians to destroy temple, fulfilling prophecy (Jer. 7:14–15; 2 Kings 25:8–17). (4) Jesus predicts Roman destruction by Titus, fulfilled (Matt. 24:1–2; Jewish War).
(5) Temple falls in 586 BC (~420 BC Jewish date), in Av; starts Daniel’s 490 years (Dan. 9:24–27). (5) Temple falls in AD 70, in Av; fulfills Daniel’s 490 years (Matt. 24:1-34; Jewish War 6.4.5).
(6) Exile to Babylon disciplines covenant people (Jer. 7:15). (6) Old covenant ends; Jews go into Roman slavery; spiritual new covenant house matures (1 Pet. 2:4–5; Rev. 21:16).
(7) Jeremiah inspects temple, finds it unclean; Babylonians raze it (Jer. 7:1–15; 2 Kings 25:9). (7) Jesus, High Priest, inspects, cleanses temple twice; Romans raze it (John 2:13–17; Matt. 21:12–17; 22:7; Lev. 14).
(8) Innocent blood shed, defiling temple, land (Jer. 7:6; 22:3). (8) Righteous blood shed, e.g., Zechariah; Zealots’ continue murdering (Matt. 23:35; Jewish War 4.297–314).
(9) God comes “soon” and “would not delay” upon the clouds to tread Judah for 3 years within ~19–23 years of contemporary audience (Jer. 4:13; Lam. 1:15; Ezek. 7:7–8; 12:22-23, 25; 30:3). (9) Christ comes “soon” and “would not delay” upon the clouds to tread Jerusalem for 3 ½ yeas within ~37–40 years of contemporary audience (Matt. 24:30-34; Lk. 21:27-24; Rev. 1:3, 7; 11:2-8; 14:17-20; 22:7, 10, 20).
(10) Stars fall, heavens darken = civil and religious rulers collapse (Ezek. 32:7–8; Isa. 34:4). (10) Stars fall, heavens shaken = civil and religious rulers fall and end (Matt. 24:29; Rev. 6:12–14).
(11) Temple’s fall mourned on Tisha B’Av for unfaithfulness (Mishnah Taanit 4:6). (11) Temple’s fall mourned on Tisha B’Av for judgment (Talmud Yoma 9b).
(12) Post-exile worship fails to include outcasts, Gentiles (Isa. 56:3–8; Ezra 9–10). (12) Jesus heals outcasts, children praise; true worship rises (Matt. 21:14–17; Ps. 8:2).

The Typological Flow

The chart illustrates the parallels between 586 BC and AD 70, showing Jesus’ actions as the culmination of Old Testament prophecies (cf. Luke 21:22). Rows (1–3) highlight the warnings and corruption leading to judgment, with Jesus’ quotation of Jeremiah 7:11 tying the “den of robbers” motif. Rows (4–5) and (9–10) detail the divine judgment through human agents (Babylonians / Romans – using imminence language literally and consistently “soon” “will not delay”) trampling, and de-creation imagery, fulfilled in the temple’s fall. Rows (6–7) and (12) emphasize the transition from exile/old temple to the new covenant “spiritual house,” with Jesus’ priestly actions (Lev. 14) and restoration of worship (Matt. 21:14–17) fulfilling Isaiah 56:3–8. The healings and children’s praise (row 12) contrast the post-exilic failure to include outcasts, showing Jesus’ establishment of the Messianic Temple where Gentiles, the marginalized and unclean can be made clean and worship freely.

Conclusion

Matthew 21:12–17 presents Jesus as the true High Priest, inspecting the temple per Leviticus 14, condemning its corruption (vv. 12–13), and restoring its purpose through healings and praise (vv. 14–17). By quoting Jeremiah 7:11 and Isaiah 56:7, Jesus links the Second Temple’s fate to the First Temple’s destruction in 586 BC, fulfilled in AD 70. The healings of the blind and lame and the children’s cries of “Hosanna” fulfill Isaiah 56:3–8, welcoming outcasts and Gentiles into the new covenant kingdom/temple, a perfect cubed Most Holy Place (Rev. 21:16). This passage underscores the end of the old covenant system and the rise of a new spiritual house, where God dwells in His people post-AD 70, fulfilling the eschatological hope of universal worship. 

Study Questions for Matthew 21:12–17 

  1. What does Jesus’ cleansing of the temple in Matthew 21:12–13 reveal about His authority as the true High Priest compared to Caiaphas, and how does this align with the priestly role in Leviticus 14:33–53?
  2. How does Jesus’ quotation of Jeremiah 7:11 (“den of robbers”) in Matthew 21:13 connect the corruption of the Second Temple to the First Temple’s state before its destruction in 586 BC?
  3. In what ways does Jesus’ citation of Isaiah 56:7 (“house of prayer”) in Matthew 21:13 reflect the temple’s intended purpose, and how does this contrast with Caiaphas’ commercialization of the Gentile courts?
  4. Why is it significant that Jesus heals the blind and lame in the temple courts (Matt. 21:14), and how does this fulfill the eschatological vision of Isaiah 56:3–8 for including outcasts and Gentiles?
  5. What does the children’s praise of “Hosanna to the Son of David” (Matt. 21:15–16) reveal about Jesus’ messianic identity, and how does His quotation of Psalm 8:2 affirm the purity of their worship?
  6. How do the chief priests’ and scribes’ indignation in Matthew 21:15 contrast with the actions of the blind, lame, and children, and what does this suggest about the state of temple leadership?
  7. How does the flow from judgment (Matt. 21:12–13) to restoration (Matt. 21:14–17) in this passage reflect the transition from the old covenant temple to the new covenant “spiritual house” (1 Pet. 2:4–5)?
  8. According to James B. Jordan’s interpretation, why is it significant that Jesus cleansed the temple twice (John 2:13–17; Matt. 21:12–17), and how does this mirror the two inspections in Leviticus 14?
  9. How do the typological parallels in the chart (e.g., rows 7, 9, 12) between the 586 BC and AD 70 temple destructions enhance our understanding of Jesus’ actions as High Priest in Matthew 21:12–17?
  10. What does the trampling imagery (row 9: Jer. 4:13; Lam. 1:15; Luke 21:24) signify about God’s judgment in both 586 BC and AD 70, and how does it relate to Jesus’ pronouncement in Matthew 21:12–13?
  11. How does the de-creation imagery of “stars falling” (row 10: Ezek. 32:7–8; Isa. 34:4; Matt. 24:29) symbolize the collapse of rulers in both 586 BC and AD 70, and how does this connect to the temple’s fate?
  12. Why did the post-exilic community fail to fully include outcasts and Gentiles in worship (row 12: Isa. 56:3–8; Ezra 9–10), and how does Jesus’ ministry in Matthew 21:14–17 correct this failure?
  13. How does the mourning on Tisha B’Av (row 11: Mishnah Taanit 4:6; Talmud Yoma 9b) reflect the shared significance of the temple destructions in 586 BC and AD 70, and what does this suggest about covenant unfaithfulness?
  14. What role does the 490-year prophecy of Daniel 9:24–27 (row 5) play in linking the 586 BC (~420 BC Jewish date) and AD 70 temple destructions, and how does Jesus’ prophecy (Matt. 24) fulfill this?
  15. How does Matthew 21:12–17, as a whole, illustrate the shift from the physical temple to the new covenant kingdom/temple (Rev. 21:16), and what implications does this have for worship today?

[1] James B. Jordan, a 2004 article, “Jesus and the Holy House: A Study in Temple Cleansing,” published through Biblical Horizons.  This is difficult to find online after Jordan’s stroke.

Matthew 21-23 Fulfilled in AD 70, Part 1:  The Triumphal Entry (Matthew 21:1–11) – Jesus as the Greater Alexander, Solomon, and Nehemiah

Introduction: A Messianic Spectacle

Having completed a five-part series demonstrating that, prior to Matthew 24-25, Jesus taught His second coming would occur within the lifetime and generation of the first-century church (cf. Matt. 10:22-23; 16:27-28; 23:39; 26:63-65; Luke 17:20-37), I believe it would be beneficial to undertake a series on Matthew 21-22. This series will show that the eschatology in these chapters also points to an AD 70 fulfillment. This approach will provide a comprehensive context before exegeting Matthew 24-25.

When Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (Matt. 21:1–11), He is bringing in the minds of His audience the fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9, Isaiah 62:11, and Psalm 118, enacting a prophetic drama that fulfilled Jewish Messianic hopes for a believing righteous remnant according to the Scriptures. Far from a military conqueror like Alexander the Great, a temporal king like Solomon, or a civic restorer like Nehemiah, Jesus entered as the humble King of Peace, inaugurating a spiritual New Covenant Kingdom. Matthew portrays Him as surpassing these Old Testament types, establishing an eternal Temple and peace through His suffering and judgment in AD 70. This entry marks the climax of Old Covenant history, culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and the rise of Christ’s everlasting kingdom.

Isaiah 62:11

In Matthew 21:5, Jesus’ triumphal entry fulfills a conflation of Zechariah 9:9 (“Behold, your king is coming to you, humble, and mounted on a donkey”) and Isaiah 62:11 (“Say to the daughter of Zion, ‘Behold, your salvation comes’”).  Isaiah 62 is rich with eschatological imagery:

  • Wedding motifs (vv. 4–5): God’s covenant love restores Israel, likened to a bride.
  • New Jerusalem (v. 7): A restored city with open gates (v. 10) and a highway for the redeemed.
  • Second exodus typology: Some interpret Isaiah 62 as foreshadowing the return from exile back into the land under Ezra and Nehemiah, which typifies the ultimate redemption and or “gathering” “in Christ,” the Messiah [not “in the land”].  “In the land” vs. “in Christ” is the covenantal shift between the old and new covenants.  Here Jesus is a greater Cyrus, Ezra, and Nehemiah that produces the true and everlasting restoration between man and God.  In Zechariah 9 Jesus is the greater Alexander.

Eschatological judgment and salvation:

Isaiah 62:11’s “reward” and “recompense” suggest Christ’s coming to save the remnant and judge the wicked, which you connect to both His first coming and the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem as a second coming in judgment (cf. Matt. 16:27-28):

  • “Behold, your salvation comes; behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him” (Isa. 62:11)
  • “For the Son of Man is about to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done.  Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom” (Matt. 16:27-28)

This context frames the triumphal entry (Matthew 21:1–11) and the temple cleansing (Matthew 21:12–17) as eschatologically charged events. Jesus’ actions signal not only His humble first coming but also the impending judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70, aligning with the Messiah coming to grant “salvation” and “recompense” of Isaiah 62:11. The next event of Jesus cleansing the temple, as a priestly act, could thus be seen as part of this judgment, inspecting and condemning the corrupt “house” (temple) in which if unclean, not one stone would be left upon another per Leviticus 14:33–53.

Zechariah 9: Historical and Prophetic Context

Zechariah 9:1–8 traces a military campaign from Damascus to Philistia, mirroring Alexander the Great’s conquest of the Levant (333–332 BC). Jerusalem is spared: “I will encamp at my house as a guard, so that none shall march to and fro” (Zech. 9:8). Josephus recounts Alexander’s peaceful entry into Jerusalem, guided by a dream and the High Priest’s presentation of Daniel’s prophecy, where he offered sacrifices in the Temple.[1] This historical type prefigures Jesus, the true King, who enters humbly to fulfill Zechariah 9:9: “Your king is coming to you, humble, and mounted on a donkey.”

Jesus as the Greater Alexander 

Alexander’s entry into Jerusalem, marked by military might yet divine restraint, foreshadows Jesus’ Triumphal Entry. Both are linked to Daniel’s prophecies: Alexander as the Greek king (Dan. 8, 11) and Jesus as the Son of Man (Dan. 7, 9). However, their aims differ. Alexander honored the Temple physically; Jesus cleansed it spiritually, declaring Himself the true Temple (John 2:19–21). Alexander’s empire crumbled; Jesus’ kingdom endures (Isa. 9:7). Some see the Parable of the Minas (Luke 19:11–27) as reinforcing this typology: like Alexander, Jesus departs to receive a kingdom, entrusts stewards, and returns to judge opponents, fulfilling the judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt. 24:30–34).

Parallels Between Jesus and Alexander the Great

Category Alexander the Great (Type) Jesus Christ (Antitype)
Prophetic Background Zechariah 9:1–8 describes his military conquest and sparing of Jerusalem. Zechariah 9:9 describes Him entering Jerusalem on a donkey as the true Messianic King.
Entrance into Jerusalem Approached with armies but pacified by the High Priest in colorful garments due to a dream. Approached with 12 disciples, rode a pure donkey, cleansed the Temple, and pronounced judgment (Matt. 21:1–13).
Reception in Jerusalem Honored the high priest, entered the Temple, offered sacrifice, shown Daniel’s prophecy. Greeted with “Hosanna” (Ps. 118), cleansed the Temple, declared judgment (Matt. 21:9–13).
Claim to Divinity Called “Son of Zeus,” depicted as a sun god, falsely claimed divine status. Truly the Son of God, Sun of Righteousness, humbled Himself, exalted by the Father (Mal. 4:2; Matt. 24:27 AENT; Luke 17:24 AFV; Phil. 2:5–11;).
Age at Death Died at 32–33 after rapid conquest of the known world. Crucified at 33, rose and came in AD 70 to conquer sin, death, and the Law, establishing an eternal kingdom (Isa. 9:7; 1 Cor. 15:54–57; Ephs. 3:20-21).
Role in Daniel’s Prophecy Daniel 8, 11: King of Greece who defeats Persia, a temporal ruler. Daniel 7:13-27, 9:24-27; 12:7: Son of Man is worshiped by nations, bestows kingdom to saints, and judges apostate Jerusalem through Romans (AD 67-70).
Legacy Empire fractured after death, a temporal legacy. Eternal spiritual kingdom grows through the Church (Isa. 9:7; Dan. 2:44; Rev. 22:2, 17).
Temple Interaction Offered sacrifices in the Temple, honoring its sanctity (Josephus, Antiquities11.8.5). Cleansed the Temple, establishing Himself as the true Temple (John 2:19–21; Matt. 21:12–13).

Parallels Between Jesus, Alexander, and the Parable of the Minas (Luke 19:11–27)

Theme Alexander the Great (Type) Parable of the Minas (Luke 19) Jesus Christ (Antitype)
Prophetic Background Zechariah 9:1–8: Conquest; Jerusalem spared. Implied Danielic judgment and kingdom themes. Zechariah 9:9; Daniel 7, 9, 12: King on a donkey, Son of Man judging Jerusalem (AD 70).
Departure to Receive Kingdom Left Macedonia to conquer Persia, claiming dominion. Nobleman goes to a far country to receive a kingdom (v.12). Ascended to the Father, received eternal kingdom as eternal Priest/King, returned in judgment in AD 70 (Ps. 110 / Dan. 7:13 = Matt. 26:63-65).
Entrance into Jerusalem Approached with armies, pacified by High Priest in bright robes. Not specified; metaphorical royal return. Rode a pure donkey, cleansed Temple, pronounced judgment (Matt. 21:1–13).
Reception in Jerusalem Honored priesthood, shown Daniel’s prophecy. Citizens reject the nobleman (v.14). Greeted with “Hosanna,” later rejected by leaders (Matt. 21:9; John 19:15).
Rejection by Some Tyre, Gaza resisted; faced destruction. Citizens say, “We do not want this man to reign” (v.14). Jewish leaders: “We have no king but Caesar” (John 19:15).
Judgment upon Return Destroyed resistant cities (Tyre, Gaza). Enemies slaughtered (v.27). Judged Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt. 23:36–39; 24-25; 26:63-65; Luke 21:20–24).
Stewardship During Absence Installed satraps to maintain order. Servants entrusted with minas (v.13). Entrusted disciples with the Gospel (Matt. 28:18–20).
Reward for Faithfulness Gave lands to loyal generals (Ptolemy, Seleucus). Faithful servants rule cities (v.17). Rewards disciples with kingdom roles (Matt. 25:21; Rev. 2:26).
Type of Kingdom Temporal, divided after death. Earthly metaphor for heavenly reign. Everlasting spiritual kingdom “within” hearts of His people (Luke 17:20ff.; John 18:36; Heb. 12:28).
Legacy Empire dissolved; historical fame. Warns of reward or judgment based on stewardship. Kingdom expands & is without end (Isa. 9:7; Matt. 28:18–20; Rev. 22:2, 17).

Jesus as the Greater Solomon

Solomon, the son of David, rode a mule at his coronation (1 Kings 1:33–38), symbolizing covenantal succession. Jesus, riding a pure donkey (Zech. 9:9), fulfills Genesis 49:10–11 and surpasses Solomon’s reign. Solomon’s 40-year rule brought political peace and a physical Temple (1 Kings 4:24–25; 6). Jesus, “greater than Solomon” (Matt. 12:42), offers spiritual peace, freeing souls from sin (Rom. 5:1), and builds a living Temple with Himself as the Cornerstone (1 Pet. 2:4–5). Like Solomon, Jesus reigned over Old Covenant Israel for approximately 40 years (AD 30–70, from His death and resurrection to the fall of Jerusalem), but His everlasting rule continues (Dan. 2:44; Heb. 1:8). While Solomon’s wisdom and wealth drew the Queen of Sheba (1 Kings 10:1–10), Jesus’ divine wisdom and universal kingship attract all nations (Matt. 2:1–12; 28:19).

Parallels and Typology Between Jesus and Solomon

Category Solomon (Type) Jesus Christ (Antitype)
Kingship Anointed as David’s heir, rode a mule to assert succession (1 Kings 1:33–38). Rode a pure donkey, fulfilling Davidic prophecy as the eternal King (Zech. 9:9; Matt. 21:5).
Peace Reigned in political peace for 40 years, no major wars (1 Kings 4:24–25). Brings spiritual peace to remnant from AD 30-70 in reconciling man to God, surpassing Solomon’s peace (John 14:27; 16:33; Rom. 5:1).
Temple Role Built the physical Temple, a house for God’s presence (1 Kings 6). Establishes the spiritual Temple as the Cornerstone, with believers as living stones (Matt. 21:42-45; John 2:19; 1 Pet. 2:4–5).
Wisdom and Global Recognition Renowned for wisdom, attracting foreign rulers like the Queen of Sheba (1 Kings 4:29–34; 10:1–10). Greater than Solomon, embodying divine wisdom, acknowledged by Gentiles (Magi, centurion) (Matt. 12:42; 2:1–12; 8:5–13; Col. 2:3).
Reign Duration Ruled Israel for 40 years (1 Kings 11:42). Reigned over Old Covenant Israel for 40 years (AD 30–70) through His death, resurrection, and judgment; His everlasting rule continues (Heb. 1:8; Dan. 2:44).
Prophetic Connection Foreshadowed as a son of David building God’s house (2 Sam. 7:12–13). Fulfills the Davidic covenant as the eternal Son, building the true Temple (Acts 2:29–36).
Wealth and Glory Known for wealth, gold, and splendor (1 Kings 10:14–21). His blood more valuable than gold and silver, gives faith which is also more valuable than gold and silver, brings spiritual riches, offering eternal inheritance (1 Pet. 1:7, 18-18; Eph. 1:18; 2:8-10; Rev. 3:18).
Judgment Judged idolatry in Israel, leading to division (1 Kings 11:9–13). Judges apostate Israel or Jerusalem in AD 70, establishing the New Covenant Jerusalem or Nation (Matt. 21:43-45; 23:36–24:34; Rev. 19-22).
Royal Entry Rode a mule in a public coronation (1 Kings 1:38–40). Rode a pure donkey in a humble, prophetic entry (Zech. 9:9/Matt. 21:1–11).
Sacrifice and Worship Dedicated the Temple with massive sacrifices (1 Kings 8:62–63). He is the true Temple and offered Himself as the ultimate sacrifice, inaugurating the New Covenant (John 1:29; Matt. 26:28; Heb. 9:11–14).

Jesus as the Greater Nehemiah

My good friend Robert Cruickshank believes Zechariah 9:11-12 is referring to Israel coming back into the land under the restoration leadership of Ezra and Nehemiah.[2]  Per Robert’s view, I’m not sure how Zechariah 9 moves from the historical context of Alexander the Great’s conquests and his interaction with Jerusalem around 333–332 BC in verses 1–8 to the restoration themes tied to Ezra and Nehemiah’s time, roughly 458–424 BC, in verses 11–12.  But I’d love for you to check out my friend’s article for his perspective on Zechariah 9:11-12.  On the chance there is a connection here, we should note, theologians and commentators have long seen Nehemiah, the covenantal leader who rebuilt Jerusalem’s walls and restored its worship (Neh. 1–6, 13), as a type of Christ. James Hamilton nails this in his book Exalting Jesus in Ezra and Nehemiah (2014), showing how Nehemiah’s work points to Jesus’ Triumphal Entry (Matt. 21:1–11), where He rides in on a donkey to establish His New Covenant Kingdom.[3] Nehemiah’s humble service, despite opposition from Sanballat and Tobiah (Neh. 4:1–3), parallels Jesus’ entry on a donkey, symbolizing peaceful covenant restoration (Zech. 9:9). Nehemiah cleansed the Temple (Neh. 13:4–9); Jesus did so spiritually, declaring Himself the true Temple (Matt. 21:12–13). While Nehemiah rebuilt physical walls, Jesus builds the spiritual Jerusalem—the Church—as “living stones” (1 Pet. 2:4–5). The donkey, a “covenant donkey” tied to ratification ceremonies,[4] underscores Jesus’ role in ratifying the New Covenant through His blood (Matt. 26:28), surpassing Nehemiah’s temporal renewal.

Parallels and Typology Between Jesus and Nehemiah   

Category Nehemiah (Type) Jesus Christ (Antitype)
Leadership Humbly served as governor to rebuild Jerusalem’s walls and restore covenant worship (Neh. 2:17–18; 10). Enters on a donkey as humble King, establishing the New Covenant through His death (Zech. 9:9; Heb. 9:15).
Temple Cleansing Cleansed the Temple of abuses, restoring its sanctity (Neh. 13:4–9). Cleansed the Temple, declaring Himself the true Temple (Matt. 21:12–13; John 2:19–21).
Opposition and Mockery Faced ridicule from Sanballat and Tobiah (Neh. 4:1–3) and plots against his life (Neh. 6:2–7). Faced mockery during entry and crucifixion (Matt. 21:15; 27:42), yet completed His work (John 19:30).
Restoration of Jerusalem Rebuilt physical walls, securing the city for God’s people (Neh. 6:15–16). Builds spiritual Jerusalem (the Church) as “living stones” (1 Pet. 2:4–5; Heb. 12:22–24).
Covenant Symbolism Leadership reflects covenant renewal, aligned with the “covenant donkey” tradition (Neh. 10; Gen. 49:11). Rides a pure donkey, ratifying the New Covenant through His blood (Zech. 9:9; Matt. 26:28).
Weeping Over Jerusalem Wept over Jerusalem’s ruin, seeking its restoration (Neh. 1:4). Wept over Jerusalem, foreseeing its judgment (Luke 19:41–44; Matt. 23:37–39).
Completion of Work Completed the wall despite opposition, renewing the covenant (Neh. 6:15; 10:28–29). Declared “It is finished,” establishing the New Covenant despite opposition (John 19:30; Heb. 9:15).

The Royal Donkey: A Theological Symbol 

Ken Way argues that Zechariah 9:9’s donkey is a “purebred son of a jenny,” not a youthful colt, emphasizing royal purity over Solomon’s mule, a hybrid symbolizing temporal rule.[5] Jesus’ donkey ride signals a humble, spiritual kingship, fulfilling the Davidic promise of an eternal kingdom (2 Sam. 7:12–13) and the “covenant donkey” tradition tied to covenant ratification (Gen. 49:11).[6] Unlike Solomon’s affluent coronation or Nehemiah’s civic restoration, Jesus’ entry prioritizes prophetic fulfillment, aligning with His mission to suffer and redeem (Isa. 53).

Psalm 118: Hosanna and the Cornerstone

The crowd’s cry of “Hosanna” (Matt. 21:9) echoes Psalm 118:25–26, a post-exilic hymn of covenant faithfulness. They hoped for a Temple-restoring Messiah to defeat Rome [possibly using the Temple as fortress as we see in the events of AD 67-70], but Jesus quotes Psalm 118:22–23: “The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone” (Matt. 21:42). He is the true Temple, rejected by Israel’s leaders but chosen by God. Those who stumble in unbelief face judgment, fulfilled in Jerusalem’s fall in AD 70 (Matt. 23:36–39).

Rabbinic Views: A Dual Messiah?

The Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 98a) wrestles with how to reconcile two well-known Messianic texts and pictures:

Daniel 7:13: One like a Son of Man comes on clouds

Zechariah 9:9: The King comes humbly on a donkey

Some thought these texts could be reconciled as two different Messiah’s coming (Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David) while others theorized:

“If Israel is worthy, He will come on the clouds; if not, humbly on a donkey.”

One Rabbi correctly understood this not describing two different Messiah’s or what kind of Messiahic arrival would take place in Israel if they were faithful or not, but rather:

“Messiah will be both powerfully exalted (‘clouds’) and humbly self-effacing (‘a  donkey’).”[7]

Jesus embodies this duality—entering humbly to suffer (Matt. 21:1–11) and returning in judgment (AD 70, Matt. 16:27-28; Matt. 24:27-30; 25:31). Unlike Alexander’s false divinity, Solomon’s flawed rule, or Nehemiah’s temporal reforms, Jesus is the true Son of God, fulfilling all roles perfectly (2 Cor. 1:20; Phil. 2:5–11).

Conclusion: The King of Peace and Judgment

Jesus’ Triumphal Entry was a prophetic act, surpassing the typologies of Alexander, Solomon, and Nehemiah. As a greater Alexander, He spared Jerusalem temporarily but judged it in AD 70, establishing a spiritual kingdom. As a greater Solomon, He brought eternal peace and built a living Temple. As a greater Nehemiah, He restored the true Jerusalem through His redemptive work. The generation that shouted “Hosanna” witnessed His return in salvation and judgment (Matt. 24:27-34; Luke 21:20-32), proving His kingship is not of this world (John 18:36) but reigns forever (Dan. 2:44) “within” the hearts of His people (Luke 17:20-37).

Study Questions:

  1. Contextual Understanding: What is the main purpose of the article’s series on Matthew 21–22, and how does it relate to the author’s prior work or five part series on Matthew 10:17-23, 16:27-28; 23:39; 26:63-65; and Luke 17:20-37 as paving the contextual setting to understand Matthew 24–25?
  2. Prophetic Fulfillment: How does Jesus’ triumphal entry in Matthew 21:1–11 fulfill the prophecies of Zechariah 9:9, Isaiah 62:11, and Psalm 118, according to the article?
  3. Eschatological Significance: The article connects Jesus’ actions in Matthew 21 (triumphal entry and temple cleansing) to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. How does it argue this connection reflects both salvation and judgment?
  4. Typology of Alexander the Great: In what ways does the article compare and contrast Alexander the Great’s entry into Jerusalem (Zech. 9:1-8) with Jesus’ triumphal entry, and how does Jesus surpass Alexander as the “antitype”?
  5. Parable of the Minas: How does the article use the Parable of the Minas (Luke 19:11–27) to reinforce the typology between Alexander the Great and Jesus, particularly in terms of judgment and kingdom establishment?
  6. Typology of Solomon: The article describes Jesus as a “greater Solomon.”  In the Jewish mind would there be a connection between Solomon riding on a donkey and Jesus riding on a donkey?  What other specific parallels does it draw between Solomon’s reign and Jesus’ ministry, especially regarding peace, temple, and wisdom?
  7. Typology of Nehemiah: How does the article, referencing Robert Cruickshank and James Hamilton, present Nehemiah as a type of Christ, and what are the key parallels between Nehemiah’s work and Jesus’ triumphal entry?
  8. Theological Symbolism: According to the article, what is the significance of the “royal donkey” in Zechariah 9:9, and how does it reflect Jesus’ kingship compared to Solomon’s mule?  What kind of donkey did Jesus ride? 
  9. Psalm 118 and Hosanna: How does the crowd’s cry of “Hosanna” in Matthew 21:9, linked to Psalm 118, reflect their expectations of the Messiah, and how does Jesus properly define these expectations?
  10. Rabbinic Interpretations: The article mentions the Babylonian Talmud’s discussion of a dual Messiah or dual responses to Messiah (Daniel 7:13 vs. Zechariah 9:9). How does it explain Jesus fulfilling both the “clouds” and “donkey” prophecies?
  11. New Covenant Kingdom: How does the article contrast the temporal achievements of Alexander, Solomon, and Nehemiah with Jesus’ establishment of an eternal, spiritual New Covenant Kingdom?
  12. Critical Reflection: The article claims Jesus’ second coming occurred in AD 70. What evidence does it provide to support this view, and how might this interpretation challenge or align with traditional eschatological perspectives?

[1] Josephus, Antiquities 11.8.5

[2] Robert E. Cruickshank, Jr., Double Restoration and Trouble with Equations:  Pop-Prophecy and Zechariah 9:11-12, 03/01/2025, https://burrosofberea.com/double-restoration-and-trouble-with-equations-pop-prophecy-and-zechariah-911-12/

[3] James M. Hamilton Jr., Exalting Jesus in Ezra and Nehemiah, Christ-Centered Exposition Commentary (Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2014), cited in Nick Batzig, “Nehemiah as a Type of Christ,” Feeding on Christ, September 8, 2014, https://feedingonchrist.org/nehemiah-type-christ/.

[4] Willem A. VanGemeren, ed., New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997), 575–577.

[5] Way, Kenneth C. “Donkey Domain: Zechariah 9:9 and Lexical Semantics.” Journal of Biblical Literature 129, no. 1 (Spring 2010): 105–114. Way examines four Biblical terms, three found in Zechariah 9:9—ḥamor, ’ayir, ’aton—and a fourth pērēd in Zechariah 14:15. […] Way believes ben ’atonot is not meant to describe a foal, but rather indicates the animal is a purebred jenny. Then Zechariah 9:9 would describe a single donkey (ḥamor), not any donkey, specifically a jackass (’ayir), and not any jackass, specifically a ben ’atonot, that is, a purebred jackass.

[6] Ibid., Willem A. VanGemeren,

[7] Michael L. Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus: Messianic Prophecy Objections, Vol. 3 (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2003), 73. Brown cites Jewish traditions that acknowledge both Zechariah 9:9 and Daniel 7:13 refer to the same Messiah, depending on Israel’s worthiness—yet some rabbis proposed that both modes would be fulfilled in a single person.

The Coming of the Son of Man in AD 70 Part 4: Matthew 23:39 “Blessed in He Who Comes in the Name of the Lord”

 

Many exegetes approach Matthew 24-25 without noticing the vital context that Matthew 23 plays in its development.  Gary DeMar writes,

“To understand Matthew 24, we must begin with a brief background study of Matthew 23. The disciples had just heard Jesus pronounce His “woes” on the Pharisees. Jesus ended His denunciation of Israel’s religious leaders with this bombshell: “Behold, your house is being left to you desolate!” (23:38). What “house” did Jesus have in mind? Matthew 24 begins:  “And Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him” (24:1).

So then, the “house” that is being left to them “desolate” in Matthew 23:38 is the “temple” that will soon be judged and torn down, stone by stone (24:1).

The disciples were obviously curious since the temple was the most holy site in all Israel. Earlier in His ministry, Jesus pronounced to the religious leaders that His own body was the true temple. The temple of stone was a temporary edifice that pointed to a greater, permanent temple (John 2:1922). Only after Jesus’ resurrection did the disciples begin to understand that the true and everlasting temple is “the temple of His body” (2:21). The physical temple was designed to be temporary. To make the temple of stone a permanent structure in the light of Jesus’ atoning work would be a denial of the Messiah and His redemptive mission.

The disciples were surprised when Jesus told them that the temple was going to be destroyed, with not one stone left on top of another (Matt. 24:2). In response, they asked this multifaceted question: “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age” (24:3)? It is crucial that we pay close attention to when Jesus said these events would take place.

Jesus told the scribes and Pharisees, “Truly I say to you, all these things shall come upon this generation,” that is, the destruction of their temple and city will be realized before the then-existing generation passes into history (23:36). It was the generation of those who rejected Jesus who would experience His wrath. The “this generation” of Matthew 23:36 is the generation upon whom Jesus pronounced judgment.”[1]

Let’s examine the parallel and contextual connections between the coming of Christ and judgment found in Matthew 23 with that of Matthew 24–25 and compare it with the flow we have seen between Matthew 10:17-23, Mattthew 16:27-28 and Luke 17:20-37 as forming and being inseparable from Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 24-25.  With that in mind we begin this chart picking up where we left off in comparing Luke 17:20-37 in “Part 3” of our series with Matthew 24-25 and begin the count with #18:

Matthew 23

Matthew 24–25

(18) The Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat and hypocritically judge (Matt. 23:2ff.). (18) Jesus will sit on His glorious throne and judge these hypocrites, (Matt. 25:31, 41–45).
(19) The “blind” Pharisees & Scribes  produce “sons of hell” in evangelism (Matt. 23:15). (19) Jesus’ disciples will preach the gospel, producing “redemption” or inheritance of the Kingdom             (Matt. 24:14; Luke 21:28–32).
(20) They swear by the temple’s gold and beauty but destruction              (Matt. 23:16–36). (20) Jesus predicts destruction of their temple and condemns them              (Matt. 24:1–2; 25:41–46).
(21) The Pharisees will “fill up” Israel’s sin of blood guilt through persecuting and killing Jesus sends to them (Matt. 23:31–36). (21) The Pharisees will face “wrath” and “days of vengeance” for beating and killing those whom Jesus sent  (Mark 13:9–13; cf. Matt. 10:17–23).
(22) This will mark the judgment of the living (the Pharisees) and the dead (the martyrs) (Matt. 23:31–36). (22) Time of judgment will affect the living (“wrath against this people,” “fall by the sword,” “be led captive”) and the dead                     (Luke 21:20–24; Matt. 25:31–46).
(23) The Pharisees, given seven woes, will face judgment when Christ “comes again” to desolate their temple (Matt. 23:13ff.) (23) Israel’s religious and civil rulers, symbolized as “stars,” will “fall from heaven” as Jesus comes in judgment to desolate their temple (Matt. 24:29ff.)
(24) Jerusalem [Pharisees and Sadducees] resist Jesus’ soteriological and eschatological “gathering” of His children and persecute those He sends to them (Matt. 23:37) (24) Leadership resists Jesus’ soteriological and eschatological “gathering” of His children and persecutes those He sends to them (Matt. 10:17-22; 24:9-31; Mark 13:9)
(25) In their contemporary “this generation,” they would see Him come “again” to judge them and “desolate” their temple              (Matt. 23:37-39). (25) Christ’s contemporary “generation” will see His coming in judgment and desolate their City and Temple (Matt. 24:1–2, 34, cf. Matt. 26:62–64).

Many partial preterists overlook that Jesus prophesies both the judgment and vindication of the living (e.g., the Pharisees) and the dead (e.g., the martyrs) when He connects the vindication of the martyrs—from Abel onward—to the destruction of the Temple and His coming within His generation (Matt. 23:29–39). This aligns with Jesus’ teaching that the eschatological gathering at the sound of the trumpet (resurrection) and the judgment of the dead would occur when the Temple and the Old Covenant age ended in His generation (Matt. 24:3, 27–34; 25:31–46).

As we will explore, Jesus’ reference to His coming when the Jews would be saying, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord,” subtly indicates that His return would coincide with a Jewish feast day when this song was sung. This serves as a “sign” of His coming, prompting the disciples’ questions for further signs in Matthew 24:3.

I would agree with James Jordan who points out it is essential to recognize that Matthew 23–25 form a cohesive literary unit, bound by Jesus’ assertion that “this generation” would witness not just the desolation of their house (the temple) but also judgment and reward for both the living (the Pharisees) and the dead (the martyrs). The structure forms a chiasm[2]centered on the resurrection and judgment of the living and dead being fulfilled in the first century generation:

(a) Seat of Moses (23:1–12)

  (b) Eight Woes (23:13–32)

(c) Full Judgment (23:33–35)

(d) All in This Generation (23:36)

        (e) Christ Comes to Gather/Raise the dead at sound of a Trumpet (23:37–     24:31)

(d) All in This Generation (24:32–36)

(c) Full Judgment (24:45–25:46)

(b) Three Parables (24:45–25:30)

(a) Seat / Throne of Jesus (25:31–45)

Matthew 23 and Luke 17 speak of the same second coming event. Christ’s return, shining like the sunshine from east to west, will judge the Pharisees for the unclean condition within their hearts, while His kingdom is realized within believers’ hearts upon His arrival in AD 70 (Matt. 23:27; Luke 17:20-37). Let’s now consider how the second coming of Christ is described in Matthew 23:

The Song That Sealed Their Fate

“For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord’” (Matt. 23:39).

This phrase, once sung joyfully by Jews from the walls of Jerusalem to welcome pilgrims during the three annual feasts, takes on a sobering turn in Jesus’ mouth. In seed form, He foretells that His “coming” will not bring celebration but judgment. Instead of welcoming peace and salvation, they would—during one of their feasts—unwittingly welcome destruction upon themselves.[3]

From AD 67–70, Jews were bottled up in Jerusalem, expecting God to rescue them from Rome and establish an earthly kingdom. But Jesus had warned in Matthew 24 that such expectations were fueled by false prophets. Their own festive greeting—“Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord”—became the very script for divine judgment, as God once again “came” through a Gentile army, just as He had done via the Assyrians and Babylonians.

As Paul understood (quoting Psalm 69:22 in Romans 11:9-10), even the Psalms speaks of a “trap” laid at their table, and Josephus confirms that the Jewish-Roman War began during Passover while they were singing this very song.

Jesus makes it unmistakably clear: the “you” who will say this is the same “you” (the Pharisees and leaders of Jerusalem) He has been addressing throughout Matthew 23. This verse concludes the chapter’s dire warning that they would see Him again not in peace, but in judgment.

Matthew 24 then continues seamlessly, elaborating on this judgment: the temple’s destruction, signs of Christ’s coming, and a reckoning—all to occur, as Jesus solemnly affirms once more, within “this generation.”

Despite the unity of content and time frame between Matthew 23-24 Dispensationalist writers like Thomas Ice argue for a distinction in Jesus’ use of “this generation” between Matthew 23:36 and Matthew 24:34 to support a futuristic interpretation of Matthew 24. Ice asserts,

“When one compares the use of ‘this generation’ in Matthew 23:36 (an undisputed  reference to AD 70) with its prophetic use in Matthew 24:34, a contrast becomes obvious.  Jesus contrasts the deliverance for Israel in Matthew 24:34 with the predicted judgment in Matthew 23:36.”[4]

However, this interpretation is inconsistent with the thematic and contextual unity of Matthew 23–24, where both chapters emphasize judgment and deliverance within the same contemporary timeframe—namely, the generation alive during Jesus’ ministry, culminating in the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70.

In Matthew 23, Jesus pronounces woes on the religious leaders, condemning their persecution of prophets and righteous individuals. He declares, “All these things will come upon this generation” (Matt. 23:36), predicting judgment on Jerusalem and the temple’s destruction as vindication for the martyrs. This judgment, as Ice acknowledges, is “an undisputed reference to AD 70.” Similarly, Matthew 24 continues this discourse, addressing the disciples’ questions about the temple’s destruction (Matt. 24:1–3). Jesus describes events leading to the city’s fall, including persecution, the flight of believers from Judea for deliverance, and judgment on the persecutors, culminating in the temple’s destruction (Matt. 24:15–21, 34). He explicitly states, “This generation will not pass away until all these things take place” (Matt. 24:34).

The thematic parallels are clear: both chapters address judgment on Jerusalem for rejecting God’s messengers and deliverance for the faithful, all within “this generation.” The Greek term genea (“generation”) consistently refers to the contemporary generation in Jesus’ usage (e.g., Matt. 11:16, 12:39, 16:4), and there is no textual basis to redefine it in Matthew 24:34 as a future or symbolic generation. Ice’s claim that “it is obvious that these things did not occur in AD 70”[5] ignores historical evidence. The Roman siege of Jerusalem (AD 66–70) fulfilled Jesus’ predictions: the temple was destroyed, believers fled to safety (e.g., to Pella, as early Christian traditions record), and the city faced catastrophic judgment, aligning with the “great tribulation” described (Matt. 24:21).

Dispensationalists like Ice redefine “this generation” in Matthew 24 to fit a futuristic, Zionist theology that expects a future tribulation and temple rebuilding. This interpretation imposes an artificial division between Matthew 23 and 24, disregarding their shared context as a single discourse (Matt. 23:1–24:51). By admitting that Matthew 23:36 refers to AD 70, Ice inadvertently undermines his own argument, as the linguistic and thematic continuity suggests Matthew 24:34 likewise refers to the same generation. The attempt to separate the two relies on theological presuppositions rather than exegesis, forcing a futuristic reading that contradicts the plain meaning of Jesus’ words.

In conclusion, the consistent use of “this generation” in Matthew 23–24, coupled with the parallel themes of judgment and deliverance, supports a preterist interpretation: Jesus predicted events fulfilled in AD 70, not a distant future. Dispensationalist reinterpretations, while motivated by theological commitments, fail to account for the historical and textual evidence, rendering their distinctions between Matthew 23 and 24 unconvincing.

Having looked at all of the “coming” of the Lord passages approaching Matthew 24-25 and noticing that they were fulfilled in AD 70, we now turn to give an exegesis of the Olivet Discourse to see if Jesus is consistent with Isaiah, Daniel and Himself in teaching just one imminent coming.

Conclusion 

Matthew 23 is the critical lens through which the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24–25) must be understood, establishing the imminent judgment of Jerusalem’s temple and its religious leaders within “this generation” (Matt. 23:36; 24:34). Jesus’ pronouncement of the temple’s desolation (Matt. 23:38) and His woes against the Pharisees for their hypocrisy and persecution set the stage for the disciples’ question about the timing and signs of His coming and the temple’s destruction (Matt. 24:1–3). The thematic and literary unity of Matthew 23–25, structured as a chiasm centered on judgment and resurrection, underscores that Christ’s coming in AD 70 fulfilled both the judgment of the living (Pharisees) and the vindication of the dead (martyrs), as prophesied. The ironic twist of the festive cry, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord” (Matt. 23:39), sung during the Passover when the Jewish-Roman War began, signals not salvation but divine judgment through the Roman armies, echoing Old Testament patterns of God’s coming via foreign powers.

Dispensationalist attempts, such as those by Thomas Ice, to divorce Matthew 24:34 from the AD 70 fulfillment affirmed in Matthew 23:36 falter against the consistent use of “this generation” and the shared themes of judgment and deliverance. Historical evidence—Jerusalem’s fall, the temple’s destruction, and the flight of Christians to Pella—confirms Jesus’ predictions were fulfilled in AD 70, not a distant future. By rooting His teaching in Old Testament prophecies (e.g., Isaiah, Daniel), Jesus presents a unified eschatological vision of His imminent coming to end the Old Covenant age. This first-century fulfillment establishes the New Covenant kingdom, realized within believers’ hearts (Luke 17:20–37) and proclaimed today (Rev. 22:17). Understanding Matthew 23 as the foundation of the Olivet Discourse affirms the reliability of Jesus’ words and invites believers to live faithfully in the enduring reality of His kingdom, established in AD 70.

Major Premise:
Matthew 23 teaches that Christ would come in judgment upon Jerusalem during one of their feast days—when they would sing, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord”—to vindicate the martyrs by judging both the living (the Pharisees) and the dead (the martyrs), and to desolate the temple—all within His first-century audience’s “this generation” (Matt. 23:29–39).

Minor Premise:
Matthew 24–25 continues this same discourse without interruption, describing the same coming of Christ, the same judgment of the temple, the same vindication of martyrs (the living and the dead), and situating it all within the same time frame—“this generation” (Matt. 24:3, 27–34; 25:31–46). 

Conclusion:
Therefore, the coming of Christ described in Matthew 24–25 is the same AD 70 judgment foretold in Matthew 23 and was fulfilled within that first-century generation. Any attempt to divide these comings introduces an artificial distinction that ignores the literary and theological unity of the text.

Study Questions: 

  1. How does Jesus’ statement in Matthew 23:36 that “all these things shall come upon this generation” provide the key to interpreting the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24–25?
  2. What is the significance of Jesus saying “your house is left to you desolate” (Matt. 23:38) just before He predicts the temple’s destruction in Matthew 24:2?
  3. How does the repeated use of “this generation” in Matthew 23:36 and Matthew 24:34 argue against a futurist or dispensationalist reading of the Olivet Discourse?
  4. What are the implications of Jesus tying the vindication of all the martyrs—from Abel to Zechariah—to the destruction of Jerusalem (Matt. 23:35–36)?
  5. How does the parallel structure (chiasm) from Matthew 23 through 25 support the idea of a unified, first-century fulfillment of judgment and resurrection?
  6. In what way does the quote “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord” (Matt. 23:39) serve as both a liturgical cry and a sign of impending judgment?
  7. How do the parallels between Matthew 23 and Matthew 24–25 (e.g., judgment of Pharisees, martyr vindication, temple desolation) strengthen the preterist view?
  8. What does the consistency between Jesus’ teachings in Matthew 10, 16, 23, and 24 reveal about His understanding of the timing and nature of His coming?
  9. Why does Thomas Ice argue for a distinction between “this generation” in Matthew 23:36 and Matthew 24:34, and what exegetical flaws undermine his claim?
  10. How does recognizing Matthew 23–25 as a single, cohesive eschatological discourse challenge the popular notion of a future, physical second coming still awaiting fulfillment?

[1] Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness Obsession of the Modern Church, (Atlanta, GA: American Vision, 1994), 37

[2] James B. Jordan, MATTHEW 23-25 A LITERARY, HISTORICAL, AND THEOLOGICAL COMMENTARY, (Powder Springs, GA:  American Vision, 2022), 21

[3] My friend Don Preston shared this view with me and how he came across it: “I was in a bookstore owned by a friend. I was just browsing and came across the book: Elizabeth Lattimer Judea from Cyrus to Titus, (Chicago; A. C. McClurg and Co., 1899), 123+). Here is more of her quote: 345–describing the final coming of pilgrims to Jerusalem before the siege, she says, “From the far east, from Antioch and Egypt, Asia Minor and Cyprus, thousands of Jews, confiding in the inaction of Vespasian, had flocked to Jerusalem to celebrate this last Passover. For the last time worshipers approached the temple gates singing the usual songs of Degrees; for the last time they were welcomed by the greeting ‘blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!’ and answered the priest’s welcome with the words, ‘We have wished you good luck– ye who are of the house of the Lord.’” Page 345.

[4] Ibid., 93

[5] Ibid.

 

The Coming of the Son of Man in AD 70 Part 3: Luke 17:20–37 – The Light of Day Dawns and the Kingdom Shines Within

What kind of kingdom was Jesus describing, and when would it arrive? As explored in our three-part Daniel series, both the spiritual kingdom and Christ’s coming “on the clouds” would be fulfilled during the Roman Empire, when He would destroy one temple and “anoint” or consecrate / fill another “Most Holy Place” (Dan. 2; 7:13-27; 9:24-27). Let’s allow Jesus to further interpret Daniel, clarifying the nature, timing, and manner of His coming and Kingdom’s arrival.

These were the burning questions posed by the Pharisees in Luke 17:20, and they remain central to any serious discussion of eschatology today. Even as we see modern day Khazarian “Jews” like Benjamin Netanyahu try and usher in the messiah through waging war with Iran which is in sharp contrast to what Daniel and Jesus describe as the Kingdom and how it comes.  In this often-overlooked passage, Jesus delivers a striking and subversive answer: “The kingdom of God does not come with observation… for behold, the kingdom of God is within you [or within a person].” With this statement, Jesus shattered the expectations of a visible, political, and territorial messianic kingdom. He redirected attention inward—to the heart, to the spirit, to the transformative presence of the King Himself.

This chapter explores Luke 17:20–37 not merely as a preview of judgment, but as a revelation of the nature and timing of Christ’s kingdom and Parousia. Far from being a vague, futuristic promise or an indefinite reign waiting for physical realization, Jesus teaches that His coming would be as clear and all-encompassing as the rising sun—from east to west—and yet, paradoxically, not externally observable. It would be a judgment that would fall on unbelieving Israel like the flood in Noah’s day or fire in Lot’s day—sudden, decisive, and covenantal—yet a deliverance that would dawn like the morning light in the heart for the faithful.

Through a chiastic literary structure, Jesus distinguishes between false, external hopes for the kingdom and its actual, spiritual unveiling within the hearts of His people when He would be revealed from heaven like the light of day. This chapter will demonstrate that Luke 17 is not describing some distant, physical return of Christ, but the imminent and climactic transition from the old covenant to the new—a coming that would bring judgment on apostate Israel and resurrection life to those who recognized the kingdom already in their midst.

Luke 17:20–37

Now when the Pharisees demanded of Him when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God does not come with observation; Neither shall they say, ‘Behold, it is here!’ Or, ‘Behold, it is there!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is standing in the midst of you.” Then He said to the disciples, “The days will come when you shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and shall not see it. And they shall say to you, ‘Look here,’ or, ‘Look there.’ Do not go, neither follow them. For as the light of day, whose light shines from one end under heaven to the other end under heaven, so also shall the Son of man be in His day. But first it is necessary for Him to suffer many things and to be rejected by this generation. Now as it was in the days of Noah, so also shall it be in the days of the Son of man.They were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were being given in marriage, until the day that Noah went into the ark, and the Flood came and destroyed them all. And it was the same way in the days of Lot: they were eating, they were drinking, they were buying, they were selling, they were planting, they were building; But on  the day that Lot went out from Sodom, it rained fire and sulphur from heaven and destroyed them all. This is how it shall be in the day that the Son of man is revealed. In that day, let not the one who is on the housetop, and his goods in the house, come down to take them away; and likewise, let not the one who is in the field return to the things behind. Remember Lot’s wife. Whoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whoever shall lose his life shall preserve it. I tell you, in that night there shall be two in one bed; one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two men shall be in the field; one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.” And they answered, saying to Him, “Where, Lord?” And He said to them, “Where the body is, there will the eagles be gathered together” (Luke 17:20-37 AFV).

Just as Matthew 23–25 is structured with a chiastic pattern, Luke 17:20–37 also follows a chiasm. Some may be asking, “What in the world is a chiasm?” Simply put, it’s a literary structure in which ideas are presented and then mirrored in reverse order, often highlighting a central point.  Here is a classic example.

(A)  No one can serve two masters,

     (B)  for either he will hate the one

          (C) and love the other,

          (C) or he will be devoted to the one

     (B) and despise the other.

(A) You cannot serve God and money.

In a chiasm, the beginning and end usually mirror each other, while the center often contains the main message—the “meat in the middle.” In ancient Hebrew and Biblical times, this form of teaching was popular because the parallel structure made it easy to memorize the teaching.

Now notice how Luke 17:20–37 forms its own chiasm, framed by two questions. The central issue is the manifestation of Christ’s kingdom, specifically at His second coming:

(A)  The question by the Pharisees – When will the kingdom come or be realized (17:20–21)?  It will come “within the heart of a person.”

     (B)  When the coming of the Son of Man is revealed as the sun (17:22–25)

          (C)  This will be like in the days of Noah (17:26–27)

          (C)  This will be like in the days of Lot (17:28–29)

     (B)  When the Son of Man is revealed (17:30)

(A) The question by the disciples – Where, Lord? “Where the dead body is.”

This chiasm, centered around two questions—one from the Pharisees and one from the disciples— reveals when, how and where the kingdom would come. Jesus tells the Pharisees it will be unseen—internally realized within the hearts of believers—at the time when the Son of Man is revealed, in a judgment like that of Noah’s or Lot’s day.

To the disciples, Jesus answers that the location of this coming kingdom would be marked by judgment: their enemies would be gathered like a corpse, devoured by vultures—an image of divine retribution. This too happens when the Son of Man is revealed.

Elsewhere, Jesus says the kingdom would be taken from the Pharisees and given to a new “nation” (the Church) producing its fruit (Matt. 21:43–45). Our text here in Luke 17 describes, how, when, and where that transfer would be accomplished in the events of AD 67 – AD 70.

“Within You”

Some modern translators translate the Greek word entos as “among you” or “in your midst” without sufficient linguistic justification. They appear to do this for two reasons. First, they want to avoid associating Jesus’ spiritual and internal kingdom with the future, eschatological “not yet” of Christ’s parousia, thus comfortably situating the kingdom in the here and now of the “already.”  And, secondly, they fear translating the passage as “within you” might imply that the unbelieving Pharisees had the kingdom within them.

However, linguistic evidence strongly supports the translation “within you” or, better yet, “within the heart of a person.” Strong’s Concordance clearly defines entos as “within you”: “1787. ἐντός entós; adv. from en (1722), in. Within. Used also as a prep. with the gen. (Luke 17:21, “the kingdom of God is within you,” meaning it is located in your heart and affections, not external). With the neut. def. art., tó entós, the inside (Matt. 23:26; Sept.: Ps. 39:4; 109:22). Zodhiates, S. (2000).”

Consider the following arguments which prove with 100% certainty that entos should be translated as “within you” or, even better, “within the heart of a person”:

Contextual contrast: Luke 17:21 contrasts external, visible signs (“look here or there”) with something internal, spiritual, and unseen (“within you”).

Consistent NT usage: The only other NT occurrence of entos is Matthew 23:26, where Jesus contrasts outward appearances with inner spiritual reality, again clearly meaning “inside.”

Septuagint usage: The Greek Old Testament (LXX) consistently uses entos to denote something internal—either within a building (like the temple) or within a person’s spiritual or inward being (cf. Ps. 103:1; 109:22; Isa. 16:11).

External Greek usage: Outside the NT, entos never means “among.”

Alternative Greek for “among”: Luke, who frequently uses the Greek mesos (“among,” “in the midst”), certainly would have chosen it if he intended “among you.”

Lexical authority: Liddell-Scott’s Greek lexicon translates entos in Luke 17:21 as “in your hearts.”[1]

Early Church Fathers: Those closer to Koine Greek consistently interpreted entos as “within you.”

Pronoun flexibility: Concerns that “within you” implies kingdom presence within unbelieving Pharisees ignore the flexible Greek pronoun usage. William Hendriksen clarifies that “you” can simply mean “a person” or “one,” not specifically Pharisees.[2] Thus, Jesus’ teaching is that when the kingdom fully arrives at His second coming, it would not be physically observable, but experienced spiritually within the hearts of people.

Luke often follows theological teaching with a parable: Luke often concludes Jesus’ teachings with a parable emphasizing His main point (e.g., 6:20–49; 10:1–37; 11:14–36; 17:20–18:8).[3]  Thus the “day(s) of the Son of Man” include the spiritual inheritance of the kingdom and Christ’s parousia, but also severe persecution requiring vindication.While the disciples may be tempted to want the same visible, political vindication desired by the Pharisees, Jesus assured them that vindication and deliverance from persecution would indeed come “quickly” (Luke 18:8) at His second coming, not thousands of years later.

Partial Preterist Admissions:  In discussing Luke 18:7-8 Keith Mathison gives exegetical reasons why he believes this “speedily” coming of Christ and judgment is his impending coming in AD 70 [the first being that Luke 17:20-37 is referring to AD 70]:

         “a.  In the preceding chapter (Luke 17:20-37), he speaks of the coming destruction of   Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

  1. In 18:7, Christ assures His listeners that God will not delay long in bringing about justice for his elect.  It could reasonably be argued that two thousand years is a long delay.
  2. In verse 8, Christ assures us that God will bring about justice speedily.  Again, this would seem to indicate a fulfillment within a short amount of time.”[4]

Once again it becomes obvious that Jesus has been teaching a first century second coming event in Matthew 10:17-23, 16:27-28, and now here in Luke 17-18 which will form his more detailed teaching on the subject in the Olivet Discourse:

Matthew 10:17–23 / 16:27–28 /

Luke 17:20-37

Olivet Discourse

Matthew 24 / Luke 21 / Mark 13

(1) Delivered up to councils and synagogues (Matt. 10:17) (1) Delivered up to local councilsand synagogues (Mark 13:9)
(2) Brought before governors and kings to be witnesses to the Gentiles(Matt. 10:18) (2) Brought before governors and kings to be witnesses to the Gentiles(Mark 13:9)
(3) Holy Spirit would speak through them (Matt. 10:19–20) (3) Holy Spirit would speak through them (Mark 13:11)
(4) Betrayal and persecution; stand firm to the end (Matt. 10:22) (4) Betrayal and persecution; stand firm to the end (Mark 13:12–13)
(5) Disciples would not exhaust cities of refuge before the Son of Man’s coming (Matt. 10:23) (5) Disciples (and later Paul) would preach the gospel to the then known world before “the end” (of the OC age) and the coming of the Son of Man (Matt. 24:14; Mark 13:10)
(6) Christ comes in glory (Luke 9:26) (6) Christ comes in glory (Matt. 24:30)
(7) Christ comes with angels

(Matt. 16:27)

(7) Christ comes with angels

(Matt. 24:31)

(8) Christ comes in judgment 

(Matt. 16:27)

(8) Christ comes in judgment

(Matt. 24:28–31; 25:31–34)

(9) Christ and the kingdom come in power (Mark 8:38) (9) Christ and the kingdom come in power (Luke 21:27–32)
(10) Some in the crowd would live to witness the second coming 

(Matt. 16:28)

(10) Some in the crowd would live towitness the second coming

(Luke 21:16–18)

(11) Some in the crowd would diebefore the second coming (Matt. 16:28) (11) Some in the crowd would diebefore the second coming (Luke 21:16)
(12) Christ would come soon and be ashamed of His generation

(Matt. 16:27, YLT; Mark 8:38)

(12) All fulfilled in His “this generation”

(Matt. 24:33–34; Luke 21:27–32)

Luke 17:20–37 Matthew 24:1–41
(13) Fleeing from housetops & fields (17:31-33) (13) Fleeing from housetops & fields (24:17ff.)
(14) Son of Man comes as Light of Day shining from East to West (17:24) (14) Son of Man comes as Light of Day shining from East to West (24:27)
(15) Vultures gathered at corpse (17:37) (15) Vultures gathered at corpse (24:28)
(16) Days of Son of Man as Days of Noah (17:26-30) (16) Days of Son of Man as Days of Noah (24:37ff.)
(17) One taken / one left (17:34-36) (17) One taken / one left (24:41ff.)

Once we get into Matthew 24-25 it will become clear that there is no exegetical evidence to support the idea that Matthew 24–25 is addressing two comings of Christ, as some dispensational Zionists have taught (e.g. Darby) and as some partial preterists (e.g. Gentry) teach.

When we compare Jesus’ teaching of His coming in Matthew 24 and Luke 17, it becomes even more obvious that He was not addressing two different comings. Nor does Matthew present “two sections” referring to two comings. Both chapters speak of one eschatological event.

Partial preterist Gary DeMar (rightly) rejects the view held by dispensationalists and some partial preterists who split Matthew 24. We disagree with Kenneth Gentry, who argues that verses 27–30 refer to Christ’s coming in  AD 70, while verses 36–51 refer to a future second coming. Dispensationalists flip this; they see vv. 27–30 as a future second coming and vv. 36–42 as a pre-trib rapture.

Gary addresses this directly:

Many futurists claim that the phrase “took them all away” (Matt. 24:39) refers to a rapture that is still in our future. On the contrary. “In the context of 24:37–39, ‘taken’ presumably means ‘taken to judgment’ (cf. Jer. 6:11 NASB, NRSV)” (Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 115.) The phrase ties the judgment of the world in Noah’s day with the judgment of the Jews’ world in Israel’s day that took place with the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple.[5]

The comparison with Noah’s day is critical: those “taken” were not the righteous, but the wicked. As John Gill affirms, those left behind—like Noah and his family—were spared, while the others were taken in judgment. Gill connects this directly to Luke 17:27–29, where “taken” also implies destruction, not rapture.

Gary also addresses another major issue for futurists: the order of events in Luke 17 compared to Matthew 24. Some commentators (e.g., J Marcellus Kik, Kenneth Gentry) argue that Matthew 24:35 marks a transition to a future coming. But this fails to explain why Luke 17 rearranges five key Olivet Discourse elements found in Matthew 24—suggesting both accounts refer to the same AD 70 fulfillment. As Ray Summers notes: “This is a most difficult passage… Some small parts of it, however, are repeated in Luke 21 in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70)… The entire complex cautions one against dogmatism in interpreting.”[6]

DeMar concludes that the “two comings” theory collapses when Matthew 24 and Luke 17 are compared. Both accounts cover identical prophetic events, just in different orders. As he illustrates, if the five major events of Matthew 24 are numbered 1–2–3–4–5, Luke presents them as 2–4–1–5–3—a clear sign of recapitulation, not a separate timeline:

Matthew 24:1–41

Luke 17:20–37

#1  Fleeing from housetops & fields #2  Son of Man comes as sunshine
#2  Son of Man comes as sunshine #4  Days of Son of Man as Days of Noah
#3  Vultures gathered at corpse #1  Fleeing from housetops & fields
#4  Days of Son of Man as Days of Noah—Gentry claims different judgment in Future #5  One taken / one left
#5  One taken / one left—Gentryclaims different judgment in Future #3  Vultures gathered at corpse

Was Luke so confused and forgetful, that when Christ taught on His second coming in Luke 17 and Luke 21, Luke only addressed ONE coming while Matthew pointed out that there are really TWO comings?  If Luke understood Christ teaching two comings in the Olivet Discourse, then why does he mix up the order of those events in Luke 17 to be one and the same event?

When we compare Jesus’ teaching on His second coming and the arrival of His kingdom in Luke 17:20–37 with Luke 21:27–32, we realize that both His kingdom and second coming would be fulfilled within Jesus’ contemporary “this generation” and His kingdom and Parousia presence would not be physically seen, because it would be revealed “within the hearts” of His people.  He would come as “The Sun of Righteousness…shining from the east to the west,” “healing” and bringing resurrection life “within the hearts” of His people, while the old covenant kingdom would be desolated and never remembered.

Christ comes as the Light of Day not “Lightning”

Having dealt with the fact that at Christ’s coming He would establish His kingdom “within” the heart of His followers, we need to unpack the OT source of Jesus coming like the “light of day” in both Matthew 24:27 and Luke 17:24 and that being Malachi 3-4:2.

For as the light of day, whose light shines from one end under heaven to the other end under heaven, so also shall the Son of man be in His day (Luke 17:24 A Faithful Version).

“For as the sunshine comes out from the east and is seen even in the west, thus will be the coming of the Son of man” (Matt. 24:27, Aramaic English New Testament).

Many futurists, partial preterists, and even some full preterists interpret this verse as describing lightning—sudden, powerful, and destructive. Some connect this to Christ’s coming through the Roman armies in AD 70, which has merit.[7]However, others, including myself, believe Jesus is describing His second coming (Greek parousia) as the rising sun, whose light spreads from east to west.

For this reason, I prefer the Aramaic English New Testament rendering of astrape as “sunshine” rather than “lightning.” Partial preterist Steve Gregg raises the same concern:

The word “lightning” is the Greek astrape. This word is in fact, the correct term for lightning, but this is not always its meaning.  When defined in the lexicons, astrape is said to mean either “lightning” or, more generally, “bright shining.”  It is in this latter sense that the word is used in Luke 11:36… Interestingly, the same translators who rendered astrape as “lightning,” in Matthew 24:27, quite reasonably chose to translate the same word as “bright shining,” in Luke 11:36… Would it not present a very different image if Jesus were to have said, “For as the bright shining comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be”?  Instead of a lightning bolt, this would clearly be comparing His coming to a glorious sunrise!

Greg continues:

If one should arise before the dawn and watch the eastern horizon, the sky will be observed to change from nearly black to a lighter blue… a ribbon of red-orange will gradually appear, and the whole sky will become progressively lighter… Within seconds, the sun will fully present itself, and the dawning of the day is complete … the Kingdom’s glory will increase more and more until the moment Jesus appears.[8]

This sunrise imagery better matches the nature of the parousia as the progressive, internal unveiling of Christ’s kingdom “within” His people (cf. Luke 17:20–21; Col. 1:27).

It also contrasts sharply with the “secret inner rooms” in the previous verse (Matt. 24:26), where false prophets claim hidden revelation. Christ, by contrast, is revealed like the sun—openly, unmistakably, from east to west.

The events of AD 67–70 confirmed this: Christ judged the old covenant world and revealed Himself as the true Messiah—His presence shining forth like the dawning of a new day.

This interpretation also harmonizes with biblical themes that describe both Christ’s first and second coming as manifestations of light, sunrise, or daybreak:

  • Malachi 4:2 – “But for you who fear my name, the Sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings.”
  • Luke 1:78–79 – “And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High; or you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways, to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins, because of the tender mercy of our God, whereby the sunrise shall visit us from on high to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace”
  • Romans 13:11–12 – “Besides this you know the time, that the hour has come for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed. The night is far gone; the day is at hand.”
  • 2 Peter 1:19 – “…as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.”
  • Revelation 2:28 – “…I will give Him the morning star.”
  • Revelation 22:16 – “I am the bright and morning star.”

Taken together, these passages suggest Christ’s parousia was not merely an act of judgment but also a revelation of light—the dawn of a new covenant day and the end of the old covenant night.

“Behold, I send my messenger [John the Baptist as Elijah], and he will prepare the way before me [Christ]. And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple [in judgment – at His second coming]; and the messenger of the [New] covenant [Christ] in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire…” (Mal. 3:1–2).

“For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble. The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the Lord of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch. But for you who fear my name, the SUN of Righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings. You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall … Behold, I will send you Elijah [John the Baptist] the prophet before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes. And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction” (Mal. 4:1–2, 5–6).

Malachi 3–4 predicts two messengers:

  1. John the Baptist—the eschatological Elijah who prepares the way, and
  2. Christ— who comes suddenly to His temple in judgment, fulfilling and bringing to maturity the new covenant promises.

“The day” that is “coming” is the second coming, portrayed as both a fiery judgment for the wicked and a sunrise of healing for the righteous. This dual imagery captures the essence of the Day of the Lord: retribution for the unrepentant, restoration for the faithful.

Ellicott’s Commentary offers this helpful insight:

“The fathers and early commentators have understood Christ by the Sun of Righteousness… As the rising sun diffuses light and heat… the advent of the reign of righteousness, which will reward the good and the wicked, each according to his deserts…”[9]

John Gill similarly affirms a messianic reading of Malachi 4:2, citing ancient Jewish sources:

“They say… until the Messiah comes, as it is said, ‘unto you that fear my name shall the sun of righteousness arise.’” Philo also connects the “Sun” to the divine Logos, who brings “refuge and salvation.” Though some interpreted it literally—as the sun burning and the wicked healing the righteous—Gill notes this symbolic dual outcome at the end of the age.[10]

John Lightfoot connects John the Baptist’s ministry and the “wrath about to come” (Matt. 3:7) to Malachi 4’s prophecy, seeing it in the AD 70 judgment:

“These words respect the very last words of the Old Testament… and denote the most miserable destruction of the nation, and now almost ready to fall upon them.”[11]

Adam Clarke offers one of the clearest preterist interpretations of Malachi 4:1–2, seeing Christ’s coming as spiritual and fulfilled in AD 70:

Verse 1 – The burning day is the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, leaving “neither root nor branch,” a phrase denoting total judgment.

Verse 2 – The “Sun of Righteousness” is Christ, whose gospel and Spirit bring healing and life to all who believe. Clarke emphasizes that Jesus’ influence is “universally diffused” like the sun. “Ye shall go forth…” refers to Christians who, recognizing the sign of Jerusalem surrounded by armies, obeyed Christ’s command to flee and escaped to Pella—preserving every Christian life.[12]

Ancient Jewish and Christian commentators alike have seen Malachi 4:2 as:

  1. A messianic prophecy referring to Christ;
  2. A reference to His second coming, not His first.
  3. A spiritual and covenantal coming in AD 70—bringing salvation to believers (spiritually through imputed righteousness and physically through the flight to Pella) and judgment to the wicked.

These three themes align with the central thesis of this article. Likewise, New Testament references to Christ as the Morning Star (Rev. 2:28; 22:16) support a spiritual fulfillment at His second coming. While many debate whether these refer to AD 70 or the second coming, full preterism resolves the tension—not as either/or, but as a fulfilled already/not-yet paradigm.

In Malachi 4:2, the “Sun of Righteousness” arises to inaugurate the new covenant world of righteousness, bringing salvation to the soul (cf. 1 Pet. 1:4–12; 4:5–7; 2 Pet. 1:19; 3:13). Paul echoes this in Romans 13:11–12, the “day” is at hand, bringing salvation to believers and marking the end of the “night” of the old covenant age—not physical transformation at the end of world history, but spiritual renewal in AD 70 (cf. Rom. 11:26–27).

In Luke 17:24 and Matthew 24:27, Jesus’ coming is likened to light shining from east to west. The Greek word astrapē can mean “lightning” or also “bright shining.”[13] This suggests Christ’s parousia is not a brief event but a sustained and illuminating presence. The related verb phainō (used for “shine”) can even describe vegetation emerging, reinforcing the image of a sunrise—not a lightning strike—as the symbol of His coming. 

Jesus would not appear in some dark inner chamber, like the false Messiahs of His day. His presence would be as open and unmistakable as the dawn itself:

“…from the rising of the sun and from the west, that there is none beside me.  I am the LORD…” (Isa. 45:6; 19–25; cf. Mal.1:1, 4:1–2, 5–6).

Perhaps Joshua 10:12–14 foreshadows eternal life in the new covenant age, when God caused the sun to stand still as a sign that He was fighting for Israel. In the new creation, every day is likewise a day without darkness or reproach (Isa. 60:19–20; Rev. 21:23–26). Then, the sun stood still in the heavens; now, the “Sun of Righteousness” never sets.

Christ’s enduring presence—His eternal Day within the Church—is proof that nothing can prevail against her. Just as the miracle in Joshua’s day testified to divine victory, so too does the radiance of Christ’s light in the lives of His people testify to His reign. Those still outside, walking in darkness, are often stirred to longing when they witness the warmth and joy of God’s presence in His people. Yet this same light also hardens the reprobate—just as the sun melts wax but hardens clay.

As plants receive life from the sun through photosynthesis, the Church draws eternal life from Christ alone. In union with Him, the Church becomes the leaves on the Tree of Life, and the Light of the new Jerusalem brings healing to the nations (Rev. 22:2). The gospel—God’s living water and light—goes forth as special revelation to awaken the thirsty soul. No physical luminary can declare the righteousness of God! Only Christ and His Church, as the true heavenly kingdom, can bring the light that saves.

Without the “Sun of Righteousness,” without the glory of God’s imputed righteousness shining into the heart and mind of man, all is lost. The world truly does revolve around the “Sun [Son] of Righteousness.”

Conclusion

Luke 17:20–37 is not a riddle to be unpacked by modern prophecy speculation—it is a divine proclamation of how Christ’s kingdom would arrive and be revealed. Jesus’ coming was not to be observed in the skies like a comet or hidden in secret rooms like a conspiracy—it would be a dawning presence, shining from east to west, exposing and ending the darkness of the old covenant world while bringing healing, righteousness, and resurrection life and light to those who feared His name.

This crucial passage offers one of the clearest teachings on the nature and timing of Christ’s kingdom and Parousia. Contrary to both futurist speculation and overly materialistic expectations—even among some partial preterists—Jesus declares that His kingdom would not be externally visible or politically manifest, but rather internal, spiritual, and already present within His faithful ones.

In this passage, Jesus unites several key prophetic themes:

  • the spiritual nature of the kingdom (v. 21),
  • the imminent character of His coming (v. 24; 18:7-8),
  • the judgment upon unbelieving Israel like that in Noah and Lot’s day (vv. 26–30),
  • the urgent command to flee when the signs appear (v. 31–33), and
  • the decisive separation between the righteous and the wicked (vv. 34–37).

Moreover, the striking parallels between Luke 17 and Matthew 24 expose the untenable division many modern interpreters attempt to impose on the Olivet Discourse. The very same language—about the days of Noah, the lightning-like Parousia, the one taken and the one left, and the vultures over the corpse—is found in both accounts. To argue that Luke 17 refers to AD 70 while Matthew 24 refers to a future second coming ignores these textual and thematic overlaps. Luke 17 is not only contextually prior to Matthew 24, but also foundational to it—demonstrating that Jesus’ eschatology remained consistent throughout His ministry.

This demands a consistent interpretation: If Luke 17—where all of these apocalyptic elements are present—refers to Christ’s coming in AD 70, then Matthew 24–25, which uses the exact same language, refers to the same event. Jesus did not teach two different comings of the Son of Man separated by thousands of years coming as the light of day; He taught one Parousia, one judgment, one consummation, one kingdom transition—fulfilled in the lifetime of His hearers.

Major Premise: If the coming of Christ in Luke 17:20–37 refers to the same coming of the Son of Man described in Matthew 24–25 [as most futurists correctly see it]

Minor Premise: and yet the coming of Christ in Luke 17:20-37 was fulfilled in the judgment of Jerusalem in AD 70 [as many partial preterists see it]

Conclusion: —then the coming in Matthew 24–25 must also have been fulfilled in AD 70.

If “A=B” and yet “A” was fulfilled in AD 70, then so was “B.” Pretty basic stuff – A = Luke 17 and B = Mathew 24-25

The coming of the Son of Man is not future to us but was imminent to His first-century audience. It was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, when the corrupt religious system was judged and the kingdom was revealed to be fully “within” those united to Christ. Just as in the days of Noah and Lot, the judgment was swift and unexpected—bringing deliverance to the righteous and wrath to the wicked. The vultures gathering over Jerusalem’s corpse signal not a future end of the world, but the end of a covenantal world—the world of Torah, temple, and tribal exclusivity.

The internal kingdom Jesus proclaimed has been inaugurated and established. His light continues to shine, not from a rebuilt temple or geopolitical Israel, but from the hearts of those who live in the power of the new covenant. The Church, indwelt by the King and empowered by His Spirit, is the true Israel of God—vindicated in history and called to walk in the light of His already-fulfilled Parousia. The kingdom is here. The King has come. The light of day is shining, and it will never go out.

Today’s Application: 

We have explored Malachi 3–4 in connection with Christ’s coming in judgment and salvation in Luke 17:20–37, depicted as the “Sun of Righteousness” or “Light of Day.” In AD 70, Christ fulfilled these prophecies, dismantling the Zealots’ vision of a militaristic Messianic kingdom and establishing the spiritual, eternal kingdom prophesied by Daniel and Jesus—a kingdom that exists “within” believers.

In contrast, modern Khazarian “Zionist zealots” hold misguided beliefs about Benjamin Netanyahu, viewing him as a potential forerunner to the Messiah, or even the Messiah himself.  Their vision of the kingdom is rooted in warfare and territorial conquest. According to certain Orthodox Jewish circles:

“It would seem that these proposals as well as other ‘signs’ have led some in the Orthodox community to believe that Bibi Netanyahu is Masiach ben Yosef (Messiah, son of Joseph) the military leader that will precede the coming of the Messiah. [He will die in battle, but will make the way for the Messiah to come.] They claim that Netanyahu will be the last leader of Israel until the Messiah comes. Because Netanyahu has a military background and the fact that [they believe] he has taken on the spiritual mantle of Mordechai as is demonstrated in his speech to the U.S. Congress noted above, they are calling him Mashiach ben Yosef.  Their website enumerates the many ways Bibi fulfills the requirements of this forerunner.”[14]

These modern zealots seek to establish a “Jewish” Messianic kingdom through war, with propaganda—funded by figures like the Rothschilds [who own MSM]—portraying Israel as merely “defending itself.” However, those familiar with the Talmud and the extreme political views of Benjamin Netanyahu recognize its violent undertones and flawed attempts to usher in a kingdom through war. Both Daniel and Jesus prophesied the definitive end of Old Covenant national Israel in AD 70 and the establishment of the true, spiritual, and eternal kingdom within those who follow the real Messiah in the New Covenant age.

Evangelical Zionists are not much better in that they support the violence of Talmudic Zionism even when stealing land from and killing Christians because they think they have a mandate to “support God’s people” and modern Israel is “fulfilling prophecy.”  But in essence Talmudic and Evangelical Zionism have rejected the OT and NT teaching concerning the timing of Messiah to come upon the clouds in judgment and establishing the spiritual Messianic Kingdom “within” the hearts of His people.  They have aligned their views of an earthly kingdom with that of unbelieving apostate Jews of the first century.  How long will they wait and want war in hopes of bring about the coming of Messiah (first or second) when these prophecies have already been fulfilled when and how Daniel and Jesus prophesied?

Study Questions:

  1. What does Jesus mean when He says the kingdom of God does not come with observation but is “within you” (Luke 17:21)? Is Jesus exegeting both the time and nature of fulfillment of Daniel’s kingdom in Daniel 2 and 7? What are the connections between Dan. 2; 7:13-27 and Luke 17:20-37?  Is it when Christ would be revealed as the light of day that the kingdom would be “within”?
  2. How does the chiastic structure of Luke 17:20–37 help clarify its meaning?
  3. In what ways does Jesus contrast external, visible expectations of the kingdom with its true spiritual reality here in Luke 17 and Matthew 23?
  4. How do the “days of Noah” and “days of Lot” illustrate the nature and timing of Christ’s coming?
  5. What parallels can be drawn between Luke 17 and Matthew 24 that support a unified, single fulfillment in AD 70?
  6. Why is it significant that Jesus said His coming would be “as the light of day shining from one part of the sky to the other”?What OT passage depicts Messiah as coming as the sun and within that context is the destruction of the Second Temple mentioned?
  7. What is the significance of the imagery of vultures gathering around the corpse in both Luke 17 and Matthew 24?
  8. How does Jesus’ answer to “Where, Lord?” in Luke 17:37 point to the destruction of Jerusalem?
  9. Why do some translators avoid rendering entos as “within you,” and what are the implications of this choice?
  10. How does this passage challenge the common modern assumption that Jesus’ second coming is still in our future?
  11. When read alongside Luke 21:27–32, and in light of the chiastic structure of Luke 17:20–37, is it clear to you that the promise of Christ establishing His kingdom “within” the hearts of His people was to be fulfilled at His coming in AD 70? While many argue that this inward and spiritual aspect of the kingdom was realized in his first coming, does the context of Luke 17 support that conclusion—or does it instead point to the judgment and kingdom consummation associated with his coming in AD 70?
  12. In Luke 17:34–36, Jesus speaks of one person being “taken” and another “left.” According to the article, who is taken and who is left, and how does this differ from popular rapture interpretations?
  13. How does the article’s interpretation of Luke 17:20–37 challenge futurist views that expect a physical, visible return of Christ in the future?
  14. How does the Talmud and many Kazarian “Jews” like Banjamin Netanyahu think the messianic kingdom is going to come and are they trying to accomplish that now?Is this Zealotism 2.0?  How is Christ’s kingdom different?

[1] Liddell, Henry George, and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, rev. Henry Stuart Jones, 9th ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 577. Liddell-Scott specifically translates entos in Luke 17:21 as “in your hearts.”

[2] William Hendriksen, Gospel of Luke, (Grand Rapids, MI: 1978), 805.

[3] A.J. Mattill, Jr., Luke and the Last Things: A Perspective for the Understanding of Lukan Thought (Dillsboro, NC: Western North Carolina Press, 1979), 89.

[4] Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism Aan Eschatology of Hope (Phillipsburg, PA: P&R Publishing, 1999), 213

[5] Gary DeMar, “Is the Rapture Found in Matthew 24?”, Christian Family Study Centre, December 7, 2020, accessed Mar 31, 2025, https://christianfamilystudycentre.home.blog/2020/12/07/is-the-rapture-found-in-matthew-24/.

[6] Ray Summers, Commentary on Luke: Jesus, the Universal Savior (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1972), 202.

[7] Bray, Matthew 24 Fulfilled, 120–128.

[8] Steve Gregg, Empire of the Risen Son: A Treatise on the Kingdom of God—What It Is and Why It Matters, Book One: There Is Another King (Maitland, FL: Steve Gregg, 2020), 388–389.

[9] Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers, Malachi 4, StudyLight.org, https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ebc/malachi-4.html

[10] John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible, Malachi 4, BibleHub, https://biblehub.com/commentaries/gill/malachi/4.htm.

[11] Lightfoot, J. (2010). A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica, Matthew-1 Corinthians, Matthew-Mark(Vol. 2, p. 78). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

[12] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton & Porter, 1831; repr., Bible Hub, accessed April 18, 2025),https://biblehub.com/commentaries/clarke/.

[13] James Strong, Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2001), s.v. “astrapē.”

[14] Victoria Radin, Who is Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu?

The Coming of The Son of Man in AD 70 Part 2: Matt. 16:27-28 – He is About to Come in Glory, Power, and in His Kingdom

Introduction

In Part 1 of this series, we examined Matthew 10:17–23 and identified several key points. First, Jesus draws on Daniel 7, describing a period of intense persecution preceding the Son of Man’s coming to deliver the Kingdom to the saints and bring the “end.” Second, the only “coming” of the Son of Man that aligns with the New Testament’s context and chronology in this passage is Jesus’ coming in judgment through the Roman armies in AD 70. Finally, the parallels between Matthew 10:17–23 and Matthew 24–25, when viewed through the analogy of faith, confirm that the persecution, Kingdom, coming of the Son of Man, and “end” refer to the same event. This raises a critical exegetical question: How many comings of Christ and eschatological “ends” do Jesus and Daniel address in Matthew 10:17–23, Daniel 7, 9:24–27, and 12:4–7?

In Part 2, we will analyze Matthew 16:27–28, highlighting the same challenges for partial preterists and futurists. The consistent teaching of Jesus, reinforced by parallels between Matthew 10:17–23, 16:27–28, and 24–25, makes it clear that He describes a single coming fulfilled within the lifetime of His first-century audience. For partial preterists like Keith Mathison, who interpret the Son of Man’s coming in Matthew 10:22–23 and 16:27–28 as fulfilled in AD 70, Matthew 24–25 poses a problem: it becomes difficult to argue that Jesus envisions two separate comings—one in AD 70 and another at the supposed end of world history.  This is why Mathison has gone back and forth in how to exegete Matthew 24-25.  Then there are other partial preterits like Ken Gentry who try to create two comings of Jesus beginning here in Matthew 16:27-28 so he can try and slide that distinction in Matthew 24-25.  We will critique Gentry’s approach and others who divide these verses (vss. 27-28) to uphold creedal expectations of a future coming, revealing the eisegesis underlying their interpretations.

Matthew 16:27–28 / Mark 8:38–9:1

“For the Son of Man will [or is “about to…” YLT] come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works. Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom” (Matt. 16:27–28).

“For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” And he said to them, “Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has [‘already’ Rotherham    Translation] come with power” (Mark 8:38–9:1).

Before exegeting these key texts, it is important to note that many conservative interpreters rightly observe them as referring to Christ coming in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. These passages provide a framework for understanding Christ’s coming as apocalyptic and imminent, in keeping with the consistent New Testament emphasis on fulfillment within the first century.

Adam Clarke correctly connects the coming of Christ in glory of Matthew 16:27 with Daniel 7:13-14 to AD 70,

“This was the glorious Mediatorial kingdom which Jesus Christ was now about to set up, by the destruction of the Jewish nation and polity, and the diffusion of his Gospel through the whole world.”[1]

He also identifies the coming in the next verse to be referring to the judgment upon Jerusalem,

 “This verse seems to confirm the above explanation, as our Lord evidently speaks of the establishment of the Christian Church after the day of pentecost, and its final triumph after the destruction of the Jewish polity; as if he had said, “Some of you, my disciples, shall continue to live until these things take place.” The destruction of Jerusalem, and the Jewish          economy, which our Lord here predicts, took place about forty-three years after this: and some of the persons now with him doubtless survived that period, and witnessed the   extension of the Messiah’s kingdom; and our Lord told them these things before, that when they came to pass they might be confirmed in the faith, and expect an exact fulfillment of all the other promises and prophecies which concerned the extension and support of the kingdom of Christ.

To his kingdom, or in his kingdom…This makes the passage a little more conformable to the passage already quoted from Daniel; and it must appear, very clearly…of the destruction of the Jewish polity…”[2]

Reformed theologian and John Lightfoot agrees:

“In Matthew, it is the Son of man coming in his kingdom. The coming of Christ in his vengeance and power to destroy the unbelieving and most wicked nation of the Jews is expressed under these forms of speech.”

Lightfoot then outlines several descriptions tied to this coming:

  1. “The great and terrible day of the Lord” (Acts 2:20; 2 Thess. 2:2–3)
  2. “The end of the world” (Jer. 4:27; Matt. 24:29)
  3. “The last times” (Isa. 2:2; Acts 2:17; 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Pet. 3:3)—referring to the final days of that covenant age
  4. The beginning of a “new world” (Isa. 65:17; 2 Pet. 3:13)
  5. His “coming in the clouds” (Rev. 1:7), “in glory with the angels” (Matt. 24:30)
  6. His enthronement and judgment with the apostles judging Israel (Matt. 19:28; Luke 22:30)

Lightfoot concludes:

“Our Savior had said, ‘Whoever is ashamed of Me and of My words in this adulterous and sinful generation…’ to warn that His coming in glory would occur during the lifetimes of some standing there.”[3]

Keith Mathison interprets Christ coming in His glory of Matthew 16:27-28 to be a foundational text in understanding how the coming of Christ in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 was fulfilled in AD 70,

“There is a distinct parallel between the language of 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 and Matthew 16:27-28, which describes a coming of the Son of Man for judgment within the lifetime of some of His disciples.”[4]

Although Matthew 16:27-28 is another instance where Jesus promises to come in judgment within the lifetimes of some in the crowd standing before Him, drawing once again on Daniel 7:13-14 as He did in Matthew 10, many seek to separate verse 27 from verse 28. Some readily acknowledge that verse 27 refers to the second coming of Christ, but because they believe it cannot have been fulfilled in the lifetime of Jesus’ disciples, they interpret the coming of Christ in verse 28 as the ascension or transfiguration event. However, numerous exegetical arguments demonstrate a strong connection between these two verses.

(1) “For the Son of Man is about to come…” (Matt. 16:27, YLT)

The Young’s Literal Translation (YLT), along with Darby, Wuest, and Weymouth, correctly renders Jesus’ words as “about to come,” emphasizing the imminence conveyed by the Greek verb mellō. This translation aligns with mellō’s usage throughout Matthew and the New Testament, consistently indicating something imminent—not distant or indefinite.

Here are several examples of mellō in Matthew’s Gospel:

  • Matthew 2:13 (WEY): Herod is “about to” seek Jesus’ life, prompting Joseph and Mary to flee. Mellō expresses an imminent threat, not a vague or far-off danger.
  • Matthew 3:7 (GNT): John warns the Pharisees of the “wrath about to come.”  The urgency is supported by the context—John’s message of a kingdom “at hand” (v. 2), with judgment imagery: the ax already “at the root of the trees” (v. 10), and the winnowing fork “in His hand” (v. 12). This wrath and kingdom were not distant; they were looming over that generation. Jesus later ties this judgment and harvest to the end of the Old Covenant age (cf. Matt. 13:39–43; 24:3, 31–34).
  • Mathew 17:10–13: Mello appears twice. First, Elijah is “about to” come—a sign of immediate expectation. Jesus identifies John the Baptist as the fulfillment, confirming Elijah had already come. Yet many premillennialists still expect a future Elijah, despite Jesus’ clear teaching. Second, mellō refers to Jesus’ own suffering, which was also imminent, not far off.
  • Matthew 24:6 (WEY): The disciples would “before long” begin hearing of wars and rumors of wars. While these were early signs, Jesus clarifies “the end” was not yet. The decisive signs of the end—worldwide gospel proclamation (Matt. 24:14) and armies surrounding Jerusalem (Luke 21:20)—would signal that His coming was truly near. that Christ’s second coming was indeed near.

In summary, the “about to” coming in Matthew 16:27 coheres with the promise in verse 28—that some standing there would live to see the kingdom come in power. After generations of longing for the Messiah, the long-awaited kingdom was, at last, about to arrive.

(2) “Verily I say unto you…” (Matt. 16:28)

The phrase “Verily,” or “Truly I say to you,” appears nearly 100 times in the Gospels. It always functions to emphasize or affirm what was just stated—not to introduce a new, unrelated subject. The meaning is strong: “truly,” “indeed,” or “may it be fulfilled.”

Despite this, Thomas Ice, a dispensational premillennialist, claims:

“…verse twenty-seven looks at the establishment of the kingdom in the future, while a          promise of seeing the Messiah in His glory is the thought of verse twenty-eight. They are two     separate predictions separated by the words ‘truly I say to you.’”[5]

However, Ice does not provide a single instance where “Truly I say unto you” is used to introduce a new subject. Without any supporting evidence, his point is, at the very least, unscholarly and, at worst, irresponsible.

At an Evangelical Theological Society session, I once heard a premillennial speaker make the same claim. During the Q&A, I asked, “Can you provide just one example in Jesus’ teachings where the phrase ‘Truly I say to you’ begins a new subject?” After a long silence, he admitted, “No.” I replied, “Then it’s unwise to repeat arguments from other scholars who haven’t done their research. I’ve examined every use of the phrase, and in every case, it reinforces the previous point—which is exactly how it functions in Matthew 16:27–28.”

Christ had just declared He was “about to come” to reward each person (v. 27), and He doubled down on that point in v. 28: some of His listeners would live to see it. Far from shifting topics, His “truly” emphasizes the nearness and certainty of what He just said.

(3) “Some standing here shall not taste of death” and “the kingdom of God” (Matt. 16:28)

Jesus’ statement that “some standing here shall not taste of death” refers to a specific prophetic sequence: persecution in the apostolic generation followed by the arrival of the kingdom in judgment. This is not a vague prediction that a few disciples would live into old age; it is anchored in Jesus’ consistent teaching that links persecution with His return (cf. Matt. 10:16–23; Luke 21:16–32; Matt. 23:31–36; John 21:19–22; Rev. 6:10–11; 16:6, 15; 18:5, 20). The only unrelated death mentioned in the Gospels is that of Judas.

Jesus’ teaching echoes the book of Daniel:

  • The kingdom would be established during the Roman Empire (cf. Dan. 2 & 7).
  • Persecution of the saints would precede the coming of the Son of Man on the clouds, followed by their receiving of the kingdom (Dan. 7:13–22).

Premillennialist Thomas Ice offers a weak rebuttal to the preterist interpretation. He writes:

 “A further problem with the preterist view is that our Lord said ‘some of those standing here…’ It is clear that the term ‘some’ would have to include at least two or more individuals… Peter notes that ‘John only survived among the 12 disciples till the destruction of Jerusalem.’”[6]

This argument is flawed on two fronts. First, it wrongly assumes Jesus was speaking only to the Twelve. However, Mark’s parallel makes it explicit: “Then He called the crowd to Him along with His disciples and said…” (Mark 8:34–9:1). Jesus was addressing a broader group, not just the apostles.

Second, Ice’s assumption that only John survived until AD 70 is speculative and irrelevant. “Some” could easily apply to members of the broader crowd Jesus addressed—even if only a few survived the predicted judgment.

Taken together with his earlier claim that “Verily I say unto you” introduces a new topic (which it never does), this reflects a pattern of misinterpretation. Such oversights are surprising from someone regarded as a prophecy expert and public debater.

(4) “…in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of man also shall be ashamed of him, when he cometh…” (Mark 8:38).

Jesus is not accusing His audience of physical adultery, but of spiritual and covenantal unfaithfulness. By calling them an “adulterous generation,” He is identifying Israel as the unfaithful bride who rejected her Messiah—the Groom standing before them. Though Mark 8:38 doesn’t explicitly mention Jerusalem’s divorce and remarriage, it alludes to them through the language of shame and covenant judgment. The coming of the Son of Man “with His reward” evokes wedding imagery from Isaiah 62:4–5, 11, linking judgment with the eschatological marriage feast.

Under the old covenant, God was “married” to Israel (cf. Exod. 19–24). This relationship was depicted as monogamous, and later—after the kingdom split—as polygamous. In this analogy, God took two “sisters” as wives:

  • Israel (Aholah/Samaria, capital of the northern kingdom)
  • Judah (Aholibah/Jerusalem, capital of the southern kingdom) (cf. Jer. 31:31–32; Ezek. 1:1–4; 1 Kings 11:9–13).

Both “wives” committed spiritual adultery. Israel was divorced and judged through the Assyrian captivity. Judah, though judged by Babylon, remained under covenant—because from her line would come the Messiah.

The prophet Hosea dramatizes Israel’s divorce and burial among the Gentiles, while anticipating Judah’s future judgment and a restored marriage in the “wilderness” (Hos. 2). This renewed covenant, fulfilled in Christ, would be a remarriage—a new bride formed from both Jews and Gentiles.

Under old covenant law, an adulterous wife was to be stoned, and a priest’s wife burned. Revelation 19 portrays Jerusalem—the unfaithful harlot—as judged accordingly. She is stripped and left “ashamed” (cf. Rev. 17:16). In contrast, the church—Christ’s new bride—is clothed in righteousness, the “New Jerusalem” from above (cf. Matt. 22:1–14; Rev. 3:18; 19:8; 21:2; 2 Cor. 5:1–21).

Thus, when Jesus says He will be “ashamed” of that generation at His coming, He is invoking a prophetic tradition of marital judgment and covenant transition. The unfaithful wife would be exposed; the faithful bride would be glorified.

These marriage and judgment motifs will reappear later in this chapter—in Jesus’ parable of the ten virgins (Matt. 25:1–12) and in Revelation 17–21, where the full picture of Jerusalem’s divorce and the Church’s betrothal is fully revealed.

(5) “…There are certain of those here standing, who shall in nowise taste of death, until they see the kingdom of God, already come in power” (Mark 9:1, Rotherham Translation).

Mark’s version of this prophecy adds a key detail: some standing in the crowd would live to see Christ’s kingdom already come in power. Unlike Matthew, who uses the future tense (“will see”), Mark uses the perfect participle, indicating a completed action—they would witness that it had already arrived. Kenneth Gentry, citing J.A. Alexander, clarifies this point:

“Here “come” is “not, as the English words may seem to mean, in the act of coming (till they see it come), but actually or already come, the only sense that can be put upon the perfect participle here employed.”[12] Thus, His disciples were to expect its exhibition in power. It was not powerfully to evidence itself immediately, for many of His disciples would die before it acted in power. Yet it was to be within the lifetimes of others, for “some” standing there would witness it. This seems clearly to refer to the A.D. 70 destruction of the temple and removal of the Old Testament means of worship (cf. Heb. 12:25–28; Rev.1:1, 3, 9). This occurred as a direct result of Jesus’ prophecies (John 4:21–23; Mt. 21:33ff.; 23:31–34:34).[7]

In other words, Jesus wasn’t merely predicting a future event—He was assuring His disciples that some of them would look backand recognize that the kingdom had already arrived in power. This was fulfilled in the AD 70 destruction of the temple and the end of the Old Covenant system—events Jesus had explicitly predicted (cf. John 4:21–23; Matt. 21:33ff.; 23:31–24:34).

Jesus also says they would “see” His coming. The Greek word eidō implies more than physical sight—it includes spiritual perception or understanding. Some in His audience would both witness the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and grasp that this was the fulfillment of His promise: the kingdom had come “with power” and was now present “within” (Luke 17:21).

This reading aligns Mark 8:38–9:1 with Luke 17:20–37 and affirms that Jesus’ coming was not a visible removal of believers from the earth, but a covenantal transition. It rebuts futurist “rapture” interpretations and supports the view that survivors remained to spread the good news in the renewed new covenant creation—just as Isaiah foresaw (cf. Isa. 65–66).

(6) Matthew 16:27–28 and the Olivet Discourse—The Analogy of Faith (Jesus Interprets Jesus)

Earlier we saw that Matthew 10:17–23 previews themes expanded in the Olivet Discourse. Likewise, Matthew 16:27–28 condenses Jesus’ teaching on His coming in glory, judgment, and power—later unpacked in greater detail in Matthew 24–25.

Matthew 16:27–28 & Parallels

Olivet Discourse

(1)  Christ comes in glory

(Luke 9:26)

(1)  Christ comes in glory

(Matt. 24:30)

(2)  Christ comes with angels

(Matt. 16:27)

(2)  Christ comes with angels

(Matt. 24:31)

(3)  Christ comes in judgment

(Matt. 16:27)

(3)  Christ comes in judgment

(Matt. 24:28–31; 25:31–34)

(4)  Christ and the kingdom come in power (Mark 8:38) (4)  Christ and the kingdom come in power (Luke 21:27–32)
(5)  Some disciples would live

(Matt. 16:28)

(5)  Some disciples would live

(Luke 21:16–18)

(6)  Some disciples would die

(Matt. 16:28)

(6)  Some disciples would die

(Luke 21:16)

(7)  Christ would be ashamed of some in His “this adulterous generation”(Mark 8:38) (7)  All would occur in His “this generation” (Matt. 24:34)

Premillennial Zionists like Thomas Ice argue that verse 28 refers to the transfiguration, not the second coming. To support this, Ice claims that “verily I say unto you” introduces a new topic.[8] But this phrase never introduces new material—it always links and emphasizes what came before.

The Greek conjunction kai (“and”) does mark narrative progression: “And after six days Jesus…” (Matt. 17:1). Yet the transfiguration is not the fulfillment—it is a preview of Christ’s glory and His new covenant authority.

At the transfiguration, Peter wants to preserve the visible glory of Moses and Elijah. But God removes them, leaving only Christ’s glory and the command to “hear Him” (Matt. 17:5–8). This symbolizes the passing away of the old covenant and the supremacy of the new (cf. Matt. 24:35).

Peter later clarifies this in 2 Peter 1:16–19, where he defends the second coming against critics. He appeals not to speculation but to the vision on the mount as confirmation from God. Though Peter doesn’t use metamorphoō (“transfigured”), he invokes the same imagery: “until the Day dawns and the Morning Star rises in your hearts”—a reference to the “last day” of John’s Gospel and the “in that day” of Luke 17 and Matthew 24–25.

The verb metamorphoō appears only two other times: in Romans 12:2 and 2 Corinthians 3:18. In both, it signifies a spiritual, covenantal transformation, not a biological one. In Romans, this transformation culminates in the fullness of Jew and Gentile salvation (Rom. 11:25–36), and is tied to the imminent arrival of final redemption (Rom. 13:11–12). In 2 Corinthians, believers are “being transformed” as the veil of the old covenant lifts, reflecting Christ’s glory with unveiled faces.

The fading glory of Moses—and of Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration—illustrates the end of the old covenant. The new covenant brings unfading, eternal light, allowing the church to behold Christ’s glory forever (2 Cor. 4:6; Rev. 22:4).

The Transfiguration as a Preview of the Parousia  

Sam Waldron interprets Matthew 16:27 as the second coming event but Christ coming in His kingdom of verse 28 as having,

“…language of Christ coming in His kingdom would appear, then, to be a reference to his transfiguration on the mount which was a kind of precursor of His second coming in glory.”[9]

If the transfiguration is a foreshadowing of the Futurists concept of the second coming or parousia, we should ask: where in that vision do we see the planet earth burning, Christ descending on a literal cloud, or corpses flying out of tombs to reunite with their spirits?

None of these popular images appear. Instead, the transfiguration reveals the theological essence of the parousia: the passing glory of the old covenant, represented by Moses (law) and Elijah (prophets) giving way to the abiding glory of the new covenant, fully established by AD 70.

Waldron also tries to make a distinction or “contrast” between Christ “coming in glory” (v. 27) verses Him “coming in His kingdom” in (v. 28) as being two separate comings separated by thousands of years.  But once again Mr. Waldron does not go back to Jesus’ OT source of Daniel 7:13-14 which connects Him coming upon the clouds in glory with His kingdom.  Nor is there any discussion of how Christ both comes in His glory and the kingdom within His generation in the Olivet discourse (cf. Luke 21:27-32).  Therefore, Paul under inspiration connected Christ’s coming and His kingdom as “about to” arrive together anticipating the events of AD 70,

“I fully testify, then, before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is about to judge the living and dead at His appearing and His kingdom (2 Tim. 4:1 LSV/SLT/YLT/BLT).

The first two major teachings on the coming of the Son of Man—Matthew 10:17–23 and Matthew 16:27–28 (paralleled in Mark 8:38–9:1)—serve as condensed previews of the fuller exposition Jesus gives in the Olivet Discourse:

Matthew 10:17–23 / 16:27–28

& Parallels

Olivet Discourse

(1) Delivered up to councils and synagogues (Matt. 10:17) (1) Delivered up to local councils and synagogues (Mark 13:9)
(2) Brought before governors and kings to be witnesses to the Gentiles(Matt. 10:18) (2) Brought before governors and kings to be witnesses to the Gentiles(Mark 13:9)
(3) Holy Spirit would speak through them (Matt. 10:19–20) (3) Holy Spirit would speak through them (Mark 13:11)
(4) Betrayal and persecution; stand firm to the end (Matt. 10:22) (4) Betrayal and persecution; stand firm to the end (Mark 13:12–13)
(5) Disciples would not exhaust cities of refuge before the Son of Man’s coming (Matt. 10:23) (5) Disciples (and later Paul) would preach the gospel to the then known world before “the end” (of the OC age) and the coming of the Son of Man(Matt. 24:14; Mark 13:10)
(6) Christ comes in glory (Luke 9:26) (6) Christ comes in glory

(Matt. 24:30)

(7) Christ comes with angels

(Matt. 16:27)

(7) Christ comes with angels

(Matt. 24:31)

(8) Christ comes in judgment 

(Matt. 16:27)

(8) Christ comes in judgment

(Matt. 24:28–31; 25:31–34)

(9) Christ and the kingdom come in power (Mark 8:38) (9) Christ and the kingdom come in power (Luke 21:27–32)
(10) Some in the crowd would live to witness the second coming 

(Matt. 16:28)

(10) Some in the crowd would live towitness the second coming

(Luke 21:16–18)

(11) Some in the crowd would diebefore the second coming

(Matt. 16:28)

(11) Some in the crowd would diebefore the second coming

(Luke 21:16)

(12) Christ would come soon and be ashamed of His generation

(Matt. 16:27, YLT; Mark 8:38)

(12) All fulfilled in His “this generation”

(Matt. 24:33–34; Luke 21:27–32)

Before closing, as we did in Matthew 10, I will demonstrate that Jesus once again has Daniel’s prophetic material at the forefront of his mind:

Daniel 7; 9; & 12

Matthew 16:27-28 & Parallels

1).  The Son of Man / Messiah comes during the time of the 4th or Roman Empire on the clouds “as” or “like” “the Ancient of Days” (Dan. 7:13 (OG) LXX)

 

1).  Jesus was living in the time of the Roman Empire and was “about to come” “in his glory and the glory of His Father” within the lifetime of those standing in the crowd (Luke 9:26-27)
2).  This is when Christ rules in His kingdom & the saints inherit His kingdom            (Dan. 7:14, 27) 2).  Christ and His kingdom come in power and glory at this time (Matt. 16:27-28)
3).  This would be when the Ancient of Days would “open the books” in the Great White Throne judgment (Dan. 7:10)

*  This is not the ascension, but the Second Coming at the end of the millennium when the “book(s) are opened” and the dead are raised and judged – 7:10-13; 9:24-27; 12:1-2

3).  This would be when Jesus would judge or “repay each person according to what they had done” (Matt. 16:27)

*  Jesus is invoking the context and fulfillment of Dan. 7; 9; and 12 when Messiah was understood to come to judge and raise the dead – cf. 11QMelch.

Partial Preterism and Matthew 16:27-28

While many partial preterists agree with us that Matthew 16:27–28 form a unified declaration by Christ foretelling His AD 70 coming to judge, reward, and establish His kingdom, others—such as Kenneth Gentry—disagree. In an article on this passage, Gentry seeks to redefine what constitutes “orthodox preterism” on this critical text. He claims that anyone who sees verses 27 and 28 as referring to the same AD 70 event is veering into “liberalism” or advocating “hyper-preterism.”

Gentry’s position is that verse 27 refers to the Second Coming of Christ at the end of world history, when all men are rewarded, whereas verse 28 pertains to Christ’s coming to manifest His kingdom in the fall of Jerusalem.

However, this sharply contradicts the views of other prominent partial preterists such as Gary DeMar, who swiftly responded to Gentry, pointing out that many respected commentators throughout church history have interpreted Matthew 16:27 as a reference to Christ’s coming in judgment in AD 70. These include Adam Clarke, Henry Hammond, and—ironically—Gentry’s own favored “orthodox preterist,” John Lightfoot. Ouch.[10]

We must also mention Gentry’s contemporary, Keith Mathison, who likewise interprets both Matthew 16:27–28 as referring to Christ’s judgment upon Jerusalem. Mathison even uses this passage as a foundational support for his view that Christ came in flaming fire to bring relief to the persecuted Thessalonian Church and wrath upon their persecutors in AD 70 (2 Thess. 1:7–9). This is particularly noteworthy since many “orthodox preterists” consider that fiery coming in 2 Thessalonians 1 to be the Second Coming event that ends the millennium (cf. Rev. 20:5–15). Will Gentry now accuse Mathison—his own co-author and editor of When Shall These Things Be?—of advancing a “hyper-preterist” or “liberal” interpretation of Matthew 16:27–28 and 2 Thessalonians 1:7–9? Gentry’s appeal to “orthodox preterism” quickly collapses under the weight of his own theological allies, including Lightfoot and Mathison.

Gentry offers two primary arguments for why Matthew 16:27–28 must refer to two entirely separate comings of Christ, separated by thousands of years.

First Argument: Alleged Universal End of Time Judgment in Matthew 16:27

Gentry argues that verse 27 refers to a final judgment of all mankind because Jesus says He will “repay every man”:

“In v. 27 we see the universal nature of His coming: He ‘will then repay every man.’ Thus, all men will be involved in His judgment.”

This is deeply ironic, considering Gentry admits elsewhere that Revelation 22:10–12—where Christ says He is coming soon to repay each person according to what he has done—was fulfilled in AD 70[11]:

“Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done” (Rev. 22:12).

Let us respond directly to Gentry’s first point:

  • Matthew 16:27 (YLT) clearly states that the Son of Man was “about to come” (Gr. mellō) to judge and reward all men. Revelation 22:12 uses nearly identical language, affirming Christ’s soon coming to bring recompense to each person. The time-frame and substance match perfectly.
  • Both passages draw directly from Daniel 7:10–13, where the Son of Man comes in judgment during the Roman Empire, the books are opened, and all are judged. This judgment scene not only matches Matthew 16:27 and Revelation 22:12 but also forms the same judgment after the millennium in Revelation 20:12–13.
  • Revelation 22:10 declares that the “appointed time” for the vision isnear and should not be sealed, in contrast to Daniel 12:4, 9, where the vision is not near and thus sealed. Daniel 12:2–7 describes “the appointed time” for the resurrection and judgment occurring at the time of the tribulation, during the final three-and-a-half years when Jerusalem would be “completely shattered” (Dan. 12:7)—i.e., AD 67–70. Thus, Matthew 16:27 and Revelation 22:10–12 are speaking of the same near and imminent judgment, rooted in Daniel’s vision of the coming of the Son of Man to open the books and judge all men (Dan. 7:10–13; Rev. 20:12–13 = Rev. 22:10–12).

Second Argument: Supposed Difference Between Christ’s “Coming in Glory” and “Coming in the Kingdom”

Gentry claims that the “coming in glory” in verse 27 is distinct from the “coming in His kingdom” in verse 28. But this argument collapses upon closer biblical inspection.

As demonstrated elsewhere, Jesus consistently links His coming in glorypowerjudgment, and the arrival of His kingdom in texts such as Matthew 24:30–31, Mark 13:26–30, Luke 17:20–37, and Luke 21:27–32. There is no disjunction between His “coming” and the arrival of the “kingdom”—they are concurrent events.

Paul also affirms this in 2 Timothy 4:1 (YLT), where Christ’s about to be (mellō) coming or appearance brings both the kingdom and the judgment of the living and the dead—a clear reference to the same AD 70 event.

In short, Gentry has no legitimate exegetical basis for separating Matthew 16:27–28. His own admission that Revelation 22:10-12 was fulfilled in AD 70 refutes his insistence that Matthew 16:27 must be a future, world-ending event. And his attempt to redefine “orthodox preterism” not only contradicts biblical context but alienates his theological heroes and peers.

Major Premise:

The coming of the Son of Man in judgment, glory, and power to recompense described in Matthew 16:27 / Mark 8:38-9:1 is the same event as the coming of the kingdom in power described in Matthew 16:28, and both are tied to the AD 70 judgment on Jerusalem—as affirmed by intertextual parallels with Daniel 7:10–13; 12:2–7Revelation 22:10–12Revelation 20:12–132 Thessalonians 1:7–9, and Jesus’ own teaching in Matthew 24:30–31Mark 13:26–30Luke 17:20–37, and Luke 21:27–32.

Minor Premise:

All these texts (Matthew 16:27–28; Revelation 22:12; Daniel 7:10–13; Revelation 20:12–13; 2 Thess. 1:7–9; etc.) describe one unified judgment-coming of Christ:

  • That was“about to” (Gr. mellō) or “soon” (Rev. 22:10–12),
  • That brings judgment and reward,
  • That occurs within the lifetimes of Jesus’ first-century audience (Matt. 16:28),
  • And that is consistently connected to the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Old Covenant age (Dan. 12:2-7; Luke 21:27–32; Matt. 24:3–34).

Conclusion:

Therefore, Matthew 16:27–28 refers to the same first-century, AD 70 coming of Christ in judgment and kingdom / glory / power and cannot be divided into two separate comings thousands of years apart. Kenneth Gentry’s attempt to divide the verses is exegetically, contextually, and theologically untenable.

Conclusion

Matthew 16:27–28, paralleled in Mark 8:38–9:1, stands as a pivotal teaching on the imminent coming of the Son of Man in His glory and kingdom, fulfilled in AD 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Old Covenant age. Jesus’ declaration that “some standing here shall not taste death” until they see the kingdom come in power (Matt. 16:28; Mark 9:1) underscores the first-century timeframe, reinforced by the Greek mellō (“about to”) and the consistent use of “this generation” across His teachings. Drawing on Daniel 7:13–14, Jesus connects His coming with judgment, reward, and the establishment of His mediatorial kingdom, themes echoed in the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25). The transfiguration, often misread as the fulfillment, serves instead as a preview of this eschatological event, symbolizing the transition from the fading glory of the Old Covenant to the eternal light of the New Covenant.

Exegetical arguments—such as the continuity affirmed by “verily I say unto you,” the covenantal imagery of an “adulterous generation,” and the spiritual perception implied by “see”—refute futurist attempts to separate verses 27 and 28 or project the coming to a distant future. Dispensationalist claims, like those of Thomas Ice, lack textual support and misinterpret key phrases, while the preterist view aligns with historical evidence (Jerusalem’s fall) and New Testament imminence (e.g., 2 Tim. 4:1). By framing His coming as a covenantal judgment and marital transition, Jesus fulfills Old Testament prophecies (Isa. 62; Hos. 2) and establishes the Church as His new bride. Matthew 16:27–28 thus lays a foundation for the Olivet Discourse, affirming that Christ’s Parousia in AD 70 was a transformative event, bringing judgment on the unfaithful and glory to the faithful, with the kingdom now present in the hearts of believers (Luke 17:21) and proclaimed in the new covenant age.

Major Premise:
Daniel 7:13–14 foretells the Son of Man coming with the clouds during the Roman Empire to receive dominion, glory, and a kingdom, accompanied by judgment, the opening of the books, and the vindication of the saints—events tied to “the end” (Dan. 7:10–27; 12:1–2).

Minor Premise:
In Matthew 16:27–28, Jesus draws directly from Daniel’s prophecy, declaring He was about to come in the glory of His Father with His angels to reward each person. He also promises that some standing there would live to see His kingdom come with power—mirroring His earlier teaching in Matthew 10:23 and later exposition in Matthew 24:27–34, where the same coming, judgment, and kingdom arrival occur within “this generation.”

Conclusion:
Therefore, Matthew 16:27–28 describes the same coming of the Son of Man as in Matthew 10:23 and Matthew 24:27–34—a unified eschatological event fulfilled in AD 70, when Christ came in judgment upon apostate Israel, ended the Old Covenant age, and established His kingdom in power, all in perfect fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecies.

Study Questions for Matthew 16:27-28:

  1. How does the phrase “about to come” (Greekmellō) in Matthew 16:27 influence your understanding of the timing of Christ’s return in this passage?
  2. Why is it significant that Jesus links the promise of His coming in glory (v. 27) directly with a promise that some of His audience would live to see it (v. 28)? How does this challenge futurist interpretations?
  3. What role does Daniel 7:9-13, 12:2-4 play in shaping Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 16:27–28, and how does this Old Testament background reinforce a preterist view?
  4. What exegetical evidence undermines the claim (by Thomas Ice and others) that Matthew 16:27 and 16:28 refer to two separate events?
  5. Why is the phrase “Truly I say unto you” (amēn legō humin) important in arguing for the unity of verses 27 and 28? How is it used elsewhere in the Gospels?
  6. In what ways does the transfiguration serve as a preview, rather than a fulfillment, of the Parousia? What theological themes are symbolized in the fading of Moses and Elijah and the sole exaltation of Christ?
  7. How does Mark 9:1’s use of the perfect participle (“already come with power”) contribute to the case for a first-century fulfillment of the kingdom’s arrival?
  8. What is the covenantal significance of Jesus calling His generation “adulterous,” and how does this shape our understanding of His coming in judgment?
  9. How do Paul’s words in 2 Timothy 4:1 (YLT) (about Christ being “about to judge” at His appearing and His kingdom) harmonize with Matthew 16:27–28 and support an AD 70 fulfillment?
  10. Why do some partial preterists (like Kenneth Gentry) divide these verses into two different comings, and how does that compare to the unified approach held by figures like Adam Clarke, John Lightfoot, and Keith Mathison? Whose reading do you find more compelling—and why?
  11. Does Gentry’s argument for dividing Matthew 16:27–28 hold up, given that he also takes Revelation 22:10–12 and Daniel 12:2 as fulfilled in AD 70? Is he not creating an artificial distinction between two comings of Jesus in order to later justify the same division in Matthew 24–25?Does Gentry desperately need a future to us coming of Jesus to remain creedal and do you think this is the main reason for his eisegesis of Matthew 16:27-28?

[1] Adam Clarke, StudyLight.org Matthew 16:27

[2] Ibid.

[3] John Lightfoot, Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica, Vol. 2 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1979), 422.

[4] Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism An Eschatology of Hope (Phillipsburg, NJ:  P&R Publishing, 1999), 228

[5] Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice, End Times Controversy: The Second Coming Under Attack (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2003), 87.

[6] Ibid., 88.

[7] Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., He Shall Have Dominion, 219–220.

[8] Ice, End Times Controversy, 88.

[9] Waldron, Ibid. 382

[10] Gary DeMar, How Commentators Interpret Matthew16:27 https://americanvision.org/posts/how-commentators-interpret-matthew-16-27/?fbclid=IwY2xjawEWUWdleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHfy7eL-ioS_c-VtPJ-hBZEKCECb9t8OV_k4wVY2S-s3cbqKrbttycQM9kg_aem_D9hGO8_vbMh0Uv-mxr7JUw

[11] Kenneth Gentry and contributors, FOUR VIEWS ON THE BOOK OF REVELATION, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998), 41

The Coming of The Son of Man in AD 70 Part 1: Matthew 10:17-23 – What “Coming” of the Son of Man & “End” Is This?

Introduction

After examining articles that show how God uses Isaiah and Daniel to build on Moses’ eschatology in Deuteronomy 32, we see their shared focus on a perverse and crooked generation during the Roman Empire, marking the “near” “appointed time of the end.” This generation would witness the Messiah’s coming on the clouds, bringing salvation to His people while executing imminent judgment to end old covenant Israel in AD 70. Throughout the Gospels, Jesus prophesies this return in judgment within the lifetime of His first-century audience, a teaching foundational to passages like Matthew 24–25. Yet, dispensationalists propose two future comings—a secret rapture followed by a visible return seven years later—while partial preterists affirm a spiritual coming in AD 70 but expect a final return to conclude history. Does Jesus’ teaching support two distinct eschatological comings, or one fulfilled in the first century? Furthermore, did He describe this coming as physical and visible or as spiritual and internal? To answer these questions, we will exegete key passages, including Matthew 10:17–23, 13:39–43, 16:27–28, 26:64–65, and Luke 17, before exploring Matthew 24–25, to clarify how Jesus points to AD 70 as the fulfillment of all Old Testament prophecy (Luke 21:22–32).

Matthew 10:17–23

Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore, be wise as serpents and harmless as doves.  But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to councils and scourge you in their synagogues.  You will be brought before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles.  But when they deliver you up, do not worry about how or what you should speak. For it will be given to you in that hour what you should speak; for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.  “Now brother will deliver up brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death.  And you will be hated by all for My name’s sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved. When they persecute you in this city, flee to another. For assuredly, I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes (Matt. 10:17–23, NKJV).

Jesus told His first-century disciples—not a future generation—that they would not run out of cities in Israel to flee to before He returned. These cities served as places of refuge during persecution, and the coming He refers to is His return in judgment against Jerusalem in AD 70.

Premillennialist D.A. Carson explains and concedes,

“vv. 17–22, pictures the suffering witness of the church in the post-Pentecost period during a time when many of Jesus’ disciples are still bound up with the synagogue.  vv. 2 The “coming of the Son of Man” here refers to his coming in judgment against the Jews, culminating in the sack of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple (so France, Jesus, p. 140; Feuillet, “Les origines,” pp. 182–98; Moule, Birth, p. 90; J.A.T. Robinson, Jesus and His Coming [London: SCM, 1957], pp. 80, 91–92; and others).[1]

Amillennialist Sam Waldron also concedes,

“My conclusion is that the “coming” of Matthew 10:23 is a reference to His sending of judgment upon Jerusalem in A.D. 70 through the Roman armies.”[2]

Yet many interpreters avoid this conclusion, instead suggesting Jesus’ “coming” here was fulfilled at the cross, resurrection, or Pentecost. This view fails for two reasons:

First, Jesus listed specific events that would precede His coming:

  1. Some would be scourged in synagogues.
  2. Some would be brought before governors and kings.
  3. The Holy Spirit would be given as a miraculous defense.
  4. Some would be put to death during a period of severe persecution.

None of these events occurred before the crucifixion, the resurrection, or Pentecost; however, all are documented in the book of Acts and took place before Christ came in the judgment upon Jerusalem in AD 70.

Second, Matthew 10:17–23 previews what Jesus would expand upon in Matthew 24–25: persecution, divine aid, the gospel going to the nations, and the parousia or “coming”—all within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34).

The AD 70 Parallels and Domino Effect of Matthew 10:17-23

Jesus’ words in Matthew 10 foreshadow the broader pattern of events He later elaborates in the Olivet Discourse, forming a unified eschatological framework: one coming, one judgment, fulfilled within the lifetime of His disciples. The parallels between Matthew 10:17–23 and the Olivet Discourse are striking:

Matthew 10:17–23 Olivet Discourse
(1) Delivered up to local councilsand synagogues (Matt. 10:17) (1) Delivered up to local councilsand synagogues (Mark 13:9)
(2)  Brought before governors and kings as witnesses to the Gentiles (Matt. 10:18) (2) Brought before governors and kings as witnesses to the Gentiles (Mark 13:9)
(3) Holy Spirit would speak through them (Matt. 10:19–20) (3) Holy Spirit would speak through them (Mark 13:11)
(4) Family betrayal and persecution; he who endures to “the end” will be “saved” (Matt. 10:22) (4) Family betrayal and persecution; he who endures  to “the end” will be “saved” (Mark 13:12–13)
(5) Disciples would not exhaust cities of refuge before the “end” and the Son of Man’s coming (Matt. 10:23) (5) Disciples and Paul were to preach the gospel to the then-known world before “the end” (of the old covenant age) and the coming of the Son of Man (Matt. 24:14; Mark 13:10)

Many commentators, noting the strong parallels between Matthew 10:17-23 and Matthew 24-25, overlook the audience relevance and temporal context, teaching that Matthew 10:17-23 refers to a future to us second coming of Jesus. They assume both Matthew 10:23 and Matthew 24-25 describe events still to come. However, we align with the commonsense position of Premillennial D.A. Carson, Amillennial Sam Waldron, and Postmillennial Partial Preterists whom interpret Matthew 10:23 as Christ’s judgment coming in AD 70. We also agree with certain futurists who point out the obvious in that the parallels between Matthew 10:17-23 and Matthew 24-25 indicate they refer to the same coming of Christ.  These two orthodox views have formed Full Preterism.  This is not an “either or” but a “both and” solution.

The parallels between Matthew 10:17–23 and Matthew 24–25 create exegetical challenges for Premillennialists like D.A. Carson and Amillennialists like Sam Waldron, who argue that these passages do not refer to the same coming of the Son of Man. If Jesus promised to return to judge Jerusalem, as they both affirm Jesus teaches here in Matthew 10:23, would He not have referenced this “coming” elsewhere in His teachings such as Matthew 16:27-28, Matthew 24-25, and Matthew 26:64-65? Furthermore, if New Testament authors, under divine inspiration, describe Christ’s coming as “at hand,” “soon,” or “about to” occur, why would these references not also point to the AD 70 judgment, consistent with Matthew 10:23? Many partial preterists such as Gary DeMar recognize the implications of Christ’s teaching in Matthew 10:23, connecting it to Matthew 16:27–28 and other New Testament passages that emphasize a “soon” coming, all pointing to AD 70. In contrast, Carson and Waldron treat the “coming” of Christ in Matthew 10:23 as an isolated event, disconnected from Jesus’ other teachings on His imminent return in the Gospels and the broader New Testament.

In the immediate context of Matthew 10, Jesus proclaims, “The kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 10:7). As we will see, Christ connects His coming with the arrival of the kingdom in subsequent passages. Futurists err by limiting the “at hand” kingdom solely to Christ’s first coming, especially since Jesus draws from Daniel 7:13–27, which ties the coming of the Son of Man to receiving the kingdom. Daniel 2 further clarifies that this kingdom is spiritual, distinct from human kingdoms.

Let’s examine the parallels between Jesus’ teaching here in Matthew 10 with his OT source material in Daniel:

Daniel 7; 9; & 12

Matthew 10

1). There is severe persecution before the Son of Man comes on the clouds and the saints inherit His Kingdom (Dan. 7:13-27) 1). There is severe persecution before the Son of Man “comes” and the saints inherit His Kingdom (Matt. 10:17-23)

 

2). The Son of Man comes & the saints inherit the “kingdom” during the time of the Roman Empire (Dan. 7:1-27) 2). The Son of Man comes in the lifetime of the disciples & the “kingdom” was “at hand” during the Roman Empire (Matt. 10:7-23)
3). The coming of the Son of Man at “the appointed end” is when Messiah would judge Israel and the nations or when the “book(s) were opened” (Dan. 7:10-13; 12:1-4LXX) 3).  The disciples would live to witness the “end” and “coming” of the Son of Man at the “day of judgmentwhen He would judge Israel with the nations                (Matt. 10:15-23)

 

Scholars like Carson and Waldron often overlook that Jesus’ Old Testament source in Matthew 10:17–23 is Daniel 7:13–27, which develops the same eschatological themes:

  • The coming of the Son of Man (Dan. 7:13 = Matt. 10:23).
  • Persecution precedes inheriting the kingdom, the time of the end and the coming of the Son of Man (Dan. 7:13–27 = Matt. 10:7, 17–23).
  • Contextually, this is described as “the day of judgment,” even for the dead of Sodom and Gomorrah, when Christ would sit on His throne, judge the nations, and strip them of their dominion (Dan. 7:9–27 = Matt. 10:15).

While we commend D.A. Carson, Sam Waldron, and postmillennial partial preterists like Kenneth Gentry for interpreting Christ’s “coming” in Matthew 10:23 as fulfilled in AD 70, they inconsistently apply this exegesis by failing to connect it to Daniel 7 and Matthew 24–25, where the same second coming event is described. Some partial preterists assert that the “coming” in Matthew 10:23 and Matthew 24:30 refers to AD 70 but argue that Matthew 25:31 describes a future event. Yet, in Matthew 10:23, 24:30, and 25:31, Jesus fulfills the “coming” prophesied in Daniel 7:13. Where does Daniel 7:13 indicate two distinct comings of Jesus separated by thousands of years? Moreover, the “coming” in Matthew 25:31 recapitulates the same event discussed in Matthew 24:3, 27, and 30, all rooted in Daniel’s prophecy.

When the disciples inquire about His “coming” in Matthew 24:3, and Jesus responds in Matthew 24:30 and 25:31, why would they assume this refers to a different coming than the one He promised within their lifetimes in Matthew 10:23, also fulfilling Daniel 7:13? Why would Jesus or the disciples have the end of world history in mind when He taught that they would experience the “end” at His coming within their generation? Furthermore, isn’t the “end” and “three and a half years” tied to the Son of Man’s coming in Daniel 7:13, 25–26 the same “end” and “three and a half years” in Daniel 9:26–27 and 12:4, 7, linked to “the war” that results in Jerusalem’s “desolation” and “shattering” between AD 67 and AD 70? Carson and Waldron’s hermeneutics fall short, as they fail to harmonize their AD 70 interpretation of Matthew 10:17–23 with Matthew 24–25 and neglect to develop the Old Testament source texts in Daniel 7, 9:24–27, and 12:4–7, as required by the analogy of faith.

Before leaving our text, it is important to point out that Jesus is not saying that His disciples would fail to reach all towns in Israel before His return. Rather, while they carried out their mission from roughly AD 26–66, He assured them there would always be another city of refuge. Some scholars, like B.M. Metzger, interpret the Greek to mean just that:

“…the Committee preferred to regard the words as a natural continuation, inserted in order to explain the following statement, οὐ μὴ τελέσητε τὰς πόλεις τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ ἕως [ἂν] ἔλθῃ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου (which was taken to mean, “You will not exhaust the cities of Israel [as cities   of refuge], before the Son of Man comes”).”[3]

Up to the end (of the old covenant age), He would provide them with cities of refuge somewhere within Israel. Paul later confirms that all nations throughout the then-known Roman world had heard the gospel in his day just as the end of the old covenant age was approaching (cf. Rom. 10:18; 16:25–26; Col. 1:5–6, 23).

Conclusion

Matthew 10:17–23 presents a clear and unified teaching on the imminent coming of the Son of Man, fulfilled in AD 70 with the judgment on Jerusalem and the end of the Old Covenant age. Jesus’ promise that His disciples would not exhaust Israel’s cities of refuge before His return (Matt. 10:23) ties directly to the persecution, divine empowerment, and gospel proclamation detailed in the passage, all of which were realized in the apostolic era as documented in Acts. Drawing on Daniel 7:13–27, Jesus frames His coming as a singular eschatological event, bringing judgment, the kingdom’s arrival, and vindication for the persecuted, all within “this generation” (cf. Matt. 24:34). The striking parallels with the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25) confirm this as one coming, not two, refuting dispensationalist and partial preterist attempts to posit multiple returns or a distant future fulfillment.

Scholars like D.A. Carson and Sam Waldron correctly identify Matthew 10:23 as fulfilled in AD 70 but falter by isolating it from Jesus’ other teachings (e.g., Matt. 16:27–28; 24–25) and Daniel’s prophecies (Dan. 7:13; 9:26–27; 12:4–7), which consistently point to a first-century consummation. The preterist interpretation, harmonizing Matthew 10 with these texts and New Testament imminence (“soon,” “at hand”), affirms that Christ faithfully returned in AD 70, spiritually establishing His kingdom and bringing closure to the Old Covenant system.

Major Premise:
Daniel prophesied a singular coming of the Son of Man during the Roman Empire, involving persecution, judgment, and the inauguration of the Kingdom, to be fulfilled at the “appointed time of the end” (Dan. 7:13–27; 9:24–27; 12:1–7).

Minor Premise:
Jesus taught in Matthew 10:17–23 that His disciples would face persecution, be empowered by the Holy Spirit, and not finish fleeing through Israel’s cities before the Son of Man came. He later repeated and expanded these same themes in the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25), placing them all within His generation.

Conclusion:
Therefore, Matthew 10 and the Olivet Discourse describe the same AD 70 fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy—the coming of the Son of Man in judgment upon apostate Israel and the establishment of the Messianic kingdom within the first-century generation.

Study Questions for Matthew 10:17–23:

  1. What two major questions does this chapter seek to answer about Jesus’ coming?
  2. Why do many scholars such as D.A. Carson and Sam Waldron believe Matthew 10:23 refers to Jesus’ coming in AD 70? And if this coming of Christ was fulfilled in AD 70, then doesn’t it beg the question as to why the NT coming of the Lord that was “near” “soon” and would “not be delayed” is the same AD 70 coming Jesus prophesied here?
  3. List four events Jesus said would occur before His coming in Matthew 10. Did any of these occur before the transfiguration, crucifixion, ascension, or Pentecost?
  4. How do the themes in Matthew 10:17–23 parallel the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24–25?
  5. How does the language of “the end” and the coming of the Son of Man connect Matthew 10 to Daniel 7 and 12? Why don’t you think men like Carson and Waldron avoid that study?
  6. Why is the phrase “you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes” significant to audience relevance?
  7. What is the meaning of the Greek term Metzger interprets in reference to “cities of Israel”?
  8. How does Paul’s declaration that the gospel had been preached to “all nations” by his time support an AD 70 fulfillment?
  9. What errors do partial preterists and futurists make when interpreting Matthew 10:23, according to this chapter?
  10. Why does the chapter argue there is only one coming of Christ described throughout the Gospels and Daniel—not two?
  11. What evidence shows that Matthew 25:31 is a recapitulation of Matthew 24:30 and not a different event?
  12. How does the use of “soon,” “near,” and “in a very little while” in NT texts confirm the first-century timing of Christ’s coming?

[1] D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Matthew, Mark, Luke, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 8 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984), 252.

[2] Sam Waldron, THE DOCTRINE OF LAST THINGS AN OPTIMISTIC AMILLENNIAL VIEW, (Free Grace Press, 2025), 384

[3] Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed., a companion volume to the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament (4th rev. ed.) (London and New York: United Bible Societies, 1994), 25. Emphasis added.

Daniel Part 3 – Daniel 12: The Tribulation, Appointed Time of the End and the Resurrection Fulfilled in AD 70

Introduction 

As we have seen, Daniel 7 builds upon Daniel 2, and then Daniel 9 absorbs both Daniel 2 and 7. Therefore, it shouldn’t surprise us that Daniel 12 further consolidates these earlier prophecies. Each chapter progressively clarifies the timing and spiritual nature of these events, situating their fulfillment within the Roman Empire era, during the “appointed time of the end” of the old covenant age in AD 70.

(1)  The Tribulation (Daniel 12:1)

We are constantly bombarded by self-appointed “prophecy experts” who portray the tribulation as an event to be experienced for our generation. For the pre-tribulationist folks, it’s all good to some extent because we are supposed to experience a secret “rapture” right before it all heats up and unfolds. But if you are a post-tribulationist we are exhorted to store canned goods, buy survival equipment, etc…, because what the “anti-Christ” is going to unleash upon the Church during this period is going to be severe. But as we will see, since there is recapitulation between Daniel 2, 7, 9 and now 12, this too would be fulfilled during the “appointed time” of the “end” of the old covenant age and during a “three-and-a-half years” time frame that fits within the time of the Roman Empire.

Jesus explicitly references Daniel 12:1 in Matthew 24:21, clearly placing the tribulation among “all these things” to be fulfilled within His and the Apostles’ contemporary “this generation” (Matt. 24:21–34).

Luke’s parallel account slightly differs from Matthew’s, using different language for the tribulation[1] and the “abomination that causes desolation”:

“For then there will be great tribulation [Greek thlipsis], such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be” (Matt. 24:21).

“For there will be great distress [Greek ananke] upon the earth and wrath against this people. They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled” (Luke 21:23–24).

And it shall be a time of distress…their afflictions there will have been nothing to equal it from its beginning until its end…”[2]

Both Matthew and Luke begin their statements with “For,” clearly connecting the tribulation/distress with their versions of the “desolation” of Jerusalem and her temple, along with the same exhortation to flee from Judea to the mountains (Matt. 24:16–21; Luke 21:21–24). This is the same historical flight the Christians obeyed when they saw the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem and fled to Pella to escape God’s covenantal wrath upon Jerusalem. History records the Romans under Cestius Gallus initially surrounding Jerusalem and then mysteriously retreating only to come back later under Vespasian and Titus.  In between these two periods the Christians escaped Jerusalem to Pella.

Josephus, the Jewish historian, vividly describes this period:

“Now this vast multitude is indeed collected out of remote places, but the entire nation was now shut up by fate as in prison, and the Roman army encompassed the city when it was crowded with inhabitants. Accordingly, the multitude of those that therein perished exceeded all the destructions that either men or God ever brought upon the world; for, to speak only of what was publicly known, the Romans slew some of them, some they carried captives,…[3]

Josephus also records that “many of the most eminent of the Jews swam away from the city.”[4] Similarly, the ecclesiastical historian Eusebius writes:

“The whole body, however, of the Church at Jerusalem, having been commanded by a divine revelation, given to men of approved piety there before the war, removed from the city, and dwelt at a certain town beyond the Jordan, called Pella. Here those that believed in Christ, having removed from Jerusalem, as if holy men had entirely abandoned the royal city itself, and the whole land of Judea; the divine justice, for their crimes against Christ and his Apostles finally overtook them, totally destroying the whole generation of these evildoers from the earth.”[5]

Luke emphasizes the localized nature of the tribulation, specifying it as God’s “wrath” upon “this people” (first-century Jews) in their local land—not the entire globe! This “wrath” is echoed in John the Baptist’s warning to the Pharisees: “Who warned you to flee from the wrath about to come? … Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees … His winnowing fork is in his hand” (Matt. 3:7, 10–12, GNT). The imminent wrath for John’s contemporaries is undeniable.

Matthew, writing to a Jewish audience, employs familiar Hebraic hyperbole: “…such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be” (Matt. 24:21). Compare this to:

  • “Behold, I give you [Solomon] a wise and discerning mind, so that none like you has been before you and none like you shall arise after you” (1 Kings 3:12).
  • “He [Hezekiah] trusted in the Lord… so that there was none like him among all the kings of Judah after him, nor among those who were before him” (2 Kings 18:5).
  • “Before him [Josiah] there was no king like him… nor did any like him arise after him” (2 Kings 23:25).[6]

Does this create a contradiction about which king—Solomon, Hezekiah, or Josiah—was Israel’s greatest or most loyal to God? No, it’s common Hebraic hyperbole, emphasizing their greatness and devotion within Israel’s history. More relevant is hyperbole tied to Jerusalem’s historical judgments:

“And because of all your abominations I will do with you what I have never yet done, and the like of which I will never do again” (Ezek. 5:9).

This refers to a “Day of the Lord” that was “near” in Ezekiel’s time, when God judged Jerusalem through Nebuchadnezzar’s armies around 586 BC (cf. 2 Kings 25; Ezek. 7:7; 33:21). Commentators like Matthew Poole estimate this “near” event spanned 3–5 years, or at most 16–18 years. This Babylonian judgment illuminates the “near” coming in the Olivet Discourse:

  1. The “Day of the Lord” came via an invading Gentile army (Babylon).
  2. God was depicted figuratively coming “on the clouds” (cf. Ezek. 30–32).
  3. De-creation language described darkened heavens, sun, moon, and stars (Ezek. 32:7–8).
  4. Imminence terms like “near” and “without delay” were literal, tied to the prophet’s lifetime and audience (Ezek. 7:7ff.; 12:25; 30:3).
  5. Hyperbole framed it as Israel’s worst judgment of the past or future (Ezek. 5:9).

This matches precisely with Jesus’ Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24):

  1. The “Day of the Lord” judgment came through a Gentile army (Romans).
  2. Christ came figuratively “on the clouds.”
  3. Cosmic de-creation language was employed (sun, moon, stars darkened).
  4. Imminence terms like “near” and “this generation” were literal, fulfilled within the lifetime of His audience.
  5. Hebraic hyperbole marked it as Israel’s greatest judgment—past or future.

This careful analysis clearly demonstrates the contextual, historical, and linguistic consistency of Daniel 12’s “great tribulation” as fully realized in the events surrounding Jerusalem’s destruction between AD 67–70, precisely as Daniel and Jesus prophesied.

(2) The Timing of the Resurrection (12:1–7)

At that time shall arise Michael, the great prince who has charge of your people. And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never has been since there was a nation till that time. But at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone whose name shall be found written in the book. And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever. But you, Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase… [The angel answers Daniel in v. 7] that it would be for a time, times, and half a time [3½ years], and that when the shattering of the power of the holy people comes to an end all these things would be finished/fulfilled (Dan. 12:1–4, 7).

Daniel 12:2–3 is the Old Testament’s clearest resurrection text, cited by Jesus and New Testament writers in Matthew 13:39–43, John 5:24-29, Acts 24:15 (YLT), Revelation 20:5–15, and 1 Corinthians 15. Yet it’s inseparably tied to the AD 67–70 tribulation, a reality partial preterists can no longer deny in print. Partial preterist James Jordan now sees Daniel 12:2–3 (and Daniel’s personal resurrection in v. 13) as a spiritual, corporate resurrection spanning Jesus’ ministry to AD 70. He even posits Daniel’s soul was raised from Abraham’s Bosom in AD 70, per Daniel 12:2-13, Matthew 24:31, and Revelation 20. Here are selected quotes from his Daniel Commentary:

The resurrection of [Dan. 12:2] seems to connect to the evangelistic and teaching ministry spoken of in verse 3; thus, it is some kind of historical resurrection that is spoke of, a resurrectional event in this world, in our history.”[7]

“…Daniel 12:2 tells us that in the days of Jesus the nation will undergo a last spiritual resurrection, but some will not persevere and their resurrection will only be unto destruction.  The Parable of the soils fits here (Matt.13:3–23):  three different kinds of people come to life, but only one of the three different kinds of people come to like, but only one of the three kinds is awakened to persevering, everlasting life.

During His ministry, Jesus raised the nation back to life.  He healed the sick, cleansed the unclean, brought dead people back to life, restored the Law, entered the Temple as King, etc.  Then, as always, the restored people fell into sin and crucified Him.

Thus, a resurrection of Israel is in view.  The wicked are raised, but do not profit from it, and are destroyed.  The saints experience a great distress, and live with God forever and ever.”[8]

“The death of the Church in the Great Tribulation, and her resurrection after that event, were the great proof that Jesus had accomplished the work He came to do.  The fact that the Church exists today, nearly 2000 years after her death in the Great Tribulation, is the ongoing vindication of Jesus work.”[9]

“Revelation takes up where Daniel leaves off, and deals mostly with the Apostolic Age and the death and resurrection of the Church.”[10]

“What Daniel is promised is that after his rest in Abraham’s bosom, he will stand up with all God’s saints and join Michael on a throne in heaven, as described in Revelation 20, an event that came after the Great Tribulation and in the year AD 70.”[11]

Similarly, after long debate, even Kenneth Gentry recently conceded the necessity of understanding Daniel 12 as a spiritual resurrection fulfilled in AD 70:

“In Daniel 12:1–2 we find a passage that clearly speaks of the great tribulation in AD 70.”[12]

“…But it also seems to speak of the resurrection occurring at that time…”[13]

Daniel appears to be presenting Israel as a grave site under God’s curse: Israel as a corporate body is in the “dust” (Da 12:2; cp. Ge 3:14, 19).  In this he follows Ezekiel’s pattern in his vision of the dry bones, which represent Israel’s “death” in the Babylonian dispersion (Eze 37). In Daniel’s prophecy many will awaken, as it were, during the great tribulation to suffer the full fury of the divine wrath, while others will enjoy God’s grace in receiving everlasting life. Luke presents similar imagery in Luke 2:34 in a prophecy about the results of Jesus’s birth for Israel: “And Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary His mother, ‘Behold, this Child is appointed for the fall and rise of many in Israel, and for a sign to be opposed.

Christ Himself points out that some from Israel will believe and be saved, while others will not (e.g., Mt. 10:34–36; 13:11–15), that in the removing of the kingdom from Israel many will be crushed and scattered like dust (Mt. 21:43–45).  He even speaks of the saved Jews as arising from the “shadow of death” (Mt. 4:16).  Though in AD 70 elect Jews will flee Israel and will live (Mt. 24:22), the rest of the nation will be a corpse:  “wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather” (Mt. 24:28).  Indeed, in AD 70 we see in the destruction of the city of Jerusalem (Mt. 22:7) that “many are called, but few are chosen” (Mt. 22:14).  Elsewhere he employs the imagery of “regeneration” to the arising of the new Israel from out of the dead, old covenant Israel in AD 70:  “You who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Mt. 19:28).[14]

“…it appears that Daniel is drawing from the hope of a future, literal resurrection and applying it symbolically to the first century leading up the tribulation in AD 70.  That is, he is portraying God’s separating believing Jews out of Israel through the winnowing of Israel in AD 70.”[15]

“Daniel only picks up on resurrection imagery and, like Ezekiel, applies that to corporate Israel.  He is teaching that in the events of AD 70, the true Israel will arise from old Israel’s carcass, as in a resurrection.”[16]

Here’s a summary of James Jordan and Kenneth Gentry’s view on the resurrection in Daniel 12:

  1. It represents Israel’s final spiritual and corporate resurrection.
  2. Both Israel and the Church participate in this spiritual, covenantal, and corporate resurrection, with the new covenant Church—or new Israel of God—emerging from the corpse of old covenant Israel in AD 70.
  3. An “already and not yet” evangelistic process unfolded between Christ’s earthly ministry and His AD 70 coming, culminating in this resurrection or “end” of Israel during the events of AD 67–70.
  4. This resurrection included Daniel’s soul being raised from Abraham’s Bosom to sit on a throne, reigning with Christ and inheriting eternal life.

Some confusion arises from Daniel’s phrase “sleep in the dust.” This is merely a figure of speech, as David Green clarifies:

“The dead were not literally sleeping, nor were they literally in the dust.  They were “in dust” only insofar as, in their death, they had not ascended into God’s presence in Christ.  In terms of the righteousness and life of God, they were earth-bound.  From a literal standpoint, they were in Sheol/Hades (the abode of the Adamic dead), and it was from out of Sheol that they were raised to stand before the heavenly throne of God (Dan. 12:1–2).”[17]

This imagery draws on the Garden narrative, where Adam, upon sinning, spiritually died and was exiled from God’s presence into the cursed “dust” outside Eden (Gen. 3:19). Similarly, when Israel broke covenant, she faced corporate spiritual death, exiled from the Promised Land into Gentile slavery, cast into the symbolic “dust” of captivity (Isa. 29:4; Isa. 47:1). Returning to or rising from the dust often symbolizes exile, slavery, or spiritual/corporate death, while rising from it can depict Israel’s return to the land and restoration to covenant life. Before Christ’s parousia, even righteous Old Testament dead remained in spiritual death—exiled in the “dust” of Hades—awaiting Christ’s AD 70 coming to fully bring them into God’s presence.

(3) The Righteous Will Shine Like the Stars (Daniel 12:3)

After the resurrection of Daniel 12:2, the living evangelists and their converts will “shine like the brightness of the sky above” or “like the stars forever and ever” (Dan. 12:3). Jesus quotes this prophecy in Matthew 13:39–43, placing the resurrection at the end of the old covenant age—“this age.” The living believers are “gathered” into the kingdom’s barn, shining “like the sun in the kingdom with their Father” (Matt. 13:43). As in Isaiah 65–66 and Revelation 21–22:2, 17, post-resurrection, the living remain in the new covenant age, shining with Christ in the new Jerusalem, continuously proclaiming the gospel and inviting sinners to enter, be healed, and receive eternal life. Clearly, Daniel’s “appointed time of the end” (Dan. 7:22; 9:26–27 LXX; 12:2–4 LXX), involving judgment and resurrection, marks the end of the old covenant age—not world history itself—while the gospel of light and life continues.

(4) Shut Up the Words and Seal the Book (12:4)

Daniel is told to “seal up” the prophecy of Daniel 2, 7, and 9:24–27, recapitulated in Daniel 12, because its fulfillment lay 490 years ahead, during the Roman Empire. John’s vision, extending Daniel’s, was “near” and thus left unsealed (Rev. 1:3; 11:18; 22:10). Revelation clearly encompasses Daniel 2, 7, 9, and 12, affirming that their fulfillment—including the resurrection described in Daniel 12:2—was “about to be” accomplished “shortly” in AD 70 (Rev. 1:1, 19 YLT; 22:7–10, 20).

(5) Until the Appointed Time of the End (12:4, 9)

The Septuagint’s “appointed time [Grk. kairos] of the end” (Dan. 12:4, 9) plainly recapitulates Daniel 7:22–26 (v. 22 uses an Aramaic kairos cognate) and 9:26–27 LXX. Obviously, Daniel 7, 9, and 12 describe one consummative “appointed time” and “end,” fulfilled during the Roman Empire, signaling the old covenant’s close in AD 70. Partial preterists wish for two “ends”—one in AD 70, another at history’s close—but Daniel offers no such duality, undermining their “nuanced” and hyper-creedal philosophy / eschatology.

(6) Knowledge Will Increase (12:4)

Unlike evangelical claims tying this to modern technology (computers, jets, AI), the context of Daniel 2, 7, 9, and 12 shows it as the increasing knowledge of Messiah’s coming and kingdom in the “last days.” From John the Baptist onward, Jesus’ ministry amplified this understanding, clarifying the nature and timing of the kingdom’s establishment in AD 70. His miracles—signs of the last days of old covenant Israel—validated His teachings on the spiritual kingdom prophesied in Daniel 2 and 7, and His imminent cloud-coming judgment upon Israel. (e.g., healing a paralytic to prove He forgives sin, a Messianic prerogative; Mark 2:1–12; cf. Dan. 7:13; 9:24). Rejecting the Pharisees’ expectation of a physical kingdom, Jesus consistently taught a spiritual kingdom “within” believers (John 6; Luke 17:20–37), a kingdom “not of this world” (John 18:36), distinct from earthly kingdoms described in Daniel 2 and 7. His gospel firmly established an AD 70 fulfillment (Matt. 24:3–34; Luke 21:27–32). Likewise, the apostles, guided by the Spirit, confirmed this spiritual kingdom and its “soon” AD 70 maturity (John 16:13–15), aided by revelatory gifts like prophetic knowledge (e.g., Acts 15:12–17; Amos 9:11–12; cf. 1 Cor. 13:8). These gifts ceased after their purpose was completed in AD 70.

(7) [Daniel asks]: “How Long…?” [Angel answers]: “A Time, Times, and Half a Time” (Dan. 12:5–7)

Daniel asks how long until “the end of these wonders” described in verses 1–4. The angel replies, “for a time, times, and half a time [three-and-one-half years], and that when the shattering of the holy people comes to an end all these things would be finished” (Dan. 12:7). Thus, Daniel’s tribulation, judgment, resurrection, and knowledge increase—all core to Daniel’s vision—were to be fulfilled within this period (AD 67–70). These elements were first noted in Daniel 7:25, recapitulated in Daniel 9:24–27’s final half-seven., and again here in Daniel 12 as “the war” shattering Israel in AD 67–70. Jesus confirmed this explicitly, stating “all these things” (including His cloud-coming and the resurrection or eschatological “gathering”) would occur within His “generation” (Matt. 24:31-34), perfectly aligning with Daniel 12:7’s “all these things.” This synchrony undermines futurist eschatologies and strongly supports full preterism through clear Old and New Testament evidence. John, too, connects this three-and-one-half-year trampling of Jerusalem to “the appointed time for judging the dead” (Dan. 12:2–7; Rev. 11:1–18), decisively settling the debate between partial and full preterism through Christ’s (Matt. 13:39–43; 24:3–34) and John’s testimony (Revelation) regarding the timing of the resurrection and judgment of the living and the dead.

(8) The Purification of the Righteous and the Wicked’s Blindness (Dan. 12:10)

In Revelation, John shows Asian churches enduring spillover persecution from Jerusalem before Christ’s “soon” return in AD 70 (Rev. 1:9). John identifies himself as their “partner in the tribulation and kingdom,” closely connecting their persecution with the inheritance of the kingdom. This connection is rooted in Daniel 7 and 12, which specifically require a three-and-one-half-year period of persecution before the Son of Man’s coming on the clouds and the saints’ inheritance of the kingdom. First-fruits Jewish Christians emerge from the Great Tribulation in white, inheriting eternal life and God’s presence on Mount Zion (Rev. 7; 14; Dan. 12:1, 10). Likewise, the Asian churches who faithfully endure inherit “gold refined by fire,” “white garments,” and the promise of reigning with Christ in the new creation (Rev. 2:9–11, 22–28; 3:3–5, 10–12, 18–21).

Daniel emphasizes that while the wicked would remain blinded to prophetic truths, the wise would understand. Jesus’ parables intentionally veiled kingdom truths from hard-hearted listeners but revealed them clearly to His elect, whom the Father drew (cf. John 6). Meanwhile, unbelievers clung to their carnal kingdom expectations, easily deceived by false prophets and the Man of Lawlessness during Israel’s final days.

(9) The “Abomination,” “1,290 Days,” “the End,” and Daniel’s Standing (Dan. 12:11–13)

The “abomination[s]” of Daniel 12:11 plainly recapitulates Daniel 9:27, firmly placed in AD 67–70. The prophetic timeframe of “1,290 days” restates the “3½ years” of Daniel 7:25, 9:26–27 (LXX), and 12:7. At the culmination of this period—the definitive “end” of the old covenant age in AD 70—Daniel would “stand” (rise spiritually) from Hades into God’s presence, inheriting eternal life forever. Since Daniel 12 fully integrates Daniel 2, 7, and 9:24–27, let us summarize clearly how these chapters interconnect:

Daniel 2 Daniel 12
(1)  The consummative judgment (2:34–35, 44–45) (1)  The consummative judgment (12:2)
Daniel 7 Daniel 12
(2)  Warfare, persecution and deathfor the saints before the end (7:21–26) (2)  Time of tribulation in which saints will be “refined” before the end (12:1, 4, 10).
(3)  After a period of “three-and-a-half years” at “the end” of the “appointed time” the saints inherit the kingdom [Aramaic cognate of kairos] (7:22–26) (3)  After the “shattering of the holy people” for “three-and-a-half years” the resurrection of the just takes place at the “appointed time of the end” (12:2–4 LXX/kairos, 7)
(4)  The consummative judgment –when the books are opened (7:10) (4)  The consummative judgment –when the book is opened (12:1)
Daniel 9:24–27 Daniel 12
(5)  “Abominations” would lead to Jerusalem and the second temple being “desolated” (9:24–27) (5)  “Abominations” would lead up to the power of the holy people being completely shattered (12:7, 11)
(6)  Messiah would bring judgment and salvation at the “appointed time” or at “the end” (9:24–27LXX/kairos) (6)  The judgment and salvation [resurrection] of the just and unjust would come at the “appointed time of the end” or “the end” (12:2–4LXX/kairos, 13)
(7)  The consummation to take place at the end of the last broken 7 or the “three-and-a-half years” [AD 67 – AD 70] of the “the war” (9:26–27) (7)  The consummation would take place at the end of the “three-and-a-half years” or a period of “1,290 days” [AD 67 – AD 70] “when the power of the holy people wascompletely shattered” (12:7, 11)
(8)  When old covenant Jerusalem is judged in AD 70, the spiritual new covenant kingdom = the Church as God’s new Most Holy Place dwelling is anointed / inherited (9:24) (8)  When Jerusalem is shattered and judged is when the righteous are raised and shine – inheriting the kingdom at the end of the old covenant age in AD 70 (12:2–3/Matt. 13:43)
(9)  All of this was far off for Daniel and fulfilled after 490 years during the Roman Empire when Jerusalem and the second temple would be desolated (9:24–27) (9)  Because the time of fulfillment for Daniel & his people was far off, the vision was to be “sealed up” but left open & fulfilled “near” during the Roman Empire (12:4, 9 / Rev. 22:10)

Major Premise:
Daniel 2, 7, 9, and 12 all build upon each other depicting a unified eschatological sequence in which tribulation, judgment, resurrection, and the arrival of the eternal kingdom occur during the time of the fourth empire (Rome) and culminate in the destruction of Jerusalem at the “appointed time of the end,” following a three-and-a-half-year tribulation period.

Minor Premise:
Jesus explicitly cites and alludes to these same prophecies in His Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24; Luke 21) and parables (Matt. 13), applying their “appointed time” of fulfillment to His first-century generation, predicting the tribulation, abomination, desolation of the temple, resurrection/gathering of the elect, and kingdom inheritance—all within the Roman Empire and before “this generation” passed away.

Conclusion:
Therefore, the tribulation, resurrection, judgment, and kingdom described in Daniel 2, 7, 9, and 12 were fulfilled in AD 70 during the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, marking the end of the old covenant age and the full establishment of the new covenant kingdom, just as Jesus taught.

Conclusion 

Daniel 12, as a culmination of the prophecies in Daniel 2, 7, and 9:24–27, decisively anchors the tribulation, resurrection, and “appointed time of the end” to the first-century destruction or “shattering” of Jerusalem in AD 67–70, fulfilling the “three-and-a-half years” of covenantal judgment (Dan. 12:7). Jesus explicitly applies Daniel 12:1–13 to His generation in Matthew 24:21–34, linking the great tribulation, the “abomination(s)” committed by Jewish and Roman armies, and the eschatological gathering (resurrection) to the fall of the temple, as confirmed by historical accounts from Josephus and Eusebius. The resurrection of Daniel 12:2–3, understood as a spiritual and corporate awakening, saw the righteous “shine like the stars” (Matt. 13:43) as the new covenant Church emerged from the “dust” of old covenant Israel’s demise, while the wicked faced judgment. This fulfillment, marked by the “shattering of the holy people” (Dan. 12:7), aligns with Revelation’s “soon” judgment and resurrection (Rev. 11:18; 20:5–15), left unsealed for its imminent realization (Rev. 22:10).

The consistent recapitulation across Daniel’s visions—tribulation, abominations, judgment, and resurrection within the Roman Empire—refutes futurist and partial preterist attempts to posit a distant “end” or multiple comings. Instead, Daniel and Jesus present a unified eschatological vision: the spiritual Messianic kingdom, established through gospel proclamation and consummated in AD 70, replaced the old covenant order and kingdom (Matt. 21:43-45; Luke 17:20-37; Luke 21:20-32).

Study Questions – Daniel 12: The Tribulation, Resurrection, and the Appointed Time of the End

1. How does Daniel 12 recapitulate and build upon the earlier visions in Daniel 2, 7, and 9?

  1. What theological or prophetic developments does it introduce or clarify?
  2. How did Jesus apply Daniel 12:1 to His generation in Matthew 24:21–34?
  3. What evidence in the Gospels shows that Jesus placed the tribulation and “abomination” within the first century?
  4. How do the historical accounts of Josephus and Eusebius corroborate Jesus’ prophecy and Daniel’s vision of Jerusalem’s tribulation and desolation?
  5. How does Hebraic hyperbole help us understand expressions like “such as has not been from the beginning of the world…” (Matt. 24:21; Dan. 12:1)?
  6. Why is this important for interpreting prophetic language accurately?
  7. What is the significance of the three-and-a-half-year period mentioned in Daniel 7, 9, and 12?
  8. How is this timeframe fulfilled in the events of AD 67–70?
  9. In what way does Daniel 12:2–3, 13 describe a spiritual or corporate resurrection, and how is this echoed in Matthew 13:39–43, Matthew 24:30-31 and Revelation 11:1-18; 20:5-15?
  10. How do Jordan and Gentry interpret this and are they consistent in Revelation 20:5-15?
  11. What role does the “shattering of the holy people” for “three-and-a-half years” (Dan. 12:7) play in Daniel’s timeline (Dan. 9:26-27), and how does Jesus allude to this in His teaching (Luke 21:24) and John in his (Rev. 11:1-18)?
  12. Why is Daniel told to “seal up the book” and how does this contrast with John’s command to leave his vision “unsealed” in Revelation?
  13. What does this suggest about the timing of fulfillment?
  14. How does the phrase “knowledge shall increase” (Dan. 12:4) relate to the gospel and kingdom message of Jesus and the apostles, rather than to modern technological advances?
  15. What is the meaning of the righteous “shining like the stars” in Daniel 12:3, and how does this relate to post-resurrection life in the new covenant age?
  16. Summarize how Daniel 2, 7, 9, and 12 form a unified prophecy fulfilled in AD 70.

Books by Michael Sullivan available on his website store: https://fullpreterism.com/product-category/books/

Screenshot

Website: fullpreterism.com

Patreon.com/MikeJSullivan

YouTube teaching videos: @michaelsullivan6868

X: @Preteristesch

[1] The Greek words thlipsis (tribulation) and ananke (distress) are listed as synonyms in the Abbott-Smith Lexicon, harmonizing the two accounts effortlessly.

[2] 1QM 1:11–12

[3] Josephus The Complete Works, Chapter 9:4, https://ccel.org/ccel/josephus/complete/
complete.iii.vii.ix.html

[4] Jewish War 2, 20, 1

[5] Eusebius, History of the Church 3, 5

[6] See the use of prophetic hyperbole in Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness Obsession of the Modern Church (Atlanta, GA:  American Vision, Inc., 1994), 105

[7] James B. Jordan, The Handwriting on the Wall: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2007), 618. Emphasis added.

[8]  Ibid., 618–619.

[9]  Ibid., 620

[10]  Ibid., 621

[11]  Ibid., 628

[12] Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology, 3rd ed. (Draper, VA: Apologetics Group Media, 2009), 538.

[13] Ibid., 538. Emphasis added.

[14] Ibid., 538–539. Emphasis added.

[15] Ibid., 539. Emphasis added.

[16] Ibid., 540. Emphasis added.

[17] Green, Hassertt, and Sullivan, House Divided, 2nd ed. (Publisher Location: Publisher, 2009), 178.

Daniel Part 2 – Daniel 9:24-27: Six Crucial Prophetic Events Fulfilled in AD 70

Daniel 9:24-27: Daniel’s Seventy-Sevens Fulfilled

Daniel 9:24-27 recapitulates and expands the eschatological themes already introduced in Daniel chapters 2 and 7. In Daniel 2 and 7, the Messianic kingdom emerges spiritually from heaven—depicted metaphorically as a stone cut without hands or as the Son of Man descending with the clouds—to judge God’s enemies (stripping dominion from earthly powers) and to grant salvation, authority, and the eternal kingdom to His saints.

But what else occurs at the kingdom’s arrival? Daniel 9:24 reveals more: with the kingdom’s arrival comes forgiveness of sin and the establishment of everlasting righteousness. Just as Daniel 2 and 7 depict salvation for God’s faithful alongside judgment on the hostile nations and apostate Israel (symbolized by the clay in Daniel 2), Daniel 9 elaborates on this judgment. After a prophetic period of 490 years, during the Roman Empire, Daniel predicts that “his people” and “holy city” would face judgment for “cutting off” the Messiah—the same Son of Man introduced in Daniel 7:13 (Dan. 9:26). Consequently, a great war (“the war”) would ensue, and Messiah would send another “prince” at the “appointed time” of the “end” (of Daniel’s 70 weeks) to bring desolation upon Jerusalem and its temple (Dan. 9:26–27, LXX).[1]

Daniel’s final “week” (the last seven-year period) would thus encompass a second-exodus interval of approximately forty years, divided into two critical three-and-a-half-year periods:

  • From AD 30–33, culminating with Messiah being “cut off” (crucified).
  • From AD 67–70, culminating with Messiah’s judgment through the Romans to desolate the temple and city.

During this terminal generation (cf. Deut. 32:5, 20) Israel would be “filling up” the measure of her sins (Dan. 9:24) while giving time for the gospel to be preached throughout the Roman Empire, saving the remnant and engrafting believing Gentiles into one unified body of Christ—just before the final judgment fell upon the old covenant community.

The Six Events of Daniel 9:24 Fulfilled by AD 70

(1) To Finish Transgression

Daniel 9:24 foretold a time when Jerusalem would “finish” or “fill up” its transgressions against God and His Messiah. Jesus explicitly linked this completion of sin to His contemporary generation, declaring to Israel’s leaders: “Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your forefathers!” (Matt. 23:32). As Premillennial Zionist Dr. Michael Brown acknowledges (citing James E. Smith):

 “To fill up [or restrain] the transgression.  Within the 490 years period the people of Israel would commit their final transgression against God.  Jesus indicated that the leaders of his generation were about to fill up the measure of the sin of their forefathers (Matt. 23:32)…”[2]

And Dr. Brown himself reinforces this interpretation when he writes:

“…take seriously Yeshua’s words spoken in Matthew 23:32, when he sarcastically exhorted the hostile Jewish leaders of his day, “Fill up the measure of the sin of your  forefathers!”  Thus, the generation that rejected the Messiah would suffer the  culmination of the sins of all the previous generations: “Upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth…I tell the truth, all this will come upon this             generation” (Matt. 23:35a, 37).”[3]

Unfortunately, Brown’s adherence to premillennial Zionism prevents him from taking seriously Yeshua’s words in Matthew 23, which describe the consummative judgment of the living (e.g., the Pharisees) and the dead (e.g., the martyrs), reaching back to Genesis. As that contemporary generation drew to a close, Revelation confirms this first-century fulfillment: the vindication of the martyrs’ blood at the hands of the great harlot city, Babylon (old covenant Jerusalem, where the Lord was crucified—Rev. 11:8), would occur in a “very little while” at Christ’s “soon” second coming (Rev. 6:10–11; 17–22:6–7, 10–12, 20). This judgment (vindication) and resurrection of the dead align with Jerusalem’s fall in Daniel 12:1–7, during a “three-and-a-half-year” period (AD 67–70) “when the power of the holy people would be shattered” (Dan. 12:7). Peter likewise affirms that this “appointed time for the judgment” of the “living (e.g., Pharisees) and the dead” (e.g., martyrs) was “at hand” (1 Pet. 4:5–7, 17).

(2)  Put an End to Sin

In Hebrews, the Saints enter into the Sabbath rest when Christ “put an end to sin” at His imminent, “in a very little while,” Second Appearing as the Great Anointed High Priest. This fulfilled new covenant promises to Israel and closed the “last days” of the old covenant age in AD 70 (Heb. 3-4; 9:26–28; 10:25, 37; Rom. 11:26–27; 13:11–12; Dan. 9:24b).

(3)  To Atone for Wickedness or Cover Over Iniquity

This third objective is closely related to the previous point. At Christ’s second appearing, the sins of His people were fully atoned, covered over, and remembered no more in the new covenant creation. Scripture portrays this as God burying their iniquities in the depths of the sea (Isa. 65–66; Mic. 7:19).

(4)  To Bring in Everlasting Righteousness


Peter declares that at the AD 70 Day of the Lord, Christ ushered in “everlasting righteousness” or a “world of righteousness,” arriving in an imminent timeframe: “the end of all things is at hand” (1 Pet. 4:5–7; 2 Pet. 3). This was the “inheritance” and “salvation of the soul” ready to be revealed to Peter’s contemporaries (1 Pet. 1:4–12; Acts 2:20–40). Paul similarly taught that this righteousness was “about to be reckoned” for the early Church:

“But also, on ours, to whom it [righteousness] is about to be reckoned—to us believing on     Him who did raise up Jesus our Lord out of the dead” (Rom. 4:24 SLT, LSV, YLT, BLT).

“For through the Spirit we eagerly await by faith the righteousness for which we hope” (Gal. 5:5).

(5)  To Seal Up Vision and Prophet

Many commentators view Daniel 9:24–27 as a concise summary of Jesus’ first and second redemptive comings. Yet they struggle with its conclusion: the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, clearly prophesied by Jesus (Luke 21:20–22ff). Jesus is explicit that all Israel’s Old Testament promises and prophetic material regarding His redemptive work—including His second coming—would be fulfilled within the generation of AD 30–70 (Luke 21:22–32).

Old Testament scholars Keil and Delitzsch define the phrase “seal up vision and prophet” aptly:

“Prophecies and prophets are sealed, when by the full realization of all prophecies prophecy   ceases, no more prophets any more appear.”[4]

This definition is helpful because it explicitly addresses the cessation of the prophetic office at the completion of Daniel’s seventy weeks.  The Hebrew nabiy is used 316 times in the OT, translated as “prophet” 312 times, and only once, in Daniel 9:24, as “prophecy.” This linguistic detail proved pivotal in my public debate with Charismatic Zionist Dr. Michael Brown concerning the cessation of prophecy, tongues, and knowledge by AD 70 (1 Cor. 13:8–12)—a point for which he offered no rebuttal.

Charles John Ellicott echoes this interpretation, connecting the cessation of miraculous signs and revelatory gifts described in 1 Corinthians 13:8–12 with the fulfillment of Daniel 9:24–27:

“The impression of translators being that all visions and prophecies were to receive  completed fulfillment in the course of these seventy weeks.  It appears…, to be more  agreeable to the context to suppose that the prophet is speaking of the absolute cessation of all prophecy” (I Cor. 13:8).[5]

Premillennial Zionist James Leon Wood agrees:

 “The words taken together refer to the final fulfillment of revelation and prophecy, i.e., when  their functions are shown to be finished.”[6]

(6) To Anoint the Most Holy Place

Christ anointed and consummated the new covenant Church as His Most Holy Place and Bride in AD 70 (cf. Ex. 20, 29–31, 40; Hebrews 9:6–10; Revelation 11:18–19, 19–21:16). David Green insightfully elaborates:

“Finally, it was through the anointing of the Holy Spirit that the whole city of Jerusalem was made new and became “the Tabernacle of God,” when the worldly Holy Place fell in 70 (Heb. 9:1, 8). Under the old covenant, every article of God’s tabernacle was consecrated by  the anointing of oil (Ex. 30:25–30; 40:9; Lev. 8:10, 12).  In the same way, in the Last Days, God taught His elect ones the truth of His gospel through the anointing of the Holy Spirit (2  Cor. 1:21,22; I Jn. 2:20,27), until all of them had come to know Him (Jn. 6:39).  Then came  “the end” (Dan. 9:26), when the Body of Christ, all His holy ones, the living and the dead, were raised up to become His anointed (God-taught) “Most Holy Place” in the new covenant  world (Jn. 6:44–45; Eph. 2:21–22; Heb. 8:11–13; Rev. 21:3).”[7]

As demonstrated, there is no scriptural justification for inserting a 2,000-year gap between the 69th and 70th seven (week) of Daniel’s prophecy—nor does the prophecy’s fulfillment restart with modern events such as those of 1948. The prophecy, and how the NT develops it, clearly places all the soteriological and eschatological events to be fulfilled when the temple is destroyed in AD 70 and the people judged or rewarded. Since Daniel 2, 7 and 9 all would be fulfilled during the time of the Roman Empire, it becomes clear why Jesus and all of the NT authors emphatically taught that these prophetic events would occur “soon” in their own generation.

The following points summarize key connections between Daniel 7:13–27 and Daniel 9:24–27, highlighting their shared recapitulation:

  • The coming of the Son of Man on the clouds (or through another “prince” and his army during the war).
  • The appointed time when the saints inherit the kingdom.
  • The period of three-and-a-half years of tribulation and desolation.
  • The appointed time of judgment, marking the end of the age.
Daniel 7 – Fulfilled during

Roman Empire

Daniel 9 – Fulfilled during

Roman Empire

(1)  “3 ½ years” [AD 67 – AD 70] is the appointed time of consummation (7:25–26) (1)  “3 ½ years” [AD 67 – AD 70] “the war” is the appointed time of consummation (9:26–27)
(2)  This would be the “appointed time” [the Aramaic cognate to kairos] to the “end” (7:9–10, 22–26) (2)  This would be the “appointed time[Greek LXX kairos] of the end” (9:26–27LXX)
(3)  Appointed time for the judgment and resurrection of the dead at Christ’s coming upon the clouds when the books are opened (7:9–10) (3)  Implied – consummation of all 6 soteriological / eschatological events at the “appointed time of the end” (9:24–27)
(4)  The spiritual and eternal kingdom of God in Dan. 2 and 7 comes from heaven to earth and is inherited by the saints (2:34; 7:22, 27) (4)  When the old covenant second temple is destroyed God will build and anoint a spiritual Most Holy Place which came from heaven to earth “soon” in AD 70                     (Dan. 9:24; Rev. 21:16—22:7–10, 20)
(5)  All to be fulfilled during the Roman Empire (7:1–27) (5)  All fulfilled at the end of the 490 years during the Roman Empire  (9:24–27)

Jesus and Daniel 7 = Daniel 9

In Matthew 23–26, Jesus merges Daniel 7 and 9, predicting His cloud-coming within “this generation” (Matt. 23:36; 24:34) to judge and “desolate” Jerusalem and the temple (Matt. 24:2–3ff.; Luke 21:20–32), an event the priesthood would witness (Matt. 26:62–65). Before this judgment, Christians would face intense persecution (Matt. 24:9–10; Dan. 7:21–22). Jews and Romans would commit “abominations” in both the land and temple (Matt. 24:15; Luke 21:20–32), thus “filling up the measure” of Israel’s sins (Matt. 23:29–36), as foretold in Daniel 9:24–27.

The believing remnant and Gentile faithful eagerly awaited Christ’s revelation from heaven, an event that would bring both “kingdom” and “redemption” (Luke 21:27–32; Matt. 24:27–34), as prophesied in Daniel 7:18–27 and 9:24. By blending Daniel 7:13 with Malachi 4:2, Jesus portrays Himself as the “light of day,” shining like the rays of the sun from east to west, or as the “Sun of Righteousness,” healing His people in AD 70 (Matt: 24:27–30, AFV/ANT; Mal: 4:2). This event simultaneously “brought in everlasting righteousness” for believers and consummated judgment on the Second Temple (Dan. 9:24–27; Mal. 3–4; cf. Rom. 4:24, SLT).

Jesus identifies this as the divinely “appointed time” (Greek kairos) and “end” of the old covenant age (Matt. 24:3, 14; Mark 13:32–37; Luke 21:22–24), echoing Daniel 7:22–27 (Aramaic cognate of kairos) and Daniel 9:26–27 (LXX). This period of judgment, coinciding with Jerusalem’s trampling by Gentile forces (“times of the Gentiles”), lasted three and a half years (AD 67–70), exactly matching Daniel’s prophecies (Luke 21:24; Rev. 11:1–8, 18; Dan. 7:22–26; 9:26–27, LXX). Jesus warned the Pharisees and priesthood explicitly that they would personally witness this judgment, including the emergence and subsequent destruction of the arrogant “little horn,” who would speak blasphemies and cause abominations (Dan. 7:8–26; 9:26–27).

Major Premise:
Daniel 7 and 9 both predict that during the time of the fourth kingdom (Rome), a judgment would fall upon Jerusalem, and the saints would inherit the kingdom after a three-and-a-half-year tribulation—at the appointed time of the end.

Minor Premise:
Jesus explicitly applies these time markers and prophetic “appointed time” of events to His own generation, identifying the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, the “abomination of desolation,” the inheritance of the kingdom by the faithful, and His coming on the clouds as fulfilling Daniel 7 and 9 within the first century (Matt. 23:36–39; 24:15–34; Luke 21:8, 20–32; Matt. 26:64-65).

Conclusion:
Therefore, the prophecy of Daniel 7 and 9—concerning the cutting off of Messiah, the judgment of Jerusalem, and the establishment of the Messianic kingdom—was fulfilled in AD 70, just as Jesus declared. 

Conclusion 

Daniel 9:24–27 consolidates and expands the eschatological vision of Daniel 2 and 7, outlining six soteriological and eschatological events—finishing transgression, ending sin, atoning for iniquity, bringing everlasting righteousness, sealing up vision and prophet, and anointing the Most Holy Place—all fulfilled by AD 70 within the Roman Empire. Jesus merges these prophecies with Daniel 7 in Matthew 23–26, explicitly placing their consummation within “this generation” (Matt. 24:34), marked by the judgment of Jerusalem and the temple’s desolation during the “three-and-a-half years” of “the war” (AD 67–70; Dan. 9:26–27). This period saw Israel “fill up” its transgressions (Matt. 23:32), culminating in divine retribution through Roman armies, while the gospel spread, saving the remnant and Gentiles into Christ’s new covenant body (Matt. 24:14). The spiritual Messianic kingdom, depicted as a stone and the Son of Man’s cloud-coming, was fully established, anointing the Church as the Most Holy Place and ushering in everlasting righteousness (Dan. 9:24; Heb. 9:6–10).

By AD 70, the prophetic office ceased, and all Old Testament promises tied to Christ’s redemptive work were fulfilled, as confirmed by New Testament imminence (Rev. 22:10; 1 Pet. 4:5–7). The “appointed time” (kairos) of Daniel 7:22 and 9:26–27 (LXX) synchronized with Jesus’ teachings, rejecting any 2,000-year gap or futurist reinterpretation. This first-century fulfillment, blending judgment and salvation, reflects God’s covenantal fidelity, transitioning from the old covenant’s end to the new covenant’s maturity. Daniel 9 thus stands as a cornerstone for understanding Christ’s Parousia as the “Sun of Righteousness,” bringing redemption and kingdom inheritance to His people while desolating the unfaithful, establishing the Church as the eternal new covenant community in AD 70.

Study Questions –Daniel’s Seventy-Sevens Fulfilled (Daniel 9:24–27)

  1. How does Daniel 9:24–27 build upon and recapitulate the eschatological framework of Daniel chapters 2 and 7?
  2. In what ways do all three visions point to a first-century fulfillment?
  3. What six eschatological or redemptive events are listed in Daniel 9:24, and how does the chapter argue that each was fulfilled by AD 70?
  4. Why is it significant that Daniel’s prophecy specifies the judgment of “the people” and “holy city” for cutting off the Messiah?
  5. How does this language connect to Matthew 23–24?
  6. What is the importance of the “three-and-a-half-year” time period in both Daniel 7 and 9?
  7. How does this correspond with the events of AD 67–70?
  8. How does Jesus apply the judgment and tribulation of Daniel 9:26–27 to His own generation in Matthew 24 and Luke 21?
  9. In what way did the early church understand “finishing transgression” and “putting an end to sin” to be imminent realities tied to their generation?
  10. How does this challenge futurist timelines?
  11. What does “sealing up vision and prophet” mean in the context of Daniel 9:24, and how does this relate to the cessation of prophecy by AD 70?
  12. Why is there no textual or theological justification for inserting a 2,000-year gap between the 69th and 70th weeks of Daniel’s prophecy?
  13. According to the chapter, how does Jesus’ use of Daniel 7 and 9 in Matthew 23–26 confirm a covenantal and imminent fulfillment rather than a distant or geopolitical one?
  14. How does this chapter affirm the full preterist view that the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 marked the fulfillment of Daniel’s seventy-sevens and the transition to the new covenant kingdom?

Books by Michael Sullivan: https://fullpreterism.com/product-category/books/

Screenshot

Website: fullpreterism.com

Patreon.com/MikeJSullivan

YouTube teaching videos: @michaelsullivan6868

X: @Preteristesch

[1] Don K. Preston, “Daniel 9, The Seventy Weeks and the LXX,” Full Preterism, February 15, 2016,https://fullpreterism.com/daniel-9-the-seventy-weeks-and-the-lxx-guest-article-by-don-k-preston/.

[2] Michael Brown, AJOJ, Vol. 3, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2003), 93.

[3] Ibid., 96. Emphasis added.

[4] Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. 9, 344.

[5] Charles John Ellicott, Commentary on the Whole Bible, vol. 8 (London: Cassell and Company, 1884), 387.

[6] James Leon Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1973), 250.

[7] David A. Green, “From Babylon to Babylon: An Exposition of Daniel’s Seventy Weeks,” Preterist Cosmos, 2003,https://www.preteristcosmos.com/daniel.html.

The Resurrection of the Dead Fulfilled by AD 70

The Resurrection of the Dead Fulfilled by AD 70

Jewish Views on the Resurrection

Many higher critical Bible sceptics, Talmudic Zionists, Muslims, Dispensational Zionists or  Christian Futurist systems of eschatology simply assume that the only concept of the resurrection of the dead in the OT and during Jesus’ day was a biological fleshly one in which an alleged individual’s physical / spiritual body would emerge from the literal grave at the end of time and thus be fitted for the afterlife in the new creation or some paradise on earth.  An understanding that the Bible only teaches this kind of resurrection has resulted in spiritualizing the imminent time texts of the NT away which point to the resurrection being fulfilled by AD 70.  The other gross abuse has been in not acknowledging that the OT and NT authors connect the resurrection event with the judgment of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in AD 70.   It is my purpose in this article to correct the record by doing the hard exegesis that critics and Futurist Christianity has not done.

I like how Lester L. Grabbe points out that, during the Second Temple period, the interpretations of the resurrection in the OT were not all necessarily understood to refer to the physical body. They included the view that the resurrection involved only the souls/spirits of individuals being fit for God’s presence either at death, or only their souls were raised at a general judgment of the dead event.  He points out that there is no evidence that the physical view was any more dominant than the spiritual view.  While lengthy, I think his historical comments will be helpful before we begin an exegesis of the OT and NT resurrection texts and simply assume they are addressing a biological resurrection at the end of time when Jesus or Messiah comes:

“It is sometimes asserted that the resurrection of the body was the characteristic Jewish belief. This is not borne out by the data. A variety of beliefs seem to be attested about the same time in Israelite history. One of these was the resurrection of the body, but there is little reason to think that it was earlier or more characteristic of Jewish thinking than the immortality of the soul or resurrection of the spirit. And it is clear that some Jews still maintained the older belief in no afterlife. The Sadducees (see section 2.7) are one group who thought so; so did Ben Sira. Writing about 190 bce Ben Sira does not seem to think of any life beyond death, as interpreted by the vast majority of scholars. Therefore, it would be quite wrong to refer to any of these beliefs as ‘characteristically’ Jewish or the Jewish belief on the subject.”[1]

“The exact form of the resurrection is not always specified, but we should not expect it always to entail resurrection of the body. Sometimes only the resurrection of the spirit is in mind, as in Jubilees 23:20–22:

And at that time the Lord will heal his servants, and they shall be exalted and prosper greatly; and they shall drive out their adversaries. And the righteous shall see it and be thankful, and rejoice with joy for ever and ever; and they shall see all the punishments and curses that had been their lot falling on their enemies. And their bones shall rest in the earth, and their spirits shall have much joy; and they shall know that the Lord is one who executes judgement, and shows mercy to hundreds, and to tens of thousands, and to all that love him.

Belief in the immortality of the soul is known at least as early as the Book of Watchers (1 Enoch 1–36). The souls of the various sorts of people are preserved in hollow places after death (1 Enoch 22):

And from there I went to another place, and he showed me in the west a large and high mountain, and a hard rock and four beautiful places, and inside it was deep and wide and very smooth . . . Then Raphael, one of the holy angels who was with me, answered me and said to me, These beautiful places are intended for this, that the spirits, the souls of the dead, might be gathered into them; for them they were created, that here they might gather all the souls of the sons of men. And these places they made where they will keep them until the day of their judgement and until their appointed time – and that appointed time will be long – until the great judgement comes upon them.

As the rest of the passage indicates, the souls of the dead are already experiencing reward and punishment in their intermediate state. In this case, the existence of the soul after death seems to be combined with the idea of a final judgement. This may imply a general resurrection, though this is not stated explicitly. In other sections of 1 Enoch, a resurrection is mentioned (46:6; 51:1; 90:33; 91:10; 92:3–4).

Other sources give no indication of a resurrection at all, only the immortal soul. A good example is Wisdom of Solomon which speaks of the soul (e.g., 3:1–9) but does not mention the resurrection. Whether Wisdom thinks the souls of all are immortal, or only those of the righteous, is debated. Many feel that immortality is not inherent in the soul itself but is a gift given only to the righteous.

The Testament of Abraham gives the clearest picture of how the souls are judged after death (Version A 11–14; Version B 9–11). The souls are brought before a throne on which Abel sits as judge. The one who presents the souls for judgement is Enoch, the scribe of righteousness (Version B only). The judged souls go either through the strait gate which leads to life (for the righteous) or the broad gate to destruction (for the sinners). Although there is a brief indication of belief in a general resurrection in the Testament of Abraham (Version B 7:16), judgement of each individual seems to take place immediately after death, and the emphasis is on this immediate judgement of the soul while the body rests in the grave.

On the other hand, the immortal souls and the resurrection may be combined, as in 2 Baruch 29–30:

[30:2] And it shall come to pass at that time that the treasuries will be opened in which is preserved the number of the souls of the righteous, and they will come out, and the multitude of souls will appear together in one single assembly; and those who are first will rejoice, and those who are last will not be cast down. For each one of them will know that the predetermined end of the times has come. But the souls of the wicked, when they see all this, will be the more discomforted. For they will know that their torment is upon them and that their perdition has arrived.[2]

Murray J. Harris after examining the intertestamental period of Judaism agrees:

“And there is the concept of the immortality of the soul or spirit that is gained at death or at the End [of the Mosaic age], with or without a resurrection of the [physical] body.”[3]

In Jewish tradition and exegesis there is also the view that the resurrection takes place 40 years after Messiah,

“Jewish writings stipulate that forty years after the coming of the Messiah there will be a resurrection of the dead, and all who are lying in dust will rise to new life.” (The 13 Principles and the Resurrection of the Dead)

The Rebbe often quotes the Zohar to the effect that the Resurrection will take place 40 years after the advent of Mashiach. (See Igros Kodesh, Vol. II, p. 75; Sefer HaSichos 5752, Vol. I, p. 274. However, there are also other references in the sichos (e.g., Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XXVII, p. 206; Sefer HaSichos 5733, Shabbos Parshas Balak, footnote 3).”[4]

The fact that the resurrection could be a resurrection of spirits out of Hades in the coming judgment and that it would be fulfilled 40 years after Messiah was cut-off or during His transitionary reign between their old covenant “this age” and the new covenant “age about to come” fits perfectly with the teachings of Jesus and the NT authors.

Then there are many scholars that point out the main concept of resurrection was to be a corporate body resurrection.  That is after Israel was in exile (death) she would be restored back to the land and temple and thus be back into God’s presence (resurrection).  Here is a list of scholars developing the idea of a corporate body resurrection within Jewish and Christian thought that was sent to me by my good friend Don K. Preston who writes,

“Robert Wilken, Land Called Holy: Wilken, Land Called Holy, (70): “When the Scriptures speak about the ‘resurrection of the body’ (in Ezekiel 37) the Jews believe that there will be a ‘restoration of Jewish polity.’”

Tom Holland, Romans: Divine Marriage, (265) – Commenting on Romans 8:10 – He says that Ezekiel 37 lies behind 1 Corinthians 15 as well as Romans 8. He then says – “The point to note is that the resurrection of Ezekiel 37 is corporate– it is the nation that was raised. The Jew had no notion of individual resurrection because he saw the nation’s resurrection as the fulfillment of covenantal promises. These promises are not the property of the individual Jew but of Israel. The slide into individualism takes us out of the biblical mind-set – including Paul’s– for, while resurrection embraces individuals, it is the experience of the community.”

Steven M. Bryan, Jesus and Israel’s Traditions of Judgment and Restoration, Society for New Testament Studies, Monograph Series 117, (Cambridge University Press, 2002), 105– “Isaiah 26 seems to stand behind Isaiah 52:1-2 where resurrection language describes not actual resurrection as in Daniel 12:2 but to national liberation.”

Robert Alter, Isaiah 26:19, the Hebrew Bible, p. 703: “The entire line of poetry flatly contradicts the declaration in verse 14 that the dead shall not live. The operative term of distinction is “Your.” Is the prophet introducing a doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, which is GENERALLY NOT THOUGHT to emerge UNTIL the Book of Daniel? This is at least a POSSIBILITY, and this is certainly the way this verse was LATER understood by communities of believers. BUT, given the theme of NATIONAL RENEWAL that informs this ENTIRE prophecy, it may be MORE LIKELY that what the poet has in mind is a REBIRTH OF THE NATION, LIKE Ezekiel’s vision of the valley of dry bones.” (all emp. mine, wb).

Scott McKnight, New Vision, (13) – “Jesus entered Jerusalem at the beginning of the last, fateful week of his life, realized the utter gravity of Israel’s situation, and knew that he had to offer himself consciously and intentionally to God as a vicarious sacrifice for Israel in order to avert the national disaster, and he did so as an atoning, substitutionary sacrifice. … Not only in theological truth but in historic fact, the one bore the sins of the many, confident that in him the whole Jewish nation was being nailed to the cross, only to come to life again in a better resurrection, and that the Day of the Son of Man which would see the end of the Old Israel would see also the vindication of the new.” (Citing Caird, Jesus and the Jewish Nation, p. 22).

Andrew M. Mbuvi, Temple, Exile and Identity in 1 Peter, (T and T Clark International, New York, 2007), Library of New Testament Studies (345)36, n. 140– He cites R. P. Gordon on the Targumists– They said that “even a righteous Israelite could be denied a part in the resurrection if he had been buried beyond the borders of Israel. Conversely, the hope of resurrection was extended to non-Israelites whose only merit was their internment within the holy land.”

Also, the idea of exile as death and restoration to the land as resurrection – Mbuvi, Temple, (p. 36)– “The exile, as separation from God, meant death. The return from exile then came to be understood as a return to life– a resurrection.” “We find the connection here in Ezekiel between the return of the lost tribes of the northern kingdom and the resurrection of the dead” (344); “Whether or not this (Various prophecies such as Ezekiel 37, 1 Enoch 48:7-8; 51:1-5; 61:5; 62:14-16– DKP)– refers to ‘bodily resurrection’ for our purposes it is only necessary to point out that resurrection is intrinsically linked to the end of the Exile and a return to the Land (cf. Ezekiel 37).”

John Watts, Word Biblical Commentary, Isaiah, Vol 24, (Waco, Word, 1985)344, “The exiles in Assyria and Egypt are said to have been perishing. But they will be gathered by God to come and worship him on his holy mountain in Jerusalem (v. 13). Separation from the temple is equivalent to death. Being allowed to participate again in Jerusalem is like coming back to life.”

Jon Levenson, Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel, (New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 2006)154-155– Levenson gives one of the finest explanations of resurrection as the restoration of fellowship I have seen. “The sources in the Hebrew Bible, as we have seen, have a definition of death that is broader than ours. That is why they can see exile, for example, as death and repatriation as life, in a sense that seems contrived (to state it negatively), or artful (to put it positively), to us but probably did not seem so to the original authors and audiences. In part, this is because the ancient Israelites, altogether lacking the corporealist penchant of thought so powerful in modernity, did not conceive of death and life as purely and exclusively biological phenomena. These things were, rather, social in character, (his emp), and could not, therefore, be disengaged from the historical fate of the subjects of whom they are predicated. Or, to put it differently, death and life in the Hebrew Bible are often best seen as relational events and are for the selfsame reason inseparable from the personal circumstances of those described as living or as dead. To be alive in this frequent biblical sense of the word inevitably entailed more than existing in a certain physical state.” Levenson- Page 38 – Although the author of these verses (Psalms 88–DKP) is surely not yet dead in our sense, in his own view he already dwells—one hesitates to say ‘‘lives’’—in the realm of the dead. In this, Philip S. Johnston finds a contradiction. He finds it impossible to understand ‘‘how an experience of death can be real but partial’’—if, that is, ‘‘death necessarily entails total deprivation of life and irreversible separation from [Yhwh].’’ As he puts it, ‘‘The psalmist who can still pray is clearly not dead.’’∞∂ The answer to Johnston’s objection lies in the Israelite conception of death and its difference from others, especially ours. Whereas we think of a person who is gravely ill, under lethal assault, or sentenced to capital punishment as still alive, the Israelites were quite capable of seeing such an individual as dead. Or, to be more precise, they could do so in their poetic literature without, it seems to me, implying that in a more prosaic genre (like historiography or religious law) they would make the same categorization. In other words, for us death is radically discontinuous with life, a quantum leap, as it were, lying between the two. For the psalmists, by contrast, the discontinuity lay between a healthy and successful life and one marked by adversity, in physical health or otherwise. We are predisposed to think that ancient Israelites conceived of death as involving two stages, one characterized by intense affliction but capable of reversal and another permanent and irreversible, like death as modern secular thought conceives it (figure a). In fact, they saw illness as continuous with death and thought of the reversal of illness as so miraculous as to be in the nature of a resurrection (figure b).– page 38

Here is the quote from Pitre that I cited: Brant Pitre, Jesus, Tribulation and the End of Exile, (Grand Rapids, Baker Academic, 2005, 414 – he says, commenting on Daniel 12: “This prophecy of the resurrection and justification of the ‘many’ like all ‘resurrection’ texts in the Old Testament, is also a prophecy of the restoration of Israel.””[5]

Throughout the body of the article I will also be quoting from the orthodox Partial Preterist Reformed community to see if such a spiritual, forty years new exodus, followed by souls being released from Hades at the end of the old covenant age, and corporate body resurrection was fulfilled in AD 70 and if so, does this harmonize with Full Preterism and the Biblical position.

Reformed Views of a Spiritual Resurrection in AD 70

Many Christians are unaware that Reformed Partial Preterism teaches the “orthodox” view that there was a spiritual resurrection of the dead at the coming of Christ in AD 70.  This position teaches the exact same concepts I will be developing, in that the OT and NT supports that:

1).  There was a spiritual, progressive, corporate and covenantal resurrection from the condemnation and death of the old covenant body of Israel being transformed and rising into the imputed righteousness and resurrection life of the new covenant body of Israel between AD 30 – AD 70.

2). This spiritual, progressive, corporate and covenantal resurrection is consummated at Christ’s coming upon the clouds in the events of AD 67 – AD 70 when God empties the souls from Abraham’s Bosom, or Hades, and causes His righteous to inherit God’s presence and eternal life.

Unfortunately, the weakness of this position is that both the OT and NT teach that this is the ONE end of the age (old covenant age) consummative resurrection event and not just “a” resurrection.

I will be arguing in this chapter that the above “orthodox” Christian understanding of a spiritual, progressive, covenantal and corporate body resurrection is THE general end of the age resurrection event that was fulfilled imminently by AD 70.  We will examine and quote these admissions throughout the body of the article from men such as James Jordan and Kenneth Gentry especially when we address the resurrection of Daniel 12:2

The resurrection of Job 19:25-27?

“For I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last he will stand upon the earth. And after my skin has been thus destroyed, yet in my flesh I shall see God, whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes shall behold, and not another. My heart faints within me” (Job 19:25-27).

Note how the American Standard Bible translates verse 26 as having the exact opposite meaning as how the physical resurrection proponents would read it: “And after my skin, even this body, is destroyed, then, without my flesh shall I see God.”

The Anchor Bible reads and understands the Hebrew as “without my flesh” and the NIV concedes that this can be the meaning and adds a note (“from my flesh”).

OT and Hebrew scholars Keil and Delitzsch translate the Hebrew in the key verse thus:

“And after my skin, thus torn to pieces, And without my flesh shall I behold Eloah…”

And they further elaborate that this text should not be used to support a fleshly resurrection:

“If we have correctly understood על־עפר, Job 19:25, we cannot in this speech find that the hope of a bodily recovery is expressed.”[6]

Barne’s Notes on the Bible renders it:

“After I shall awake, though this body be destroyed, yet out of my flesh shall I see God.”

The Hebrew can actually teach the exact opposite of an expectation of a physical resurrection in that Job is saying “apart from my flesh” or “without my flesh” he would see God.  Therefore, this passage could easily be supporting an understanding of a resurrection of the soul in seeing God and, if so, would be consistent with spiritual Jewish views we just looked at.

Some have postulated that Job was one of those raised out of the tombs with Jesus in Matthew 27, and therefore he saw Jesus standing on the earth before He ascended.  If so, there is no evidence that Job took a physical body to heaven or ascended with Christ.  If such a view was correct (and I don’t think it is), then Job’s physical resurrection was a “sign” type miracle, and he went into the town testifying of Christ and then would die again, as the purpose of Lazarus’ resurrection served.

A more probable interpretation given by Futurists and Preterists alike is that Job is looking for vindication in this life and is not discussing a physical or spiritual resurrection hope in the afterlife. As David Green writes,

“But even if we translate the phrase to read, “from my flesh” (i.e., from the vantage point of my flesh), this could be taken to mean that Job expected to see God within his own lifetime, while still in his flesh.  And, as a matter of fact, that is exactly what happened.

After Job’s time of tribulation and anguish, his Redeemer at last arose on the dust and answered Job out of the whirlwind (Job 38:1). After God’s “archers”/“troops” (i.e., Job’s accusers) surrounded and “devoured” Job, and after Job was filled up with the afflictions of his flesh, he was redeemed from his sufferings. He was vindicated as “a perfect and upright man” and his enemies were judged (cf. Job 19:29 and 42:79).  Thus Job, with his own eyes, and from his flesh, saw God: I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye has seen You (Job 42:5).

Regarding Job 14:13-17:

O that You would hide me in Sheol, that You would keep me secret, until Your wrath be past, that You would appoint me a set time, and remember me!  If a man dies, shall he live again?  All the days of my appointed time [literally, “warfare”] will I wait, till my change come [or, “until my exchanging or replacement come”].  You shall call, and I will answer You.  You will have a desire to the work of Your hands (Job 14:13-15).

If Job was prophesying concerning the resurrection of the dead in this passage, then we must say that Job was triumphing in the idea that his wretched and miserable condition (his “warfare”) would continue for hundreds or even thousands of additional years while in Sheol (Job 14:14), and that only at the end of human history would God’s “wrath” (Job 14:13) against him pass, and that only then would Job be relieved from his warfare as a battle-wearied soldier is replaced by another (“changed”) (cf. Job 10:17; 14:14-15).

Either God remained/remains angry with Job for hundreds or thousands of years after Job’s death, or Job was not speaking of a vindication at the resurrection of the dead.  As the context leads us to believe, what Job desired was vindication instead of death.  Instead of resigning himself to dying, stricken of God, Job yearned by faith for vindication and redemption in his own lifetime.  He hoped that God would not crush him as an enemy, but would instead relent and restore him to Himself (Job 14:14b, 15).  As we know, Job’s hope was not deferred, as per futurism (Prov. 13:12).  Instead, it was fulfilled, and Job was delivered and vindicated in his own lifetime.  “So, the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning” (Job 42:12).”[7]

The resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3

“At that time shall arise Michael, the great prince who has charge of your people. And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never has been since there was a nation till that time. But at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone whose name shall be found written in the book. And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt3 And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above;[a] and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever. 4 But you, Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.” (Daniel asks and is told by the angel when all this would be fulfilled in v. 7)7…that it would be for a time, times, and half a time, and that when the shattering of the power of the holy people comes to an end all these things would be finished” (Dan. 12:1-4, 7).

Daniel 12:2-3 is by far the most important and clearest OT text on the resurrection.  Jesus and the other NT writers appeal to its fulfillment in Matthew 13:39-43, John 5, Acts 24:25, Revelation 20:5-15, and even 1 Corinthians 15.

“All these things” (Dan. 12:7)

Daniel is clearly told in verse 7 that the judgment and resurrection of verses 2-4 would be fulfilled at the same time as the “tribulation” period and during the “time of the end [of the old covenant Mosaic age].”  Verse 7 also informs us that this would be a 3 ½ year period of time [the last half of the last seven years of the Daniel 9:24-27 prophecy] when God would “shatter the power of the holy people” in the events of AD 67 – AD 70.

Jesus has already connected the “end of the age” resurrection “gathering” and “tribulation” period to be a part of the “all these things” to be fulfilled in Jesus’ contemporary “this generation” (Mt. 24:3-34).  This “end of the [old covenant] age” gathering is the same event Jesus described in Matthew 13:39-43.  Let’s get a visual for the parallels and connections:

Since A (Daniel 12) is = to B (Matthew 13):
Tribulation on national Israel as never before 12:1 13:40-42
Time of the end / end of “this” OC age separation 12:1, 4, 9, 13 13:39-41
Saints rise and shine in the eternal kingdom 12:2-3 13:43
Wicked rise to shame in eternal condemnation 12:2 13:39-42 
And if B (Matthew 13) is = to C (Matthew 24-25):
Pre-kingdom evangelism by Jesus’ evangelism 13:37-38 24:14
Tribulation on national Israel as never before 13:40-42 24:21-22
End of “this” age / end of the age separation 13:39-41 24:30-31; 25:31-41
Sons of the day / hour shine with the Son 13:43 24:27, 30-31, 36
Inheritance of and entrance into the kingdom 13:43 25:34/Luke 21:30-32 
Then A (Daniel 12) is = to C (Matthew 24-25)
Tribulation and sanctification / Great Tribulation 12:1, 10 24:21-22
Hour / day / time of the judgment (aka separation) 12:1-2, 4 (OG) LXX 24:36; 25:31-33
Fulfillment at the time of the end / end of the age / the shattering of Israel’s world/power or her “heaven and earth” (the temple, etc…) 12:4, 7, 9, 13

 

24:3, 13-14, 28-29, 34-35

 

Inheritance of and entrance into the kingdom 12:2-3, 13 25:34/Luke 21:30-32
The sons of the day / hour shine with the Son of life 12:3 24:27, 30-31, 36
Kingdom age evangelism via God’s shining ones 12:3

 

24:14, 25:29

 

Two or more things that are equal to another thing are also equal to each other
Kingdom age evangelism Dan. 12 = Mt. 13 = Mt. 24-25
Tribulation like never before Dan. 12 = Mt. 13 = Mt. 24-25
Time of the end (shattering of Israel’s power) / end of the old covenant age (destruction of OC Israel’s temple) Dan. 12 = Mt. 13 = Mt. 24-25
Chosen ones raised and shine to eternal life and wicked raised to eternal condemnation / the righteous raised to shine and tares burn / sheep inherit eternal life / goats to eternal punishment Dan. 12 = Mt. 13 = Mt. 24-25

 Partial Preterist James Jordan now understands the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 (and Daniel’s personal resurrection [his soul] in verse 13) as being a spiritual and corporate resurrection that took place from Jesus’ earthly ministry to AD 70.  Jordan even believes that Daniel’s soul was raised out of Abraham’s bosom according to Revelation 20 in AD 70.  Here are some selected quotes from his commentary on Daniel:

The resurrection of [Dan. 12:2] seems to connect to the evangelistic and teaching ministry spoken of in verse 3; thus, it is some kind of historical resurrection that is spoke of, a resurrectional event in this world, in our history.”[8]

“…Daniel 12:2 tells us that in the days of Jesus the nation will undergo a last spiritual resurrection, but some will not persevere and their resurrection will only be unto destruction.  The Parable of the soils fits here (Mt. 13:3-23):  three different kinds of people come to life, but only one of the three different kinds of people come to like, but only one of the three kinds is awakened to persevering, everlasting life.

During His ministry, Jesus raised the nation back to life.  He healed the sick, cleansed the unclean, brought dead people back to life, restored the Law, entered the Temple as King, etc.  Then, as always, the restored people fell into sin and crucified Him.

Thus, a resurrection of Israel is in view.  The wicked are raised, but do not profit from it, and are destroyed. The saints experience a great distress, and live with God forever and ever.”[9]

“The death of the Church in the Great Tribulation, and her resurrection after that event, were the great proof that Jesus had accomplished the work He came to do.  The fact that the Church exists today, nearly 2000 years after her death in the Great Tribulation, is the ongoing vindication of Jesus work.”[10]

“Revelation takes up where Daniel leaves off, and deals mostly with the Apostolic Age and the death and resurrection of the Church.”[11]

“What Daniel is promised is that after his rest in Abraham’s bosom, he will stand up with all God’s saints and join Michael on a throne in heaven, as described in Revelation 20, an event that came after the Great Tribulation and in the year AD 70.”[12]

After challenging Kenneth Gentry for many years on the timing of the resurrection of Daniel 12, he too has had a recent epiphany recognizing that there had to have been some kind of spiritual resurrection of Daniel 12 fulfilled in AD 70:

“In Daniel 12:1-2 we find a passage that clearly speaks of the great tribulation in AD 70.”[13]

“…But it also seems to speak of the resurrection occurring at that time…”[14]

“Daniel appears to be presenting Israel as a grave site under God’s curse: Israel as a corporate body is in the “dust” (Da 12:2; cp. Ge 3:14, 19).  In this he follows Ezekiel’s pattern in his vision of the dry bones, which represent Israel’s “death” in the Babylonian dispersion (Eze 37). In Daniel’s prophecy many will awaken, as it were, during the great tribulation to suffer the full fury of the divine wrath, while others will enjoy God’s grace in receiving everlasting life. Luke presents similar imagery in Luke 2:34 in a prophecy about the results of Jesus’s birth for Israel: “And Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary His mother, ‘Behold, this Child is appointed for the fall and rise of many in Israel, and for a sign to be opposed.’”

Christ Himself points out that some from Israel will believe and be saved, while others will not (e.g., Mt. 10:34-36; 13:11-15), that in the removing of the kingdom from Israel many will be crushed and scattered like dust (Mt. 21:43-45).  He even speaks of the saved Jews as arising from the “shadow of death” (Mt. 4:16).  Though in AD 70 elect Jews will flee Israel and will live (Mt. 24:22), the rest of the nation will be a corpse:  “wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather” (Mt. 24:28).  Indeed, in AD 70 we see in the destruction of the city of Jerusalem (Mt. 22:7) that “many are called, but few are chosen” (Mt. 22:14).  Elsewhere he employs the imagery of “regeneration” to the arising of the new Israel from out of the dead, old covenant Israel in AD 70:  “You who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Mt. 19:28).”[15]

“…it appears that Daniel is drawing from the hope of a future, literal resurrection and applying it symbolically to the first century leading up the tribulation in AD 70.  That is, he is portraying God’s separating believing Jews out of Israel through the winnowing of Israel in AD 70.”[16]

“Daniel only picks up on resurrection imagery and, like Ezekiel, applies that to corporate Israel.  He is teaching that in the events of AD 70, the true Israel will arise from old Israel’s carcass, as in a resurrection.”[17]

Let’s summarize the position of Jordan and Gentry here on what the resurrection of Daniel 12 entails:

1). It is Israel’s last spiritual and corporate resurrection.

2). Both Israel and the Church participate in this spiritual, covenantal and corporate resurrection whereby the new covenant Church or new Israel of God is raised out of the corpse of old covenant Israel in AD 70.

3). There was an “already and not yet” type evangelism taking place between Christ’s earthly ministry and His coming in AD 70 which brought about the consummative resurrection or “end” of Israel during the events of AD 67 – AD 70.

4). This resurrection resulted in Daniel’s soul being raised out of Abraham’s bosom to be seated on a throne to reign with Christ and inherit eternal life.

Response – Jordan appeals to the evangelism taking place in the parable of the soils instead of dealing with the evangelism taking place where Jesus actually quotes Daniel 12:2-3, and that is in the parable of the wheat and tares (cf. Mt. 13:39-43).  Jesus clearly places this pre-kingdom evangelism and the resurrection of Daniel 12 to be fulfilled at the end of the old covenant age and nowhere else!  And as I demonstrated earlier in our discussion of the end of the age in Matthew 24:3 and 13:39-43, a colleague of Jordan and Gentry’s is Joel McDurmon, who does admit the end of the age in Matthew 13:39-43 is the old covenant age. This places the resurrection ONLY at the end of the old covenant age and no other time.

It is important to note that Gentry at one time criticized Dispensational Zionism for having two resurrection doctrines (one before and one after the 1,000 year millennial period):

“Contrary to dispensationalism and historic premillennialism, there is but one resurrection and one judgment, which occur simultaneously at the end of history:  Daniel 12:2; Matthew 25:31-32; John 5:28-29…Acts 24:15).”[18]

Gentry NOW says “it appears” there is a double fulfillment of the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 (one in AD 70 and another at the end of world history).  Yet he argues against other views giving the tribulation period a double fulfillment or any kind of fulfillment beyond the 3 ½ years Daniel mentions, which he correctly sees being fulfilled in the events of AD 67 – AD 70.  Daniel is told that “all these things” (the tribulation and resurrection) would be fulfilled together during the “time of the end” [of the old covenant age] or during the 3 ½ years – when Israel’s power is completely shattered.

When we harmonize Jordan, Gentry (#1 and #2) and McDurmon on the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 and Matthew 13:39-43 we get the biblical position of NT resurrection:

Major Premise:  The resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 is “one” general resurrection of the just and unjust to be fulfilled “at the end of the age” and forms the resurrection of Jesus’ teaching and that of the NT authors [cf. Mt. 13:39-43; John 5; Acts 24:15; 1 Cor. 15; Rev. 20:5-15; etc.] (Gentry #1).

Minor Premise (A):  But the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 has an “already and not yet” pre-kingdom evangelism connected with it that addresses the inward heart and soul of man or the living (Jordan).  This pre-kingdom evangelism is mentioned in Matthew 13:39-43 and 24:14, and was a sign fulfilled before the “end of the old covenant age” in AD 70 (McDurmon).

Minor Premise (B):  But Daniel’s soul was raised out of Abraham’s bosom in AD 70 at this last spiritual and corporate resurrection in which the new covenant body of Israel was raised out from the old covenant body of Israel in AD 70 (Jordan and Gentry#2).

Conclusion:  The “ONE” “end of the age” (spiritual, progressive, corporate and covenantal) resurrection of the just and unjust was fulfilled after a pre-kingdom evangelism affecting the hearts of the living, roughly from AD 27 – AD 67.  This resulted in the new covenant body of Israel being raised out from the corpse of the old covenant body of Israel, a historic event in AD 70 which also resulted in souls being emptied out of Abraham’s bosom to inherit God’s presence and eternal life in AD 70 at the end of the old covenant age (the position of the author – “Reformed and always reforming” – Sovereign Grace Full Preterism).

Some get confused over Daniel’s phrase “sleep in the dust.” This is merely a figure of speech, as David Green points out:

“The dead were not literally sleeping, nor were they literally in the dust.  They were “in dust” only insofar as, in their death, they had not ascended into God’s presence in Christ.  In terms of the righteousness and life of God, they were earth-bound.  From a literal standpoint, they were in Sheol/Hades (the abode of the Adamic dead), and it was from out of Sheol that they were raised to stand before the heavenly throne of God (Dan. 12:1-2).”[19]

The Resurrection “Gathering” of Matthew 13:39-43 and Matthew 24:3, 30-31 at the “End of the Age”

Since Jesus places the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 to take place at “the end of the age” (Mt. 13:39-43) and this “end of the age” is inseparably connected to His Second Coming in Matthew 24:3, 30-31, we must identify what “end of the age” is in view – the end of the old covenant age or the end of the new covenant age?  When we allow the Bible to interpret itself, it becomes very easy to see how “all these things” in Matthew 24:3-34 were fulfilled in Jesus’ contemporary “this generation.”  So, let’s turn our attention to proving just that!

The end of what age? (Mt. 24:3)

“As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age (Mt. 24:3)”?

“And they asked him, “Teacher, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when these things are about to take place” (Lk. 21:7)?

The first thing we notice between Matthew’s account placed alongside Mark’s and Luke’s is that after Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple, Mark and Luke do not include the “and end of the age” (Greek suntéleia ho aiṓn) in the disciple’s question(s).  The fact that this phrase is only used in Matthew’s gospel three times (cf. Mt. 13:39-43; 24:3 and 28:18-20) and in the book of Hebrews (cf. Heb. 9:26-28) communicates its Jewishness.

Since the “end of the age” is referring to the end of the old covenant age when the temple would be destroyed, there is no conflict between the accounts.  If so, are we to expect that Mark and Luke were so careless as to not introduce the subject of the alleged end of world history into the most important account of Jesus’ teaching on Bible prophecy?  For Mark and Luke, when the Son of Man comes upon the clouds in judgment, this is when the temple would be destroyed (which for Matthew is when the old covenant age would end as well).

We should briefly examine Matthew 13:39-43 where Jesus has used “end of the age” (Greek suntéleia ho aiṓn) before.  Partial Preterist Joel McDurmon, commenting on the end of the age in Matthew 13:39-43, concedes it is the end of the old covenant age:

“It is clear that Jesus did not have in mind the end of the world, nor did He mean the final judgment. Rather, Matthew 13:2430, 36-43 describe the judgment that would come upon unbelieving Jerusalem. During this time, the angels would “gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity” (13:41) and these would be judged with fire.  Many of them literally were burned in fire during the destruction of Jerusalem.  During this same time, however, the elect of Christ— “the children of the kingdom” (v. 38)—will be harvested.  While the explanation of the parable does not tell us their final end, the parable itself has the householder instructing the harvesters to “gather the wheat into my barn.”  In other words, they are protected and saved by God.

This, of course, is exactly what happened to the Christians.  Not only were they saved in soul, but they mostly fled Jerusalem before the Roman siege.  This was consequent to Jesus’ advice to flee and not look back once the signs arose (Matt. 24:16-22); indeed, this would correspond with the angels’ work of harvesting the elect (24:30).”[20]

McDurmon even develops Jesus’ two age model (“this age” = old covenant age) and “age to come” or “age about to come” (the new covenant age) in Pauline eschatology to be one and the same.  After making his case in Ephesians 1:21; 2:1-7; 3:8-11; Colossians 1:26; 1 Corinthians 10:11; Hebrews 9:26, he concludes:

“So, from the teaching of Jesus, Paul and the author of Hebrews, we get a very clear picture of the two primary ages:  one that endured up until the time of Christ, and another that began around that same period.  I believe these two periods, being hinged upon the coming and work of Christ, pertain obviously to the Old and New Covenant administrations.”[21]

Getting back to the disciple’s question in Matthew 24:3, DeMar correctly writes:

“The disciples question involves three interrelated, contemporary events: (1) the time of the temple’s destruction; (2) the sign that will signal Jesus’ coming related to the destruction of the temple; and (3) the sign they should look for telling them that “the end of the age” has come. These questions are related to the destruction of the temple and the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system and nothing else.”[22]

In the 1994 version of DeMar’s Last Days Madness, he connects Matthew 23 with 24 and adds that the maturity or “consummation” of the new covenant arrived in AD 70 as well:

“The “woes” of Matthew 23 and the destruction of the temple and the city of Jerusalem were a result of all that John the Baptist and Jesus had been warning the scribes, Pharisees, and chief priests regarding the judgment that would come upon them if they did not repent. “All these things,” Jesus cautioned, “shall come upon this generation” (23:36). It is after hearing about the desolation of their “house” – the temple – that the disciples ask about the “temple buildings” (24:1). Jesus answered the disciples’ questions relating to the time and signs of Jerusalem’s destruction, always with the background of Matthew 23 in view, since His comments in that chapter had precipitated the questions (24:3). The Old Covenant order would end with the destruction of Jerusalem. This would be the “sign” of the “end of the age,” the end of the Old Covenant, and the consummation [MJS – bringing to maturity] of the New Covenant.[23]

DeMar explains his position on the “end of the age” and then uses a quote from George Hill to support its historical relevance:

“Notice that the disciples did not ask about the end of the “world” (kosmos), as some Bible versions translate the Greek word aion.  In context, with the temple and city as their primary focus, they asked about the end of the “age.”  They were asking when time would run out for the temple, the city of Jerusalem, and the covenant promises that were related to the Mosaic system of animal sacrifices, ceremonial washings, and the priesthood.

Time was divided by the Jews into two great periods, the age of the law and the age of the Messiah. The conclusion of the one was the beginning of the other, the opening of that kingdom which the Jews believed the Messiah was to establish, which was to put an end to their sufferings, and to render them the greatest people upon the earth. The apostles full of this hope, said to our Lord, immediately before his ascension, “Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? [Acts 1:6].  Our Lord uses the phrase of his coming to denote his taking vengeance upon the Jews by destroying their city and sanctuary.  The “end of the age” refers to the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system with its attendant sacrifices and rituals.”[24]

End of the age” – were the disciples confused?

Virtually all Futurist eschatologies begin with the disciples’ question in Matthew 24:3 and simply assume what they need to prove when they assume that the disciples were “confused” in associating Jesus’ coming and the end of the age with the destruction of the temple.  Since Futurist  eschatology separates these events by thousands of years and the disciples linked them to be fulfilled altogether, they merely assume the disciples were mistaken and not themselves, or they assume their Zionist Futurist system.  Here are some key hermeneutical steps that Futurism willfully skip:

1). The Jews of Jesus’ day understood and connected the phrase “this age” to the old covenant age of Moses and the prophets, with the desolation of Jerusalem and the temple, as predicted in Daniel.  They understood the “age to come” as the new covenant or Messianic age.  The context supports the destruction of the temple the disciples and Jesus were actually looking at. This would mark the “end of the age” that they were currently living in, the old covenant age, not the end of world history.

Daniel in chapters 7, 9 and 12 was told that the eschatological “time of the end” events such as the desolation of the temple, the resurrection, the tribulation, the coming of the Son of Man and the arrival of the kingdom were “all” to take place together when the city and temple would be destroyed or “when the power of the holy people would be completely shattered” (cf. see the consummation and recapitulation scenes in Dan. 7:13-22; 9:24-27, climaxing in Dan. 12:1-7).

2). Isaiah, in his “little apocalypse” (cf. Isiah 24-27), posits all of the eschatological events (judgment, de-creation, avenging the sin of blood guilt, the blowing of the trumpet / eschatological gathering / resurrection, etc.) to be fulfilled when Israel violated the old covenant, and thus would take place together when the temple would be destroyed or “when he makes all the altar stones to be like chalk stones crushed to pieces” (Isaiah 27:9).  Again, the judgment and destruction of the city and temple were inseparably connected together just as in Daniel.  Why are they “confused” to link them together when the OT prophets connected them together?!?

3).  In Matthew 13:39-43, 51 Jesus taught the judgment and resurrection (“the time of the end” of the eschatological events in Daniel 12:2-3) would “all” take place at the end of their old covenant “this age.”  Jesus specifically asks them if they understood His teaching on the time of this harvest at the end of their “this age” and they emphatically responded “Yes” (vs. 51).  We have direct evidence that they DID understand Jesus’ teaching on the “end of the age,” contrary to the false assumptions pawned off by Zionists.

4).  As we have seen and proven thus far, Jesus had previously taught the disciples that He would return in some of their lifetimes and be ashamed of some within their contemporary “this generation” (Matthew 10:22-23; 16:27-28/Mark 8:38-9:1).

So, before we even get to the resurrection or eschatological “gathering” in Matthew 24:31, the disciples could have discerned from such prophets as Daniel and Isaiah that all of the eschatological events would be fulfilled together when Jerusalem was judged and her temple destroyed.  And before we get to Matthew 24, Jesus had already clearly stated that He would return in some of their lifetimes and connected this coming with the desolation of their “house” / temple (Mt. 10:22-23; 16:27-28; 23:36-39).  If this isn’t clear enough, the record clearly confirms the disciples understood Jesus’ teaching on the end of their “this age” with a resounding “yes” (Mt. 13:39-51)!  We do not seek to divide what God has joined together or go beyond what Scripture teaches – while Futurist eschatology does.

Since there is no direct evidence here in Matthew 24 that the disciples were “confused,” Futurist systems appeal to the fact that the Gospels often point out that the disciples were confused over various issues.  But this proves nothing here in Matthew 24, or it is a classic example of “proving too much.”  Here is how. In each case, Jesus (or Matthew as a responsible narrator of his gospel) explicitly points out when the disciples are confused or ask a question that needs correction (cf. Mt. 16:6-12, 21-23; 17:4-5; 19:13-15; 20:20-25).  Therefore, since we don’t find Jesus or Matthew claiming the disciples were “confused” in asking the question they did, the burden of proof is now thrown in the lap of Futurist Premillennial Zionists to prove the disciples are confused in Matthew 24.

Milton Terry was spot on when he wrote of Jesus’ teaching on the “end of the age” in the Olivet Discourse and elsewhere in the NT (such as Hebrews 9:26-28) as the end of the old covenant age and not the end of world history:

“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 that 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.” “…the writer regarded the incarnation of Christ as taking place near the end of the aeon, or dispensational period. To suppose that he meant that it was close upon the end of the world, or the destruction of the material globe, would be to make him write false history as well as bad grammar. It would not be true in fact; for the world has already lasted longer since the incarnation than the whole duration of the Mosaic economy, from the exodus to the destruction of the temple. It is futile, therefore, to say that the ‘end of the age’ may mean a lengthened period, extending from the incarnation to our times, and even far beyond them. That would be an aeon, and not the close of an aeon. The aeon of which our Lord was speaking was about to close in a great catastrophe; and a catastrophe is not a protracted process, but a definitive and culminating act.”[25]

After all, the Second Appearing or coming of Christ to close the old covenant age is further described as Christ’s coming “…in a very little while” which “would not tarry” (Hebrews 10:37).  Again, the inspired NT authors both understood what “age” would end and when Christ would come to bring its end!

If Jesus’ coming in AD 70 ended and changed the old covenant age, then there is really no justification for reading into the text (eisegesis) that the disciples were “confused” or that the Olivet Discourse has anything to do with the end of world history.

The Resurrection of Matthew 24:30-31

Gary DeMar and James Jordan of American Vision are now teaching this is not a mere post AD 70 evangelism, but a resurrection event of OT and NT souls being raised out of Abraham’s bosom or Hades into God’s presence in AD 70. In a recent debate with Michael Brown Gary applied this to the souls of the OT dead being raised into God’s presence in AD 70. James Jordan while teaching Daniel 12:2 is a resurrection of souls for the OT worthies in AD 70, now applies Matthew 24:30-31 to the resurrection of the NT martyrs in AD 70. Jordan writes,

“Further confirmation of this interpretation is to be found, I believe, in the phrases that follow in verse 31. There we see messengers gathering the elect not from their graves (which is how the Last Judgment scenes read), nor from all over the earth (which is how an evangelistic passage would read), but from all over the heavens. They are gathered from the four winds, not from the four corners of the earth. They are gathered from the ends of heaven, not from the ends of the earth (cf. Deut. 4:32; Psa. 19:6; Jer. 49:36).

This language might be taken as a general reference to the whole earthly world, except for the fact that it fits so very well with what we find, again, in Revelation. The dead saints “under the altar” are in “paradise” or “Abraham’s bosom,” a location symbolically equivalent to the firmament heavens that are right below the throne-heavens (Rev. 6:9-11). It is these elect, and their newly-massacred brethren who come out of the Great Tribulation, who are gathered before the Throne in Revelation 15.”[26]

He goes on to summarize,

“Let us summarize Matthew 24:29-31. Immediately after the great affliction, the great persecution and martyrdom of the apostolic church, the world will be changed from the Old to the New Creation. No longer will sun and moon determine liturgy and worship; the former covenant with its lunar liturgy will be broken forever. No longer will angelic stars and heavenly powers govern humanity, for in Jesus, mankind has at last come of age. No longer will angels rule the world. They will vacate their heavenly thrones.

At that time, the promised sign will be given, a sign that shows that Jesus, a man, is truly enthroned in heaven. That sign is the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. The Jews will mourn over Jerusalem, and they will realize that the Church, which they had hoped to destroy, has now ascended to the Ancient of Days and has been given the Kingdom promised in Daniel 7. Those saints have been gathered by the angels in connection with the seventh and last trumpet described in the book of Revelation, their souls gathered from all the heavenly places in Paradise where they had been waiting for this day. The saints are gathered before the Throne in the highest heavens, and shortly will sit down on thrones with their Lord and Master. They will be the new stars and moon and will sit where the angels formerly sat in heaven.”[27]

Some brief thoughts on Jordan’s comments:

1).  Since in his commentary on Daniel 12:2-3, 13 he includes Daniel’s soul being raised from Abraham’s bosom in AD 70, there is a larger group of souls raised than just the martyrs.  I would have liked to see him harmonize those two teachings not just going to Revelation and dealing with the martyrs. Yet Gary DeMar in his recent debate with Michael Brown over Matthew 24 taught the gathering of the elect in Matthew 24:31 was the resurrection of the OT dead elect.

Jordan tries to make a distinction from this spiritual resurrection in AD 70 from an alleged future physical one based on the absence of “graves” which he (without evidence) says must be a future to us “general resurrection.” And although “graves” is not mentioned, from the “dust” (figuratively) is in Dan. 12:2 and here in Mt. 24:31 the description of the same spiritual resurrection is described as from the “four winds” of “heaven.”  Jordan has not proven this isn’t a description of the “general resurrection.”  Especially if he says the resurrection of Daniel 12 was fulfilled spiritually in AD 70 and yet Daniel 12 IS the resurrection from the “graves” of John 5:19-29! This and a resurrection from the “graves” can be a corporate and spiritual resurrection as described in Ezekiel 37:12. Even Gentry sees the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 being a spiritual and corporate resurrection for Israel and the Church in AD 70 and uses the resurrection of Ezekiel 37 as support. So if a spiritual and corporate resurrection can be from “the dust” and or out from “the graves,” then a spiritual and corporate resurrection from the “graves,” the “dust” and from the “four winds of heaven” can refer to the general resurrection in AD 70. Again, a combination of Jordan’s writings have the OT worthies (the dead) and the NT martyrs (those who have died “in Christ”) being spiritually raised together at Christ’s Parousia in AD 70 — that IS the Full Preterist view of the resurrection and that of the NT.

2).  Jordan and DeMar’s position on a spiritual AD 70 resurrection at the end of the OC age in AD 70 begs the question – If the righteous OT and NT dead were raised together to inherit eternal life in God’s presence, at Christ’s parousia, at the sound of a trumpet (or “the last trumpet”) in AD 70, then why isn’t this the same resurrection, parousia and trumpet discussed by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4-5 and 1 Corinthians 15?!?  Paul doesn’t discuss there was coming TWO different kinds of resurrections for the OT “the dead” and those who had died “in Christ” – 1). “a” spiritual one at Christ’s parousia in AD 70 and then 2). a physical one at the end of world history!  Partial Preterist such as Milton Terry and men like Mike Bull at least have connected Jesus’ imminent eschatology with Paul’s in these texts but they teach some kind of limited physical resurrection and “rapture” in AD 70. Of course, none of these texts discuss a limited number being raised or “raptured” but they must have a limited amount to try and get around how historians would miss such an event!

If A (Matthew 24) is = B (1 Thessalonians 4-5)
Christ returns from heaven 24:30 4:16
With voice of Arch Angel 24:31 4:16
With trumpet of God 24:31 4:16
Caught/gathered together with/to Christ 24:31 4:17
“Meet” the Lord in the clouds 24:30 & 25:6 4:17
Exact time unknown 24:36 5:1-2
Christ comes as a thief 24:43 5:2
Unbelievers caught off guard 24:37-39 5:3
Time of birth pangs 24:8 5:3
Believers not deceived 24:43 5:4-5
Believers to be watchful 24:42 5:6
Exhorted to sobriety 24:49 5:7
Son/sunlight shinning from e. to w. / Sons of the Day 24:27, 36, & 38 5:4-8
And if B (1 Thessalonians 4) is = to C (1 Corinthians 15)
The sleeping to be raised 4:13-14 15:12-18
The living to be caught/changed 4:15-17 15:51-52
Christ’s coming (Greek: Parousia) 4:15 15:23
At the sound of the trumpet 4:16 15:52
Encouraged to stand firm 4:18 15:58
Same contemporary “we” 4:15-17 15:51-52
Then A (Matthew 24 & Parallels) is = to C (1 Corinthians 15)
Christ to come (Greek: parousia) 24:27 15:23
His people to be gathered/changed 24:31 15:52
To come with the sound of a trumpet 24:31 15:52
To be “the end” (Greek telos, the goal) 24:3, 14 15:24
Kingdom consummation (goal reached) Luke 21:30-32 15:24
All prophecy fulfilled at this point Luke 21:22 15:54-55
Victory over the Mosaic Law/temple Mt. 24:1 15:55-56
Same contemporary “you” or “we” Mt. 24:2ff 15:51-52
Two or More Things that are Equal to Another Thing are Also Equal to Each Other
Matthew 24 1 Thessalonians 4 1 Corinthians 15
At His coming (24:27-31) At His coming (4:16) At His coming (15:23)
At the trumpet (24:31) At the trumpet (4:16) At the trumpet (15:52)
Dead raised, all gathered (24:31) Dead raised (4:16) Dead raised (15:35-44)
All living gathered (24:31) Living caught together to Him (4:17) Status of living changed (15:51)

 As I point out in my exposition of 1 Corinthians 15, the Corinthians had a hard time reconciling how the OT dead would be raised with those who had died “in Christ,” since they died before or outside the new covenant or being “in Christ.” In a similar way some Jews denied resurrection for those who did not die in or were not buried “in the land.”   Dispensationalists likewise have a hard time seeing how the two groups can be raised together.  Paul has to point out that they are all a part of ONE body that was in the process of “being raised” from Adamic “the death” which was in the process of “being destroyed” (1 Cor. 15:26 WUESTNT).  The two groups needed each other and could not be made “perfect” without each other (Heb. 11:40).  I would have loved James to try and harmonize how the OT dead and the NT saints were raised out of Abraham’s bosom in AD 70 and yet somehow this wasn’t the general resurrection?  Especially since the judgment  and resurrection of the dead of Daniel 12 is the judgment and resurrection of the dead found in Jn. 5 and is the end of the millennium judgment and resurrection of the dead of Rev. 20:5-15.  He still leaves major questions hanging and the exegesis is incomplete.

3). And if the first century Church “judged the angels” (1 Cor. 6:3) or “crushed Satan shortly” “under their feet” (Rms. 16:20/Gen. 3:15) in AD 70 and have taken their place in rulership over the nations with Christ, then the angels and Satan were judged at Christ’s coming in AD 70 per Matthew 25:31-46.

4). Jordan and DeMar are still teaching that the destruction of Jerusalem was a sign of the ascension, and that Christ was ruling from heaven. This is possible, but I agree more with F.F. Bruce in that John in Revelation 1:7-17 and Matthew in Matthew 24:30 is following the OG LXX which reads the Son of Man comes upon the clouds both as the Son of man AND “…AS the Ancient of Days” and not “up to the Ancient of Days.” After all John describes Jesus coming upon the clouds as both the Son of Man and then immediately describes Him as the Ancient of Days in Daniel 7 (Rev. 1:7-17). And K&D correctly point out Christ is coming downward on the clouds in judging the little horn and the nations. If the point is that Christ is coming “up to the Ancient of Days,” then it would be after he had come down in judgment in His Parousia of AD 70 to deliver the Kingdom (the raised souls of the OT and NT saints – again the resurrection event) to the Father (1 Cor. 15:23-24 / Dan. 7:13-27). Either way, Jesus and the NT authors interpret Daniel 7:13 as the Second Coming event and not the ascension.

5).  The reformed creeds are at least correct in teaching there is only one end of the age judgment and resurrection for the “quick and the dead,” so the resurrection of dead souls for the OT and NT saints into God’s presence to inherit eternal life at Christ’s Parousia in AD 70 is not “a” resurrection, but “THE” resurrection event.

Many Futurists miss that Jesus here in Matthew 24:30-31 is also drawing on the resurrection of Isaiah 27:9-13 where the eschatological “trumpet” “gathering” “harvest” is inseparably connected to the time when Jerusalem “the fortified city” is judged and her “altars” become like “chalkstone.”

The resurrection of John 5:20-29

“For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing. And greater works than these will he show him, so that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. 22 For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. 24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. 25 “Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. 28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment” (Jn. 5:20-29).

Commentators have long understood that Daniel 12:2 is the source for Jesus’ teaching on the resurrection in John 5:28-29 because the only OT passage which mentions a resurrection for both the righteous and the wicked is Daniel 12:2.  This, and the only OT passage addressing “eternal life,” is Daniel 12:2.  G.K. Beale points out an additional connection, in that Jesus is following the (OG) LXX of Daniel 12:1-2, 4 when it comes to this coming resurrection “hour” of both believers and unbelievers.[28]  Beale points out that Jesus gives the resurrection hour of Daniel 12:1-2 a soteriological and eschatological “already and not yet” period:

“…notice that Jesus also clearly refers to the same Daniel prophecy in verses 24-25 and applies it to people presently (or imminently) coming to life (“an hour is coming and now is”).[29]

He provides this helpful chart and adds:

Daniel 12:1-2 (OG)

John 5:24-25, 28-29

 

 

 

12:1:  “And at that hour…

12:2:  “Many of those who sleep in the width of the earth will arise[anatesontai]…some unto eternal life and others to reproach…and to eternal shame.”

5:24:  “…he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.”

5:25:  “…an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.”

5:28:  “…for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,”

5:29:  “and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection [anatasin] of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection [anatasin] of judgment.”[30]

“Jesus understands the Dan. 12 prophecy [and the coming ‘hour’] to have begun fulfillment.”[31] “Dan. 12:1-2 refers to the hour of tribulation followed by resurrection.  In fact, the ‘hour’ of Dan. 12:1 is further understood as ‘the hour of the end’ in Dan. 12:4 OG.”[32]

But as we have seen in combining the writings of James Jordan, Kenneth Gentry and Joel McDurmon, in Daniel 12:1-3 and Matthew 13:39-43, Jesus has placed the “already and not yet” of the resurrection as having its consummation at the end of the old covenant age in AD 70.  This was when Israel and the Church were receiving eternal life and being raised from the death of the fleshly old covenant body of Israel into the spiritual new covenant body of Israel.  This last “already and not yet” resurrection for Israel would result in souls being raised out of Abraham’s bosom or Hades into God’s presence.

I was able to share Beale’s concept of the already and not yet hour of Daniel 12 and John 5 with my co-author, David Green, in our second edition of House Divided, along with the chiastic structure connecting “the coming hour and now is” of John 4 with John 5.  Green was able to add an even better response to Strimple on this key passage:

“In order to understand John 5:28 and 29, we must first look three verses above it, in John 5:25, where Jesus said that the hour “now is” when “the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear shall live.”  As most Reformed interpreters agree, Jesus in that verse was referring to the preaching of His death and resurrection. The preaching of that message commenced at Pentecost.  “The dead” were physically living people who were spiritually dead in sin, and “the voice of the Son of God” was the gospel.  Having heard the gospel, those who were spiritually “dead” were spiritually resurrected.  They lived in that they received eternal life through faith in the gospel (“the voice of the Son of God”).

Then, in verses 28 and 29, Jesus expanded His teaching on the resurrection to include those who were not only spiritually dead, but who were also physically dead.  He did not call them “dead” (as He had already called the living who were spiritually dead), but He referred to them through another figure of speech as “all who are in the graves.”  They were not literally in their graves or tombs, of course, but were in Hades/Sheol.

What is often missed in this passage is that, like the physically living in verse 25, the physically dead in verse 28 were also going to live by means of hearing Christ’s “voice.”  As we know from verse 25, that “voice” is the gospel.  The physically dead therefore were going to hear the gospel (cf. 1 Pet. 4:6.) and were, as a result of hearing the gospel, going to be resurrected (regenerated, born from out of death and Hades).  This means that the physically dead were, like the physically living, spiritually dead.  And this inescapably means that both the physically living and the physically dead were going to be spiritually resurrected by means of the gospel-voice of the Son of God.  One resurrection in two main stages:  First, the last days saints; then, the Old Testament dead (“the rest of the dead” in Revelation 20:5). Note the parallels between John 4:21, 23 and John 5:25, 28:

..[T]he hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth. . . . (Jn. 4:23)

[T]he hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. (Jn. 4:21)

 

[T]he hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. (Jn. 5:25)

[T]he hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice. . . . (Jn. 5:28)

These two sets of prophecies are parallel.  They speak of the same timeframes, which were these:

Pentecost (AD 30)

The true worshipers would worship the Father in spirit and in truth.

The dead would hear the voice of the Son of God, and live.

Fall of Jerusalem (AD 70)

God’s worshipers would no longer worship Him in Jerusalem.

All who were in the graves would hear His voice.

After hearing the gospel, the dead were raised out of their Adamic graves (Hades) in the end of the age.  And those among them who believed the gospel received eternal life in the kingdom of God.  But those who hated the gospel (those who had done evil) were raised out of Hades only to stand before God and to enter into “eternal punishment” / “the second death” (Matt. 25:46; Jn. 5:28-29; Rev. 20:14).”[33]

Excellent Job by David Green!  Let me briefly point out the chiastic structure connecting “the hour that was coming, and now is” of John 4-5 that didn’t make it in the second edition:

(A)   [T]he hour cometh (the “not yet”), when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father (Jn. 4:21).

     (B)  [T]he hour cometh, and now is (the “already”), when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth. . . (Jn. 4:23).

     (B)  [T]he hour is coming, and now is (the “already”), when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live (Jn. 5:25).

(A). [T]he hour is coming (the “not yet”), in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice. . . (Jn. 5:28).

This is interesting in that Kenneth Gentry considers the “already and not yet” of “the coming hour and now is” of John 4 to refer to AD 27/30 – AD 70 in that the “not yet” of the “hour” was realized in AD 70 when the earthly temple was destroyed; the Church now worships God in spirit and in truth as we commune with Him as God’s Mount Zion.  In appealing to John 4:21-23 Gentry writes,

“The New Testament anticipates this imminent change of the old typological temple era into the new final era of spiritual worship.”[34]

For Gentry, Jesus’ teaching in John 4:21-23

“…concludes the anticipatory old covenant era (John 4:20-23; Heb. 1:1; 12:18-29), which “will soon disappear” (Heb. 8:13); it finally and forever closes down the typological sacrificial system, reorienting the worship of God (Heb. 9-10); and it effectively universalizes the Christian faith by freeing it from all Jewish constraints…”[35]

Gentry equates Jesus’ phrase, “the hour has come” (the eschatological “not yet”) with other AD 70 time texts such as “the time is short”, “the day is approaching”, “it is the last hour,” and “in just a little while.”[36]

Therefore, since John is linking John 4-5 together with this chiasm, it should be very apparent that the “already and not yet” of the “hour is coming and now is” of John 5 is also referring to the AD 27/30 – AD 70 transition period.  If not, why not?  Especially since Gentry has already conceded that the resurrection of Daniel 12 was fulfilled spiritually in AD 70 and that John 5 is the resurrection of Daniel 12!  And if not, the burden of proof is upon the Futurist and Gentry to prove that the phrase an “hour is coming and now is” in John 5 is being used of a completely different time period than that of John 4:21-23!

It’s not difficult to know when the eschatological “not yet” hour of John 4:21 and John 5:28 would arrive when we allow John to interpret himself:

“And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever. Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore, we know that it is the last hour” (1 John 2:17-18).

“And he said with a loud voice, ‘Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of his judgment has come…’” (Rev. 14:7).

“‘Put in your sickle, and reap, for the hour to reap has come, for the harvest of the earth is fully ripe.’ So, he who sat on the cloud swung his sickle across the earth, and the earth was reaped” (Rev. 14:15-16).

And, of course, Partial Preterists such as Gentry understand this eschatological “not yet” “hour” of John in these texts as imminently fulfilled when the old covenant world passed away, when Babylon (Jerusalem) was judged, or when Israel’s harvest/resurrection was fulfilled in the events of AD 67 – AD 70.

Major Premise: The “already and not yet” resurrection “hour” of Daniel 12:1-4 (OG) is the resurrection “already and not yet” hour of John 5:25-29.  The “not yet” consummation to this hour is further described by John in 1 John 2:17-18 and Revelation 14:7, 15-16.

Minor Premise: But the “not yet” resurrection “hour” of Daniel 12:1-4 (OG) was spiritually fulfilled in the “hour/time of the end” described as the 3 ½ years “when the power of the holy people would be completely shattered” – i.e., in the events of AD 67 – AD 70.  As John and his contemporaries approached or were in the AD 67 – AD 70 time frame, he stated clearly that the “last hour” of that harvest judgment and resurrection of Israel had come.

Conclusion: The eschatological “already and not yet” hour/time-of-the-end resurrection of Daniel 12:1-4 (OG) and John 5:25-29 was a progressive, spiritual, covenantal resurrection in which the new covenant body of Israel was being raised out of the death of the old covenant body between AD 27/30 – AD 70.  It would include “all” the souls of the wicked and righteous being raised out of Abraham’s bosom or Hades to either inherit God’s presence/eternal life or eternal punishment.

There needs to be compelling evidence that the “hour is coming, and now is” of John 4:21-23 is a different time period than the “hour is coming, and now is” of John 5:25-28, and Gentry provides none!

There needs to be compelling evidence that the spiritual “already and not yet” resurrection Jordan and Gentry give us for Daniel 12:2-3, which took place between AD 27/30 – AD 70, is not the same “already and not yet” resurrection time frame of John 5:25-29, and we receive none.

Just as Jesus placed the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 at the end of the old covenant age in AD 70 (cf. Mt. 13:39-43), He consistently took the “coming hour” judgment and resurrection of Daniel 12:1-4 (OG) in John 4:21-23, 5:25-29 as something imminent and to be fulfilled by AD 70.

The last day resurrection of John 6:37-40

“All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day” (Jn. 6:37-40).

The “last day” is simply the last day of Israel’s “already and not yet” last days eschaton from AD 30 – AD 70.  Those living within that generation who believed, and were thus sovereignly called to do so (vss. 37, 44), would be raised up to inherit resurrection eternal life at the same time the dead would (cf. Jn. 11:25-27).  God’s “longsuffering” was working out His salvation and granting repentance, not willing that any of His Jewish or Gentile elect ones should perish (2 Pet. 3:9-10).  As the gospel was being preached throughout the Roman Empire before “the end” of the old covenant age (Mt. 24:14), the Father had given the Son a Jewish remnant and group of in-grafted Gentiles to believe in Him before the events of AD 67 – AD 70 unfolded.

Since God has always been and always will be omniscient, omnipotent and all sovereign, those coming through the gates of the New Jerusalem and partaking of the living waters are also ordained or chosen to do so (Rev. 22:17).  This will always ring true as long as there are sinners and the gospel is preached – “Blessed are those you choose and bring near to live in your courts!  We are filled with the good things of your house, of your holy temple” (Ps. 65:4).

As the cross is an in-time historical event accomplished for our salvation and the forgiveness of sins, so too was His second appearing apart from sin to save the members of His body, the Church.  The first century elect ones were anticipating being raised into eternal life in AD 70.  Positionally through Christ’s redemptive work – His death, resurrection and Second Coming – His entire body (past, present and future) has been raised and made perfect in His sight.  Those who believed in Christ prior to AD 70 were raised at the last day of the old covenant age and they “never die,” just as we today who believe the gospel have been raised and “never die.”  And to that subject we now turn our attention.  But before we do, there is no exegetical evidence that John 5-6 teaches a biological resurrection at the end of world history.

A spiritual resurrection for the dead and living in John 11:25-26

“I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die [OT worthies like Abraham or Daniel along with those who recently died prior to AD 70], yet shall he live [be raised out of Abraham’s bosom or Hades to inherit God’s presence and eternal life], and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die [that is not that they would never see biological death, but rather inherit God’s “within” Kingdom and presence of eternal life]. Do you believe this (John 11:25-26)?”

The death that held both the believing dead [in Abraham’s bosom or Hades] and the living prior to AD 70 in its grip, awaiting Christ’s redemption through the cross and Second Coming, was the spiritual death that came through Adam.  Consider the following seven points or arguments that support this premise and exegesis.

1). Common Hebraic parallelism in our text makes it clear that both “resurrection” and reception of “life” are equivalent to each other in meaning.  Therefore, since the reception of “life” through faith means to “never die” (overcoming the spiritual death that came through Adam the very day he sinned), then the “resurrection” for those who had died in faith should have the same or similar meaning.  That is, both the dead and the living would receive spiritual new covenant or resurrection life and enjoy God’s presence forever in His kingdom.

2). An examination of Jesus’ “I am” statements also supports a spiritual fulfillment of the resurrection.  Thus far in the gospel of John, all of Jesus’ “I am” statements are spiritual:

  1.  I am the Bread/Water of Life (John 6:35) – spiritual Bread & Light
  2.  I am the Light of the world (John 9:5) – spiritual Light
  3.  I am the Door (John 10:9) – spiritual Door
  4.  I am the Good Shepherd (John 10:11) spiritual shepherd
  5.  I am the Resurrection (John 11:25) – is this the only “I am” that is physical?
  6.  I am the True Vine (John 15:1) – spiritual vine
  7.  I am the Way (John 14:6) – spiritual way

Those who believe in Christ as “Bread” or “Water” partake of Him, or find this fulfilled spiritually.  The same can be true of being in the “Light” and the “Way,” abiding in Him as the “Vine,” etc.

3). Thus far in the gospel of John, all references to “life” are spiritual (cf. chapters 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10).

4). In John, the primary purpose of miracles (other than proving that Jesus is a prophet sent by the Father, or that He is the Great “I Am”) is to point to a spiritual truth.  Feeding a great multitude is to point to the fact that Jesus is the bread from heaven who gives spiritual eternal life (Jn. 6:26-35).  He heals the blind to prove He can heal those who are spiritually blind [thus those who are spiritually dead] (John 9:39).  In Mark’s gospel, Jesus heals a crippled man to prove He has the power to forgive sin (Mrk. 2:10-11).  So here in John 11 Jesus is going to perform a physical sign miracle of raising Lazarus biologically to prove and point to a deeper meaning that He is “the (spiritual) resurrection and (spiritual) life.”

5). We must allow John to interpret John elsewhere.  In John’s version of the Olivet Discourse (the book of Revelation) we learn the following on when and what the resurrection looks like:

A). The judgment of the dead and/or the resurrection out of Hades into God’s Most Holy Place presence is connected to something that would be fulfilled “shortly” or “soon,” and therefore by AD 70 and not the end of world history (Rev. 1:1, 22:20).

B). The judgment of the dead [and thus the resurrection of the dead] was connected to when the “great city” Egypt / Sodom  / Babylon (old covenant Jerusalem – “where the Lord was crucified”) would be judged in AD 70 (Rev. 11:8-19; see also the harvest/resurrection motif in chapters 7 and 14).  Revelation 11 also mentions the 3 ½ year period that is connected with the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-7.

C). Revelation 20-22 mentions NO biological resurrection of corpses, just souls being emptied out of Hades at the “soon” Second Coming, bringing an end to the millennial period (Rev. 20, 22:7, 20).

“In the resurrection whose wife will she be”? (Lk. 20:27-40)

There came to him some Sadducees, those who deny that there is a resurrection, and they asked him a question, saying, “Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies, having a wife but no children, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. Now there were seven brothers. The first took a wife, and died without children. And the second and the third took her, and likewise all seven left no children and died. Afterward the woman also died.  In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife will the woman be? For the seven had her as wife.”  And Jesus said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, for they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.  But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.  Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him.” Then some of the scribes answered, “Teacher, you have spoken well.” 40 For they no longer dared to ask him any question” (Lk. 20:27-40).

This argument by the Sadducees (who denied life of the soul/spirit after death) worked well against their Pharisee opponents. Why?  Because many of the Pharisees believed that the Mosaic OT Torah would be carried into the new creation or Messianic age. Therefore, the Sadducee challenge could be summarized like this:

“Since you believe in a physical bodily resurrection to fit men and women to live in the new creation and you believe Torah will be practiced at that time, then explain to us whose wife this woman will belong to once all seven brothers are raised and they are all living in the new heavens and new earth together?!?  After all, there are women giving birth in the new creation (cf. Isa. 65:23), so are these illegitimate children?  Are these births taking place within Torah-ordained marriages?  So is this woman, raised in the resurrection with her seven husbands, going to have children by all of her husbands?  Whose wife will she be”?

You can almost hear them chuckling because this was forcing the Pharisees into the practice of polyandry (the practice of a woman having more than one husband at once), which unlike polygamy (which was condoned and practiced under the OT law) was not lawful and was considered an abomination of sorts.

While this argument worked for the Pharisees, it did not work for Jesus. Why?

First, Jesus did not teach that the resurrection involved physical bodies capable and ready to sexually produce (as they had in their lives upon earth).  Believers in Abraham’s Bosom or Hades would be raised out of Hades into God’s presence to be like the angels in heaven, spiritual beings not producing offspring in the spiritual or heavenly realm.  They would not be placed upon the earth in physical resurrected bodies to be united with their loved ones or prior spouses.

Secondly, Jesus refutes the notion that the OT law (Levirate marriage law) would be applicable in the new creation or new covenant age. The practice of marrying your husband’s brother for the purpose of raising up physical seed was inseparably tied to inheritance laws connected to being “in the land” and was typological and “ready to vanish” in AD 70 (Heb. 8:13).  In the new covenant age, sons of the resurrection are produced or “raised up” through the gospel and produce an inheritance found “in Christ” (not “in the land”).

Jesus effectively silenced BOTH groups.  He silenced the Sadducees who denied that Abraham and the rest of the dead were still alive in the afterlife – “He is not the God of the dead (Sadducees view), but of the living” (inferring that Torah supports and He likewise teaches that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were still very much alive).

He also refuted or silenced the Pharisees on two points.  First, He did so by teaching that the dead would be raised from Hades to be “like the angels” (not having physical bodies), so the issue of “marrying” and producing biological children is a moot point for them.  And for the living who inherit the kingdom and continue in the new covenant Messianic age, the Pharisees were also wrong to think that the Mosaic law (and thus the Leverite marriage law) would continue being applicable.

Jesus’ teaching silenced and amazed both groups and the crowd listening to this critical debate on how the resurrection would be played out in the Messianic new covenant age.

This, however, does pose a challenging question to the Talmudic Zionist or Premillennial Zionist, and that is, if you employ a literal hermeneutic to Isaiah 65:17-23 and if everything is perfect in the new creation, then why are there sinners and biological death there and are these births taking place as painless deliveries?  And if there is no marriage after the resurrection and within the new creation, are these illegitimate births taking place in Isaiah 65?

Concluding Jesus’ teaching on the resurrection

At the beginning of this section, we looked at Jewish and Christian views which taught that at the end of the Mosaic old covenant “this age,” or during the “general resurrection judgment,” there would be a resurrection of souls or spirits (not a biological fleshly corpse resurrection) out of Abraham’s Bosom or Hades to inherit everlasting life in God’s presence, or inherit everlasting punishment and condemnation.

We also looked at Christian views which teach that there was a progressive Great Commission “already and not yet” period or “coming hour and now is” between AD 27/30 – AD 70 before the old covenant “this age” would end, whereby the new covenant body of Israel was being raised out from the death of the old covenant body of Israel.  Not only this, but at the end of this process in AD 70, souls were raised out of Abraham’s Bosom or Hades to inherit God’s presence and eternal life while ruling with Him.

In examining Jesus’ teaching on the resurrection, we find His teaching to be in harmony with these historical spiritual concepts of the resurrection which were believed by Jews before His ministry in the intertestamental period, and were continued to be believed by some during His ministry. This understanding of the resurrection has even continued with us in an orthodox Christian exegesis of Daniel 12:2-3.  We simply argue that Daniel 12:1-4 does not teach two, or double, fulfillments of an “already and not yet” eschaton(s) or resurrection(s) for Israel and the Church separated by thousands or millions of years.  The exegetical evidence within Daniel 12:1-7 itself and how the NT develops this passage, supports that there is only ONE consummative “end of the age” resurrection event, and it was fulfilled at the end of the old covenant age in the events of AD 67 – AD 70.

Paul on trial and His hope of an “about to be” resurrection of Acts 23:6-9 / 24:13-15 YLT

“Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, “My brothers, I am a Pharisee, descended from Pharisees. I stand on trial because of the hope of the resurrection of the dead.”  When he said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided.  (The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees believe all these things.). There was a great uproar, and some of the teachers of the law who were Pharisees stood up and argued vigorously. “We find nothing wrong with this man,” they said. “What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him (Acts 23:6-9).”

“You can easily verify that no more than twelve days ago I went up to Jerusalem to worship.  My accusers did not find me arguing with anyone at the temple,or stirring up a crowd in the synagogues or anywhere else in the city. 13 And they cannot prove to you the charges they are now making against me.  However, I admit that I worship the God of our ancestors as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect. I believe everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets,“…nor are they able to prove against me the things concerning which they now accuse me.  ‘And I confess this to thee, that, according to the way that they call a sect, so serve I the God of the fathers, believing all things that in the law and the prophets have been written, 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; and in this I do exercise myself, to have a conscience void of offence toward God and men always” (Acts 24:11-15 YLT).

“And now I stand here on trial because of my hope in the promise made by God to our fathers, to which our twelve tribes hope to attain, as they earnestly worship night and day. And for this hope I am accused by Jews, O king!  Why is it thought incredible by any of you that God raises the dead?”  “…To this day I have had the help that comes from God, and so I stand here testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would come to pass: (Acts 26:6-8, 22).

Paul’s trial and accusations of insurrection

Initially the Pharisee sect, upon hearing that Paul was a Pharisee and on trial for his hope of Israel’s resurrection, said, “We find nothing wrong with this man.”  After all, the real problem was those Sadducees who didn’t believe in any afterlife or resurrection.  But as time went on, they learned something about his resurrection beliefs that caused them to join in with the false accusation that Paul was guilty of insurrection against Rome.  Every time Rome heard his case, the Romans were convinced that Paul was on trial for religious and doctrinal issues with his fellow Jews, and was no threat to Rome.

Futurists assume that, because Paul had a Pharisee background, he must have held to an end of time biological resurrection like all of them believed.  But as I began this chapter, I pointed out that there were various views of the resurrection among the Jews, and I don’t see any definitive proof here that all sects of the Pharisees believed in a fleshly resurrection.

Since there were some Pharisees, or a sect of Pharisees, present who believed in a physical resurrection of the dead that was inseparably connected with a physical resurrection of national Israel, this created a problem.  Why?  Because for this sect, it was believed that if you were a Jew and you died outside of the land, you either would not participate and ceased to exist, or resurrection entailed one tunneling his way underground all the way back to the land in order to pop up and be resurrected, living a life in the new age under TORAH.  They did not separate their physical resurrection hopes from their carnal physical land and kingdom hopes of ruling over the Gentiles from Jerusalem with Torah and the temple still in place.

For Paul, the resurrection was grounded in Jesus being the Resurrection (cf. Jn. 11:25) and His presence within him was his hope of glory (cf. Cols. 1:27).  These Pharisees definitely disagreed with any resurrection hope that was connected with Jesus, because after all He had rejected their carnal views of a Messianic kingdom on earth (cf. Jn. 6) and they knew there was no separating the two.  They despised this aspect of the resurrection which Paul was in the process of attaining to in Philippians 3—in which he had grounds of boasting as a Pharisee under the law, but he considered that life as having “confidence in the flesh” and to be “lost” in order “to gain life and righteousness in Christ” which the law could not give.  In fact, Paul considered that the life he led under Torah as the Pharisee of Pharisees was nothing but “dung/crap” (cf. Phil. 3:3-9).  So while Paul did believe in a resurrection of souls out from Hades into God’s presence, perhaps the main thing they objected to concerning Paul’s hope of an imminent resurrection was that it would not include a physical restoration or resurrection of national Israel under Torah with the temple intact, etc.

For these reasons, Paul had to go.  As Don Preston observes,

“The Pharisees charged Paul with “sedition,” but the Roman authorities rejected that charge.  They did not believe Paul was inciting anti-Roman rebellion.  However, Paul was most assuredly teaching a sedition against the Pharisees and their nationalistic kingdom / resurrection hopes!”[37]

“After all, at first they believed that both Jesus and Paul were their allies.  But they quickly learned differently and put them both on trial for their teachings on the kingdom and the resurrection.  They sought to kill both Jesus and Paul for the very thing they were supposed to believe in![38]

Jesus

Paul

Jesus taught / offered the kingdom. Paul taught / offered the kingdom.
Jews initially accepted the offer. Pharisees initially thought Paul taught the resurrection like they did.
Jesus rejected the offer of kingship. The Pharisees came to reject Paul’s doctrine of resurrection.
When Jesus rejected the Jewish offer, they put Jesus on trial for being seditious, claiming to be king; as His kingship was not the kind they were claiming, as Pilate affirmed. When the Pharisees came to understand Paul’s resurrection doctrine, they put him on trial with the false charge of sedition; the Romans found Paul innocent of political sedition; the real issue was the resurrection.
Jesus: My kingdom is not of this world / The kingdom does not come with observation. “We do not look on the things that are seen, but unseen / “The Jerusalem that is above, the mother of us all” / We have here no abiding city, but seek one about to come” (2 Cor. 4:16f. / Gal. 4:22f. / Hebrews 13:14).[39]

For those Futurists who boast that they have the same kind of physical resurrection and kingdom hope the Pharisees who condemned Paul had, we must ask them the following:  1) Do you believe the dead soul hovers over the “Luz bones” of a person, and then will 2) tunnel itself all the way to the land of Israel to be raised in the land, only to then 3) enjoy life in the new age under Torah?  We prefer to stick with the spiritual kingdom and resurrection hopes and teachings of Jesus and Paul.

Paul’s imminent expectation of the resurrection of Daniel 12:2

Paul’s imminent expectation of the resurrection can be found in the following literal translations, properly translating the Greek word mello in Acts 24:15 as “about to be”:

“…there is about to be a rising again of the dead, both of righteous and unrighteous…” (Young’s Literal Translation).

“having a hope in God, which they themselves also await, that there is about to be a resurrection, both of the just and of the unjust” (The Berean Literal Bible).

“having hope toward God, which they themselves also wait for, [that] there is about to be a resurrection of the dead, both of righteous and unrighteous;” (Literal Standard Version).

“and having a hope directed towards God, which my accusers themselves also entertain, that before long there will be a resurrection both of the righteous and the unrighteous” (Weymouth New Testament).

“Having hope to God, which they themselves also admit, a rising from the dead about to be, both of just and unjust” (Smith’s Literal Translation).

The Interlinear Literal Translation of the Greek New Testament (1897) and The Lexham English Septuagint (LES) Interlinear works also translate mello here in Acts 24:15 as “about to be.”

What was Paul’s source for his resurrection hope?  Paul was accused of teaching things contrary to the Law and the Prophets.  Yet in his own defense he stood there and boldly countered, saying that he testified and preached no other things except that which could be found in the Law and Prophets.  This statement coupled with the fact that there is no other OT text which describes a resurrection for the just and unjust places Daniel 12:2 as Paul’s “about to be” resurrection expectation.

Paul declared that the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 was the ONE “hope” of Israel.  Notice that Paul does not give the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 a double meaning or double fulfillment!  He clearly does NOT teach an imminent spiritual resurrection coming to close the old covenant age in AD 70 and then another future physical one for the just and unjust at the end of world history.

Does this not fit the orthodox Christian view and exegesis of Daniel 12:2 such as that of James Jordan and Kenneth Gentry?

Jordan teaches that the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 is referring to “…in the days of Jesus the nation [Israel] will undergo…[one] last [in AD 70] spiritual resurrection…” that would result in Daniel’s soul being raised out of Abraham’s Bosom.  Paul says Daniel 12:2 is his and Israel’s one “hope” (singular) of the resurrection and that it was “about to” take place.

And Kenneth Gentry usually appeals to the Young’s Literal Translation and other literal translations when wanting melloto be translated as “about to be” in the book of Revelation, so according to that standard why doesn’t Paul have an imminent expectation of the resurrection here in AD 70 as well?  I cited several translations and Greek works that have no problem with mello being translated as “about to” take place.

And what about Gentry interpreting the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 as, “He is teaching that in the events of AD 70, the true Israel will arise from old Israel’s carcass, as in a resurrection”?!?  There is no other Mosaic old covenant Israel beyond AD 70 in Mr. Gentry’s theology, as far as I know of. Paul also does not say that there are TWO hope(s) of Israel regarding the resurrection of Daniel 12:2.

Therefore, Paul interpreted the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 as the ONE “hope” of his contemporary twelve tribes of Israel which was “about to be” fulfilled in the coming events of AD 67 – AD 70 to close the old covenant age. Paul’s imminent expectation of the spiritual resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 is in complete harmony with Jesus’ teaching of it in Matthew 13:39-43 and John 5:25-28.

Paul’s “eagerly waiting” for the resurrection & “at hand” second coming in Philippians 3-4

“For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh— though I myself have reasons for such confidence. If someone else thinks they have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more:  circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for righteousness based on the law, faultless.  But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ.  What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ  and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in[a]Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith.  I want to know Christ—yes, to know the power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, attaining to the resurrection from the dead.  Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already arrived at my goal, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me.  Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press ontoward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.  All of us, then, who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you.  Only let us live up to what we have already attained.  Join together in following my example, brothers and sisters, and just as you have us as a model, keep your eyes on those who live as we do.  For, as I have often told you before and now tell you again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ.Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is set on earthly things.  But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body” (Phil. 3:4-21).

“The Lord is near” (Phil. 4:5).

Many miss the context of Paul’s discussion on the resurrection of Philippians 3:21.  There is an “already not yet,” or what I like to call an “already becoming / transforming and not yet,” to Paul’s teaching on the resurrection here.  Paul considered his life under the old covenant Mosaic law to be garbage or dung, and that he had already attained to some degree of being conformed to the resurrection of Christ.  Obviously, this is not a biological resurrection. Paul was not half glowing or something like that.  The old covenant Law was “garbage” or “dung/crap” and he was being conformed from that “vile/lowly” old covenant body of Adam and Moses to Christ’s glorious new covenant body.  This “already transforming and not yet” resurrection process would be completed at the “near” Second Coming event (Phil. 4:5).

There is also another imminent time text or Greek word often ignored in Phil. 3:20 – Paul and the first century church were “eagerly waiting” (Grk. apekdechomai) the “near” Second Coming event which would conclude this “already and not yet” resurrection process that Paul has in view.  Partial Preterist Peter J. Leithart lists Paul’s use of apekdechomai in 1 Cor. 1:7-8 as an AD 70 imminent time text referring to the “revealing” “day of the Lord” in AD 70 and then points out,

            “Phil. 3:20 uses the same verb to describe our waiting for the Savior, the Lord Jesus.”[40]

Obviously, Leithart doesn’t want to address this inconsistency.  If the first century church was to “eagerly wait” apekdechomai the “day of the Lord” (1 Cor. 1:7-8) is an imminent time text referring to AD 70, then why wouldn’t Paul’s first century “eagerly waiting” the resurrection and “at hand” coming of Christ in Philippians 3-4 also be referring to AD 70?  Once again Partial Preterism is found to be more than inconsistent or never clarifying their positions on which texts are referring to an imminent AD 70 coming of Christ and resurrection event and which ones are not.  This same problem surfaces again in our next text where Paul not only uses apekdechomai, but mello (“about to be”) and kairos (Paul’s eschatological “now time” or the “appointed time” of consummation).

Paul being in the “appointed or critical time” “eagerly waiting” the “at hand” “about to be,” glorification, “redemption of the body” and “salvation of all Israel” (Rms. 8:18-23YLT; 11:13-15, 25-27; 13:11-12)

“For I reckon that the sufferings of the present time [Grk. kairos – Paul’s eschatological “now time” and better translated here as the “appointed time” of fulfillment] are not worthy to be compared with the glory about to be [Grk. mello] revealed in us; for the earnest [Grk. apokaradokia – “head outstretched”] looking out of the creation doth expect [Grk. apekdechomai] the revelation of the sons of God; for to vanity was the creation made subject—not of its will, but because of Him who did subject it—in hope, that also the creation itself shall be set free from the servitude of the corruption to the liberty of the glory of the children of God; for we have known that all the creation doth groan together, and doth travail in pain together till now.  And not only so, but also we ourselves, having the first-fruit of the Spirit, we also ourselves in ourselves do groan, adoption expecting [Grk. apekdechomai]—the redemption of our body;…” (Rms. 8:18-23 YLT)

“…I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.  For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead.”  “…I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers:  a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.  And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, ‘The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob’; ‘and this will be my ‘covenant with them when I take away their sins.” (Rms. 11:13-15, 25-27)

“Besides this you know it is the critical or appointed time [Grk. kairos], that the hour has come for you to wake from sleep.  For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed.  The night is far gone; the day is at hand.” (Rms. 13:11-12)

There are several exegetical issues we need to unpack when addressing all three of these eschatological passages (Rms. 8:18-23; 11:13-15, 25-27; and 13:11-12).  What is this kairos “appointed time” Paul says he and the Romans were currently in?  How were these passages “eagerly” “at hand” and thus “about to be” fulfilled by AD 70?  What is this “creation” (Grk. kitisis) that is groaning?  Is Paul’s imminent “appointed time,” “salvation”/“redemption” and resurrection the same as predicted by Daniel and Jesus?

Let me briefly lay out my points of agreement among the divided house of Futurism and Partial Preterism when it comes to these three key eschatological texts:

1).  I agree with Partial Preterist teaching that the time texts in Romans 8:18-23YLT and Romans 13:11-12 support that this resurrection and eschatological day of salvation and redemption was imminently fulfilled in AD 70.

2).  I agree with Partial Preterist’s that believe “all Israel” was “saved” in AD 70 (ex. Gary DeMar and James Jordan).

3).  I agree with the most influential Partial Preterist of all time–John Lightfoot, that the “creation” of Romans 8 is not the physical planet but rather the “creation of men” seeking salvation from the inward “decay” of sin.

4).  I agree with commentators who see Paul’s eschatology in all three of these passages being not only one and the same consummative event, but also addressing the one Second Coming and salvation described by Daniel in Dan. 7; 9; 12; and Jesus’ eschatology in His Olivet Discourse.

Romans 8:18-23YLT        

Since our text clearly addresses the resurrection event (“the redemption of the body”), we must go back to Paul’s previous context to see what kind of “death” and “life” or future resurrection he has been addressing thus far.  Having already gone over the spiritual death that came through Adam the very day he sinned in the garden and the free spiritual gift of eternal life and justification that comes through Christ in Romans 5, I will now pick up Paul’s “already and not yet” “likeness” into Christ’s “death” and “resurrection” motif of Romans 6.

“For if we have united with him in a death like his, we will [future] certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.” (Rms. 6:5)

“And if we died with Christ [to THE sin of Adam], we believe that we also shall [future] live with him.” (Rms. 6:8)

“For in that he [Christ] died, to THE sin he died once, and in that he lives, He lives to God [in unbroken fellowship with Him].” (Rms. 6:10YLT/AB/GNT).

The first thing that jumps out at us is that Paul is not referring to a physical bodily death and resurrection to be “like” Jesus’.  Why?  Because the Romans were still alive and had experienced a “death” and burial “LIKE his,” and thus this clearly is not referring to physical death or biological bodily union or change.  Therefore, to be in union and share in the “resurrection LIKE his,” in the “about to be” future (Rms. 8:18-23YLT) is likewise not referring to a biological bodily union or change at the end of time.  In verse 10 we see that the emphasis and theological point of Paul in pointing out that Christ died once to THE sin of Adam resulted in Him enjoying the Father’s unbroken fellowship and presence.  Therefore, Paul is anticipating a FUTURE (but imminent future) resurrection that is SPIRITUAL and will result in God’s people enjoying His presence.

Well, what about Romans 7, is biological death and resurrection Paul’s point here?

“When the commandment came, sin came alive and I died.”  “Wretched man that I am!  Who will deliver me from this body of death [the corporate body of Adam/Moses] (Rms. 7:9)

Here Paul is personifying himself as being in the corporate body of Adam or the corporate body of Israel and being under “THE law.”  Being within this corporate covenantal body or mode of sinful existence one could never achieve or produce eternal life, but rather only be in a state of spiritual separation and death—awaiting the finished work of Christ through His cross and parousia for full deliverance.  But during the transition period (roughly between AD 30 – AD 70), due to faith and the Spirit’s presence within the saints, they were entering into the “already” resurrection “life” of Romans 8.

Many unfortunately interpret Paul’s phrases such as “body of sin” “body of death” “body of flesh” “flesh” “mortal body” “vile body” as somehow being the physical body that is cursed, evil, or sinful.  This would be Gnosticism which Paul is not teaching.  And if physical aging demonstrates that the physical body is “cursed,” then was Jesus cursed because He aged?  Paul is using these terms to describe a corporate and covenantal body in Adam/Moses that is opposite of that of being in the corporate body of Christ.  If being “in the flesh” is the physical body, then we can never please God while in the physical body – “Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” (Rms. 8:8).  And if we are talking about the biological “flesh” and “body” then how can one “not be in the flesh” while being biologically alive and how can the “body [be] dead” while being biologically alive?  (Rms. 8:9-10).

The imminent “appointed time” in Romans is the eschatology of Daniel  

Paul does not use the Greek word kronos for “time” in Rms. 8:18 and Rms. 13:11 which deals with chronological time but rather kairos, which carries more of the idea of a very specific “appointed time” decreed by God concerning a specific eschatological “crisis” or “consummation.”

In the LXX of Dan. 9:27 and Dan. 12:4, kairos is used to describe the appointed time of consummation to Daniel’s seventy-sevens prophecy.  Then the last half of the last seven of Dan. 9:26-27—the “three and a half years” that brings the “the war” of the Romans with the Jews and thus “desolation” upon Jerusalem and the second temple is brought up and recapitulated in Dan. 12:4, 7 as the eschatological “end” or “when the power of the holy people would be completely shattered” between AD 67 – AD 70.  And while Dan. 7 does not use the Greek word kairos, it is recapitulating the same judgment and salvation as Dan. 9 and 12 are but including the Second Coming or coming of the Son of Man upon the clouds and the time of inheriting the Kingdom being within the time of the fourth or Roman Empire:

Daniel 7

Daniel 9

Daniel 12

1).  “3 ½ years” [AD 67 – AD 70] is the time of the judgment       (vss. 25-26) 1).  “half a week” [3 ½ years remaining AD 67 – AD 70] is the “appointed time” for judgment and “end” of 490 years (9:27 LXX Grk. Kairos) 1). “3 ½ years” [AD 67 – AD 70] is “appointed time of the end” judgment  (12:4, 7 LXX Grk. Kairos)
2).  “Little horn” [line of the Herods & Jews] judged for boasting against God and persecuting or making war with the followers of Messiah (vss. 25-26)

 

2).  “Your people,” [Jews] “your holy city” [Jerusalem], temple, “abomination” leading to “desolation” in the “tribulation,” & “THE war” (vss. 24-27)

 

2).  “Power [scepter taken from Judah Gen. 49:10] of holy people [Jews] completely shattered” connected to “abomination” leading to “desolation” & “tribulation” (12:1, 7, 11)
3).  The Judgment [books opened & Ancient of Days on throne] – the esch. “end” (vss. 9-10, 26)

 

3).  The Judgment – the esch. “end” (vss. 24-27)

 

3).  The Judgment & Resurrection of the dead – esch. “end” (vss. 1-4)

 

4).  Messiah – Son of Man comes upon the clouds [second coming] and the reception and inheritance of the Kingdom takes place   (v. 13-14, 27) 4).  Messiah/Prince sends another “Prince” [Titus] & his armies to “desolate” & make “war” against Jerusalem                     (vss. 26-27 LXX) 4). [Implied in that you can’t have the “appointed time” or esch. “end” and judgment & resurrection of the dead w/o arrival of second coming and Messianic Kingdom]
5).  All to take place during 4th. Roman Empire (vss. 7-27) 5).  All to take place within 490 years       (vss. 24-27) 5).  Daniel told to “seal up the vision” because the “appointed time” and esch. “end” was “far off” and he would not live to witness it        (v. 4, 9, cf. 8:26)

There are other LXX versions that describe the resurrection and judgment of Dan. 12:2-4 as the “hour of the end.”  Therefore, Paul is echoing back to Dan. 9:27 and Dan. 12:2-4 when addressing that the “appointed time” or “hour has come” to “awake out of sleep.” It is not a stretch to see that Daniel’s “hour” in Daniel 12:1-2 (OG LXX) of awaking to resurrection is not only Jesus’ eschatological “hour” (John 4:21-23–5:25-28; or “day and hour” Mt. 24:36) but also Paul’s imminent “at hand” “hour” here in Romans 13:

Daniel 12:1-4, 7

Romans 13:11-12

1).  “And at that hour…” (v. 1) 1).  “…you know what hour it is…” (v. 11)
2).  “The hour/time of the end”     (v. 4) 2).  “how it is full time…” (v. 11)
3).  “Many of those who sleep in the width of the earth will arise…”      (v. 2) 3).  “The hour has come for you to wake up from your sleep…” (v. 11)
4).  This “hour” and “end” of resurrection and judgment would be during “3 ½ years” (AD 67 – AD 70)  “when the power of the holy people was completely shattered” (v. 7) 4).  Daniel’s eschatological salvation and resurrection “hour” and “day” was “at hand” for Paul (vss. 11-12)

With this in mind, let’s now look at how Paul is drawing upon the wider eschatology of Daniel in Romans 8—13 as a whole:

Daniel 7; 9; 12 Romans 8; 11; 13 (and other OT sources in 9-11)
1).  The “appointed time” or “hour of the end” (9:27; 12:4 LXX) 1).  The “appointed time” Grk. Kairos or “hour” (8:18; 13:11)
2).  The Second Coming to be fulfilled during the Roman Empire (7:3-13) 2).  The Second Coming to be imminently fulfilled                     (11:27; 13:11-12)
3).  Salvation and forgiveness of sin for Israel (9:24) 3). Salvation and forgiveness of sin for “all Israel” being the believing remnant and Gentiles coming to NC fulness (11:25-27)
4).  This is the time of the Resurrection and judgment of the dead (7:9-10; 12:2-4) 4).  This is the time of the Resurrection and judgment of the dead (8:18-23YLT; 11:15; 13:11-12)
5).  When Messiah would come upon the clouds in judgment over the second temple and Jerusalem between AD 67 – AD 70 “when the power of the holy people would be completely shattered”–is also when Israel [the righteous remnant w/ the Gentiles] would be saved and anointed as God’s MHP dwelling (7:10-27; 9:24 27; 12:2-7) 5).  Paul appeals to several OT passages in Rms. 9-11 that connect the salvation of Israel [the Jewish remnant & Gentiles] as being the same time as the judgment of Israel [OC hardened Israel] by AD 70 (cf. 9:27=Isa. 10:22-23 – remnant saved and would “not be delayed” when Jerusalem is judged; 10:19=Isa. 65:1-25 – when OC Jerusalem is judged a remnant forms the creation of the New Jerusalem; 11:9-10=Ps. 69:22-36; 11:26=Isa. 59:16-20 – redeemed remnant at same time performing vengeance on Israel; 11:27=Isa. 27:9-13 – sin of blood guilt atoned for through judgment and resurrection during judgment of Jerusalem)
6).  The “appointed time” of these eschatological events would be fulfilled during the fourth or Roman Empire – 490 yrs. or far off from Daniel. 6).  During time of Roman Empire and the “appointed time” or “hour” of Daniel’s prophetic events were “eagerly” expected–fulfillment was “at hand” or “about to be” consummated by AD70                           (Rms. 8:18-23YLT; 13:11-12).

Before demonstrating Paul’s eschatology in Romans 8-13 is the eschatology of Jesus in the Olivet Discourse, let’s first show how Jesus, like Paul, is drawing upon Daniel 7; 9; and 12 for an AD 70 “near” and “this generation” imminent fulfillment:

Daniel 7 Daniel 9 Daniel 12 Mt. 24-25 & Parallels
1).  “3 ½ years” [AD 67 – AD 70] is the time of the judgment(vss. 25-26) 1).  “half a week” [3 ½  years remaining AD 67 – AD 70] is the “appointed time” for judgment and “end” of 490 years (9:27 LXX Grk. Kairos) 1). “3 ½ years” [AD 67 – AD 70] is “appointed time of the end” judgment     (12:4, 7 LXX Grk. Kairos) 1).  “Times of the Gentiles” treading down Jerusalem by Romans [3 ½ years cf. Rev. 11:2-8 AD 67 – AD 70] “appointed time” Grk. Kairos (Lk. 21:8, 24; Mrk. 13:33)
2).  “Little horn” [line of the Herods & Jews] judged for boasting against God and persecuting or making war with the followers of Messiah         (vss. 25-26) 2).  “Your people,” [Jews] “your holy city” [Jerusalem], temple, “abomination” leading to “desolation” in the “tribulation,” & “THE war”         (vss. 24-27) 2).  “Power [scepter taken from Judah Gen. 49:10] of holy people [Jews] completely shattered” connected to “abomination” leading to “desolation” & “tribulation”. (12:1, 7, 11) 2). “Wrath” “against this people” [1st. Cent. Jews], & “land” [of Israel], “tribulation,” “abomination” & “desolation,” – when Jerusalem surrounded by Roman armies, destruction of temple                 (Mt. 24/Lk. 21)
3).  The Judgment [books opened & Ancient of Days on throne] – the esch. “end”             (vss. 9-10, 26) 3).  The Judgment – the esch. “end”   (vss. 24-27) 3).  The Judgment & Resurrection of the dead – esch. “end” (vss. 1-4) 3).  The judgment & Resurrection of the dead, Christ judging on throne – esch. “end” of OC age   (Mt. 24:3, 14, 31; 25:31-46)
4).  Messiah – Son of Man comes upon the clouds [second coming] and the reception and inheritance of the Kingdom takes place       (v. 13-14, 27) 4).  Messiah/Prince sends another “Prince” [Titus] & his armies to “desolate” & make “war” against Jerusalem       (vss. 26-27 LXX) 4). [Implied in that you can’t have the “appointed time” or esch. “end” and judgment & resurrection of the dead w/o arrival of second coming and Messianic Kingdom] 4).  Jesus / Messiah / Son of Man comes upon the clouds [second coming – comes through armies as Father had] and reception & inheritance of Kingdom takes place                  (Lk. 21:27-32)
5).  All to take place during 4th. Roman Empire (vss. 7-27)

 

 

 

5).  All to take place within 490 years                 (vss. 24-27)

 

 

 

 

5).  Daniel told to “seal up the vision” because the “appointed time” and esch. “end” was “far off” and he would not live to witness it           (v. 4, 9, cf. 8:26)

 

 

 

5).  All the esch. events of Dan. 7, 9, & 12 as described in the OD (Lk. 21:22) with its “appointed time” or “end” – fulfilled within the Roman Empire & in Jesus’ contemporary “generation” (24:34)

 

 

 

 

As I discussed in our exegesis of the Olivet Discourse, how one interprets the coming of Christ and resurrection of Matthew 24:30-31 is how one will understand these concepts and time of fulfillment in NT eschatology in general. Why?  Because, in a nutshell, it is the eschatology of the NT.  So I would agree with those like John Murray who understood the “redemption” of Luke 21 to be Paul’s redemption hope here in Romans:

“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…). Hence analogy would again point to the eschatological complex of events.”[41]

Since Gentry adds Matthew 24:28 as a text supporting his view that the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 was a corporate resurrection for Israel in which the new covenant corporate body of Israel was raised from the corporate corpse/body of old covenant Israel in AD 70, I have added it as a possible parallel.  One of Ken’s favorite theologians, John Lightfoot, also understands the “redemption of the body” to be a corporate body (the Church) while others such as Gary DeMar and Phillip Kayser see this as “about to be” fulfilled in AD 70.  And since N.T. Wright has correctly noticed Paul is tracking on the second or new exodus motif, I shall add this to the parallel chart:

The New or Second Exodus Motif in Romans 8:18-23YLT was “About to be” Fulfilled in AD 70
1). Israel – God’s “children” or “sons” (Deut. 32:5, 19-20) 1). Church – God’s “children” or “sons” (8:14, 16, 21)
2). God “created/made” Israel through the exodus event (Deut. 32:6; Isa. 51:15-16) 2). The “creation” of believing Gentiles and Jews the focus & not physical creation (8:22)
3). God “led” Israel (Deut. 32:12) 3). Church “led” by the Spirit (8:14)
4). Israel was “groaning” to be “set free” and “redeemed” from Egyptian slavery/bondage             (Ex. 6:2-9) 4). The Jew/Gentile Church/Creation were “groaning” to be “set free” & “redeemed” from the inner “bondage,” vanity, and corruption of Adamic sin (8:20-22)
The Appointed Time of Fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse & Lk. 17 was “At Hand” & “About to be” Fulfilled in Romans 8—13:11-12 by AD 70
1). Suffering & eschatological birth pains coming (Mt. 24:8-9) 1). Suffering & eschatological birth pains currently taking place     (8:17-18, 22)
2). Kingdom to be realized “within” a person at Christ’s Second Coming (Lk. 17:20-37/Lk. 21:27-32) 2). Christ’s “glory” would be “revealed IN” the Church at Christ’s Second Coming               (8:18; 13:11-12; cf. Cols. 1:27)
3). Called to “straighten up / lift heads” because “redemption” would be “drawing near” in their contemporary “this generation” (Lk. 21:27-28) 3). Look for with “eager expectation” (Gk. apekdechomai & apokaradokia – “to eagerly wait for fulfillment with an outstretched neck and head lifted forward”) (8:19-23)
4). Second Coming & “gathering” (resurrection) at the end of the Old Covenant age described “…as sunshine comes out from the east and is seen even in the west…” or “shining like the sun in the Kingdom” (Mt. 24:27-31 Aramaic English NT; Mt. 13:39-43 fulfillment of Dan. 12:2-3) 4).  Second Coming & “awaking from sleep” (resurrection) described as the arrival of “the [eschatological New Covenant age] Day” (13:11-12 fulfillment of Dan. 12:2-3)
5). The “time” (Gk. “kairos” better translated as the eschatological “appointed time” of fulfillment or consummation) would be “near” in the first century “generation” or by AD 70 (Lk. 21:8, 32 “the time ordained” of Dan. 12:4 Wycliffe Translation) 5). The “time” (Gk. kairos better translated as the eschatological “appointed time of fulfillment or consummation”) was “near” and “about to be” fulfilled in AD 70    (8:18YLT; 13:11-12)
6).  Partial Preterist Ken Gentry interprets the resurrection of Dan. 12:2 as old covenant Israel being a corporate body or “corpse” (cf. Mt. 24:28) that would be raised into the spiritual new covenant body of Israel/Church in AD 70 6).  The first century church was “eagerly waiting” (on tiptoes and outstretched neck) for the AD 70 “about to be” corporate body of new covenant Israel to be redeemed (Rms. 8:18-23) in AD 70.

The creation of men groaning – not planet earth

As we saw in our study of the Olivet Discourse, terms like God establishing the heaven and earth and then destroying or causing the heaven and earth to pass away (Jer. 4) can refer to God forming the creation of old covenant Israel (Isa. 51:15-16) and then causing her to pass away in AD 70 (Mt. 5:17-18; 24:35) – while at the same time establishing a new covenant heaven and earth or new covenant people.  This is exactly what we have Paul doing here in Romans 8:18-23.  The “creation” here is not referring to the physical planet at all.  It is referring to the creation of men, most likely the creation of men of Israel groaning under the law seeking Messianic redemption.

Reformed theologian John Lightfoot correctly associated the “earnest expectation of the creature” and the “whole creation groaning” with the mind and heart of man, and interpreted this passage as having nothing to do with the planet earth, not even poetically:

“. . . [T]his vanity [or futility] is improperly applied to this vanishing, changeable, dying state of the [physical] 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.”[42]

And again,

“The Gentile world shall in time be delivered from the bondage of their sinful corruption, that is, the bondage of their lusts and vile affections, (under which it hath lain for so long a time) into a noble liberty, such as the sons of God enjoy. If it be inquired how the Gentile world groaned and travailed in pain, let them who expound this of the fabric of the material world tell us how that groaneth and travaileth. They must needs own it to be a borrowed and allusive phrase.”[43]  

Lightfoot is on solid ground here citing 2 Peter 1:4, 2 Corinthians 11:3, and 1 Corinthians 15:33. 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 or squirrels longing for a better day when they won’t get hit by cars.

“Redemption of the body” the corporate body of the Church – not individual biological resurrections at the end of time

John Lightfoot not only interpreted the “creation” of Romans 8 to be the creation of men and NOT the physical planet, but he understood the “redemption of the body” to not be a resurrection of physical bodies, but rather the “mystical [corporate] body” of the Church.  In his sermon on “Many Mansions,” Lightfoot states:

“And of the same body [in context he is referring to the corporate body of Christ just mentioned in Eph. 4:13] is his meaning in that obscure and much-mistaken place (Rom. viii.23; “And not only they,” i.e. ‘the whole creation,’ or πασα κτισις, ‘every creature,’ which means no other thing, than ‘the Gentile or heathen world’: not only they groan to come into the evangelical liberty of the children of God, but we, also, of the Jewish nation, who have the first-fruits of the Spirit, groan within ourselves, waiting for the redemption, to wit, the adoption of our body:” we wait for the redeeming and adopting of the Gentiles, to make up our mystical body.”[44]

Clearly Lightfoot understood the “creation” to mean the creation of men and not the planet earth, and “redemption of the body” to be the “mystical body” of the corporate Jew/Gentile Church and not an individual physical body.  He was ahead of his time!

Paul’s reference to the “sufferings of this present time” does not have anything to do with losing one’s hair, gaining weight, cancer, etc.  Paul’s mention of the “sufferings” and “the redemption of the body” have nothing to do with those kinds of issues.  The context of the “groaning” of the first-century Christians can be found in the previous chapter.  The sufferings Paul has in mind here were eschatological, the birth pains that were to precede Christ’s return in AD 70 (Mt. 24:8; Rom. 8:22). They had to do with the last days’ persecutions and with the saints of the universal church groaning under the tyranny of sin and condemnation of the Law.

For Paul, sin had produced “death,” but obviously not physical death.  Contrary to Postmillennial and most Futurist assertions, “the body”, “death,” and “the flesh” in Romans 5–8 have nothing to do with the idea of men biologically dying as a result of Adam’s sin.  Paul’s concern is with corporate-covenantal death, as even some Reformed theologians teach.  Tom 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 sin in contrast to the corporate body of Christ—the Church.[45] He counters Gundry’s individualistic views of soma in Paul’s writings.  He also argues for “consistency” in Paul’s use of corporate terms.  “Bondage,” according to the immediate context, had to do with groaning under the condemnation of the Law (cf. Rom. 7:2, 7, 15).

For Paul, the glorification, liberation and redemption of this corporate body/creation was “about to” take place (Rms. 8:18ff.YLT)

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 that 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”).

At least Partial Preterist Postmillennialists, such as Gary DeMar, concede that the “glory” in Romans 8:18YLT was “about to be” fulfilled in AD 70, but pretend to not know what it is:

Whatever the glory is it was ‘about to be revealed…”[46]

DeMar also understands the “salvation of all Israel” in Romans 11 to be fulfilled in AD 70.  Thus, the “salvation” and “redemption of the body” in Romans 8 and 11 are not dealing with biological or planetary events at the end of time, but rather imminent redemptive events for the mystical Jew/Gentile corporate body/creation change or resurrection that was to imminently take place in AD 70.

Partial Preterists, such as Kenneth Gentry and Keith Mathison, don’t address mello here in Romans 8:18.  But interestingly enough, according to Gentry and Mathison, one of the things that was “about to come after” John wrote Revelation 1:19YLT was the arrival of the New Jerusalem and new creation of Revelation 21:1ff.  Mathison and Gentry tell us in their other works that the time texts in Revelation point to a near fulfillment of the passing of “the first heaven and earth.”  They point out that Revelation 21:1 is referring to the passing of the old covenant “creation” in AD 70 and is a fulfillment of Isaiah 65–66.  Gentry even says:

“The absence of the sea (Rev. 21:1) speaks of harmony and peace within. In Scripture the sea often symbolizes discord and sin (13:1–2; cf. Isa. 8:7–8; 23:10; 57:20; Jer. 6:23; 46:7; Ezek. 9:10). Christianity offers the opposite: peace with God and among humankind (Luke 2:14; Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:12–18; Phil. 4:7, 9).”[47]

If the removal of the sea represents the removal of sin and discord within, then AD 70 was much more than a physical flight to Pella. It was a soteriological event just as the cross was.

Gentry argues that “when used with the aorist infinitive—as in Revelation 1:19, mello’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.”[48] Gentry is correct.  The problem, however, is that when the word mellorefers to the resurrection and judgment of the living and dead in Acts 17:31; 24:15 and 24:25, it is also used with the infinitive.  In the case of Acts 24:15, in a recent article on his site, Gentry appeals to BDAG to somehow prove that when mello is used with the future infinitive, it communicates certainty and shouldn’t be translated as “about to” take place.  But, of course, as I pointed out in our exegesis of Acts 24:15, there are translations, lexicons and interlinears that do render mello there as “about to.”

Not only that, but Gentry and Mathison also fail to address in their writings that mello in Romans 8:18 is in the aorist infinitive (which they say has the “preferred meaning” of “be on the point of, be about to”) and they make no mention that our passage has two other imminent Greek words within the immediate context – apokaradokia and apekdekomai.  This serves to further solidify the translation of mello as“about to be.”  And lastly, BDAG (Gentry’s source for trying to place Acts 24:15 at the end of world history) marks mello in Romans 8:18 as being translated “about to be revealed.”  So much for consistency!

Contextually, there is no reason to not understand Paul’s expectation of the “about to be” glorification and “redemption of the body” to be when the corporate new covenant body of Israel was raised from the corporate old covenant body of Israel in AD 70.  This body/creation was groaning under spiritual Adamic death (magnified by Torah) and was liberated from that death into the life and liberty of Christ’s “at hand” salvation/coming in AD 70.

Paul’s OT passages in Romans 9-11 and the “salvation of all Israel” / “life from the dead”

We should briefly pause to consider Paul’s argumentation in Romans 9-11 and the OT passages he cites as he builds his case that the remnant of Israel and the believing Gentile inclusion “all Israel” will be saved or raised “life from the dead” when Christ comes out of Zion to take away sin in AD 70.

Romans 9 – Hosea 1-2; Isaiah 10:27-28; Isaiah 1:9; Isaiah 28:16      

Throughout Romans Paul has been combating the typical Jewish view of “salvation” when Messiah would show up—namely, the entire Nation of Israel was saved already because of their lineage or circumcision and through a militaristic Messiah, Rome and the Gentiles would be destroyed and an earthly glorious theocratic kingdom on earth would be established – and thus “all Israel” would be saved through that process.  And since the majority of Israel had not been converted to Jesus, how could Paul possibly claim He was Messiah and Israel’s promises were and would be imminently fulfilled?

In the previous chapters Paul has pointed out how they cannot trust in circumcision or keeping the law because the issue is having the justifying faith of Abraham who was to function as a Father and blessing to the Gentile Nations.  This and the believing Gentiles in Jesus were keeping the law because the new covenant had been written on their hearts.  Paul is going to make his case that the believing remnant (such as himself being from the tribe of Benjamin) and the believing Gentiles (who do the law because it has been written on their hearts through the new covenant) is HOW “all Israel” is being saved and will be saved at Christ’s “at hand” coming.  But Paul lays out his argument from Torah.

Paul makes it clear that there are two “Israel’s” and therefore God’s promises have not failed,

“But it is not as though the word of God has failed.  For not all who are descended from Israel (natural National Israel) belong to Israel (the true remnant or believing Israel – to whom belong the promises). (9:6)

Paul builds his case by pointing out that God has been completely sovereign throughout Israel’s history – choosing and loving Jacob while hardening and hating Esau before they were even born (9:8-13).  If He can do this with Jacob and Esau, God surely can choose a remnant and work through them while hardening and passing by others among Israel.  After all, if God has the sovereign right to harden Pharoah, surely, He can fashion some from the same lump of Israel as vessels of mercy [including Gentiles] and others as vessels of His wrath (9:14-24).

Hosea 1-2

Paul begins his appeals to Torah in the promises and eschatology found in Hosea in Romans 9:25-26:

“Those who were not my people I will call my people and her who was not beloved I will call beloved.”  “And in the very place where it was said to them, You are not my people, there they will be called sons of the living God.”

The eschatology of Hosea is simple – although God was going to divorce, drive Israel (the ten northern tribes) out of the land (His home), and thus kill her corporately, spiritually, and covenantally by bringing an “end to [her] kingdom,” (through the Assyrian captivity) God had promised that in Israel’s last days He would re-marry her and “gather” her with Judah and be head over them once again by establishing the new covenant with her.  God would remain married to Judah because Messiah had to come through her but her harvest, judgment and divorce would take place in AD 70 as well.  According to Jesus and John in Revelation, the eschatological “gathering,” betrothal, divorce of Judah, and re-marriage was roughly between AD 30 – AD 70 with the divorce and re-marriage being “soon” or “shortly” fulfilled between AD 67 – AD 70 when old covenant Israel was cast out of the kingdom (cf. Mt. 8:10-12; Mt. 24-25; Rev. 17-21).  Paul’s point in quoting Hosea 1-2 was to teach Israel’s salvation and restoration had already begun in Christ with the remnant or true “Israel” and ingrafting of believing Gentiles.

Peter also quotes from Hosea 1 in 1 Peter 2:10 and within its context he is demonstrating that Israel is being saved and restored spiritually through Christ and the new covenant with a spiritual – temple, priesthood, sacrifices, race – all forming a spiritual “holy nation” (1 Pet. 2:4-10).  Thus, for Peter and Paul the remnant of Israel was being saved and restored through the new covenant “in Christ” not “in the land” and thus from sin, not from the Gentiles and Roman power.

Isaiah 10:27-28

Paul in Romans 9:27-28 once again returns to the fact that the OT only predicts the salvation of a remnant among the Jews and not the entire Nation, and that this would be a “short work,”

“And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel:  Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved, for the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay.”

There are various translations of verse 28 – “…and cut it short in righteousness:  because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth,” (KJ) “…the Lord will perform the sentence He is concluding and bringing swiftly upon the earth” (BLT).  The point is simple, since the “sign” of gospel having to be preached in “all the earth” (throughout the Romans Empire) had already been fulfilled (Rms. 10:18/Mt. 24:14), God was going to execute His judgment upon the Nation and it would be “near” and in their “this generation,” (Mt. 24) and thus it would be “without delay.”  Paul is not anticipating a 2,000 years plus period awaiting Israel’s judgment and the salvation of the remnant.  And when the judgment did come—roughly between AD 66 – AD 70 it too was “short” and the Jewish Christian remnant fled the city to Pella and were safe from God’s wrath upon the City.  And to the remnant “offspring” or survivors Paul turns his attention in his next quote from Isaiah.

 Isaiah 1:9

Paul continues quoting Isaiah 1:9,

“If the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring, we would have been like Sodom and become like Gomorrah.”

In context the majority of Jerusalem have become so wicked in persecuting the righteous remnant (even killing some performing the sin of blood-guilt v. 15), that God calls Her “rulers of Sodom” and “people of Gomorrah” (1:10).  If they repent, they will be forgiven, but if not, they will be “eaten by the sword” (vss. 16-20).  Again, we see the same coin with the two sides of salvation for the remnant or judgment for the unrepentant persecuting majority taking place at the same time.  The remnant “survivors” would emerge as “the city of righteousness, the faithful city” while the unrepentant persecutor among Jerusalem is described as a “whore” that would be “burned” in judgment (vss. 21-31).  In the book of Revelation which would be fulfilled “shortly” by AD 70 John describes old covenant Jerusalem (“where the Lord was slain”) as “Sodom” and “Gomorrah” and as an unfaithful wife or “Whore” that would “soon” be judged and burned in the imminent events of AD 67 – AD 70 (cf. Rev. 11; 17-19).

The prophecy continues in Isaiah 2 in addressing the “last days” of which Paul and the Roman church were currently in.  Jesus connects this judgment quoting (2:10, 19, 21) as being the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 in Luke 23:30,

“Then they (the women who were weeping for Him on His way to the cross) will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us,’ and to the hills, ‘cover us.’”

The persecutors among Jerusalem continue to be described as “Sodom” in chapter 3 (3:9) and “in that day” of the “last days,” they would “fall by the sword in battle” (vss. 18-25; cf. Lk. 21:23-24).  Continuing this “in that day” scene Isaiah once again connects the salvation of the righteous remnant with the judgment of Jerusalem,

“In that day the branch of the Lord (Jesus) shall be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the land shall be the pride and honor of the survivors of Israel.  And he who is left in Zion and remains in Jerusalem will be called holy, everyone who has been recorded for life in Jerusalem, when the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion and cleansed the bloodstains of Jerusalem from its midst by a spirit of judgment and by a spirit of burning.” (4:2-4)

Throughout Romans 9-11 Paul is quoting from and drawing from those OT contexts the theme of an imminent salvation coming to the surviving remnant while being the same time for judgment of the unrepentant persecutors.

Isaiah 28:16  

Paul concluding Romans 9 once again (v. 32) appeals to Isaiah to demonstrate that he isn’t coming up with something new concerning the judgment of the majority among Israel (not the salvation of the majority) has been prophesied,

“Behold, I am laying Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

But of course, Paul doesn’t just have this one verse in mind, but is invoking the theological and eschatological context of what scholars have called, “Isaiah’s little apocalypse” (i.e. Isa. 24 – 28).  In quoting from Isaiah 28 Paul is reminding his Jewish scoffers that it was prophesied that most of them would reject and fall over their own Messiah/Stone and that His coming would produce a “strange work” — in that He would come to judge THEM and not the Romans and would save His believing remnant (vss. 5-6) at the time of this judgment (vss. 7-22).  Note this is not an end of world history coming of God in judgment, because it would be as God had come in judgment upon the Philistines and Canaanites (v. 21, cf. 2 Sam. 5:19-20; Josh. 10:10).

Since Paul is leading us eventually to the resurrection and “salvation” of “all Israel” being “life from the dead” (Rms. 11:15-27), it is important at this point to see what kind of death and resurrection or salvation of the remnant is prophesied in Isaiah 27-28.  Israel would undergone a spiritual, covenantal, and corporate bodily “striking” and DEATH or of being “slain” (27:7) when Jerusalem (the “fortified city”) would be “burned” and her “altars” would become “like chalkstone” (27:9-11).  This covenantal, corporate, and spiritual death would result in the resurrection or salvation or redemption of the remnant when the Messianic second exodus or eschatological “gathering” would be realized of which Jesus placed in His contemporary “this generation” (27:11-12=Mt. 24:30-31, 34).  Isaiah 27-28 is prophesying a Messianic spiritual, covenantal, and corporate body resurrection and Paul will not depart from that kind of resurrection once we get to Romans 11:15-27.

It is also important to note that the eschatological “in that day” of Isaiah 27-28 would not only be a time of judgment for the majority of Israel and salvation/resurrection for the remnant, but it would also be when “Leviathan the fleeing serpent” or “dragon” would be “slain” or judged (27:1).  This is why Paul said that Satan was going to be “crushed” or judged “shortly” by AD 70 (Rms. 16:20).

Peter likewise uses Isaiah 28:16 and Psalm 118:22 to develop his eschatology of Israel being “destined” to “disobey the word” in rejecting Jesus – the Messianic stone.  Like Paul, the majority of Israel rejecting her Messiah is not a failure of God to keep His promises, it is a part of His means of restoring and saving the remnant under the new covenant making them and the Gentiles a spiritual temple, priesthood, with spiritual sacrifices, and a spiritual race and holy nation (1 Pet. 2:10).  Peter places this judgment of the living and the dead (thus the resurrection) as an event that was “at hand” and would “not be delayed” (1 Pet. 4:5-7, 17; 2 Pet. 2:3) in AD 70—just as Paul teaches in Romans 8:18—13:11-12.

Romans 10 – Isaiah 52:7; Isaiah 53:1; Psalm 19:4; Deuteronomy 32:21; Isaiah 65:1

Paul continues his themes of appealing to the OT scriptures to show that there is no distinction between Jew and Greek in God’s plan of salvation and that this plan included the majority of Israel’s rejection.

Isaiah 52:7

In Romans 10:15 Paul cites Isaiah 52:7,

“And how are they to preach unless they are sent?  As it is written, ‘How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!’”

We need to examine the context and theology/eschatology of the rest of this chapter to see what was “preached” to Israel that was the “good news.”  Isaiah’s eschatology is like Daniel’s in that after Israel’s long exile under Gentile powers, Messiah will come and save Israel and resurrected Her “from the dust” spiritually, corporately, and covenantally.  In Isaiah 52 Isaiah connects the coming of Messiah and the eschatological wedding “put on your beautiful garments” with the preaching of the gospel and saving Jerusalem in terms of making her “clean” and raising her – “…for there shall no more come into you the uncircumcised and the unclean. Shake yourself from the dust and arise…” [cf. Dan. 12:2] (vss. 1-2).  Isaiah has previously connected the eschatological wedding with the resurrection as the time when “death would be swallowed up” on top of Mount Zion (Isa. 25:6-9).  Another reference here in Isaiah 52 to the resurrection can be seen in the LXX of verse 12 where God is said to be Israel’s “gathering” – just as Isaiah has previously taught and quoted by Jesus in Isaiah 27:12-13/Mt. 24:30-31.  He also speaks of Messiah baptizing or “sprinkling the nations” (vss. 14-15).  But what kind of baptism is this?  John the Baptist taught that while he baptized with water, Jesus would baptize new covenant believers “with the Spirit” (Mt. 3:11).  Thus, Paul sees God saving the remnant Jews and Gentiles through a spiritual circumcision and baptism “in Christ” and not an old covenant one that is connected to one setting their mind “in the land” (Mt. 3:11; Cols. 2:11-12; 3:2; Gals. 3:26-27; 1 Cor. 12:12-13).  Paul is demonstrating that Israel is being saved and restored according to the OT Scriptures, but in a way that the carnal Pharisees could not see – He would be restoring and raising a spiritual new covenant New Jerusalem and saving Her and Her seed by them being “born from above” through faith (John 3:1-18/Ezek. 36:23-29)

Isaiah 53:1

Paul continues his thought invoking the entire theological and eschatological contexts of Isaiah 52-53—having addressed the remnant’s salvation and their preaching the gospel, he asks,

“But they have not all obeyed the gospel.  For Isaiah says, ‘Lord who has believed what he has heard from us?’” (Rms. 10:16)

In other words, not every Jew or the entire nation will believe the gospel report of the remnant – that salvation can only be found in Jesus the Christ (the Messiah and “gospel” of Isa. 52-53).

Did some of the Rabbis teach this passage was Messianic?

Messiah …what is his name? The Rabbis say, ‘The leprous one’; those of the house of the Rabbi (Jehuda Hanassi, the author of the Mishna, 135-200) say: ‘Cholaja’ (The sickly), for it says, ‘Surely he has borne our sicknesses’ etc. (Isa. 53:4).”[49]

And a Targum of Isaiah 53 reads,

“Behold my servant Messiah shall prosper; he shall be high, and increase, and be exceeding strong: as the house of Israel looked to him through many days, because their countenance was darkened among the peoples, and their complexion beyond the sons of men.”[50]

The Messiah as a suffering “servant” is also described for us in the previous immediate context (Isaiah 52:13-15, see also Psalm 22).  In Isaiah, “Savior” is a consistent title for God communicating His preeminence and His uniqueness over against foreign gods and idols:

“I, even I, am the Lord, and apart from me there is no savior. I have revealed and saved and proclaimed—I, and not some foreign god among you” (Is. 43:11, 12).

Isaiah further states that God would show himself as Savior in a future blessing and restoration for Israel described in Isaiah 49:26; 60:16.  It’s simply not accurate that Christians have somehow invented the idea that the Messiah is found in such passages as Isaiah 53 or that Messiah would be a “Savior,” saving Israel (and the Gentile believing world) from their sins.

And it is not enough to just say that the “Son” in Isaiah 53 is national Israel and not Messiah.  Why?  Because within Judaism was also the belief that when Messiah came He would recapitulate Israel’s redemptive history – primarily to usher in a 40-year second exodus based upon Isaiah 11 and other passages.  Jesus is the faithful substitute “Son” and “Vine” who never sinned or failed (unlike the “son” and “vine” of national Israel), and He could be the perfect substitute for man and take His sin justly and fully away.

Let me quote an excellent article by Daniel Mann, a zealous “Jew” who moved to Israel and, after studying Isaiah 53 and what Rabbis taught on it, put his trust in Jesus as His Messiah and Savior:

If anyone was a skeptic about Jews believing in Jesus, I was. Born to second-generation Jewish American parents in Brooklyn, I experienced much anti-Semitism growing up in the 1950s and ‘60s. Since my persecutors weren’t Jewish, I assumed they were Christian. When I was 14, there was talk that a certain Jewish family in my neighborhood had converted to Christianity. I was filled with disgust. How could Jews do such a thing?

As a young adult, I had a lot of pent-up resentment against Christianity. I enjoyed ridiculing anyone who tried to talk with me about Jesus. But I was spiritually hungry. I moved to Israel, lived on a kibbutz, and visited a Hasidic yeshiva to ask questions, but I returned to the United States still wondering how to really connect with God – a Jewish God, not a Christian one.

People kept telling me about Jesus. I had a great problem with him. Many Jews had died in his name, and many who hated Jews called themselves Christians. And the idea of someone dying on a cross for me seemed like a bunch of hocus-pocus.

But I kept meeting Christians who seemed genuine in their love and concern for me, and their prayers for me seemed to “work.” So finally I prayed, “God, if Jesus is the Savior and Messiah that the Hebrew prophets wrote about, You’re going to have to show me.”

As I studied the Bible, I began to see how Jesus could have fulfilled many of the prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures. I also discovered that the New Testament wasn’t something arbitrarily tacked onto the Hebrew Bible by people who hated Jews. I was shocked to learn that Jews had written it and that Jesus himself was a Jew.

One of the most convincing passages showing that the Messiah would make the ultimate sacrifice and die for our sins was Isaiah 53.

Present-day rabbis disagree. Rashi (AD 1040-1105) might have been the first to deny that this incredible passage is Messianic. But many Jewish sages, before and after Rashi, saw the Messiah in Isaiah 53.

The highly regarded first-century Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai stated: “The meaning of the words ‘bruised for our iniquities’ [Isaiah 53:5] is, that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of his being bruised, it follows that whoso will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must endure and suffer them for them himself.”[1]

Rabbi Moshe Alshich, a famous sixteenth-century scholar, asserted: “[Our] Rabbis with one voice, accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet [Isaiah 53] is speaking of king Messiah.”[2] In contrast, today’s rabbis have rallied around the assertion that the “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah 53 is the nation of Israel and not the Messiah. Let’s take a look:

Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem. (Isaiah 53:1–3)

Throughout Isaiah 53, the masculine singular pronoun “he” is used to designate the suffering servant. This pronoun is very rarely used in regards to Israel. More usually, Israel is referred to as “you,” “she/her,” and “they/them.” But there is no problem at all using “he” in reference to the Messiah.

Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:4–6)

Just a quick read through the Prophets will show that Israel could not even bear its own sins, let alone those of others. It was our Jewish people who had “gone astray” and “turned to our own way.”

According to the revered twelfth-century Jewish scholar Ramban (Nachmanides), the Redeemer is the Messiah:

Yet he carried our sicknesses, being himself sick and distressed for the transgressions which should have caused sickness and distress in us, and bearing the pains which we ought to have experienced. But we, when we saw him weakened and prostrate, thought that he was stricken, smitten of God. The chastisement of our peace was upon him – for God will correct him; and by his stripes we were healed.[3]

While today’s rabbis deny substitutionary atonement – one man dying for the sins of the world – this had not previously been the case. The mystical Zohar records:

The children of the world are members one of another. When the Holy One desires to give healing to the world, he smites one just man amongst them, and for his sake heals all the rest. Whence do we learn this? From the saying, “He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities.” (Isaiah 53:5) (Numbers, Pinchus, 218a)

He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. (Isaiah 53:7)

We cannot find any biblical references to affirm that Israel was silent in the face of oppression. But we do find that this is true of Jesus. Before the Sanhedrin, he remained silent. When he finally spoke, it only aided the prosecution:

But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?” “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. (Mark 14:61–63)

Jesus astonished Pilate with his silence:

Then Pilate asked him, “Don’t you hear the story they are bringing against you?” But Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge – to the great amazement of the governor. (Matthew 27:13–14)

By oppression and judgment he was taken away. Yet who of his generation protested? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was punished. He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth. (Isaiah 53:8–9)

Jesus was deprived of justice (“judgment”) and was killed. Israel was not “cut off from the land of the living.” It is also clearly untrue that Israel “had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his [Israel’s] mouth.” At times, the prophets charged that our people had morally descended below the Gentiles. The Gospels declare that Jesus’ grave was with both the wicked and the rich, as he died with sinners and was buried in a rich man’s tomb.

Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand. After he has suffered, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities. (Isaiah 53:10–11)

There is no reason to suppose that Israel’s death could represent “an offering for sin.” Sin offerings had to be without any blemish. But we were covered with them. How could the knowledge of Israel “justify many?” But faith (knowledge) in the Messiah will.

This servant, who dies as a sin offering for the people, will eventually “see the light of life and be satisfied.” He will live subsequent to his death – a cryptic reference to the resurrection.

Isaiah says that this servant will bear the iniquities of many. When I first studied this passage as a young man, it began to dawn on me that I personally needed to be forgiven for my wrongdoing, what the Bible calls “iniquities.” And this servant – who was looking to me more and more like Jesus – had made that possible.”[51]

When this evidence is brought forth, “Jewish” apologists such as Rabbi Tovia Singer claim that the Christian can’t produce any Jewish tradition that Messiah ben David fulfills Isaiah 53.  But in a radio debate with Dr. Michael Brown, Tovia Singer made such a claim and Michael embarrassed Singer severely.  Here are some those quotes provided by Dr. Brown, demonstrating that Messiah ben David is the fulfillment of Isaiah 53:

“Yet he carried our sicknesses [Isa. 53:4], being himself sick and distressed for the transgressions which should have caused sickness and distress in us, and bearing the pains which we ought to have experienced.  But we, when we saw him weakened and prostrate, thought that he was stricken, smitten of God.  …The chastisement of our peace was upon him—for God will correct him and by his stripes we were healed—because the stripes by which he is vexed and distressed will heal us:  God will pardon us for his righteousness, and we shall be healed both from our own transgressions and from the iniquities of our fathers…

He was oppressed and he was afflicted [v. 7]:  for when he first comes, “meek riding upon an ass” [Zech. 9:9], the oppressors and officers of every city will come to him, and afflict him with revilings and insults, reproaching both him and the God in whose name he appears.”[52]

Brown goes on to point out that there are others who apply the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 to Messiah ben David, such as Rabbi Moshe Kohen Ibn Crispin (or Ibn Krispen) and Rabbi Mosheh El-Sheikh (or Alshekh).

Before leaving Isaiah 53 it is important to notice that in the Hebrew Messiah would be undergoing two “deaths” in verse 9,

“And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his deaths, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.”

To possibly understand this we should go back to Adam.  We believe that Adam was created a physically dying creature just as the plant life, insects, and animal kingdom were – even before Adam’s sin.  Adam was created “from the dust” and then “put” into the Temple/Garden to undergo a probationary period in his presence. If Adam would have partaken of the Tree of Life he would have eventually biologically died having spiritual eternal life and would have continued in God’s presence.  In other words, this would have been a “good death” for Adam. But once Adam sinned and partook of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil he died spiritually that very day and then God banished him to eventually biologically die not inside the Garden/Temple of His presence having the opportunity to partake of the Tree of Life, but rather he was exiled outside the Garden/Temple back in the outer “dust” from where he was created.  Israel being a corporate Adam would often repeat this process – She would sin and break covenant whoring after other gods, and would therefore die spiritually and corporately being driven from God’s Land and presence into the death and exile of bondage and slavery.  Dying in the “dust” for Israel meant she would die corporately and spiritually in exile from God’s presence (ex. Isa. 52:1-2).  When She came back into the Land say under Ezra and Nehemiah it was a resurrection and a coming out of the “graves” (Ezek. 37).  The Jews new there would be one last and Messianic second exodus from her exile and death during the time of the Roman Empire (cf. Dan. 2; 7; 9; 12).  But being delivered from this death, exile, and bondage didn’t have to do with God destroying the Romans and raising physical corpses in the Land, or establishing a physical paradise on earth, but rather it involved raising Israel’s dead (with believing Gentiles) from the spiritual bondage of “the sin” and “the death” that came through Adam and was magnified through “the law.”

In a similar way Jesus would also die a “bad death” that would include some kind of spiritual separation from the Father [“My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?” Mt. 27/Ps. 22 and “He who knew no sin became sin for us…” 2 Cor. 5:21] as well as a violent and shameful biological death upon the cross outside the gates of Jerusalem.  Then Jesus’ physical resurrection [in a Garden] was a “sign” that He was the “first” to have overcome the spiritual death and separation that came from Adam and thus He died in the flesh of the old covenant age but was the first to rise in the spirit inaugurating the new covenant age and the first to ascend into the Father’s glory and presence (1 Pet. 3:18).

Psalm 19:4

Paul in Romans 10:18 appeals to Psalm 19:4 to demonstrate that God had given the Jews scattered throughout the nations of the Roman world sufficient warning and an opportunity to hear the gospel through his ministry,

“But I ask, have they not heard?  Indeed, they have, for “their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.” (cf. Cols. 1:5-6, 23; Rms. 16:25-26).

Paul also has in mind Jesus’ “sign” that the gospel had to be preached throughout the Roman world before He would come in his “generation” to bring an “end” to the old covenant age with the destruction of the temple in AD 70 (Mt. 24:3, 14-34).

Deuteronomy 32:21

Paul now cites Deuteronomy 32:21 in Romans 10:19 to demonstrate once again what the message (prophesied in their own Scriptures) would produce among Israel,

“But I ask, did Israel not understand?  First Moses says, “I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation; with a foolish nation I will make you angry.”

The eschatology of Moses in Deuteronomy 31-32 and how Paul and the NT authors develop it couldn’t be clearer.  In Israel’s “last days” (31:29-30) there would come a specific “perverse and crooked generation” (32:5, 20) that would “reject their Rock” – the God who had created and formed them through the exodus event (32:4, 15, 18).  He would bring them to their final “end” within this “last days” specific “perverse and crooked generation” (32:20).  During this generation, He would make them “angry” and “jealous” by forming a new “people” and a new “nation” (32:21).  Yet most of them would not be wise nor be able to “discern what their later end would be” (32:28-29) – even though they sang this song constantly this mass rejection of Messiah was predicted in their own Scriptures!

Paul quotes from Deuteronomy 32:5, 20 in Philippians 2:15 when he exhorts the church who were living in this very specific “last days” “crooked generation” to,

“…be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation[Deut. 32:5, 20], among whom you shine as lights in the world, holding fast to the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor in vain.”

Because Paul understands that they were living in the terminal last days “generation” Moses prophesied of, the “day of Christ” he mentions here he later defined as being “at hand” (Phil. 4:4) in AD 70 just as he does later in Romans (cf. Rms. 13:11-12).

Peter likewise in Acts 2-3 states that the “last days” of Israel and that old covenant economy had come upon them and therefore in Acts 2:40 they needed to,

            “Save yourselves from this crooked generation (cf. Deut. 32:5, 20).”

According to the context of Peter’s sermon, they need to be saved from the

“…day of the Lord” the “great and magnificent day.”  And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:20-21)

Peter goes on in Acts 3 to describe the same coming of Christ and warning as chapter 2–as being when He would be “revealed from heaven” to “restore all things” and give “times of refreshing” to the believing remnant while other Jews who would not heed this warning would be “cut off from among the people” (Acts 3:17-23).  Per Peter, God was in the process of restoring Israel by forming a spiritual new covenant “new people” or “nation” (2 Pet. 2) and if they didn’t repent and have faith in Christ and join this new “people” they would be “cut off” from that new covenant people and blessings and be judged in AD 70.

But per Peter, what were the “all things” that needed to be “restored” according to the prophets (Acts 3:21)?  Peter declares,

            “the end of all things is at hand” (1 Pet. 4:7).

The end of all things that were at hand in Peter’s day were the elements of the old covenant world that were already in the process of passing away,

“But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.  Since all these things are being dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God…” (2 Pet. 3:10-11LEB).

Old Testament scholar, David C. Mitchell, points out that Jewish interpreters understood the “Rock” of Deuteronomy 32 to be both God and yet Messiah at the same time and forms David’s prophecy of Messiah the Rock that Israel would stumble over:

“Altogether then, the ‘Shepherd-Rock’ promised to Joseph [Gen. 49:24] is a mighty king.  The Septuagint agrees, rendering ‘Shepherd-Rock’ by one Greek word, Katischusas, ‘conqueror’.  Therefore the coming one promised to Joseph is like the Shiloh world-ruler promised to Judah earlier in the same chapter:  he is one whom the nations will obey.  And, just as the Shiloh-ruler is to come after Judah’s kingdom, a kingdom which has not even appeared at the time of Jacob’s prophecy, so the Shepherd-Rock is a divinely-appointed ruler to come after Joseph’s time, but one greater and freer than Joseph ever was.

Such an interpretation is not a novelty.  Ramban [13th century R. Moshe ben Nahman] says, in his comments on Deuteronomy 32:4, that this Rock from Joseph is the same Rock or Stone as is spoken of in Psalm 118:22.

And he [Moses] said:  Let my teaching fall like rain.  For that which he brought from the heavens, and his speech on the earth, will fall upon Israel, and settle upon them like dew (Deut. 32:2).  For I will proclaim the name of Ha-Shem in the heavens; come, declare the greatness of our God (Deut. 32:3) in the earth.  [The Rock, his work is perfect, etc. (Deut. 32:4).

And all Israel will say also the rock is Joshua, a sign about this land, for, From thence a Shepherd-Rock of Israel (Gen. 49:24).  And it was interpreted long ago:  The rock rejected by the builders has become the capstone; this is from Ha-Shem, etc. (Ps. 118:22-23).  And that is why Joshua said, This rock will be a witness between us (Josh. 24:27).  Also, For behold the rock which I have set before Joshua:  upon one rock are seven eyes (Zech. 3:9).  Let the wise understand.

Ramban’s comments are triggered by the Rock of Deuteronomy 32:4.  This Rock, he says, is not only the ETERNAL, but also Joshua.  Writing in his latter years, in the Mamluk-ruled Holy Land, he says it is a sign for ‘this land,’ and he cites Genesis 49:24, whose Shepherd-Rock he identifies as Joshua.  He then proceeds to link the divine Rock of Deuteronomy 32:4 and the Joshua Rock of Genesis 49:24 with the Rock-rejected-by-the-builders of Psalm 118.  Now Ramban knew Psalm 118 was written long after Joshua’s time.  And he knew its rejected Rock had a long history of messianic interpretations [2Q23 and 4Q173 (=4QpPsb) frg. 5, lines 1-6].  So Ramban is not speaking of Joshua ben Nun, but of another Joshua Rock yet to come, whom he sees prefigured in the rock set before Joshua ben Jehozadak in Zechariah 3:9.  So, when Ramban says that the Joshua Rock is a sign for ‘this land,’ he foresaw the land of the Israel being reconquered and ruled by another Joshua, one still to come in Ramban’s own time, that is, a Joshua messiah, who is the promised Shepherd-Rock.”[53]

And again,

“…he [Ramban] is saying that the Shepherd-Rock promised to Joseph is none other than the Rock of Deuteronomy 32:4, who is the God of Israel himself, the Angel who followed the Israelites through the desert as a thirst-quenching Rock.”[54]

To summarize Paul’s appeal to Deuteronomy 32 – God’s promises had not failed just because a majority among Israel had not believed.  Why?  Because through this process God would form a new “people” and “nation” making them “jealous” and “angry” – with most not being able to “discern what their end” would be.  This “end” (of the old covenant age not world history) was “at hand” in their “last days” “perverse and crooked generation” and inseparably connected with it was the “at hand” Second Coming of Jesus and “the judgment of the living and the dead” (Rms. 11:25-27/13:11-12; Phil. 2:15/4:4; Acts 2:20-40; 1 Pet. 4:5-7, 17).  During this covenantal transitionary generation period, the old covenant “all things” creation was being dissolved and passing away, while God was creating a new covenant creation, people of God, nation, etc…. And on that note, we transition to Paul’s next OT quote coming from Isaiah 65 and the eschatology found there.

Isaiah 65:1-2 

Paul goes on in Romans 10:20-21 to quote Isaiah 65:1-2 to further prove God’s purposes for Israel’s salvation have not failed in that while most of Israel will not discern her end due to spiritual hardness and blindness becoming “angry” and “jealous,” others will be “found” through this process,

“Then Isaiah is so bold as to say, ‘I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.’” But of Israel he says, ‘all day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.’”

Since Paul is appealing to the eschatology of Isaiah 65-66 let’s unpack these glorious chapters.

There are TWO peoples / nations / creations that God through Isaiah develops.  The first is God’s old covenant “rebellious people who provoke” Him to His face “continually” which forms the majority of the nation, and they are to be judged (65:2-7).  But as Paul has said in Romans 9:6 “for not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” [that is, there is a true Israel / remnant / seed within the nation] Paul develops here through Isaiah as,

“Thus says the LORD:  As the new wine is found in the cluster, and they say, Do not destroy it, for there is a blessing in it, for there is a blessing in it, so I will not destroy them all.  I will bring forth offspring from Jacob, and from Judah possessors of my mountains; my chosen shall possess it, and my servants shall dwell there.”

In verses 12-16 there is a contrast between the two in that when God comes to judge “with the sword” (through armies) – the remnant will eat and drink, while the other goes hungry and thirsts.  One rejoices while the other is covered in shame and cry out in pain of heart.  The unbelievers would be cursed in that their “name” (Jerusalem) would be given to the remnant and the remnant would be given a “new name” (New Jerusalem).

But how will this be accomplished?  In verses 17-25 God will covenantally “not remember” His old covenant people / Jerusalem / Creation, but will form His new covenant people / New Jerusalem / New Heavens and Earth.  Paul in quoting Isaiah 65:17 in 2 Corinthians 5:17 makes it clear that the believing Jew / Gentile Church is the “New Creation” or “New Heavens and New Earth” prophesied by Isaiah:

“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation.  The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.”

But what was the “first” that would pass away in AD 70?  To this we briefly turn to Isaiah 51:15-16,

“I am the LORD your God, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar—the LORD of hosts is his name.  And I have put my words in your mouth and covered you in the shadow of my hand, establishing the heavens and laying the foundations of the earth, and saying to Zion, You are my people.”

The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge correctly identifies this creation as old covenant Israel,

“The heavens.  ‘Heaven’ and ‘earth’ are here put by symbolic language for a political universe.  That is, that I might make those who were but scattered persons and slaves in Egypt before, a kingdom and polity, to be governed by their own laws and magistrates.”[55]

In Isaiah 66:19-24 we learn that the remnant “survivors” of the Day of the Lord in AD 70 continue in the New Creation or new covenant age–preaching the gospel to the Nations just as Revelation 22:2, 17 declares.

Paul’s appeal to Isaiah 65 strengthens his case that according to the OT scriptures God would eventually bring National Israel’s old covenant world to an end and form a new covenant world or Nation composed of the Jewish remnant and Gentile believers.  When we take a combined look at some of the best theologians within the Reformed and Evangelical communities, we find a Full Preterist interpretation of virtually 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, Crispin H.T. Fletcher-Louis, Hank Hanegraaff, and N.T. Wright (to name just a few) teach that the passing away of heaven and earth (cf. Matt. 5:17–18; 24:3, 29, 35; 1 Cor. 7:31; 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.  See the following works:

John Owen, The Works of John Owen, 16 vols. (London: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1965–68), 9:134–135. John Lightfoot, Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica: Matthew – 1 Corinthians, 4 vols. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, [1859], 1989), 3:452, 454. John Brown, Discourses and Sayings of our Lord, 3 vols. (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, [1852] 1990), 1:170. John Locke, The Clarendon Edition of the Works of John Locke: A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St Paul Volume 2, (NY: Oxford University Press, 1987), 617–618. R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998). Kenneth Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion (Tyler TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1992), 363–365. Kenneth Gentry (contributing author), Four Views on the Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1998), 89. Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church (Powder Springs: GA, 1999), 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), 269–279. Crispin H.T. Fletcher-Louis (contributing author) Eschatology in Bible & Theology (Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 1997), 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), 114, 157–158. N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996), 345–346. N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003), 645, n.42. Hank Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2007), 84–86.

These interpretations are, individually considered, “orthodox.” Yet when Full Preterists consolidate the most defensible elements of Reformed and Evangelical eschatology, anti-Preterists unite in opposition to even some of their own stated views.

Romans 11 – Isaiah 29:10; Psalm 69:22-23; Isaiah 59:20-21; Isaiah 27:9; Isaiah 40:12, 28

Isaiah 29:10

Here in chapter 11 Paul appeals to himself and the “present time” as evidence that God had not rejected His people nor has God’s promises failed in that Paul himself was among the chosen remnant elect Jews [Paul being from the Tribe of Benjamin trusting in Jesus vss. 1-6].  Paul in Romans 11:8 references Isaiah 29:10 to prove it was always God’s plan to harden Israel while causing the elect to seek and find salvation in Christ under the new covenant of grace,

“What then?  Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking.  The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, as it is written, “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.”

Once again, we see that when “blind” unbelieving old covenant Jerusalem is judged and “besieged” (vss. 1-16) is also the “in that day” or time when “the eyes of the blind shall see” and “Jacob shall no more be ashamed” (vss. 17-24).  Paul is consistently hammering away and appealing to OT text after OT text that demonstrate the majority of Israel will not believe and are thus judged while at the same time a remnant believes and is saved.

Psalm 69:22-23

Paul once again appeals to a judgment coming upon the “blind” unbelievers [this time using David as a prophet] among Israel in that He has laid a trap for them,

“Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them; let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see, and bend their backs forever.” (Rms. 11:9-10/Ps. 69:22-23)

 John Gill points out that many commentators apply this passage to the Jews gathering for Passover just before the Romans came as God’s instrument of judgment and wrath,

“…nor is it to be overlooked what is suggested by some, that the Passover may be meant by ‘table’; which was their grand yearly feast, and which they were eating when they were surrounded and taken by the Roman army, like birds in a net, or beasts in a trap:  and all this as a recompense to them; a just judgment upon them, by way of retaliation for their ill treatment of Christ when on the cross, giving him gall and vinegar for his meat and drink.”[56]

The Psalm ends by exclaiming that while there is a trap and judgment set for the blind persecutors, this will also be the time of salvation for the “humble” (vss. 32-36).

Isaiah 59:20-21

Paul reminds and exhorts the Christian Gentiles that God was in the process of breaking off some of the Jewish branches (those Jews who rejected Jesus as Messiah) and grafting them into Israel’s olive tree [thus fulfilling the Abrahamic covenant] as a “wild olive shoot.”  But Paul sees that God is not finished saving some of the Jews [in his day and generation] and that He is able to graft some of these “natural branches back into their own olive tree” and that their “acceptance” [along with the Gentiles entering into Israel’s fullness at Christ’s coming] will result in “life from the dead” – or be the fulfillment of Israel’s long-awaited restoration or resurrection promises (vss. 19-24).

Isaiah 59 addresses Israel’s sin of bloodguilt or them killing their poor brethren (vss. 3, 7) of which Christ says He would avenge at His coming to destroy their house or temple in His contemporary “generation” (Mt. 23:30-39).  Once again, we see in Isaiah 59:16-20 that at the time of judgment upon the Jewish persecutors is the time Messiah also comes to bring salvation.

Since Paul also cites Isaiah 59 in 1 Thessalonians 5 we should look at the judgment and salvation in view and when and at what event Paul sees it being fulfilled.  First the quote from Isaiah,

“He saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no one to intercede; then his own arm brought him salvation, and his righteousness upheld him.  He put on righteousness as a breastplate, and a helmet of salvation on his head; he put on garments of vengeances for clothing and wrapped himself in zeal as a cloak.  According to their deeds, so will he repay, wrath to his adversaries, repayment to his enemies; to the coastlands he will render repayment.  So they shall fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun; for he will come like a rushing stream, which the wind of the LORD drives.” (Isa. 59:16-20)

And now let’s look at how Paul uses this to form his eschatology in 1 Thessalonians 5 and to identify the “coming” of the Lord of Isaiah 59 that Paul says is the point at which “all Israel” would be “saved” or receive “life from the dead”:

“But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation.  For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us so that whether we are awake or asleep we might live with him.” (1 Thess. 5:8-10).

Paul understood that he and his contemporaries “belonged to the day” of “salvation” prophesied in Isaiah 59:16ff. and that this would result in resurrection and enjoying eternal life and God’s presences at Christ’s coming [that would take place in some of their lifetime’s cf. 1 Thess. 4:15-17 “we shall not all die” / Mt. 16:27-28].  Paul informs the Thessalonians that Christ would come from heaven in wrath to vindicate them from their Jewish countrymen (cf. Acts 17) that were persecuting them:

“This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering—since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you [Jewish countrymen – 1 Thess. 2:14-16/Acts 17], and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.  They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints…” (2 Thess. 1:5-10)

The text is very clear – Christ was going to come from heaven in the lifetime of Thessalonians to “give them relief” from their Jewish persecutors by giving their persecutors the same kind of “trouble” they were giving the Thessalonians.  But how would this take place?  Remember Paul’s reference to Psalm 69:22-23 that we just covered before Isaiah 59?  God was going to “lay a trap” for these Jewish Thessalonians when they traveled to Jerusalem for Passover and then He would come (through the Roman armies), to “repay” these Jews with “wrath” that they had been “storing up for themselves” (1 Thess. 2:14-16/Mt. 23:30-39).

It may also be helpful to see where else these themes are found such as in the book of Revelation where Christ comes as a mighty warrior, to bring vindication to the martyrs, in a day of wrath which would also bring salvation and the mature “mystery” of God.  First, the events of the prophecy of this book would be fulfilled “shortly” or “near” in AD 70 (Rev. 1:1, 22:10).  Therefore, in Revelation 6 the martyrs would be vindicated “in a little while” and this would be fulfilled when Christ’s “wrath” came upon His enemies (vss. 10-17).  In Revelation 19 Christ is dressed as a warrior and coming in “wrath” to once again “avenge the blood of His servants” (vss. 2, 11-16).  And in chapters 10-11 at the “seventh” or last trumpet, when Christ comes in “wrath” to judge the “city where the Lord was slain” for “3 ½ years” [AD 67 – AD 70] is when the “mystery” [the maturing of the Jew / Gentile union] would “no longer be delayed” and the “judgment [or resurrection] of the dead” would take place (Rev. 10:6—11:1-18).

The imminent Second Coming of Christ described as a coming warrior in a “day” of “wrath” to “avenge” or vindicate the martyrs and bring to maturity the “mystery of God,” the new creation, and to judge [or raise] the dead  
If A (Revelation) is = B (Isa. 59–66)
God comes from heaven “soon” in AD 70 as God had come before 1:7–22:7 64:1-3
He comes in “garments of vengeance” & wrath dipped in the blood of His enemies filling the dimensions of the land of Israel 14:7-20 63:1-6
He would come to punish and repay Israel for the sin of blood guilt & vindicate and reward the martyrs 6:10-11; 59:7; 62:11; 65:6-7
He comes to turn the tables – the wealthy persecutors would now starve while the righteous would feast – wedding motif. 3:9-10; Ch’s. 19-21 65:13-15
The righteous inherit the New Jerusalem/Creation filled with Christ’s light and righteousness which never fades.  The gates are always open to evangelize the Nations in the New Heavens and New Earth Ch’s 21-22 Ch’s 60; 65-66
And if B (Isa. 59—66) = C (1-2 Thess.)
The Lord comes from heaven in the lifetime of the Thessalonians as God had come before 59:16-2064:1-3 1 Th. 1:10;3:13; 4–5;        2 Th. 1:5-2:8
He comes in vengeance, wrath & flaming fire to turn the tables – by giving the Thessalonians who were being “troubled” (by their Jewish countrymen) “relief” and give their Jewish persecutors who were “filling up” the measure of their sin of blood guilt for killing the Prophets and Messiah — the same kind of “trouble”(through the Romans) they were dishing out to the Thessalonians 59:16-20; 65:13-15; 66:14-16 1 Th.2:14-16 /       Acts 17;     1 Th. 1:5-10
At Christ’s coming the righteous are gathered and shine as “Sons of the Day” in God’s presence and Kingdom 59:19;  60;      65-66 1  Th. 5:4-8;               2  Th. 2:1
Then A (Revelation) is = C (1 -2 Thess.)
Lord comes from heaven “soon” (AD 70) and or in the lifetime of these contemporary churches as He had come in the past 1:7–22:7, 10, 20 1  Th.1:10—2  Th. 1:5–2:8
The Lord comes at the sound of the last or seventh trumpet, w/ angels, to bring to maturity the “mystery of God” [Jew / Gentile union], in “wrath,” during a “3 ½ years period” [AD 67 – AD 70] of judgment upon Jerusalem – producing the judgment of the dead 10:6—11:18 1 Th. 4:16
He comes “soon” (AD 70) to the first century audience in vengeance and wrath to turn the tables on the first century persecutors and give relief and blessing to the persecuted 3:9-11;6:10-11,17; Ch’s19-21 1 Th. 1:10; 2 Th. 1:5-10
He comes to punish first century Jews and Jerusalem for “filling up the measure of their sin” for killing the Prophets & Christ Ch’s 17-18 1 Th. 2  /   2 Th. 1:5-10
At this first century coming of the Lord, the “Sons of the Day” or “spotless” Bride inherit God’s presence & NJ – no more night Ch’s 21-22 1 Th. 3:13;5:4-8
Two or More Things that are Equal to Another Thing are Also Equal to Each Other
Revelation Isaiah 59-66 1-2 Thessalonians
The Lord comes from heaven “soon” as He had in the past The Lord will come as He had come in the past The Lord comes from heaven in lifetime of Thessalonians
He comes to punish Jews & Jerusalem for the sin of blood guilt (vindicating martyrs) He comes to punish Jews & Jerusalem for sin of blood guilt (vindicating martyrs) He comes to punish Jews & Jerusalem for sin of blood guilt (vindicating martyrs)
Comes to turn the tables on first century enemies Comes to turn the tables on first century enemies Comes to turn the tables on first century enemies
Comes to give New Creation, Light, and His presence Comes to give New Creation, Light, and His presence Comes to give His Light, and His resurrection presence

Having looked at how Paul cites Isaiah 59 in 1-2 Thessalonians concerning the “wrath” “salvation” and resurrection “day” they would experience at Christ’s Second Coming; this will now help us identify the “coming” of the “Deliverer” of Romans 11:15-27 that produces “salvation” for “all Israel” when She would receive “life from the dead”:

“And so all Israel shall be saved:  as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and He will remove ungodliness from Jacob.” (Rms. 11:26)

The context of Isaiah 59:16-19, 21 and how Paul applies Isaiah 59 to the Second Coming of Christ in 1 Thessalonians 5 should make it abundantly clear that Paul is describing the Second Coming event and not Christ’s incarnation as some have mistakenly assumed.  This will become more clear as we work our way through the other OT texts Paul is drawing on.

Isaiah 27:9

First let’s quote Isaiah 27:9-10 which connects this coming of the Messiah in judgment upon Jerusalem as the time when the new covenant comes to maturity to bring about the forgiveness of sin,

“Therefore, by this guilt of Jacob will be atoned for, and this will be the full fruit of the removal of his sin:  when he makes all the stones of the altars like chalkstones crushed to pieces, no Asherrim or incense altars will remain standing.  For the fortified city [Jerusalem] is solitary, a habitation deserted and forsaken,…”

Now Paul in Romans 11:27,

            “and this will be my ‘covenant with them when I take away their    sins.”

The passage and its context in Isaiah couldn’t be clearer.  When the new covenant is matured and there is forgiveness of sins, is “when” Jerusalem is judged and her altars are ground up to be “like chalkstones.”

I have already addressed Isaiah 27 previously, but as a refresher:

1).  The “in that day” that Satan or the “dragon” would be slain or judged of Isaiah 27:1 and Genesis 3:15 Paul says would “shortly” take place (Rms. 16:20).

2).  Israel’s “death” is a spiritual and corporate death that she is to be raised from (cf. Isa. 27:7).

3).  Jesus places the eschatological “gathering” “threshing” (harvest) and “trumpet” resurrection to be at His Second Coming event in His contemporary “this generation” (Mt. 24:30-31/Isa. 27:12-13).

Again, this is addressing Christ’s first century Second Coming and resurrection event to occur at the end of the old covenant age and thus even further clarifies the “coming” of the “Deliverer out of Zion” to forgive His people and to raise Israel from the dead–thus bringing His new covenant Jew / Gentile mystery Israel to a full and mature state.

Isaiah 40:13, 28

Paul continues in Romans 11 seeking to prove that the “gifts and calling of God are irrevocable” (11:28-31).  But why?  Because the OT prophesied the salvation of the Gentiles and now the process of making some of the Jews jealous [still a remnant] and them coming to faith in Israel’s last days under Paul’s ministry, just before Her judgment in AD 70.

Paul in Romans 11:34 is drawing upon Isaiah 40:13, 28:

“Who has measured the Spirit of the LORD, or what man shows him his counsel.” “…Have you not known?  Have you not heard?  The LORD is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth.  He does not faint or grow weary; his understanding is unsearchable.

The exegete must ask, what is the context within Isaiah 40 that causes this outbreak of praise and adoration of God’s divine attributes?  Within the context God is predicting a day when He will come to judge Jerusalem but at the same time save Jerusalem (vss. 1-11).  He then challenges the nations and their gods to see if they could predict and then bring to pass such a salvation and judgment He will bring (vss. 12-28).  No such man, nation, or god can compare to the judgment and salvation God is brining and thus the outbreak of praise.  Therefore, let’s examine what the NT says of Isaiah 40’s coming judgment and salvation.

John the Baptist – Isaiah 40 & Matthew 3:2-12    

John the Baptist is the “voice” that came to “prepare the way” of the judgment and salvation described throughout Isaiah 40 (cf. Mt. 3:3).  John preached repentance because the “kingdom of heaven [was] at hand” (3:2).  John’s generation needed to repent because the “at hand” “kingdom” would be manifested in the coming judgment predicted in Isaiah 40.  In ancient times when someone was building a flat road to your city [to bring in their military equipment] in meant they were coming to conquer you and you had better surrender or there would be consequences.  Jesus would be that conquering King whom they rejected and those that did not repent would be desolated at His coming through the Roman armies in the events of AD 67 – AD 70.

In Matthew 3:7 John makes it clear that the kingdom that was at hand would be manifested in an AD 70 “about to be” punishment or wrath that would come upon them,

“When John saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming to him to be baptized, he said to them, ‘You snakes—who told you that you could escape from the punishment God is about to send?’” (Mt. 3:7GNT)

The Smith’s Literal Translation also correctly translates mello in Matthew 3:7 as, “…the wrath about to come?”             

John continues with the language of a first century imminent judgment coming upon the Pharisees,

“Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees.  Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (Mt. 3:10)

And that this imminent judgment includes an eschatological harvest is made clear in verse 12,

“His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”

The “winnowing fork” was a tool to be used at the end of the harvest – so this is a consummative or eschatological “not yet” judgment John is describing that was imminent.  Jesus likewise places the harvest resurrection, gathering, or judgment to take place at the end of the old covenant age in their contemporary “this generation” (Mt. 13:39-43/Mt. 24:3, 31-34).

Here in Matthew 3:2-12 John is predicting an imminent first century “at hand” Messianic “Kingdom” that would manifest itself in a judgment upon Jerusalem in which some would be gathered to be burned and judged while the remnant would be gathered into the barn or the Messianic Kingdom to inherit eternal life.  John is laying out the eschatology of Isaiah 40 in a vey clear way in which there would be both an imminent judgment and yet salvation for Israel to experience at the hands of the Messiah.

John the Baptist – Malachi 3-4

Luke and Jesus inform us that John was also the “Elijah” who came to “prepare the way” of the judgment and salvation of Israel found in Malachi 3-4 (cf. Lk. 1:16-17; Mt. 11:7-15).

“Behold, I send my messenger (John as Elijah), and he will prepare the way before me (Christ). And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple (in judgment – at Christ’s Second Coming); and the messenger of the [New] covenant (Christ) in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire…”

“For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble. The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the Lord of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch. But for you who fear my name, the SUN of Righteous-ness shall rise with healing in its rays/wings. You shall go out … leaping like calves from the stall… Behold, I will send you Elijah (John) the prophet before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes. And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction.”

Malachi 3-4 predicts TWO messengers: 1) John being the eschatological Elijah preparing the way for 2) the Second Coming of Jesus as the Messiah fulfilling and bringing to maturity the new covenant promises.

“The day” that is “coming” is the Second Coming which is described here not only as “the great and awesome day of the Lord,” but also as the “Sun of Righteousness” “rising” or manifesting Himself with healing rays for the righteous and yet burning the unrepentant.

Premillennial Zionist Michael Brown writes of rabbis seeing this as Messianic:

“According to the famous medieval Jewish commentaries of Radak (David Kimchi) and Mesudat David, “the Lord” refers to none other than “King Messiah.”  However, neither of these commentators took sufficient note of the fact that the Messiah was to come to the Temple that stood in Malachi’s day (and note also that it is called “his Temple”—pointing clearly to the divine nature of the “Lord” spoken of here).  I ask you, did this happen?  If it did, then the Messiah must have come before the Temple was destroyed in 70 C.E.; if not, God’s Word failed.”[57]

Just as in Daniel 7:13-14 (cf. OG LXX) and Daniel 9:24-27, Messiah had to come not just before the second temple’s destruction in AD 70, but He would be very active in its destruction – coming upon the clouds to desolate it!  This is what is deliberately missed by Futurist and Premillennial Zionist Dr. Michael Brown.  The coming of God/Messiah in the judgment of Malachi 3:1-5 is further described in the next chapter as the “great and awesome day of the Lord” of which John as Elijah came to prepare the way of (Mal. 4:5)!

At least Premillennialist John Gill points out what Michael Brown is afraid of, and that is not only was Malachi 4:5 a Messianic text but, according to him, it was fulfilled at Christ’s spiritual coming in AD 70:

“Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord; that is, before the coming of Christ the son of David, as the Jews themselves own [cf. T. Bab. Eruvin, fol. 43. 2. & Gloss. in ib.]…[being] the first coming of Christ, reaching to the destruction of Jerusalem: John the Baptist, his forerunner, the Elijah here spoken of, came proclaiming wrath and terror to impenitent sinners; Christ foretold and denounced ruin and destruction to the Jewish nation, city, and temple; and the time of Jerusalem’s destruction was a dreadful day indeed, such a time of affliction as had not been from the creation, Matthew 24:21 and the Talmud interprets [cf. T. Bab. Sabbat, fol 118. 1.] this of the sorrows of the Messiah, or which shall be in the days of the Messiah [and Gill points out elsewhere some believing “days of Messiah” would be 40 years, and they were – AD 27 – AD 67 or AD 30 – AD 70 MJS].”[58]

John Lightfoot sees the connection with John as the fulfillment of Elijah and the “wrath” of God coming in Matthew 3:7ff. and Malachi 4 as Christ coming spiritually in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70:

 “…To fly from the wrath to come.] These words respect the very last words of the Old Testament, “lest I smite the earth with a curse,” Mal. 4:[6]; and denote the most miserable destruction of the nation, and now almost ready to fall upon them.”[59]

Adam Clarke is most helpful and the clearest that Malachi 4:2 is Christ’s spiritual coming in the events of AD 67 – AD 70:

“Malachi 4:1:  Behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven – The destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans.  And all the proud – This is in reference to Mal 3:15 of the preceding chapter. The day that cometh shall burn them up – Either by famine, by sword, or by captivity. All those rebels shall be destroyed.  It shall leave them neither root nor branch – A proverbial expression for total destruction. Neither man nor child shall escape.

Malachi 4:2:  You that fear my name – The persons mentioned in the sixteenth verse of the preceding chapter, ye that look for redemption through the Messiah.  The Sun of righteousness – The Lord Jesus, the promised Messiah; the Hope of Israel.  With healing in his wings – As the sun, by the rays of light and heat, revives, cheers, and fructifies the whole creation, giving, through God, light and life everywhere; so Jesus Christ, by the influences of his grace and Spirit, shall quicken, awaken, enlighten, warm, invigorate heal, purify, and refine every soul that believes in him, and, by his wings or rays, diffuse these blessings from one end of heaven to another; everywhere invigorating the seeds of righteousness, and withering and drying up the seeds of sin. The rays of this Sun are the truths of his Gospel, and the influences of his Spirit. And at present these are universally diffused.

And ye shall go forth – Ye who believe on his name shall go forth out of Jerusalem when the Romans shall come up against it. After Cestius Gallus had blockaded the city for some days, he suddenly raised the siege. The Christians who were then in it, knowing, by seeing Jerusalem encompassed with armies, that the day of its destruction was come, when their Lord commanded them to flee into the mountains, took this opportunity to escape from Jerusalem, and go to Pella, in Coelesyria; so that no Christian life fell in the siege and destruction of this city.”[60]

The Church has argued about whether Malachi 4:5 is the Second Coming of Christ or His spiritual coming in the judgment through the Roman armies in AD 70. Again, the truth is that both views are true at the same time.

My friend and partner in our “Preterist Apologetics” videocast has written an entire book on the eschatology of John the Baptist and its connection to the salvation and restoration of Israel by Paul in Romans 11,

“So, The Voice – John – was to prepare the way of the Lord who was coming to save His people.  Is this not the salvation of Romans 11?  That salvation would arrive at the Day of the Lord.  It would be at the Lord’s coming to reward His saints.   It is when, “all flesh shall see the salvation of the Lord” (Isaiah 40:5).  That might have suggested to Paul’s readers that the salvation of the Gentiles was to have been expected and accepted, as well as conveying to the Gentiles in his audience that they were not being saved “independently” of Israel, but as a part of God’s faithfulness to Israel (Cf. Romans 1:16-17 / 15:16-27).  Either way, Paul’s citation of Isaiah 40 in Romans 11 should cue us into the fact that the coming of the Lord that he was anticipating was not the Incarnation.”[61]

And again,

“So, if John was Elijah – and he was – then the relationship between his ministry and Romans 11:25f. cannot fail to influence our understanding of Romans 11.  Elijah was to come and, “restore all things” (Matthew 17:11).  That most assuredly included Israel, did it not?  In Romans 11, wasn’t Paul talking about the restoration of Israel?  How is it possible for us to divorce John’s ministry of restoration – particularly in light of Luke 1 as noted above – from Paul’s anticipation of restoration?  But again, if John’s ministry of restoration and Paul’s eschatological hope for Israel in Romans 11 are the same, then we must sharpen our focus on the time frame, the context and nature of that restoration.”[62]

John would “restore all things” (Mt. 17:11) because his ministry was to pave  the way for or to point to the Messiah / Jesus who would come in AD 70 to “restore,” transform, and raise Israel from her old covenant natural and weak state, to her mature new covenant glorious state.

Having made the connections between Isaiah 40 with John the Baptist’s eschatology and Paul’s in Romans 11, we should briefly see how and to what event Jesus, John in Revelation, and Peter apply Isaiah 40.

Jesus and Isaiah 40   

Just as John the Baptist understood the judgment and salvation predicted in Isaiah 40 would be something imminently fulfilled for first century Israel (not modern so-called “Israel”) at the coming of the Messiah in AD 70, Jesus likewise appeals to Isaiah 40:10 [along with Isa. 62:11] in Matthew 16:27-28 to describe His coming in judgment to “reward” as something that would take place in the lifetimes of those in the crowd that were listening to Him:

“Behold the Lord God comes with might, and his arm rules for him; behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him.” (Isa. 40:10)

“For the Son of Man is going to come [Greek mello – “about to come” YLT] with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has doneTruly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” (Mt. 16:27-28)

Once again, we find the Church divided on what the “coming” of Christ is in (16:27) – some say it’s the Second Coming event while others argue it was His AD 70 spiritual coming in judgment upon Jerusalem–of which some listening to Him would experience.  Both “orthodox” views are correct and have formed Full Preterism.

John in Revelation and Isaiah 40

John in Revelation 22:10-12 is also drawing upon Isaiah 40:10 and Isaiah 62:11 when He records our Lord saying,

“Look, I am coming soonMy reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done.”

Peter and Isaiah 40

Peter in 1 Peter 1:23-24 quotes from Isaiah 40:6-9 which concerns the judgment and salvation John was the “voice” to prepare the say of,

“All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of the grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord remains forever.”

Here in the immediate context of chapter 1, Peter has already identified that they were born again in anticipating the “inheritance” and “salvation” ready to be revealed in the last time” of which the OT prophets prophesied to come [which would include the salvation of Isa. 40] not in their day and time but in Peter and his contemporary’s day and time (1:3-5; 10-12).  He goes on to explain that the judgment of the living and the dead [thus resurrection of the dead] was “at hand” and thus approaching in the coming events of AD 70 (1 Pet. 4:5-7, 17).

Having gone thoroughly over Paul’s OT sources in Romans 9-11 and showing their AD 70 connections and fulfillments, we now turn back to Romans 11:25-26 and address some exegetical details.

“I don’t want you to be unaware of this mystery,…: (Rms. 11:25)

Paul within Romans itself tells us what this “mystery” [Grk. musterion] is,

“…according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of the faith…” (Rms. 16:25-26; cf. Cols. 1:25-26)

The “mystery” is the new covenant gospel of Jesus whereby there was now Jew / Gentile union “in Christ” that was once hid in the OT, but by Paul’s day and through his unique “stewardship,” had already been preached to “all nations” throughout the Roman Empire.

The immediate context also makes the “mystery” the Jew / Gentile union in Christ the meaning since Paul has just been explaining [through the metaphor of the olive tree] how Gentiles were being engrafted into Israel’s promises (vss. 17-24).

The order is the same in Ephesians 2-3. In Ephesians 2 Paul describes the remnant Jews and the believing Gentiles being brought together in union using the metaphor of forming one new man, body, and temple [instead of an olive tree] (2:11-22).   This is then followed up by Paul in chapter 3 describing this process as the “mystery” prophesied in the OT and of which he is a “steward” (3:1-6).

“That a partial hardening has happened to Israel…” (Rms. 11:25)

Pastor David Curtis writes of this “partial” hardening as being,

“…adverbial and modifies “has happened,” not hardening.  It should read, “A hardening has happened in part to Israel.”  The hardening isn’t partial, in that it has happened to part of Israel.  The remnant is not hardened.  This is what Paul said in:  “What then?  What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened” (Rms. 11:7).  Please notice that the “elect” obtained it, and the rest, which is Israel, were hardened.  So only part of Israel is hardened, and that part is the great majority of them.

He’s just saying that the hardening is not complete.  There are some who have been saved out of their total depravity and brought to the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.  In other words, he’s saying the same thing that he said in verse 5:  “In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God’s gracious choice” (Rms. 11:5).[63]

Until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in” (Rms. 11:25)

Again, Pastor Curtis is helpful here on the meaning of “until,”

“The Greek phrase used here is achri hos. This phrase means:  “even unto a point.”  Thayer says, “It is used of things that actually occurred and up to the beginning of which something continued.”  It is a point of referenceand not a point of cessation [and gives plenty of examples such as Acts 7:17-18 / Ex. 1:6-9, 12, 20; Gals. 3:19].”

“So we could read our text, “a hardening has happened to part of Israel even unto to the point where the fulness of the Gentiles has come in.”  So it is not saying that Israel’s hardening stops when the fulness of the Gentiles happens.”[64]

The Greek word here for “fullness” is pleroma and in this context it is pointing to when Christ comes out of Zion [His Second Coming in AD 70] to forgive and or fill with His presence–thus bring to completeness or full maturity the Jew / Gentile body.  Then “all Israel” will be “saved” and or restored in her new covenant form.  A similar meaning can be found in Ephesians 1:23,

“…God gave Him [Christ] as head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness [pleroma] of Him who fills all in all.”

The eschatological goal of Christ’s coming or parousia [presence] according to Paul [of which he says some of his contemporaries would live to or “we shall not all die” before experiencing 1 Cor. 15:51 / Mt. 16:27-28]  is “…that God may be all [Father, Son, and Holy Spirit] in all [Jew / Gentile]” (1 Cor. 15:23, 28).  Paul even uses “mystery” in connection with Christ’s parousia at the sound of the “trumpet” which unites the OT dead ones of Israel with the Gentiles in Christ.

I think another good description of this is found in Revelation 21-22.  At the “soon” AD 70 Second Coming of Jesus we see the New Jerusalem [the Bride / Church] in Her mature form and she is filled with God’s presence.  The mission has not come to a termination, but to a mature state for since AD 70 she has been inviting sinners to enjoy the fullness of God’s presence and to come through the gates for spiritual “healing” and to partake of the Tree of Life and Living Waters (Rev. 21—22:2, 17).

Concluding the Restoration and Resurrection of Romans 8:18-23YLT / 9—11:15-27 / 13:11-12

We have seen that Paul identifies the Jew / Gentile “creation” of men groaning from the decay of inward sin and spiritual death that came through Adam “eagerly waiting” for the “redemption of the [corporate] body” that was “about to” come in AD 70. What was “about to be” fulfilled was the “appointed time” (Rms. 8:18) [Greek Kairos] of Daniel 9:24-27 LXX and Daniel 12:2-4, 7 LXX which connects this “redemption of the body” with the resurrection and destruction of the second temple in AD 70 foretold by Daniel.  We also noted how Romans 8:18-23 is the second exodus event and the parallels between Romans 8:18YLT—13:11-12 makes it abundantly clear that Paul’s eschatology of the imminent “appointed time” in Romans is that of Jesus’ “appointed time” in the Olivet Discourse.

From there we took a deep dive at all of the OT passages Paul is referencing in Romans 9 – 11.  Here we saw:

Most of these passages spoke of two Jerusalem’s or Israel’s – one judged at the same time the other is saved.  In some passages one is judged for persecuting and putting to death the righteous remnant martyrs – who are raised when the other would be judged.  Jesus places this event to be in His generation – when they would sing at the feast of Passover, “blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord” (Mt. 23:30-39).

As in Daniel 9:24-27 and 12:2-7, the context of many of these OT passages connects the restoration and resurrection of Israel to be at the same time as the judgment of Israel between AD 67 – AD 70 when God “laid a trap” for “hardened” Israel to experience “wrath.”

The pattern both in Romans 9-11 and within the context of these OT texts is that the righteous remnant is saved and “survives” the “last days” “day of the Lord” in AD 70 and continues preaching the gospel to the nations in the new creation.  In other words, the end of world history is never the subject of any of these OT passages.

We spent a long time on Paul’s reference to Isaiah 40 and took a deep dive into John’s eschatology since he was “the voice” to prepare the way of Isaiah’s judgment and salvation.  We also noticed that Jesus, John in Revelation, and Peter appeal to Isaiah 40 and see its judgment and salvation as being imminently fulfilled by AD 70.

Then we returned to do an exegesis of Romans 11:25-27 by demonstrating that Paul’s Jew / Gentile “mystery” was brought to “fullness” or to a complete and mature state in the new covenant at Christ’s Second Coming in AD 70–when He came out from Zion to indwell and take away the sin of the Church.  “In this way or through this manner” “all Israel [was] saved” and experienced “life from the dead” (resurrection).

In conclusion there was perfect and beautiful harmony between the imminent time indicators of Romans 8:18-23YLT and Romans 13:11-12 that could easily be applied to the same “salvation” and or corporate body resurrection and coming of Christ in Romans 11:15-27.  And if one couldn’t see that beautiful harmony and contextual flow from Romans 8:18-23YLT—13:11-12, the OT texts Paul is appealing to in Romans 9 – 11 also pointed to the time of Israel’s restoration and resurrection would be the same time she would be judged in AD 70 for the sin of her bloodguilt.

Paul, in Romans 8:18-23YLT and 13:11-12, awaited the “about to be” corporate bodily resurrection of the new covenant creation/body, and he was waiting for her members to “awake” out of the “hour” of “sleep” of Daniel 12:1-4, 7-13.  Paul not only sees the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 as “about to be” fulfilled in Acts 24:15, but he also sees it imminently fulfilled in these crucial eschatological chapters in Romans as well.

Paul expected some of his contemporaries to be alive and witness the coming of Christ and the resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15

Space does not permit me to give an in-depth exegesis of every verse of 1 Corinthians 15, but I will address much of it.  For a detailed exegesis of 1 Corinthians 15, see my co-authored book, House Divided Bridging the Gap in Reformed Eschatology and David Green’s exegesis.

Before beginning, I think we need to stick with just the basics on what we have learned so far and ask the following questions and make the following points:

1). No one disputes that the resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15 is the same resurrection as Daniel 12:2-13.

2). Having established this, we have learned from the immediate context of Daniel 12 that this resurrection would be at the same time as the tribulation and the “time of the end” – that is, “all these things” would be fulfilled together and during a 3 ½ years period of time “when the power of the holy people would be completely shattered” (Dan. 12:7).  As we will see below, Paul expected the eschatological “end” and resurrection of Daniel 12 in 1 Corinthians 15 to take place within the lifetime of some of those he wrote to in Corinth.

3). Most agree that Jesus’ teaching on the “tribulation” and “end of the age” in Matthew 24 is the same “tribulation” and “time of the end” found in Daniel 12:1-4.  And yet Jesus indicates that the end of the old covenant age and tribulation would be fulfilled during the times of the Gentiles or the 3 ½ years period of AD 67 – AD 70 in His contemporary “this generation” (Mt. 24:3, 21f.; Lk. 21:20-24, 31-32).

So then if Matthew 24/Luke 21 is equivalent to the same time frame and events as Daniel 12:1-7, and Daniel 12 is the same resurrection as 1 Corinthians 15, lets break this down more and get a logical visual.

A (Mt. 24/Lk. 21)

B (Daniel 12:1-7)

C (1 Cor. 15)

If A (Mt. 24/Lk. 21) is = to B (Daniel 12:1-7, 13)
Tribulation as never before  24:21-22 Tribulation as never before 12:1
Evangelism 24:14 Leading others to righteousness 12:3
End of the [OC] age 24:3, 14 Time of the end 12:4
Resurrection & inheritance of the kingdom 24:31; 13:43; Lk. 21:31-32 Resurrection & or inheritance of the kingdom 12:2-3, 13/Mt. 13:43
Jerusalem surrounded, trodden down/times of the Gentiles         (AD 67 – AD 70) Lk. 21:20, 24 Consummation – 3 ½ years when power of the holy people is shattered 12:7
And if B (Daniel 12:1-7, 13) is = to C (1 Cor. 15)
Resurrection unto eternal life 12:2 Resurrection unto incorruptibility or immortality 15:52-53
time of the end 12:4 time of the end 15:24
When the power [the Mosaic OC Law] of the holy people is completely shattered 12:7 Victory over “the [Mosaic OC] Law” 15:26
At the “end” of the OC age, OT dead would be raised at the same time the NT righteous living would shine in the kingdom   12:2-3, 13 If the dead of the OT are not raised, neither would those who died in Christ be raised & living unforgiven 15:15-18
Then A (Mt. 24/Lk. 21) is = to C (1 Cor. 15)
Christ to come (Greek: parousia) at sound of a trumpet 24:27-31 Christ to come (Greek: parousia) at sound of a trumpet 15:23, 52
“The end” (Greek telos, the goal) 24:3, 14 “The end” (Greek telos, the goal) 15:24
Kingdom (goal reached)                Lk. 21:31-32 Kingdom consummation (goal reached) 15:24
All prophecy fulfilled at this point Lk. 21:22 All prophecy fulfilled at this point 15:54-55
Victory over the Mosaic Law/temple 24:1 Victory over the Mosaic Law 15:55-56
Same contemporary “you” or “we” 24:2ff. Same contemporary “you” or “we” 15:51-52
“All” of the elect (even the dead) gathered (or raised) in the kingdom 24:31; Lk. 21:28-32 “The [OT] dead” raised with the dead “in Christ” 15:15-18
Two or more things that are equal to another thing are also equal to each other
Matthew 24/Luke 21 Daniel 12:1-7, 13 1 Corinthians 15
Gather/raise “all” (dead & living) the elect at “end” of OC age 24:3, 31 OT dead raised with NT saints at the end of OC age 12:2-4, 13/Mt. 13:43 OT dead raised with NT dead & living at “the end” of the OC age 15:15-18, 24, 51
All OT prophecy fulfilled when Jeru-salem surrounded & times of Gentiles (3 ½ yrs.) fulfilled Lk. 21:22-24 –              AD 67 – AD 70 Judgment and resurrection of the dead fulfilled at the end of the OC age, in a 3 ½ year period when Israel’s power shattered Resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3, 13; Hosea 13:14 and Isaiah 25:8 fulfilled at the end of OC age & in the lifetime of Paul’s 1st cent. audience          15:51, 54-55

We have also learned up to this point the following:

4). A Christian orthodox position on the resurrection of Daniel 12 involves an “already not yet” progressive, spiritual, corporate and covenantal resurrection taking place between AD 27/30 – AD 70, whereby the new covenant body of Israel was being raised out from the death of the old covenant body of Israel by AD 70.  Can a progressive, corporate bodily resurrection be seen in 1 Corinthians 15?

5). As we have just seen, the Apostle Paul has elsewhere taught under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 was “about to be” fulfilled or was “at hand” (Acts 24:15YLT; Rom. 8:18-23YLT; Rom. 13:11-12).  So the burden of proof would be to prove that Paul’s “ONE” resurrection hope which he had in Acts and Romans has now turned into two.

Therefore, as we approach the resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15, we want to see if this critical chapter also involves what we have found thus far in Paul’s teaching on the resurrection. That is, does 1 Corinthians 15 teach a corporate body resurrection that was in the process of taking place in Paul’s day, which he taught under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit would be fulfilled within the lifetime of some of his contemporaries?  We believe so.

There are several exegetical observations which demonstrate that Paul’s eschatology in 1 Corinthians 15 is not a depiction of a biological casket-type resurrection for all men that will occur at the end of world history:

1).  The parallels and analogy of faith with Matthew 24 demonstrate a first century generation fulfillment of 1 Corinthians 15.

2).  Paul’s argumentation and use of logic (modus tollens) demonstrate that those who denied the resurrection of the dead at Corinth were not denying the resurrection of Christ or the doctrine of resurrection in general, but a resurrection for a particular group (the old covenant dead of Israel).

3).  Paul’s use of the present passive indicative, as already in the process of being fulfilled, demonstrates it is not an end of time biological resurrection.

4).  Paul’s use of familiar corporate body words and phrases within the Corinthian letters and within his other epistles demonstrates that an individual, biological corpse resurrection is wrong.

5).  Paul’s appeal to, and the contexts of, Hosea 13 and Isaiah 25 demonstrate that an end of the world biological resurrection is not in view.

6).  There would be no victory over “the death” until victory over the Mosaic Torah, “the law,” was reached.  This does not fit within a futurist framework, but does within the Full Preterist framework, because “the law” (administration of death) was “soon” to vanish at the end of the old covenant age in AD 70 and thus was truly imminent in Paul’s day.

The Parallels – Analogy of Faith

Again, let’s look at those parallels which demonstrate that Paul’s eschatology here in 1 Corinthians 15 is that of Jesus’ in Matthew 24/Luke 21:

  1. Christ to come (Greek parousia) – Matthew 24:27 = 1 Corinthians 15:23
  2. His people to be gathered/changed – Matthew 24:31 = 1 Corinthians 15:51-52
  3. Comes with the sound of a trumpet – Matthew 24:31 = 1 Corinthians 15:52
  4. To be “the end” (Greek telos– the goal) – Matthew 24:3, 14 = 1 Corinthians 15:24
  5. Kingdom consummation (goal reached) – Luke 21:30-32 = 1 Corinthians 15:24
  6. All prophecy fulfilled at this time – Luke 21:22 = 1 Corinthians 15:54-55
  7. Victory over the law/temple – Matthew 24:1 = 1 Corinthians 15:55-56
  8. Same contemporary “you” or “we” – Matthew 24:2ff. = 1 Corinthians 15:
    51-52

The classic Amillennial and Historic Premillennial positions agree with us that the above parallels support the fact that Paul’s eschatological one hope, as expressed in 1 Corinthians 15, is the same teaching and resurrection developed by Jesus in the Olivet Discourse.

However, we also agree with Partial Preterists that Matthew 24 was fulfilled in AD 70.

Therefore, I can use the following historical “reformed and always reforming,” and Scriptural “the Scripture alone” / “analogy of faith” argument:

Major Premise:  The “Parousia,” resurrection “gathering,” and “trumpet” call at “the end” of the age of Matthew 24 is the same eschatological “Parousia,” resurrection “change,” and “trumpet” call at “the end” of the age for Paul in 1 Corinthians 15.  Paul’s eschatology is the eschatology of Jesus (Classic Amillennialism and Historic Premilllenialism)!

Minor Premise:  But the “Parousia”, “gathering,” and “trumpet” call at “the end” of the age of Matthew 24 was fulfilled spiritually in Jesus’ contemporary generation at the end of the old covenant age in AD 70 (Partial Preterism, mostly Postmillennial).

Conclusion: Therefore, the one and the same “Parousia,” resurrection “gathering/change,” and “trumpet” call at “the end” in 1 Corinthians 15 and Matthew 24 was fulfilled spiritually in Jesus’ generation and thus at the end of the old covenant age in AD 70 (Full Preterism).

1 Corinthians 15:1-15 – ONE Gospel Preached

Most futurist commentaries on 1 Corinthians 15 merely assume that the resurrection of the dead deniers at Corinth denied the resurrection of Jesus and the resurrection in general.  It is more than difficult to see how Paul could have still referred to them as “saints,” etc. if they believed such!  Most who take this position believe Paul’s appeal to the 500 who witnessed Jesus’ resurrection is the beginning of his correction because the group rejected Jesus’ resurrection.

This view has many problems, which we will cover shortly, but in reality Paul lays forth the historical resurrection of Christ in the beginning of the resurrection conflict at Corinth NOT because the resurrection deniers at Corinth denied Jesus’ resurrection, but because the Gentile Christians were pridefully and ignorantly denying the resurrection of a Jewish sect (the OC dead ones who had died prior to Christ).  This denial was similar to what some Gentile believers were saying about Israel and the Church at Rome (see Romans 11).  One group or party was denying the resurrection of the other.  The schisms of the various groups at Corinth (1 Cor. 1:10 – 3:23) reach their main conflict here in chapter 15, which Paul now desires to set straight. Paul, being the leader of the erring Gentile party who boasted of themselves and Paul as their leader, now humbles himself among the apostles (vss. 7-9) in order to correct this arrogant spirit. He ties his gospel message in as being ONE with the Jewish leaders (vss. 11-12).  The resurrection of Jesus and the gospel message was united and agreed upon in the preaching of Christ’s resurrection by all the parties!  Paul will use this agreement to make his case against them!

Perhaps some of their misunderstandings and arrogance began as early as Acts 18 when they heard Paul say, “Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean.  From now on I will go to the Gentiles.”  I believe that a misunderstanding of Paul here and perhaps some of his teaching that Gentiles were one body with the Jews, and that a true Jew was one who had been circumcised of the heart, led to a replacement theology and denial of an old covenant Jewish (the dead ones) eschaton / resurrection. After humbling himself and showing his solidarity with the Jewish leaders in preaching the same doctrine, Paul now begins to correct their error.

 1 Corinthians 15:12-19Paul’s Modus Tollens form of Argumentation

To further prove that the deniers of the resurrection of the dead were not denying Christ’s resurrection or the resurrection for all in general, we need to take a look at Paul’s form of argumentation. The Futurist view makes no contextual sense if you follow Paul’s argumentation and the logic he uses. Paul uses a familiar modus tollens or “if then” logical argument.  That is, “If P, then Q, and therefore not P.”

1)  “If P”

“If there is no resurrection of the dead ones…”

2)   Then Q”

If the dead are not rising (and will rise)…then not even Christ has been raised.

If the dead are not rising (and will rise)…then our preaching is useless…

If the dead are not rising (and will rise)…then and so is your faith [useless].

If the dead are not rising (and will rise)…then we are found to be false witnesses about God.

If the dead are not rising (and will rise)…then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost.

If the dead are not rising (and will rise)…then your and my baptism (of suffering & martyrdom) on the part of the dead is meaningless.

If the dead are not rising (and will rise)…then the Father is subject to Christ.

If the dead are not rising (and will rise)…then some of you are ignorant of God.

If the dead are not rising (and will rise)…then why are some undergoing a baptism (of suffering & persecution) on behalf of the dead?

If the dead are not rising (and will rise)…then there will be no resurrection for anyone and we all might as well eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die.

3) “Therefore, not P”

Therefore, your (resurrection of the dead deniers) premise that the resurrection of the (OC) dead will not take place is false (or “therefore, not P”).

Paul’s argument is also known as reduction ad absurdum.  This form of argument demonstrates that a statement (the dead will not rise) is false by showing that a false, untenable, undesirable or absurd result follows from its acceptance.  Again, Paul is using things he has in common with them and things that they would affirm in order to overthrow and show how absurd their false premise actually was in saying that the dead ones would not rise.

The Resurrection of the Dead Error Identified

Since the Corinthians believed in Christ’s resurrection and a resurrection for those who had died “in Christ,” then who is left to deny a resurrection for?  In short, the error at Corinth was an extreme view (or a hyper-dispensational or pre-mature replacement theology of sorts) that divided up the people of God in extreme ways.  They could not reconcile how the dead prior to Christ’s arrival could be raised into or with the body of Christ of which they were now a part.  In short, they were denying a key ingredient to “the better resurrection” that the writer to the Hebrews outlines:

“Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they [the OT or old covenant dead] might obtain a better resurrection:   And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment:  They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;  (of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.  And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they (“the [OT/OC] dead”) without us (the NT/NC saints “in Christ”) should not be made perfect” (Heb. 11:35-40).

The resurrection of the dead deniers at Corinth saw the “better things” for those who were “in Christ” (dead or alive – their side of the cross), but could not reconcile how the OT or old covenant dead (on the other side of the cross) could participate in a resurrection with those who had died in Christ or how they could be “made perfect” together in the body of Christ.  They had the new covenant “better things,” and thus the OT or old covenant dead were left without participation in the better resurrection to come; this was their reasoning and error.  They did not deny the doctrine of the resurrection in general, just the all-ness or oneness (with all of God’s of people) to the resurrection.

Extreme views of excluding even the righteous dead were not uncommon, even among the Jews.  Some Jews believed that anyone who died outside of the Promised Land would not participate in the resurrection:

“The Talmud records speculations on the various matters connected with the process of Resurrection.  There was a firm belief that the momentous event would take place in the Holy Land.  Some Rabbi took the extreme view that only they who were interred there would share in the future life.  ‘Those who die outside the land of Israel will not live again; as it is said, “I will set delight in the land of the living.”  (Ezek. 26:20)—those who die in the land of My delight will live again, but they who do not die there will not’…” “Even a Cananite maidservant in the land of Israel is assured of inheriting the World to Come’…”[65]

So, in this extreme view, those righteous dead who died outside of being “in the land” would not participate in Israel’s corporate resurrection.  Similarly, some at Corinth took Paul’s teaching – that all prophecy or all the promises of God were fulfilled spiritually “in Christ” (2 Cor. 1:20) – too far in that they concluded the resurrection could only take place for those who believed “in Christ” (their side of the cross), and all others perished outside of being in Him.

Therefore, since the old covenant dead perished and were not present to place their faith in Christ, then they couldn’t be a part of the spiritual new covenant body that was in the process of being raised in their day. They lost sight of the great cloud of witnesses who saw Christ’s day and were glad and would thus share in the “better resurrection” with them.

According to both of these extreme Jewish or Christian views, men such as Moses had no resurrection hope but perished outside of being either “in the land” or outside of being “in Christ.”

We see a similar inability to reconcile the OT promises made to Israel and how they would be fulfilled in the NT body of Christ coming from modern day Dispensational Zionists who think there are opposing theologies between the OT and NT.  There are two completely separate bodies of believers or peoples of God needing two separate comings of Christ, programs of salvation, etc.  Of particular interest to our discussion here is the comparison of dividing the OT dead from those who died “in Christ.” Dispensationalists such as Charles Ryrie and Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer argue in the following ways:

“Those who died before Christ’s first advent” are not among “the dead in Christ” (Charles Ryrie).[66]

“The Old Testament saints were not part of the New Creation in Christ,” and “the nation of Israel sustains no relation to the resurrection of Christ” (Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer).[67]

And again, per Chafer, the dead OT saints were not “in the new federal headship of the resurrected Christ…”[68]

This sounds like elements of the resurrection of the dead deniers’ doctrine, and confusion was picked up from Dispensational teaching.

In 1937 William Everett Bell argued against Pretribulationalism, providing evidence that at Christ’s Second Coming (after the Tribulation period) all the righteous dead were to be raised.  The ever-evolving pre-tribulational rapture theory countered with a two-resurrection view – one for those who died “in Christ” at the “rapture” “coming” and one for those who died outside of being “in Christ” (OT dead not “in Christ”) seven years later (after the Tribulation) at the Second Coming.  The resurrection of the dead deniers also divided God’s people up in a way that was contrary to the teachings of Paul, except that for them the best way to avoid the problem (which they created for themselves) was to entirely deny resurrection for the OT dead and only accept a resurrection for those “in Christ.”

These examples (one within the Talmud and modern ones) should be sufficient to demonstrate how it could be possible for some to miss how the OT dead could or even would participate in the salvation of the ONE NT or new covenant body of Christ.

Romans 11 & 1 Corinthians 15

Perhaps the best parallel to what is taking place among the Gentile deniers of the resurrection of the dead at Corinth can be found in Romans 11.  Paul has to explain that the Gentiles did not completely replace old covenant Israel and that there remained a future eschaton and expectation of fulfillment for her. And this future is explained in such a way that without God fulfilling those promises to old covenant Israel, there would be no forgiveness of sin or resurrection life for the Gentiles (cf. Rms. 11:13-27).  In Romans the Gentile arrogance against the Jews was illustrated by an olive tree, branches, and the root to demonstrate the solidarity of the Gentiles with Israel’s resurrection and covenant promises.  As we will see in our next point, Paul uses the illustration of the “first-fruits” harvest to connect the two.

1 Corinthians 15:20-28 – First fruits and Solidarity

Paul is going to now further his argument to connect Christ’s resurrection with that of Israel’s, by using the first-fruits analogy.  How could the Gentiles deny Israel’s role in the resurrection when they themselves (along with the believing Jews) were a part of the first fruits awaiting the harvest at Christ’s return (James 1:18, Rom. 8, Rev. 14)?  Paul’s resurrection hope was the “hope of Israel” and the harvest was Israel’s harvest of which they were blessed to be a part or grafted into.  To deny “the dead” or Israel’s future role in the resurrection/harvest was akin to theologically denying Christ’s role and their role at the end of the old covenant age / harvest.

First-fruits, Imminence & Analogy of Faith

Whenever the first fruits were offered up as a pledge, this was a symbol that not only the harvest was guaranteed, but that it was already ripe and being cut.  Paul uses this argument of Christ being the “first-fruits” resurrection to teach that He controls the destiny of Israel’s harvest (the dead), which Paul’s first century “we” audience would experience at “the end” of the old covenant age.

The imminence of this coming harvest judgment was first developed by John the Baptist.  He warned of an “about to” come wrath and punishment (Mt. 3:7GNT/SLT/WUESTNT).  His ax and winnowing fork were already in His hand – indicating that the judgment and end-time harvest would take place in some of their lifetimes (Mt. 3:10-12).

Jesus also taught a spiritual sowing and coming judgment / resurrection harvest which would take place at “the end” of His Jewish audiences’ “this age” (which was the old covenant age) in Matthew 13:39-43.

The first fruits and harvest resurrection and judgment of Revelation 7 and 14 was to be fulfilled “shortly” at Christ’s “soon” and “at hand” AD 70 Second Coming (Rev. 1:1—22:6-7, 10-12, 20).

Paul’s inspired teaching on an imminent harvest resurrection to take place at “the end” (of the old covenant age) is in harmony with the teaching and eschatology of John the Baptist, John the apostle and Jesus.

Major Premise:  The harvest judgment and resurrection of Matthew 3:7-12, Matthew 13:39-43, Revelation 7 & 14, and 1 Corinthians 15 is ONE and the same with the end of the age harvest resurrection event (Classic Amillennialism).

Minor Premise: But the harvest judgment and resurrection of Matthew 3:7-12, Matthew 13:39-43, and Revelation 7 & 14 was “about to be” fulfilled spiritually and “short” at the end of the old covenant age in AD 70 (Partial Preterism – mostly Postmillennialist).

Conclusion:  The ONE and the same harvest judgment and resurrection of Matthew 3:7-12, Matthew 13:39-43, Revelation 7 & 14, and 1 Corinthians 15 was fulfilled spiritually at the end of the old covenant age in AD 70 (Full Preterism).

First-fruits and the Nature of Jesus’ Resurrection Body

In Pauline theology, Christ is described as the “First” (first-fruit or first-born – Col. 1:18) from among the dead ones.  Since clearly Jesus was not the first to be raised from biological death, many futurists reason that this must then mean He was the first to be raised with a glorified and immortal body the third day, which they assert was different because it could walk through walls and could never biologically die again. However, there is no exegetical evidence that Jesus’ biological body that was raised the third day was substantially different (glorified) than the one He had before He was crucified.  Prior to His resurrection, He was able to walk on water, disappear in the midst of a crowd and transport / teleport Himself and a boat full of disciples instantly to the shore (defy physics).  So just because Jesus could appear or disappear after His resurrection, this does not prove that His body was different and that somehow at the end of history we too will get a “body” like His (that can defy the laws of physics, etc.).

The truth, however, is that Jesus’ body wouldn’t be glorified until some 40 days later at His ascension/enthronement and just prior to the giving of the Holy Spirit.  Therefore, the resurrection body of Christ that came out of the tomb is not the “same” or “first” immortal and “glorified” body that we allegedly will get at the end of world history.  If it was and ours will be just like it, then since Jesus still had His wounds, then will Christians be raised without limbs, deformities, etc.?

Yet Jesus was the “first” to overcome covenantal sin/death or spiritual separation that came from Adam the very day he sinned against God and was banished from His presence.  Jesus “became sin for us” – that is, He took the full curse (of separation) for His posterity, was raised and 40 days later glorified and restored into the “glory” and presence of the Father He had before the world began. Exactly how Jesus “became sin” and was separated (“My God why have you forsaken Me”) on our account contains concepts that we will not be able to fully understand (such as the incarnation and trinity), but it is what Scripture teaches nonetheless.  At Christ’s Parousia in AD 70, He restored God’s presence with the righteous dead (OC & NC) along with the living.

Therefore, the purpose of Jesus being raised from the dead on the third day was to be a sign (like all of His other miracles that pointed to a deeper spiritual truth) that validated He alone had conquered the curse (sin/death/separation) which came through Adam.  Jesus never came to conquer biological death for Christians.  Jesus repeatedly taught that those who believe on Him (alive or dead – Jn. 8:51; 11:25-26) would “never die.”  In other words, “never die” is synonymous with “eternal life” (i.e. spiritual life and existence in God’s presence).

In Adam or in Christ

Through the corporate body of Adam, “all” come into this world spiritually dead and separated from God (15:21-22), while through Christ and His overcoming of that death “all” of His corporate body or covenant posterity will be restored to God’s presence and have their sin completely taken away at His Parousia.  We will pick up Paul’s “in Adam” or “in Christ” doctrine and how he addresses these terms and concepts in verses 44-58 and Romans 5-8.

At His Parousia

Paul’s teaching on the Parousia (15:23) is not different than what Christ taught of His Parousia to take place in the AD 30 – AD 70 “this generation” (Mt. 24:27-34, 37).  The NT knows of only ONE hope or eschatological Parousia of Christ to bring about ONE eschatological “the end” or “end of the age,” and that was His Parousia to close “the end” or “end of the [OC] age” in AD 70.

Then Comes the End & the Kingdom

“The end” (15:24) here is consistent with Jesus’ teaching on the end of the old covenant “this age” to be fulfilled in the AD 30 – AD 70 “this generation” (Mt. 13:39-43; Mt. 24). It is Daniel’s “time of the end” (not the end of time) when the resurrection would occur at Jerusalem’s destruction in the three and a half years between AD 67 – AD 70 – i.e. “when the power of the holy people would be completely shattered” (Dan. 12:1-7).

Before we approach 1 Corinthians 15, Paul has already informed us that “the end” of the world was “shortened” and the end of the age was to take place in the lifetime of the Corinthians (cf. 1 Cor. 7:29, 31; 10:11).  The miraculous sign and revelatory gifts would confirm the Church until “the end” [of the old covenant age] or Day of the Lord (1 Cor. 1:4-8).

Paul taught that the new covenant Church age was an “age without end” (Eph. 3:20-21), so why would he here be teaching that he expected its end to take place within the lifetime of the Corinthians?  It is the old covenant age that is in view and indeed did pass away within the lifetime of Paul’s audience. The new covenant age was “about to” fully come in, and therefore the old covenant age was about to end (Eph. 1:21 WUESTNT).

The “increase” (that is the everlasting gospel) of Jesus’ government (that is His kingdom and thus His rule in the new covenant Messianic age) is also described as having “no end” in the OT (Isa. 9:7).

Concerning the timing of the consummation of the kingdom, per Daniel chapter seven, the kingdom would arrive in its fulfilled inherited form just after a time of severe persecution (Dan. 7:21) and at Christ’s Second Coming (Dan. 7:13, 18, 22).  Jesus informs us when Daniel’s prophecy would be fulfilled in Matthew 24.  He instructs His disciples that just after a severe persecution takes place, the surrounding of Jerusalem with armies (the abomination that causes desolation), and just prior to His Parousia the Kingdom would be inherited in the AD 30 – AD 70 “this generation” (Lk. 21:1-32).  How many consummations to the Messianic kingdom do Jesus and Paul teach?

Paul’s “end” here is connected to the end or fulfillment of the OT Mosaic “THE Law” which was the strength of sin in 1 Corinthians 15:55-56.  This is consistent with Jesus teaching that all that was written in the OT would be fulfilled in His generation (Lk. 21:22-32).

Christ’s Pre-Parousia Reign & His Enemies Placed Under His Feet

As David and Solomon’s reigns over Israel were 40 years, so too was Jesus’ pre-Parousia reign (roughly from AD 30 – AD 70).  Through the proclamation and power of the gospel, the power of the Holy Spirit given in the midst of imprisonment and persecutions, and the imprecatory prayers of the saints against their first century Jewish persecutors, Christ’s enemies were being placed under His feet and would perish at the end of the old covenant age. This is consistent with the teaching of the author to the Hebrews when He instructs us that the first century Jewish “enemies” to be “made his footstool” were “about to” experience a judgment of fire at Christ’s “in a very little while” AD 70 coming that could not be delayed (Heb. 10:13-37YLT).

Last Enemy “The Death” Was in the Process of Being Destroyed – The Present Passive Indicative – The Dead Were Rising

Note that death was in the process of BEING destroyed (present passive indicative):

“As a last enemy, [the] death is being abolished, for all things He put in subjection under His feet.”[69]

Gordon Fee in his work on 1 Corinthians puzzles over this:

“The grammar of this sentence is somewhat puzzling… The sentence literally reads, “’The last enemy is being destroyed.’”[70]

Others comment on the reality of the present tense here:

“It is difficult to do justice to the present passive καταργεῖται in trans-lation. As it stands, the Greek states, The last enemy is being annihilated, (namely) death (v. 26). It is arguable that Paul uses the present to denote the process of annihilation already set in motion by Christ’s (past) death and resurrection.”[71]

There is no confusion or difficulty over the last enemy of “the death” being destroyed during Paul’s day when we realize that this death was spiritual Adamic death, which was being magnified through Israel’s Torah – “the law” or “administration of death” (1 Cor. 15:56-57; 2 Cor. 3).  When the definite article “the” is in front of death, it is the spiritual death which came through Adam the very day he sinned that is in view.

However, there is understandable confusion and difficulty for the present tense of the death being destroyed for Futurists who assume that biological death and resurrection is the last enemy to be destroyed throughout 1 Corinthians 15.  How was biological death in the process of being destroyed in Paul’s day and up to ours for the last 2,000 years?!?  Are arms sticking up out of the graveyards today, with biological corpses in the process of rising and overcoming death?!?  Obviously, Paul has something else in view and Futurists do not understand him correctly.

Related to the problem for the Futurist of “the death” being in the process of “being destroyed” in Paul’s day is Paul’s use of the present passive indicative in other places in this chapter.

Although it is rare that a translation or commentator will point this issue out here in 15:26 (as I have cited above), they are all virtually silent when the present tense is being used in the following verses:

“But God is giving it a body” (v.32).

“…it is being…” (v. 38).

“…it is being raised in glory…” (43).

“…it is being raised in power…” (v. 43)

“…It is being sown a natural body, it is being raised a spiritual body…” (v. 43).

Since most think that the giving of a “body” and it being “sown” a natural body and then being raised in glory and power is allegedly addressing a biologically transformed individual body at Christ’s Parousia at the end world history, the present tense seems impossible.  But when the corporate body of Christ (the old covenant dead who had the gospel preached to them by Christ, those dead “in Christ” and those alive that constitute that ONE body) is in view, Paul’s theology/eschatology begins to make more sense.  Christ was still in the process of fulfilling OT Scripture and thus the new covenant corporate body was still being raised from and saved from the Adamic and Mosaic body of death.

Let’s not forget that Postmillennialists such as James Jordan and Kenneth Gentry believe the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 was a progressive spiritual resurrection between AD 30 – AD 70, with Jordan making it clear that this resulted in Daniel’s soul being raised out of the realm of the dead ones into God’s presence in AD 70.  And on the other hand, we have the Reformed orthodox position telling us that the resurrection of Daniel 12:2-3 and 1 Corinthians 15 is ONE and the SAME resurrection event.  Therefore, there is simply no reason to not see the progressive and spiritual resurrection that was taking place between AD 30 – AD 70 in both Daniel 12 and 1 Corinthians 15 as being the same “already and not yet” eschaton that resulted in souls being raised into God’s presence at Christ’s Parousia in AD 70.

According to Paul, the ONE resurrection hope of Israel had already broken in and there was an “already and not yet” reality to it (Rom. 11:7; Phil. 3).

That God May Be All in All

This is the eschatological goal of the NT – that “all” of God’s presence (the Father, Son and Spirit) would be in “all” of God’s people (the new covenant body of the Jew and Gentile).  The Holy Spirit’s presence was with the early Church through the charismata and in forming Christ’s image (a spiritual transformation) in the Church.  But it was only at the Second Coming of Jesus in AD 70 that the Father and the Son would then make their home within the Church (e.g. John 14:2-3, 23, 29; Lk. 17:20-21ff.; Rom. 8:18YLT; Col. 1:27).  At the “end” of Christ’s pre-Parousia reign, He would deliver the kingdom up to the Father and its process of being changed (2 Cor. 3) would be complete and consummated into its heavenly form.

The promise of God being “all in all” is the fulfillment of the feast of Tabernacles which we covered in Matthew 24:30-31 and Zechariah 12-14.

1 Corinthians 15:29-34 – Baptism on Behalf of the Dead

There has been much debate on the meaning of those being baptized on behalf of the dead (15:29).  However, the context would seem to indicate that this is a baptism of suffering that is in view (vss. 30-32; see also Lk. 12:50/Mt. 20:20-23; Mt. 23:29-36; Heb. 11:39-40).  Paul’s point and overall argument is that if the old covenant dead would not participate in the resurrection, then those Christians (such as himself) who were undergoing a baptism of suffering, persecution and death/martyrdom on their behalf (the ONE body of Christ that included the old covenant dead) were suffering and perishing in vain.  If the dead would not rise with those who had fallen asleep “in Christ,” then one might as well adopt the fatalistic mindset of “eat and drink, for tomorrow we die,” for there would be no resurrection for anyone.

1 Corinthians 15:35-58 – The Body (Greek soma) & Consistency within Pauline Theological Terms & Motifs

Much has been said and debated in recent years in regard to Paul’s use of the “body” (Greek soma) in his various epistles.  Many would insist that when Paul uses “body” in his letters to the various churches, he is mostly referring to an individualistic biological or fleshly body.  However, theologians such as Tom Holland are developing a proper cultural context in which Paul is writing with a Hebraic mindset, or within a worldview that is rooted in the OT Scriptures, which sees the body more in a corporate sense and context.  Holland does a great job developing this in Romans 5-7 and 1 Corinthians 1-12, but we find him inconsistent and dropping the ball in Romans 8 and 1 Corinthians 15.

Holland also has correctly observed that most of the time Paul uses particular theological phrases and terms in a consistent way in writing to the various churches, so that there is little confusion among them.[72]  And while we agree with this, we believe Holland is inconsistent with Paul’s consistent use of “the law”, “the sin,” and “the death” in relationship to being “in Adam” or “in Christ” when addressed in Romans 5-8, and also how he understands these terms and themes in 1 Corinthians 15.  In Romans, Paul does not use these terms and the “in Adam” / “in Christ” motif to be discussing biological death and resurrection, but rather corporate modes of existence.  We argue that Paul uses these terms and motifs virtually the same way in 1 Corinthians 15, and thus he is not addressing a biological death and resurrection motif.

Paul’s Seed Analogy & Being Buried Alive

Since the resurrection of the dead deniers did not deny a corporate bodily resurrection for themselves and those who had died “in Christ” (their side of the cross), then what is Paul’s point in using the seed analogy?  If Paul was correct in what he was saying thus far in his argumentation, then their objection would be something like, “How or what kind of body could the old covenant dead ones possibly be raised in since they died in the state of death found in Adam prior to Christ’s coming (thus they were susceptible to weakness, perishable and merely natural), unattached from us who are “in Christ” where resurrection new covenant eternal life is being realized (cf. 15:35)?”

Paul’s statement, “When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be…” summarizes their thinking and error.  For them, they were the one spiritual body that was BOTH being sown spiritually and would be raised spiritually.  In other words, they thought they sowed the same spiritual body that would be, which couldn’t be attached to the old covenant body which they believed perished outside of Christ.  Paul uses the seed analogy to demonstrate that they (along with the old covenant dead ones) were not sown a spiritual body, but rather they had the same sowing/seed origins that the old covenant dead ones were in – i.e. still in a “perishable”, “dishonorable”, “weak”, “natural”, “Adamic” body of death.  The corporate body of Christ did not originate their side of the cross out of thin air, but it originated in and came out from within the Adamic old covenant body (along with the old covenant dead ones).  The resurrection of the dead deniers needed to see that they were still a part of the old covenant body/seed/world (with the old covenant dead) that had not passed away yet.

If Paul had a resurrection of biological corpses in view, then he didn’t know how to teach and use illustrations very well.  Futurists believe the passage teaches that in biological death the body dies and then is buried or sown into the earth to be raised at the end of world history into a different form.  But for Paul in verse 36, the seed/body was not only in the process of being sown (under the earth), it was still alive and concurrently dying only to be raised into a different form.  Futurists are at odds with Paul’s teaching and illustration, which would amount to burying corpses while alive, only to undergo a process of dying and then to be raised.

In order to understand Paul’s buried alive and concurrently dying doctrine, or how the “body” here in 1 Corinthians 15 is not a fleshly individual body but a corporate body, we must allow Paul to interpret himself elsewhere.  We will pick this subject up in Romans 5-8, when addressing the nature of the body in Adam or in Christ, when it surfaces again in verses 44-58.

I believe Don K. Preston’s thesis of Paul using Hosea 6 – 13 as an inclusio as a possible working outline in 1 Corinthians 15 is an excellent observation.

“Hosea: The Outline for Paul’s Resurrection Hope
Hosea 1 Corinthians 15
1). “He has torn but he will heal, and after two days He will raise us up.” 1). Christ rose on the 3rd day according to the Scriptures – Paul introduces Hosea at the very beginning of his discourse and he closes his discourse by quoting Hosea.
2). Israel the Seed (Jezreel–God sows): Israel sown in the earth (2.23). 2). Except a seed– “That which you sow is not quickened unless it die” (John 12).
3). Israel destroyed/died (1.5– I will cause to cease the house of Israel): continuity / discontinuity – Israel destroyed / Israel restored. 3). You do not sow that which shall be (v. 37). That which you reap is not what you sow; that which is spiritual is not first, but the natural.
4). Israel of old – carnal, sinful. 4). It is sown a natural body (v. 42f).
5). Israel sown in the earth (2.23). 5). As we have borne the image of the earthy.
6). Harvest appointed for Judah when I return My people (6.11). 6). Jesus the first fruits (Jesus of Judah), of those who slept – OT saints, i.e. Israel!! (15.12f).
7). Time of the harvest = resurrection (13.14). 7). Resurrection when Hosea fulfilled (15:54-56).
8). Israel like the first fruit (9:10). 8). Christ the first fruit of Israel (15:20f).
9). They transgressed the covenant (6.7; they died (v. 5; 13.1-2, 10) – death for violating the covenant. 9). The strength of sin is “the law” (15.56) –death for violating the Law.
10). New covenant of peace (2:18; Cf. Ez. 37:12, 25f)—> covenant is covenant of marriage. 10). Sit at my right hand…Heb. 10:14–time of the new covenant (Rom. 11:26f.) – the marriage, thus the covenant —> Rev. 19:6.
11). Israel restored in the last days when “David” rules (3.4-5). 11). End of the ages has arrived (10.11); “then comes the end” (15.20f) – Christ on the throne (15.24f).
12). I will be your God. I will be your king! (Hos. 13:10). 12). 1 Corinthians 15:28(God shall be all in all).
13). Resurrection = restoration to fellowship. 13). 1 Corinthians 15: resurrection when “the sin,” the sting of “the death removed.”[73]

 The resurrection of the dead deniers needed to be reminded that they were a part of old covenant Israel’s seed/body that was promised to be raised in the last days harvest to close her age. Without their union into that seed/body, there would be no resurrection for either group.

Israel had been sown in death and captivity, but she was in the process of being raised, united together, and transformed through the good news of the new covenant.  Israel’s process of being transformed and being sown and rising from old covenant glory into new covenant glory in 1 Corinthians 15 & 2 Corinthians 3 should be viewed together, just as a spiritual seeing of God’s face in a glass or mirror found in 1 Corinthians 13 and 2 Corinthians 3-4 should be interpreted together.  We must allow Paul to interpret himself, especially when writing to the same church.  It’s just basic hermeneutics.

In Adam or in Christ & the Corporate Body Cont.

Let’s take a look at the Pauline view of being in the corporate bodies of Adam (as a type) and/or in Christ.

“But the death did reign from Adam till Moses, even upon those not having sinned in the likeness of Adam’s transgression, who is a type of him who is “about to” [Smith’s Literal Translation correctly translates mello here] come” (Rom. 5:14).

To further demonstrate that the resurrection for those in Christ is a spiritual resurrection is to notice that in Pauline “in Adam” or “in Christ” theology Adam is a “type” and Christ the anti-type.  In the book of Hebrews, the first was the physical type and shadow with the second and better being the spiritual anti-type.  The point is that the anti-type is always spiritual, and that is what we see here in 1 Corinthians 15 of the second being a “spiritual body” that the new covenant Israel/Church is raised up into.

As I pointed out earlier, there are many similarities between Romans 5-8 and 1 Corinthians 15.  Therefore, let’s spend some time here in Romans to see how Paul develops these themes.

In Romans 5:14, the context is involving an eschatological future (“about to”) coming of Christ who is the anti-type of Adam.  It will be when the future hope of glory in verses 1-5 is realized (which Rom. 8:18YLT says was “about to be revealed”) and when they would be saved from a coming wrath in verse 10.

Most Futurists, such as Postmillennialist Keith Mathison, believe that Romans 5:12 teaches that physical death for man and decay for the planet earth came through Adam’s sin and thus at Christ’s return He will reverse what Adam had brought upon the planet:

“As Paul explains, death entered the world because of Adam’s sin (Roms. 5:12).  God’s entire work of redemption from the moment of the Fall onward has been aimed at reversing the effects of sin in man and in creation.”[74]

However, the immediate context of verse 12 is dealing with spiritual salvation described as “reconciliation” being given to the believer in verse 11.  The phrase “…death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned…” is discussing spiritual death, not physical death, or people would physically die when they “sin.”  As I discussed before, in Genesis Adam died spiritually the very day he sinned.  Through Adam came the reign of spiritual “death” and “condemnation” in verse 18.  This spiritual death and condemnation that came through Adam is countered by Christ because through Him the “free gift” of the gospel is “grace” (v. 15), “justification” (v. 16), and a “reign of life” (v.17), which makes one “righteous” (v. 19).  These are spiritual graces upon the heart of man undoing the reign of spiritual death and condemnation brought through Adam.

Verses 20-21 are important: “Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”  When the Mosaic law entered the picture, it did not make death any worse, but it did increase and magnify the power and reign of spiritual death and sin in the heart of man.  This is most eloquently described by Paul in his struggle of what the law produced when it was brought upon his conscience in chapter 7.  Saul, the self-righteous Jew, thought they were “alive” under the law, but when they realized that the law could only magnify their sin and it could not completely take it away, they “died” (7:9).  Obviously, Paul did not biologically die the day he realized this.  The entire context of Romans is dealing with overcoming the spiritual death passed down through Adam, which was magnified through the giving of Torah.  This spiritual death was found in the corporate body of the sin, the death, and the flesh which Paul brings out and develops more in chapter 6.

As previously mentioned, fortunately some Pauline reformed theologians are beginning to see what we have in these Pauline terms.  Paul is not addressing an individual resurrection of a physical “fleshly” corpse in Romans 6:

“The concrete mode of existence of sinful man can sometimes be identified with sin as the ‘body of sin’ (Rom. 6:6), the ‘body of flesh’ (Col. 2:11), the ‘body of death’ (Rom.7:24).  Accordingly, the life from Christ by the Holy Spirit can be typified as a ‘doing away with the body of sin’, ‘putting off of the body of the flesh, ‘putting to death the earthly members’, ‘deliverance from the body of this death’ Rom. 6:6; Col. 2:11; 3:5; Rom. 7:24) … All these expressions are obviously not intended of the body itself, but of the sinful mode of existence of man.”[75]

Quoting T.F. Torrance,

“In his death, the many who inhered in him died too, and indeed the whole body of sin, the whole company of sinners into which he incorporated himself to make their guilt and their judgment his own, that through his death he might destroy the body of sin, redeem them from the power of guilt and death, and through his resurrection raise them up as the new Israel[76]

This corporate view of the “body of sin” is also shared by F.F. Bruce:

“This ‘body of sin’ is more than an individual affair. It is rather that old solidarity of sin and death which all share ‘in Adam,” but which has been broken by the death of Christ with a view to the creation of the new solidarity of righteousness and life of which believers are made part ‘in Christ.’”[77]

Holland feels that T.W. Manson has come the closest to the truth:

“He questioned the traditional assumption that in the phrase ‘body of Sin’ the term ‘of Sin’ is a genitive of quality; he argued that it ‘does not yield a very good sense’.  He took it to be a possessive genitive, and said, ‘It is perhaps better to regard “the body of sin” as the opposite of “the body of Christ”.  It is the mass of unredeemed humanity in bondage to the evil power. Every conversion means that the body of sin loses a member and the body of Christ gains one’”[78]

And developing the corporate body motif, commenting on Romans 6:6:

“Also, in 6:6 Paul refers to ‘putting off the old man’.  Once again this has traditionally been seen as a reference to the sinful self that dominated the life of the believer in the pre-converted state.  However, the same terminology is used in Ephesians 2:15 where Paul says, ‘to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace’.  He then goes on to say in 4:22-23, ‘put off your old self (anthropos – man), created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.’  The exhortation is parallel to that in Romans 6:6ff.  Thus, the new man, which Paul exhorts the Romans to put on, is corporate, for ‘the new man’ in Ephesians is the church, and the two who have been united to form this new man are the believing Jews and the believing Gentiles.  This corporate understanding is further supported by Colossians 3:9-15…  The realm where distinctions are abolished (here there is no Greek or Jew, v. 11) is clearly corporate.  This is indicated by two considerations.  First, ‘here’ is clearly the realm where all distinctions are abolished, and this is the new man.  Second, the meaning of the one body into which they were called (v. 15) is obviously corporate.  These descriptions of corporateness are in the context of the description of the old and new self (vv. 9, 10).  The rendering of anthropos as self by the NIV and sarx as flesh in the AV has inevitably promoted the individualistic understanding and confused the mind of the English reader.  Furthermore, that Paul’s exhortation is corporate is shown in that he appeals to them, “as God’s chosen people clothe yourselves’ (v. 12).  Thus, identifying the imagery of the old and new man as being corporate, and appreciating that it is part of the description of the ‘body of Sin’ in Romans 6:6, along with the other considerations we have presented, establishes a corporate meaning for the term the ‘body of Sin’.”[79]

What is the Soteriological and Eschatological Goal of Christ’s Substitutionary Work?

Before we leave the topic of being in Adam or in Christ, we should probably really define what Christ’s substitutionary redemption and mission is and what it isn’t.

If one defines Christ’s substitutionary work to be that Christ died physically so we don’t have to, then Christ’s redemption has been an epic failure for some 2,000 plus years and counting.  But as we have seen, the WUESTNT correctly translates 1 Corinthians 15:26 as “the death” (that came through Adam – spiritual death and separation) which was already in the process of “beING destroyed” due to Christ’s work on the cross and what He would imminently do at His Parousia to bring an “end” to the old covenant age in AD 70.  If physical death was “being destroyed” in Paul’s day and ours, we should expect physical corpses beginning to rise and walk about like the “Walking Dead” show.  Or we should see men living to be 200 – 900 years old.

And if the “wages of sin is biological death,” and Christ’s substitutionary work on the cross was designed to reverse this process, then again why do we still sin and die physically?  Jesus said that if one believed in Him and kept his commandments he would “never die.”  Again, if this is physical death, then once again Christ’s work and your faith prove Christ and Christians are epic failures.

But if Christ’s substitutionary and redemptive work on the cross and at His Parousia in AD 70 was designed to overcome the spiritual death that came through Adam, now we can understand the following passages:

  • “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mt. 27:46).

And why Paul teaches:

  • “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern/type of the one [Greek mello] about to come.  But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!  Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.  For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!  Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.  For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous” (Rms. 5:12-21).
  • God made him who had no sinto be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:21).
  • “Truly, truly, truly, I tell you, if anyone keeps My word, he will never see death” (Jn. 8:51). “…and everyone who lives and believes in Me shall never die.  Do you believe this” (Jn. 10:26)?

Here is a chart that may help:

Adam’s ONE Trespass Christ’s ONE Righteous Act
Sin entered the world Righteousness entered the world
Spiritual death entered the world Spiritual eternal life entered the world
Spiritual death and separation reigned from Adam to Moses w/ Torah magnifying how sinful sin is and how short we fall. For those in Christ, spiritual eternal life and righteousness reigns and brings us into God’s presence.
Many died spiritually in their covenant head of Adam Many are made alive in their covenant head of Christ
Spiritual judgment and condemnation came through Adam Spiritual gift of grace brings justification through Christ
One act of disobedience made those in Adam sinners One act of obedience made those in Christ righteous before God
Christ became sin for us so that  …we might become the righteousness of God

It should be clear that spiritual death and life and positional truth is what is being communicated here by Jesus and Paul.  If we are in Adam, we are subject to sin’s power which results in spiritual separation and death from God’s presence.  But if we place our faith in Christ and we are granted the gift of His grace, then positionally and spiritually we “never die”, we “become the righteousness of God,” are “justified before Him,” and “righteousness reigns in us.”

Christ died to sin or became the curse of Adam’s sin/death which separated us from God’s presence.  This “last enemy” and curse of spiritual death is what was in the process of “being destroyed” in Paul’s day.  When Adam sinned, he died spiritually.  Christ lived a perfect life and committed no sin, so He was a perfect sacrifice capable of satisfying God’s righteous and just wrath so that “we might become the righteousness of God.”  Now through Christ’s redemptive work on the cross and Parousia, we live in the new covenant creation or the “world of righteousness” and are perfectly forgiven in His sight.  And this gift of faith and of His unconditional grace causes us to be born of God whereby we “do not sin, because His seed/presence remains in us, and we cannot sin because we are born of God” (1 Jn. 3:9).  That is, a true child of God cannot commit the specific sin “leading to death” (1 Jn. 5:16-18) which would once again bring us into the spiritual death and headship of Adam.  Or as John would reinforce his meaning in Revelation 3:12, those of us who are in the righteousness of the New Jerusalem will never leave the gates and return to the spiritual death and darkness of being in Adam.

The Sovereign Grace Full Preterist has a substitutionary redemption that has been “accomplished and applied,” which has produced the 100% goal Christ came
to accomplish between AD 30 – AD 70.  We are “in Christ”, “we are His righteous-ness,” and we will “never die” and be found outside of His marvelous grace!  We are made perfect before the Father and behold His face because of what Christ has accomplished on the cross and through His “soon” Second Coming (1 Cor. 13:10-12/Rev. 22:4-7, 10, 20).  Selah.

Paul’s Consistent Use of Terms

Not only do I agree with Holland in his development of Paul being a Hebrew and thinking in Jewish collective or corporate body terms, but I also agree with him that Paul has a “system of theology” that he draws on when he uses certain words, terms, and phrases throughout his various writings:

“Also, it seems quite inconceivable that a man of Paul’s intellectual caliber should be so haphazard as to be indifferent to these alleged inconsistencies.  At Paul’s instruction, his letters were being passed around the churches (Col. 4:16).  Was he not concerned with consistency?”[80]

Paul’s themes of being in a corporate body, whether in “Adam” or “Christ,” in Romans and 1 Corinthians 15, and being raised in the likeness of Christ or experiencing deliverance from “law” (Adam in the garden) or “THE law” (Israel groaning under the Mosaic law), has nothing to do with a casket resurrection from biological death for believers.  This is a soteriological resurrection from the spiritual death inherited from Adam.  The order of being planted or buried first and then simultaneously dying only to be changed and resurrected into Christ’s image is also the same in Romans and 1 Corinthians 15.  We will look at this shortly.

Corruption v. Incorruption

Here is how Paul elsewhere uses “corruption”:

1). “that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (Rom. 8:21).

We should quote from John Lightfoot once again who not only saw the “redemption of the body” in Romans 8 to be the corporate body of the Church (which we are arguing is also the case here in 1 Cor. 15), but also identified “vanity” “corruption,” etc. to be internal spiritual vices within the heart of man:

“. . . [T]his vanity [or futility] is improperly applied to this vanishing, changeable, dying state of the [physical] 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.”[81]

And again,

“The Gentile world shall in time be delivered from the bondage of their sinful corruption, that is, the bondage of their lusts and vile affections, (under which it hath lain for so long a time,) into a noble liberty, such as the sons of God enjoy. If it be inquired how the Gentile world groaned and travailed in pain, let them who expound this of the fabric of the material world tell us how that groaneth and travaileth. They must needs own it to be a borrowed and allusive phrase.”[82]  

2). “For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life” (Gal. 6:8).

Sowing to the flesh has to do with giving in to internal temptations of the mind and heart, and reaping “corruption” has to do with inheriting (in this world and the next) the consequences of sin.  But if one sows to the Spirit, he reaps “eternal life” in this world and the next.  “Corruption” does not have to do with biological flesh.

3). “Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God.  If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations—“Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that are unto corruption in the using [or perish as they are used])—according to human precepts and teachings?  These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh” (Col. 2:18-22).

“Corruption” here is referring to the seducing Judaizers seeking to influence Jewish, and/or their proselyte Gentile, Christians into going back under the Mosaic Law to be justified before God.  Seeking to be justified by the Mosaic Law as a means of salvation meant being under the “corruption” of these false teachers and this system which would soon perish with its teachers in the events of AD 70.  Again, “corruption” is an internal reality of the heart and mind connected to sin and false teaching, not a biological change.

4).  “His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire. For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love.  For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.  For whoever lacks these qualities is so nearsighted that he is blind, having forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins” (2 Peter 1:3-9).

It was the knowledge and life of the gospel that delivered them from the inner “corruption” that was in the Jewish or heathen world of false religion.  Peter is consistent with Pauline theology.  Paul taught that through faith they were already being transformed into the image of Christ, which was obviously not a biological process that had already begun (cf. 2 Cor. 3:18).  And according to Paul in Colossians 3:9-10, Christians were “putting off the old self” and “putting on the new self” as a process of “being renewed in the knowledge after the image of its creator.”  Being in the “image of the creator”, “being transformed into the image of Christ,” or “partaking in the divine nature,” for Peter and Paul these were non-biological events and had to do with a change of mind and heart which the gospel had produced and was producing within the hearts of Christians.

5). “For, speaking loud boasts of folly, they entice by sensual passions of the flesh those who are barely escaping from those who live in error. They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption. For whatever overcomes a person, to that he is enslaved. For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first” (2 Peter 2:18-20).

Once again, we have a warning to not go back to false religion which enslaved men’s hearts and minds to the vices of sin and “corruption,” which the inner “knowledge of Christ” had delivered them from. As we have seen, this Greek word for “corruption,” as used elsewhere in the NT, does not entail a biological corruption of physical flesh needing a biological resurrection or change, nor is it being used this way by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15.

But what of Paul’s use of “Incorruption” or “immortality”?

If “corruption” had to do with internal sin, then “incorruption” would seem to be the opposite.  The Adamic or Mosaic world and belief system could only produce, expose and magnify the “corruption” of sin in the heart.  The new covenant world and body of the gospel imputed Christ’s righteousness, resulting in eternal life or “incorruptibility.”

1). He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury” (Rms. 2:7-8).

Here “immortality” or “incorruptibility” are equivalent to “eternal life.”  Earlier, we looked at the “already and not yet” (AD 27-30—AD 70) “hour” (Dan. 12:1-4 OG) of the early church receiving eternal or resurrection life, and it had nothing to do with a biological change that was taking place.

2). “Grace be with all who love our Lord Jesus Christ with love incorruptible” (Eph. 6:24).

The new covenant gospel and love of Christ for His Church and her love for Him (and family members) cannot be corrupted or fail (1 Cor. 13:7-8).

3). “…who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, and which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, for which I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher, which is why I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that day what has been entrusted to me” (II Tim. 1:10).

To understand this passage better we need to go to chapter four:

“I do fully testify, then, before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is about to judge living and dead at his manifestation and his reign—preach the word; be earnest in season, out of season, convict, rebuke, exhort, in all long-suffering and teaching, for there shall be a season when the sound teaching they will not suffer, but according to their own desires to themselves they shall heap up teachers—itching in the hearing, and indeed, from the truth the hearing they shall turn away, and to the fables they shall be turned aside. And thou—watch in all things; suffer evil; do the work of one proclaiming good news; of thy ministration make full assurance, for I am already being poured out, and the time of my release hath arrived; the good strife I have striven, the course I have finished, the faith I have kept, henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of the righteousness that the Lord—the Righteous Judge—shall give to me in that day, and not only to me, but also to all those loving his manifestation” (2 Tim. 4:1-8 YLT, BLB, LSV).

Paul was entrusted with the gospel which brings immortality or eternal life to the soul of man.  Paul knew severe persecutions were coming for him before the “about to” approaching “day” of the Lord.  His confidence was in knowing that God was going to guard his God-given faith and soul as a precious deposit as that day was “about to” come and his life was going to be poured out (just prior to the events of AD 67 – AD 70).

There is nothing here about Paul having a hope that was connected to an “incorruptible” physical body that he would get at the end of world history.  His deposit was his faith and assurance that his soul was about to receive the gift of eternal life or incorruptibility and immortality.

Peter defined this “ready to be revealed” “inheritance” as the “salvation of the soul” (1 Pet. 1:4-9).

After reading the above verses to see how Paul and the other New Testament writers use them elsewhere, it can be seen that the term “corruption” has reference to life under the Law of Moses and life “in Adam.”  Notice that it was possible to be under a state of “corruption” without having to be dead physically.  Instead, this term had reference to life under the dominion of sin.

Likewise, “incorruption” was used to describe those in the body of Christ.  Those enjoying the “incorruption” or “immortality” were those who had been added to the body (Church) of Christ by responding positively to the gospel.  Just as the Church had to progress towards perfection, the individual Christians within the Church had “incorruption” while at the same time waiting for it to come on the day when God’s wrath would be revealed (Romans 2:7).  This idea is called by some as the “already but not yet” of eschatology.  Because the “already” was not of a physical nature, it makes sense that the “not yet” would be of the same nature.  If you saw the head of a dog coming around a corner, you would expect to see the tail of a dog – not of a cat – following shortly thereafter.  The dog doesn’t change into something else just because it is fully revealed. In like manner, the nature of the incorruption (the spiritual salvation of the soul) remains the same from initiation to consummation.

Natural v. Spiritual

1). “Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory.  None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him”— these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God.  And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritualThe natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2:6-14).

In the next chapter Paul explains when the “things” were coming that the natural man could not understand:

“So then, let no one glory in men, for all things are yours, whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things about to be — all are yours,” (1 Cor. 3:22 YLT).

The rulers of Paul’s “this age” were the civil and religious rulers of the old covenant age that had crucified Christ and were “natural” men, unable to discern the spiritual blessings coming under the new covenant creation.  They and their system of power and authority were going to “pass away.”

Many exegetes are correct to point out that Paul combines the “things” of Isaiah 64:4 with the coming inheritance of the new creation of Isaiah 65:17 in this OT echo.  Paul in verses 10-14 teaches that the natural man could not accept these new covenant or new creation “things” that were being revealed by the Spirit because these were “spiritual truths.”  The natural man cannot understand the things of the Spirit, the new birth or God’s people becoming a spiritual “new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17/Isa. 65).  The inheritance of the “things” of the new creation of Isaiah 65 were “about to be” received or inherited by the new covenant body of the Church while the rulers of the old covenant “this age” were going to pass away.

2). “Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom.  But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth.  This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly/natural, unspiritual, demonic.  For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice.  But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.  And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace” (James. 3:15).

When was the harvest of judgment and righteousness coming?

“Be patient, therefore, brothers, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, being patient about it, until it receives the early and the late rains. You also, be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand. Do not grumble against one another, brothers, so that you may not be judged; behold, the Judge is standing at the door” (Jms. 5:7-9)

The rich professing Christians were causing division and persecuting the poor Christians in the Church.  Some Christians were even getting caught up into natural/earthly thinking that was demonic and from below, not from new covenant living which was “from above.”  It was important for true Christians to live out their new covenant faith and thus demonstrate that their faith was genuine and without hypocrisy, because the Judge was “at the door” and “at hand.” Those who were natural/earthy were like grass and a flower that would soon be burned up or pass away while others would inherit the crown of life (eternal life) at Christ’s imminent coming in AD 70 (James. 1:11-12/5:7-9; 1 Pet. 1:24/4:5-7, 17/2 Pet. 3).

3). “It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” These are grumblers, malcontents, following their own sinful desires; they are loud-mouthed boasters, showing favoritism to gain advantage. But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ.  They said to you, “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.”  It is these who cause divisions, worldly/carnal/earthy people, devoid of the Spirit. But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life” (Jude 1:19-21).

Judaizers are here described as “carnal” false teachers seeking to place believers back under the Law. 1 Enoch and other Dead Sea Scroll documents predicted that the end of the age judgment of Satan, the Watchers and the wicked would take place in the first century and by AD 70 just as the teachings of Jesus and the NT developed.  Very similar to what we just saw in the book of James, being “carnal” or “worldly” has nothing to do with the physical flesh of man, but being corrupted inwardly with sin and being “devoid of the Spirit.”

Earthy v. Heavenly

The Greek word for “earthy” is only used by Paul here in 1 Corinthians 15:47, 48, 49.  However, we can do a study of “heavenly” in the NT to understand what Paul is referring to.

1). “Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water even the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.  Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born from above (or again).’  The wind5 blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So, it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”  Nicodemus said to him, “How can these things be?”  Jesus answered him, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things?  Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony.  If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things (Jn. 3:5-12)?”

Citizens of the old covenant kingdom were born by flesh and blood, sons of Abraham.  But under the new covenant kingdom, one had to be “born from above” through the Spirit and faith in the Messiah/Jesus – “not of flesh and blood, nor of the will of man, but of God” (Jn. 1:11-13).

 2). “But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.  For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.  For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2:4-10).

According to Paul, when would the coming age arrive or when would the full inheritance into this heavenly realm arrive?

“…not only in this age, but also in the one about to come” (Ephs. 1:21 WUESTNT).

For Paul, one could experience spiritual resurrection and be in “heavenly places” while being in a physical body.  This spiritual existence would continue for the living in the new covenant “age about to” arrive in AD 70.  So to be “heavenly” does not mean to undergo a biological change.  Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 is teaching that the Church (comprised of the OT dead and the living) was in the process of being raised a “Spiritual Body.”

3). “But the Lord stood by me and strengthened me, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it. So, I was rescued from the lion’s mouth. The Lord will rescue me from every evil deed and bring me safely into his heavenly kingdom. To him be the glory forever and ever. Amen” (2 Tim. 4:17-18).

Again, within the immediate context, when did Paul see full access into this “heavenly kingdom” to take place?

“I do fully testify, then, before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is about to judge living and dead at his manifestation and his Kingdom/Reign…” (2 Tim. 4:1 YLT, BLB, LSV).

While Paul had been delivered by the lions of the Jewish persecution, as we have seen elsewhere in his writings and as time progressed, it was revealed to him that he would die and his life would be poured out (martyred).  Even if Paul was alive, he understood that he was raised spiritually and currently in “heavenly places,” or if he were to die his soul was “about to” experience the inheritance of the “crown of life” (eternal life) and thus the “manifestation of His Kingdom” at Christ’s imminent coming.  There’s no evidence here that to be raised in a spiritual body means to undergo a biological corpse resurrection.

4). “Therefore, holy brothers, you who share in a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession, who was faithful to him who appointed him, just as Moses also was faithful in all God’s house.  For Jesus has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses—as much more glory as the builder of a house has more honor than the house itself. (For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God.) Now Moses was faithful in all God’s house as a servant, to testify to the things that were to be spoken later, but Christ is faithful over God’s house as a son. And we are his house, if indeed we hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope” (Heb. 3:1-6).

“Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.  Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.  And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him” (Heb. 9:23-28).

“But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel” (Heb. 12:22-24).

According to the writer of Hebrews, when would the “heavenly Jerusalem/City” arrive?

“For we have no permanent city here, but we are longing for the city which is soon to be ours” (Heb. 13:14 Weymouth New Testament, see also “one about to come” – Worrell NT; Worsley NT; Smith’s Literal Translation)

Through the “heavenly calling” of the gospel, biologically living Christians were already being raised and experiencing and tasting the heavenly realm and calling (having come to or among angels, Christ and the spirits of just men made perfect).  Moses was over a physical old covenant “house,” while Jesus was an administrator and trailblazer in perfecting the new covenant spiritual “house,” which is the body of Christ.  In Hebrews 9-10 the spiritual new covenant body is depicted as the “second” (typified as the Most Holy Place house), and when Christ would come in “a very little while and would not delay” in AD 70, the “first” (the “present age” of the old covenant system, or typified as the Holy Place) would not be standing or have legal standing (Heb. 9:1—10:37).  This is when the “heavenly Jerusalem/City” that was “soon” or “about to” come did come.  Post AD 70, God has raised and filled His spiritual body or house / New Jerusalem / Most Holy Place with His presence (cf. Rev. 21:16—22:17).  There was no biological fleshly change or resurrection for the saints to undergo to experience this “better resurrection” under the new covenant.  Nor is Paul teaching that a biological resurrection of flesh is necessary to be raised a spiritual or heavenly body in 1 Corinthians 15.

The weakness of Flesh v. Power

1). “Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”  He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt. 16:13-17).

The revelation of who Christ is, or entrance into Christ’s kingdom, is not something that the power of “flesh and blood” can achieve; it is only something God who is in heaven can grant.

2). “…who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:13).

Again, under the old covenant kingdom, one was and could be born of the blood and flesh of Abraham, but under the new covenant kingdom one had to be “born of God”, “born from above,” and “born of the Spirit.”  This was and is nothing the power of natural man (“flesh and blood”) can achieve.

3). “For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel.  For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.  For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it.  And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers.  But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with flesh/anyone” (Gal. 1:11-16).

Neither “flesh” nor anyone can ultimately be said to bring one into the kingdom.  It is solely the work of God and His grace.  The power of any man/flesh cannot achieve or bring one into the kingdom ; it is a revelation and birth only God can grant.

Back to the Corporate Body Motif

David Green helps harmonize Paul’s corporate body motifs:

“To find Paul’s meaning, we need only find where in Scripture Paul elaborated on the doctrine of a human “body” that had to be sown/planted/entombed and concurrently put to death, in order that it could be made alive and changed in the resurrection of the dead.  This takes us to Romans 6-8, Colossians 2, and Philippians 3.

In these Scriptures, especially in Romans 6, Paul teaches that believers had been bodily “planted,” through Spirit-baptism, into death / into the death of Christ, in order that the body that had been planted/buried (the “body of Sin,” the “mortal body,” the “body of Death,” the “body of the sins of the flesh,” the “vile body”) would be abolished / put to death, and then be made alive and changed/conformed to the image of the Son of God in the kingdom of heaven. Note the order: Burial then death.

This sequence in Romans 6 is exactly, step by step, what Paul teaches concerning the resurrection of the body in 1 Cor. 15:36-37 and its context.  Romans 6-8 and 1 Corinthians 15 both speak of concurrent body-burial and body-death, followed by consummated body-death, body-resurrection, and body-change. Futurist assumptions notwithstanding, there is no doubt that 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 6-8 are speaking of the same burial, death, resurrection, and change—and therefore of the same body. 

The Body

What then is “the body” that was being put to death in Romans 6-8 and 1 Corinthians 15? What is the meaning of the word “body” in these contexts?  Essentially, or basically, the “body” is the “self” or “person/ personality” or “individual,” whether that of a singular saint or of the singular church universal (the body of Christ).

According to definition 1b of the word σωμα (body) in Arndt and Gingrich’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, the word “body” in Paul’s writings is sometimes “almost synonymous with the whole personality . . . σώματα [bodies] =themselves.”

Note how that “body” and “yourselves” are used interchangeably in Romans 6:12-13:

Therefore, do not let sin reign in your mortal body that you should obey its lusts, and do not go on presenting your members [of your mortal body] to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members [of your mortal body] as instruments of righteousness to God.

Compare also 1 Corinthians 6:15 and 12:27, where “you” and “your bodies” are synonymous:

. . . your bodies are members of Christ . . . . (1 Cor. 6:15)

. . . you are Christ’s body, and individually members of it. (1 Cor. 12:27)

See also Ephesians 5:28, where a man’s body-union with his wife is equated with “himself”:

So, husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself.

However, the word “body,” when it is used in reference to the eschatological resurrection, means more than merely the “self.” Paul is not using the word as a common reference to “the whole person.”

It does not refer to man’s anthropological wholeness (i.e. material body+soul+spirit=the body). Paul is using the word in a theological eschatological sense to describe God’s people as they are defined either by the wholeness/fullness (body) of Adamic Sin and Death or the wholeness/fullness (body) of Christ. The body is either the “person” united with Sin and Death, or the “person” united with Christ, whether individually or corporately.

We can begin to see this in Colossians 3:5 (KJV), where the body parts (members) of the Sin-body are not arms and legs or other physical limbs. The members of the “earthly body” were death-producing “deeds,” such as “fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness . . . ” (cf. Rom. 8:13). Thus, John Calvin wrote in his commentary on Romans 6:6:

“The body of sin . . . does not mean flesh and bones, but the corrupted mass . . . of sin.” Since a body is the sum of its parts, and since the parts of the Sin-body are sins/sinful deeds, it follows that “the body of Sin” is not the physical aspect of man.

Instead, the whole of the sins/deeds of the body equals the body of Sin. Or more accurately, the body of Sin was God’s people as they were identified with and defined by the Sin-reviving, Sin-increasing, Death-producing world of the Law.

When Paul said that believers were no longer walking according to “the flesh” (Rom. 8:1, 4, 9), he was saying that believers were putting to death the deeds of the “body” (Rom. 8:10-11, 13). The parts/members of the body equaled the deeds of “the body,” which equaled the walk of “the flesh.” “Flesh” and “body” in this context, therefore, describe man as he was defined by Sin, not man as he was defined by material body parts.

In Colossians 2:11, Paul said that God had buried believers with Christ, raised them up with Him, and had removed “the body of the flesh.” “The body of the flesh” was not the physical body. It was the Adamic man/self/person that had been dead in transgressions and in the spiritual uncircumcision of his “flesh” (Col. 2:13). That “body” (or as Ridderbos puts it, that “sinful mode of existence”) had been “removed” in Christ and was soon to be changed into the glorious, resurrected “body” of Christ.

As a comparison of Colossians 2:11 and Colossians 3:9 reveals, “the body” of Sin is virtually synonymous with “the old man”:

. . . the putting off of the body of the sins of the flesh . . . . (Col. 2:11)

. . . having put off the old man with his practices (Col. 3:9; cf. Eph. 4:22)

Compare also 1 Corinthians 15:42 with Ephesians 4:22:

[The body] is sown in corruption . . . . (1 Cor. 15:42)

. . . the old man being corrupted . . . . (Eph. 4:22)

Compare also the references to “man” and “body” in Romans 7:24:

Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from this body of Death?

And in Romans 6:6,

Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. (Rom. 6:6)

And in 1 Corinthians 15:44, 45:

. . . There is a natural body [the old man], and there is a spiritual body [the new Man]. And so it is written, the first [old] man [the natural body] Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [the last Man, the spiritual body] a quickening spirit.

Since the natural body is nearly synonymous with the old man, we should expect that the spiritual body is nearly synonymous with “the new man,” the Lord Jesus Christ. Compare 1 Corinthians 15:53-54 with Ephesians 4:24; Colossians 3:10 and Romans 13:14:

For this perishable [body] must put on the imperishable [body] . . . . (1 Cor. 15:53-54)

and put on the new man [the spiritual body], which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth. (Eph. 4:24)

and have put on the new man [the spiritual body] who is being renewed to a true knowledge according to the image of the One who created him. (Col. 3:10)

But put on the Lord Jesus Christ [the new man, the spiritual body], and make no provision for the flesh in regard to its lusts. (Rom. 13:14)

As most futurists agree, “the old man” and “the new man” are not expressions that describe man in terms of physicality. “The old man” was man as he was in Adam, alienated from God and dead in Sin. He was “the body of Sin.” The new Man is man as he is reconciled to God in Christ, the lifegiving Spiritual Body.”[83]

The Eschatological Mystery

Elsewhere in Paul’s teaching on God’s “mystery,” he demonstrates how the OT predicted (and the NT revelatory gifts developed) the Jew / Gentile unity in the body of Christ.  Here, Paul is demonstrating how the living will be changed and raised with “all” the dead (including the OT dead) together – into the ONE raised and glorified Body of Christ.

The Trumpet Change and Israel’s Feasts

While no one disputes that Paul’s trumpet change here is the same trumpet catching away in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, Partial Preterists object that it is somehow different than Jesus’ trumpet gathering at His Parousia in Matthew 24:27-31.  Of course, this is pure eisegesis on their part and a failure to harmonize Jesus’ eschatology with Paul’s, as previously demonstrated.  While we agree that the coming of Christ in Matthew 24-25 was fulfilled spiritually in AD 70, we disagree with Partial Preterists such as Gary DeMar and Keith Mathison and their un-creedal and unorthodox position that Matthew 24-25 is not the “actual” Second Coming event, and we disagree with their error that Matthew 24-25 is not the same Parousia and resurrection event as described for us in 1 Corinthians 15!

Paul is in harmony with Jesus when he says that not everyone in his contemporary audience would die before experiencing Christ’s Second Coming trumpet change/gathering into the kingdom (Mt. 16:27-28; 24:30-34/Lk. 21:27-32).

The living would be “changed” not in their physical biological substance, but rather in their covenantal stance before God.  The Adamic and old covenant body of death was natural, weak, mortal, and subject to being perishable.  It needed to be clothed and changed by the heavenly man.

The trumpet call at Christ’s Parousia here is fulfilling multiple OT concepts.  It is the trumpet blown at the wedding in Jewish culture that I have discussed in Matthew 24-25.

Jesus has already been described as the “first fruits,” so we also have the trumpet being blown to fulfill the first fruits of the harvest / resurrection motif or Succot (the feast of harvest).

The blowing the trumpet here also fulfills the typological ceremonial law or the feast of the new moon festival or the feast of trumpets.[84]  These last three feasts that were in the ceremonial law had already broken into Paul’s “already and not yet” eschaton in Colossians 2-3 and Hebrews 9-12, and they are present here in 1 Corinthians 15 as well.  Again, if the trumpet call and resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15 hasn’t been fulfilled and the OT Mosaic “the law” (v. 55-56) hasn’t been fulfilled, then the Church remains under “every jot and tittle” of the OT Mosaic Law today (Mt. 5:17-19).  One cannot posit the end and fulfillment of all of the ceremonial law to be fulfilled at the cross or Pentecost, because the ceremonial feast days composed the entire structure and function for Israel’s calendar year.  There were three more to be fulfilled post-Pentecost.  According to Paul in Colossians and the writer to the Hebrews, those ceremonial type-and-shadow ceremonial laws and feasts were “about to be” fulfilled at Christ’s “in a very little while and will not delay” Second Coming (Cols. 2-3; Heb. 9-10:37).

The Perishable to be Clothed with Imperishable – the Mortal with Immortality & 2 Cor. 3-6

Paul is not describing an individual’s biological body as being “perishable” and “mortal,” but rather the Adamic and Mosaic corporate body as “perishable” and “mortal” needing to be “clothed.”  To better understand Paul here, again it is important to let him interpret himself.

In 2 Corinthians 3-6 Paul contrasts the glories of the old covenant and new covenant with two houses/temples.  In 2 Corinthians 4 the resurrection is in view (vss. 13-14) and closes by expressing that this hope is not grounded on things which can be seen (that are physical and temporal), but on things that cannot be seen (that are spiritual and eternal) (v. 18).  The “earthly tent/house/temple” in 5:1 that would be destroyed is the corporate old covenant temple/house/system, and the spiritual “heavenly dwelling/temple/house” is the corporate new covenant system.  Their groaning for this house to be revealed from heaven to clothe them is realized in an AD 70 “soon” and “shortly” time frame in the form of the glorified New Jerusalem (which is the corporate body of the Church) coming down from heaven to earth in Revelation 21-22.  The NIV correctly captures the “already and not yet” of the New Jerusalem already being in the process of coming down (cf. Rev. 3:12).  This already and not yet process is in harmony with the eschatological Pauline process of putting on Christ, being transformed into the image of Christ, dying and rising, looking at God’s face spiritually in a dim glass or mirror, a boy maturing into manhood, and here in 1 Corinthians 15 being sown and rising into a spiritual body.

Paul in 2 Corinthians 6:16 further elaborates that the new covenant temple promised in Ezekiel 37:27 (and thus that of 40-47) is the corporate body of the Church.  So the corporate and covenantal context between 2 Corinthians 3 extends to chapter 6:16.

The “groaning” to be further clothed in 2 Corinthians 5:2ff., which correlates to the clothing resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15, is the “groaning” and AD 70 imminent “about to be revealing” of God’s glory within the Church, which in context results in the full adoption of sons, the liberation of creation (of God’s people) and the “redemption of the body” (Rom. 8:18-23YLT).

As we have seen, Gary DeMar admits that the Greek word mello in Romans 8:18YLT should be translated as “about to be” and was fulfilled in AD 70.  But to admit this is to admit that the events of 18-23 were also fulfilled in AD 70.  Lightfoot correctly observed that the “redemption of the BODY” is the corporate body of Christ as in Ephesians 4:13.  Of course we agree that there was a corporate bodily change that was “about to be” fulfilled according to Paul, and that was a transformation from groaning in, and being under, the Adamic/Mosaic body of death to be liberated and raised into the glorious and redeemed body of Christ at Christ’s coming in AD 70.

Paul’s OT Echo’s – Hosea 13 / Isaiah 25

As there is a movement within the Reformed and Evangelical community that seeks to develop Paul’s Hebraic corporate body origins, which is beginning to see what Full Preterists have seen for the last 30 years, there is also a movement led by Richard Hayes which emphasizes developing the OT context of an OT reference or echo mentioned in the NT.  For example, Hayes writes,

“Thematic Coherence: How well does the alleged echo fit into the line of argument that Paul is developing?  Does the proposed precursor text fit together with the point Paul is making?  Can one see in Paul’s use of the material a coherent ‘reading’ of the source text?  Is his use of the Isaiah texts consonant with his overall argument and/or use made of other texts?”[85]

And,

“Satisfaction: Does the proposed intertextual reading illuminate the surround-ing discourse and make some larger sense of Paul’s argument as a whole?  ‘…A proposed intertextual reading fulfills the test of satisfaction when we find ourselves saying, “Oh, so that is what Paul means here in passage x; and furthermore, if that’s right, then we can begin to understand what he means in passage y and why he uses these certain words in that place.”’”[86]

In other words, one is encouraged to find and develop as many similarities between that OT original context and the context and flow of the NT author in order to understand how he is using it.  Therefore, it is important to examine what kind of bodily death and resurrection are taking place in Hosea 13 and in Isaiah’s little apocalypse (Isaiah 24-28), to help understand Paul’s use of them in 1 Corinthians 15:54-55.  This will help us understand the kind of bodily resurrection Paul has in mind.

Isaiah 24-28 – Isaiah’s Little Apocalypse

Due to Israel breaking her old covenant Mosaic law (primarily for persecuting and putting to death their poor brethren – the sin of blood guilt), Israel’s covenantal world undergoes an apocalyptic de-creation and shaking process and she corporately and spiritually dies in the form of being ruled over by Gentile leaders.  Through captivity and bondage, Babylon scattered her outside of her land.  When Israel repents and is gathered back into the land, she undergoes a spiritual, corporate and covenantal resurrection as described in Ezekiel 37.

In other words, Israel is a corporate Adam, and just as when Adam broke Edenic covenantal law and died a spiritual covenantal death, resulting in him being scattered from God’s presence (the garden/temple), so too when Israel broke covenant she underwent a covenantal spiritual death that resulted in her being scattered from God’s presence away from her temple and land.

The time of the eschatological wedding is the time of the resurrection (Isa. 25:6-8) and Jesus identifies the time of the wedding as taking place when the Roman armies would judge and burn Jerusalem, or within the AD 30 – AD 70 “this generation” (Mt. 22:1-14; Mt. 24:27-34—25:1-13).

Paul’s other reference to Isaiah is his trumpet change which takes place at Christ’s Parousia, bringing about the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:23, 52.  This is the trumpet gathering of Isaiah 27:12-13.  And, again, this is the OT echo and foundation to the trumpet gathering and trumpet catching away of Matthew 24:30-31 and 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 that would take place in the AD 30 – AD 70 “this generation,” which Paul taught (under inspiration) and thus expected his first century “we” audience to experience.

 Hosea

Hosea’s context is clear enough as well.  Due to Israel’s spiritual adultery with Baal and breaking their old covenant law, God gave Israel a certificate of divorcement.  The corporate body of Israel breaking the old covenant law resulted not only in a divorce, but it is also described as Israel dying a covenantal and spiritual death.  This death is described as God sowing Israel as a seed into the Gentile lands throughout the Assyrian Empire.  Once again, we see the same kind of corporate covenantal death that came through Adam and Israel when they broke covenant and became spiritually dead and scattered/separated from God’s presence.

But Israel would once again be betrothed and married to God in her “last days.”  The “last days” are the last days of the old covenant age which ended in AD 70 and is consistent with the “this generation” coming of Christ that results in the eschatological wedding / marriage that takes place in the OT.

Simply put, there is no biological casket resurrection that takes place at the end of world history found in Hosea or Isaiah, which Paul uses as his source for the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15.  The parallels are a spiritual corporate and covenantal resurrection, not an individual biological resurrection.  This is consistent with what we have seen earlier when harmonizing Paul with Paul in Romans 5-8 and 1 Corinthians 15.

Victory Over the Mosaic OC “the Law” = Victory Over “the Sin” and “the Death”

Some commentators not only puzzle over the present tense of “the death” in the process of “being destroyed” in Paul’s day, but they also puzzle over his reference to the old covenant Mosaic “the law” thrown in with the timing of victory over “the sin” and “the death.”  These last two references seem to correlate well with the resurrection, but what does the Mosaic old covenant “the law” have to do with it, especially since most Futurists see the old covenant Mosaic law being done away with at the cross or possibly by AD 70?

However, there is no problem for the Full Preterist who correctly sees the resurrection as “about to” take place in Paul’s day, bringing an end to the old covenant’s “this age” at Christ’s “this generation” Parousia (Acts 24:15YLT; Mt. 13:39-43; Mt. 24:27-31, 34).  When it came to Paul’s teaching on the resurrection before his accusers, he claimed he wasn’t teaching anything that couldn’t be found in the law and prophets – and Hosea 13 / Isaiah 25 / Daniel 12 are resurrection passages contained in the old covenant “the law” and prophets which Jesus said would be fulfilled in the AD 30 – AD 70 “this generation” (cf. Lk. 21:22, 32).  Jesus does not posit the old covenant “heaven and earth” of the law and prophets to be fulfilled at the cross, but rather in His generation (Mt. 5:17-18 / Mt. 24:34-35).  This is when it was all fulfilled and when that heaven and earth system “soon vanished” (Heb. 8:13).

Death would be swallowed up, and victory over its sting would only be accomplished when victory over “the law” was attained.  This was brought to fruition at Christ’s first century generation Parousia that closed and fulfilled the promises contained in the Mosaic old covenant age of “the law.” 

Concluding 1 Corinthians 15

After a careful examination of Paul’s modus tollens logical form of argumenta-tion, it becomes evident that deniers of the resurrection of the dead were not denying Christ’s resurrection or those Christians who had died “in Christ” (the new covenant side of the cross).  They could hardly be considered as Christians or saints for denying Christ’s resurrection. They were in effect denying resurrection to a specific group – the old covenant dead, whom they assumed they had replaced or were not a part of the new covenant body of Christ as they were.

As we have seen, the parallels between Matthew 24 and 1 Corinthians 15 demonstrate that an AD 30 – AD 70 “this generation” and contemporary first century “we” expectation of the Parousia and resurrection was realized and fulfilled in AD 70.

When we allowed Paul to interpret himself (using Romans 5-8), we came to a Scriptural understanding of “the [corporate] body” that was in the process of concurrently dying and rising (present tense) and was “about to be” redeemed.  The corporate and covenantal context and transformation of the temple/body of 2 Corinthians 3-6 also helped us understand what kind of body the early church was “clothed” with (and continues to be clothed with) at Christ’s Parousia in AD 70 and beyond.

The examination of Paul’s OT texts (Isa. 25 & Hos. 13) to support His resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15 were found to have nothing to do with a casket resurrection of individual biological corpses.  Rather, the cohesiveness and harmony for using those OT texts for Paul was to develop a spiritual, corporate and covenantal resurrection to close the old covenant age in AD 70 at Christ’s ONE imminent Parousia.

When victory over the Mosaic old covenant “the law” came, then victory and resurrection over “the sin” and “the death” was realized.  Victory over the old covenant “the law” was realized when all of its promises were fulfilled and/or its “heaven and earth” soon passed away in AD 70 (Lk. 21:22-32; Mt. 5:17-18; Heb. 8:13; 9:26-28; 10:37).

“Orthodox” Postmillennial Partial Preterism teaches that there was a progressive, spiritual, corporate, covenantal resurrection for Israel and the Church between AD 30 – AD 70 which resulted in souls being raised out from the realm of the dead into God’s presence at the Parousia of Christ in AD 70 (per Dan. 12:1-7,13 and other texts).  As we have seen, THIS IS THE resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15!  Selah.

Individual Body and Corporate Body

When we read 1 Corinthians 15 or 2 Corinthians 5, it sounds very much like Paul is describing a spiritual individual body as the ONE corporate body of Christ, the Church.  And to a degree, I think that is what he is doing.  When one died prior to AD 70, we learn that his soul was gathered back to God who created it (Eccl. 12:7).  Because Christ had not come, even righteous men were separated from God in Abraham’s bosom or Hades.  In this state, they were not shadows or ghosts, but had individual, spiritual bodies that reflected the images they had here on earth.  God allowed Samuel’s soul to be disturbed and come up to visit Saul in 1 Samuel 28:11-20.  Here we see that Samuel’s soul/spirit had a body that resembled the body and appearance he had while on earth.

We often speak of our aging relatives on their death beds with language such as, “Grandma is in ‘her last days’; get a flight out here quickly!”  Or “come quickly and say your goodbyes, because ‘grandpa is fading away quickly’ or ‘passing away quickly.’”  We realize that there is a transition and transformation that takes place at biological death where the temporal shell of our body goes back to the earth and our spirit or soul (our essence – personality, memories, volition, etc.) receives a different form and can continue in that form forever.  In a similar way, the old covenant man/kingdom was never designed to live on this earth forever.  He was temporal and would at some point enter into his “last days” and “soon vanish,” but at the same time would experience a change or transformation into another form, a spiritual one fit for eternity.  God’s kingdom is now a kingdom of heaven “not of this world” and we are blessed to be in it.  When we die on this side of Christ’s Second Coming in AD 70 and the end of the old covenant age, we are blessed to experience this eternal life separated from the distractions of life here on earth.  We will have a spiritual body that is recognizable, and will forever live in His majestic presence.

Before leaving the subject of the resurrection, many Futurists have taken 2 Timothy 2:17-18 out of context in order to try and condemn Full Preterism as “heretical.”  Therefore, before leaving this subject, we should address this crucial passage.

2 Timothy 2:17–18

“…and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have swerved from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already happened. They are upsetting the faith of some” (2 Tim. 2:17-18).

Without 2 Timothy 2:17–18, the Futurist doesn’t have a biblical leg to stand on in his condemnation of Full Preterists.

Far from being an anti-preterist passage, 2 Timothy 2:17–18 is actually a condemnation of the implications of Futurism.  Allow me to explain.  First of all, Hymenaeus and Philetus were Judaizers.  They were of a class of deceivers who taught Jewish “myths” and “genealogies” (1 Tim. 1:4; Titus 1:4), and were self-appointed “teachers of the Law” (1 Tim. 1:7).  They taught believers to abstain from foods (1 Tim. 4:3), no doubt using the Levitical dietary laws as a basis for their teaching.

It is because Hymenaeus and Philetus were Judaizers that Paul compared them to “Jannes and Jambres” (2 Tim. 3:8).  According to ancient historians, Jannes and Jambres were Egyptian magicians who challenged Moses’ authority in Egypt.  Like Jannes and Jambres, Hymenaeus and Philetus were teaching the strange doctrines of “Egypt” (Rev. 11:8), and were challenging Paul’s gospel-authority, attempting to deceive Christians into believing that God’s new wine (the new covenant land of promise) could be contained within the old “Egyptian” wineskins of the old covenant world.

Likewise, in 2 Timothy 2:19, Paul connects Hymenaeus and Philetus to the rebellion of Korah in Numbers 16:5, 26.[87]  Korah had led hundreds of the sons of Israel to challenge Moses’ authority.  As God had destroyed Korah and his followers in the wilderness, so God was “about to judge” (2 Timothy 4:1) and destroy the Judaizers, Hymenaeus and Philetus, and others like them (cf. Heb. 3:16–19).

According to the teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus, because Jerusalem and the temple still stood (in about AD 67) after the resurrection had allegedly already taken place, it irresistibly followed that “the sons according to the flesh” were now the heirs of the eternal kingdom and that Paul’s Jew-Gentile gospel of grace was a lie.  The blasphemous error of Hymenaeus and Philetus was that the world of the Mosaic covenant would remain forever established after the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets had taken place and the new heavens and new earth (“the resurrection”) had arrived.

This “Hymenaean” heresy is the diametric opposite of Full Preterism.  According to Preterism, the old covenant came to an eternal and irrevocable termination in “the resurrection,” when all things were fulfilled in AD 70. There is absolutely no theological connection between Preterism and Hymenaeus’ blasphemous lie of an everlasting “ministration of death.”

However, there is a clear connection between the heresy of Hymenaeus and the implications of Futurism:  If “the Law and the Prophets” are not fulfilled today, and “heaven and earth” have not passed away, and the jots and tittles of the Law have not passed away, and all things are not yet fulfilled, as futurism says, then logically and scripturally the Law of Moses remains “imposed” to this day (Matt. 5:17–19; Heb. 8:13; 9:10).  This implication of Futurism is exactly what the Judaizers, Hymenaeus and Philetus, taught when they said the resurrection was already past in AD 67.

It is also interesting how Paul’s apologetic against Hymenaeus and Philetus is similar to that of those in Thessalonica who were teaching that the Day of the Lord had “already” happened (2 Thess. 2:3).  Notice Paul says nothing like our opponents try and reason against us, such as,

“How in the world could you believe anyone teaching that the Second Coming and resurrection have already been fulfilled in AD 70?!?  Just look around.  We are still here, so the rapture hasn’t taken place, has it?  Corpses are still in the graveyards, aren’t they?  The planet hasn’t been burned up and everything isn’t perfect yet, is it?  So how in the world could you believe the Second Coming and resurrection has already been fulfilled or is a past event?”

Futurists constantly feel that these “just look around; there’s no physical manifestations of the kingdom” type “arguments” are their first and best appeals at refuting Full Preterism and yet Paul never used them.  Why?  Because Paul was a Full Preterist and understood that the Second Coming and resurrection were spiritual and unseen events and that they were “about to be” fulfilled in his future.  Paul had no beef with those teaching that these were spiritual events. He just refuted the timing of their teaching (AD 70 and the destruction of the temple were still future to Paul and his audience) and their connections with the heresy of the Judaizers seeking to usurp his authority and the Torah-free gospel he preached.

Concluding The Resurrection of the Dead

It has been admitted by Jewish and Christian scholars alike that from within the historical context in which the Bible was written that “resurrection” did not have to mean God would raise all physical bodies at the end of the world history.  They concede that resurrection beliefs included the soul or spirit being raised from the body at death.  Or the soul or spirit being raised from Abraham’s bosom or Hades at the end of the old covenant age to be in God’s presence.  And the concept that the ancient Hebrews thought in terms of corporate word pictures and thus they anticipated a corporate bodily resurrection for Israel to go through in Her last days.  We have explored all of these and seen that Jesus and the NT authors taught there was a spiritual and corporate bodily resurrection or restoration of Israel taking place in Her last days in which the Jewish remnant and Gentile believers were “being raised” from the spiritual death and sin of Adam and being transformed into the glorious new covenant body of Christ – the New Jerusalem or Israel of God.  When Christ came out from Zion to bring this Jew / Gentile body to her “fullness” or mature state – then “all Israel was saved” and post AD 70 She welcomes the Nations to be spiritually “healed” and partake of resurrection or eternal life (Rms. 11:15-27; Rev. 22:2, 17).

I have established that the Full Preterist view of the resurrection of the dead honors:

1).  The imminent time texts pointing to AD 70 which was to bring an “end” to the old covenant “age” (not end world history).

2).  The Jewish belief and tradition that the resurrection of the dead would take place during a 40 years Messianic second generation between their old covenant “this age” and the maturing new covenant “age about to come” (AD 30 – AD 70).

3).  The Christian and Jewish concepts and teachings concerning a spiritual, corporate body, and covenantal resurrection to take place at the end of the old covenant age resulting in souls or spirits being raised from Hades / Abrahams bosom to inherit eternal life and God’s presence.  While honoring the Amillennial position as well in that there was to be only ONE general resurrection of the dead at the end of the age.

Therefore, the Full Preterist position is exegetical and harmonizes the conflicting views on both the timing and nature of the resurrection of the dead.   Let those who have ears to hear, hear and those with eyes to see, see.

[1] Lester L. Grabbe, An Introduction to Second Temple Judaism: History and Religion of the Jews in the Time of Nehemiah, the Maccabees, Hillel, and Jesus, (T&T Clark Publishing, 2010), see pages 93-96

[2] Ibid.

[3] Murray J. Harris, FROM GRAVE to GLORY RESURRECTION IN THE NEW TESTAMENT Including a Response to Norman L. Geisler, (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan Publishing House, 1990), 70

[4] (Historical Jewish Sources, https://preteristarchives.org/historical-jewish-sources/?fbclid=IwAR2Osz
DkXKqp8Z-qv0RFId1hjS6_tDT7hoysllAAjdGQpUOTi03OmHx67Nc

[5] I asked Don to send me some good quotes on Jewish and Christian scholarship developing the corporate body concept and this is what he sent me which I’m sure are quotes that he has used in many of his books which I highly recommend.

[6] Kiel and Delitzsch, The Pulpit Commentary, https://biblehub.com/commentaries/job/19-26.htm

[7] Green, Hassertt and Sullivan, House Divided, Ibid., 194-195

[8] James B. Jordan, THE HANDWRITING ON THE WALL A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, (Powder Springs, GA:  American Vision, 2007), 618

[9] Ibid., 618-619

[10] Ibid., 620

[11] Ibid. 621

[12] Ibid., 628

[13] Kenneth L. Gentry, JR., HE SHALL HAVE DOMINION A POSTMILLENNIAL ESCHATOLOGY THIRD EDITION REVISED AND EXPANDED, (Draper, VA:  Apologetics Group Media, 2009), 538

[14] Ibid., 538 emphasis MJS

[15] Ibid., 538-539 emphasis MJS

[16] Ibid., 539 emphasis MJS

[17] Ibid., 540 emphasis MJS

[18] Kenneth Gentry, The GREATNESS OF THE BREAT COMMISSION, (Tyler, TX:  ICE Publishing, 1990), 142 emphasis MJS

[19] Green, Hassertt, Sullivan, House Divided Second Edition, Ibid., 178

[20] Joel McDurmon, Jesus v. Jerusalem: A Commentary on Luke 9:51 – 20:26, Jesus’ Lawsuit Against Israel (Powder Springs, GA: The American Vision, Inc., 2011), 48-49; see entire section 43-51.

[21] Ibid., 46-47

[22] Gary DeMar, Last Days MADNESS Obsession of the Modern Church, (Powder Springs, GA: Fourth revised edition, 1999), 68.

[23] Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness Obsession of the Modern Church, (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1994), 41, bold and underline emphasis MJS

[24] Ibid., 68

[25] Milton S. Terry, Biblical HERMENEUTICS A Treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments, (Rand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 441-442.

[26] James B. Jordan MATTHEW 23-25 A LITERARY, HISTORICAL, AND THEOLOGICAL COMMENTARY, (Powder Springs, GA: The American Vision Inc., – this book is currently at the printer to be published), p. 180.

[27] Ibid.,p. 181

[28] G.K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of The Old Testament In The New (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011), 131-132.

[29] Ibid., 131

[30] Ibid., 132

[31] Ibid., 132

[32] Ibid., 132

[33] Green, Hassertt, Sullivan, House Divided Second Edition, Ibid., 179-178

[34] Kenneth Gentry, co-authored book, FOUR VIEWS ON THE BOOK OF REVELATION, (Grand Rapids, MI:  1998), 89.

[35] Ibid. 46

[36] Kenneth Gentry, co-authored book, THREE VIEWS ON THE MILLENNIUM AND BEYOND, (Grand Rapids MI:  Zondervan, 1999), 246 footnote 45.

[37] Don K. Preston, Paul on Trial, PAUL, THE PHARISEES AND RESURRECTION, (Ardmore, OK: JaDon, 2020), 123

[38] Ibid. 125

[39] Ibid. 75

[40] Peter J. Leithart, REVELATION 1-11 INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMENTARY (New York, NY:  Bloombury T&T Clark, 2018), pp. 25-26

[41] John Murray, COLLECTED WRITINGS OF JOHN MURRAY 2 Systematic Theology (Pennsylvania, PA: THE BANNER OF TRUTH TRUST, 1977), 390-391

[42] John Lightfoot, Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica, Volume 4 (Hendrickson publications), 157. Lightfoot, Hammond, and Gill understand the “creation” to be referring to Gentiles. “ . . . Crellius (Comm., Para.) explains it as a reference to regenerate Christians and Le Clerc (Supp., NT) refers it particularly to Gentile Christians.” See also John Locke, The Clarendon Edition of the Works of John Locke.  I tend to see it as more of believers within old covenant Israel groaning under the law (Rms. 7) awaiting Messianic deliverance, but there is no reason to exclude righteous Gentiles also longing for the seed of the woman to deliver them from Adamic death and sin which the Mosaic Law only magnified.    

[43] Ibid., 158–159, emphases MJS

[44] John Lightfoot, Sermon on “Many Mansions,” cf. https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/lightfoot/
vol06.pdf pp. 322-323

[45] Tom Holland, Contours In Pauline Theology (Scotland: Christian Focus Publications, 2004), 85–110.

[46] Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness, Ibid., 225

[47] Kenneth Gentry, co-authored work/debate, FOUR VIEWS OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION, (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 1998), 89

[48] Kenneth Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation (Tyler, TX: Institute for Biblical Economics, 1989), 141-142, MJS

[49] Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 98b).

[50] Targum Johnathan on Isaiah 53.

[51] Daniel Mann, Isaiah 53: Rabbis, Skeptics, and the Suffering Messiah, https://www.jewsforjesus
.org.au/isaiah-53

[52] Brown, Ibid., Vol. 2, 226-227.  This is taken from Nachmanides.

[53] Mitchell, Messiah be Joseph, Ibid., 16-17

[54] David C. Mitchell, Jesus The Incarnation of the Word (Newton Mearns, Scotland: CAMPBELL PUBLICATIONS, 2021), 39

[55] Jerome Smith, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge Revised and Expanded, (Thomas Nelson Publishers), p. 802.  John Owen, John Lightfoot, R.C. Sproul, Doug Wilson, Gary DeMar, Peter Leithart, and many more all understand Isa. 65-66 and 2 Pet. 3 to be the removal of the old covenant world and the establishment of the new covenant world in AD 70 – see the list of references on this page.

[56] See John Gill’s Exposition of the Bile or his online Commentary.

[57] Brown, AJOJ, Vol. 1, Ibid., 77-78

[58] Gill, Ibid., free online:  https://www.biblehub.com/commentaries/malachi/4-5.htm

[59] Lightfoot, J. (2010). A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica, Matthew-1 Corinthians, Matthew-Mark (Vol. 2, p. 78). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

[60] Adam Clark, Commentary on the Bible [1831], free online at: biblehub.com

[61] Don K. Preston, D. Div., ELIJAH HAS COME A Solution to Romans 11:25-27 (JaDon Management, 2016), p. 13

[62] Ibid., pp. 33-34

[63] Pastor David Curtis of Bereanbiblechurch.com — see his sermon “All Israel Will Be Saved” 06/03/2012

[64] Ibid.

[65] Rev. Dr. A. Cohen, Everyman’s TALMUD, (New York:  E.P. DUTTON & CO., INC., 1949), 361-362

[66] quotes taken from:  Curtis Crenshaw and Grove Gunn, Dispensationalism Today, Yesterday, and Tomorrow, 204

[67] Ibid.

[68] Ibid.

[69] Wuest, K. S. (1997). The New Testament: An expanded translation (1 Co 15:20–28). Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans

[70] Gordon D. Fee, THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, (Grand Rapids, MI:  Eerdmans pub., 1987), 756

[71] Thiselton, A. C. (2000). The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A commentary on the Greek text (1234). Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, emphasis MJS

[72] Holland, Ibid., see 90 – 107 for this discussion

[73] Don K. Preston, 2005, 2712 Mt. Washington Rd. Ardmore, Ok.

[74] Keith A. Mathison, co-authored book, WHEN SHALL THESE THINGS BE?  A REFORMED RESPONSE TO HYPER-PRETERISM, (Phillipsburg, NJ:  P&R Publishing, 2004), 196

[75] Tom Holland, CONTOURS OF PAULINE THEOLOGY A RADICAL NEW SURVEY OF THE INFLUENCE ON PAUL’S BIBLICAL WRITINGS, (Mentor Imprint, Scotland, UK:  2004), 90, emphasis MJS.

[76] Ibid, 91

[77] Ibid., 91

[78] Ibid., 91

[79] Ibid., 95-96

[80] Ibid. 107 emphasis MJS

[81] John Lightfoot, Ibid., Vol. 4 (Hendrickson publications), 157.

[82] Ibid., 158–159, emphases MJS

[83] Green, Hassertt, Sullivan, Ibid., 206-210

[84] For a good discussion on the present tense found in 1 Corinthians 15 as well as seeing how this chapter fulfills the last three feast days of Israel, see Don K. Preston, Paul on Trial, PAUL THE PHARISEES AND RESURRECTION (JanDon, 1405 4th Ave. N.W. #109, Ardmore, OK. 73401, 2020), 95f.

[85] Richard Hays, The CONVERSION of the IMAGINATION Paul as Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 2005), 38

[86] Ibid., 41

[87] William Hendriksen; Simon J. Kistemaker: New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Pastoral Epistles (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1953–2001), 268.