Posted on 06/05/2002 11:51:09 AM PDT by sheltonmac
Any time there is a flurry of activity in the Middle East you can count on evangelical Christians to put on a good show. They run around proclaiming an "End of the World Is Near" gospel in hopes of scaring people into the Kingdom of God.
I refer to such Christians as "they" because I happen to be one of those evangelical Christians who believe that God is no longer dealing with national Israel and that His chosen people are those who comprise the church—essentially, all who believe in Christ. This may seem like a radical concept to those who look upon writers of doomsday fiction as prophetic geniuses, but that's what happens when people are drawn away from that boring, dust-covered, leaherbound Bible on the coffee table by novels with flashy covers and catchy titles.
When it comes to end times "prophecy," premillennialists seem to have a monopoly on the market. Hal Lindsey burst upon the scene in the 1970's with The Late Great Planet Earth. It became an international best-seller. In like fashion, the Left Behind series by Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins has proven to be one of the most lucrative enterprises in the history of Christendom. Sure, these books are by no means examples of literary greatness, but the authors more than make up for that with pure, unadulterated prophetic sensationalism.
The success of apocalyptic authors like Lindsey, LaHaye and Jenkins stems from their ability to exploit the prevailing eschatological school of thought among evangelical Christians, that being dispensational premillennialism. (Thank you, John Nelson Darby!) When it comes to the end times, most premillennialists believe that all Christians will be "raptured," that is, taken up out of the world by Jesus Christ at his almost second coming. Those left behind will have to face the Great Tribulation, a seven-year period of unparalleled chaos which will also herald the rule of the Anti-Christ. At the end of the Tribulation, Christ will return—his actual second coming—to set up his earthly kingdom and reign on the throne of David for a thousand years. After that millennial time of peace, God will do away with evil once and for all at the Great White Throne Judgment. (How there can be a thousand years of peace with evil present I cannot say. I suppose it's one of those things that just works it self out in the premillennialist model.)
With all the hype surrounding the end times, it is certainly understandable that theological misconceptions will filter down into our political ideology. This is not a new phenomenon. In fact, ever since the arrival of dispensational premillennialism on this continent in the 19th century our national political position has shifted to accomodate this line of thinking, thanks to the efforts of evangelical Christians.
Evangelical Christian influence has been around since the founding of this nation, and the beliefs of evangelicals have spilled over into politics. Ordinarily there would be nothing wrong with this, but flawed theology has since given way to a flawed foreign policy, and U.S. interests have become inextricably tied to the interests of modern Israel.
Strong political support for a Jewish nation began in the early 1900s. During World War I, Arthur James Balfour penned the Balfour Declaration which set the stage for British support of a Jewish homeland:
His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.Since dispensational premillennialism had already established itself as a part of the evangelical mainstream, it was only a matter of time before U.S. politicians who had been born and raised in that evangelical tradition began to let their theology affect their political ideology. In 1919, President Woodrow Wilson signaled his approval of the Balfour Declaration when he said, "The allied nations with the fullest concurrence of our government and people are agreed that in Palestine shall be laid the foundations of a Jewish Commonwealth."
American politicians have continued to voice their strong support for Israel, though little has been mentioned as to why Israel is such an important ally. But that really isn't the issue I want to explore. What seems to be driving the U.S.-Israel relationship, as far as evangelical Christians are concerned, is the popular belief that the nation of Israel still plays an important role in prophecy, and those not wanting to be caught facing the business end of God's wrathful sword come Judgment Day are pushing for more U.S. involvement in the Middle East. About the only reasons we hear are that we have a "moral obligation" to stand behind Israel or that it's simply "the right thing to do."
Dispensational premillennialists typically quote the Book of Psalms when speaking of our "obligation" to support Israel. "Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: 'May they prosper who love you'" (Ps. 122:6). This passage has been accepted by many Christians as a universal command by which all believers are bound to pray for the physical city of Jerusalem, lest they fall out of favor with God. Of course, that isn't the case.
While it may be good and practical to pray for the peace of modern Jerusalem, we should really be praying for peace all across the world—the peace that can only come about through the Good News of Jesus Christ. So, in a spiritual sense, Psalm 122 does apply to Christians today. We should pray for the peace of the spiritual Jerusalem, the church (Heb. 12:22), for the well-being of our brothers and sisters in Christ and the furtherance of the Gospel.
Many Christians, however, are too wrapped up in their flawed eschatology to realize that their first responsibility is to the church, the body of Christ, and not to a nation of unbelievers. As a result, eyes glance up in anticipation at the eastern sky every time Israel is mentioned in the media, and the practice of interpreting Scripture through newspaper headlines becomes commonplace.
It is interesting to see the ensuing pandemonium among evangelical Christians brought about by rumors of war in the Middle East. Believers ignore sound biblical instruction and start buying up extra copies of Left Behind to use as witnessing tools for reaching their non-believing friends. Christian columnists all across America crank out editorial pieces on the Jews' divine claim to the Holy Land and the importance of remaining steadfast in our nation's support of Israel. Jack Van Impe goes on television with an air of righteous vindication and says, "See? My latest reinterpretation of my previous reinterpretation of Revelation was correct! The time of Christ's coming in the clouds is fast approaching!"
Who can blame these Christians for becoming so enraptured (no pun intended) with the idea of being whisked away in the blink of an eye while the world is left to fester for seven years in its own evil juices? It is comforting for people to believe that they will escape tribulation when the end comes.
But ask anyone who holds to the premillennialist view what Christ had in mind when he proclaimed, "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place" (Matt. 24:34). Ask them what the apostle Paul meant when he said, "For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham" (Rom. 9:6b-7a). Ask them why God felt it was necessary to establish a New Covenant (Heb. 8) if the Old Covenant is yet to be fulfilled. Chances are the answers you receive will be less than satisfactory.
The truth is that the covenant God had with Israel finds its fulfillment in Christ. "And if you are Christ's," Paul reminds us, "then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Gal. 3:29). Advocating an "End of the World Is Near" gospel that appeals to gullible Christians and poll-driven politicians cannot be edifying for the body of Christ. If anything, it detracts from the work the Son of God already accomplished through his death and resurrection.
I certainly do not hold myself up as a theologian or biblical scholar, but it doesn't take one to see that the premillennialist paradigm is rather precarious. When a fundamental part of our foreign policy is based on a shaky biblical exegesis and championed by the very people who should know better, it gives one reason to question the immediate future of our nation.
At least we can rest in the fact that God is ultimately in control. His true chosen people, those who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, will not be forsaken, and the glory of the Almighty will shine forth for all the world to see.
I'm going to be rather tied up with school work etc. the next few days. Perhaps some more worthy than I will respond.
Blessings,
The World population did not reach 1 billion people until the 19th century. A 100,000,000 man army (before the 19th century) would have represented more than one-TENTH of the entire population of Earth!!
The point I'm making is, the 100,000,000 man army spoken of in Revelation could not have even been realisticly POSSIBLE until today.
As you point out, the "entire world watching" aspect of the Revelation prophesies would have been physically impossible before the advent of satellite TV.
We are living in the End Times now. The preterist "theology" cannot hold up under even the most casual reading of Scripture.
The bigger question is, who started this bogus "all prophesies are past" viewpoint, and what was their MOTIVE for doing so? Was it to discourage people from studying the Book of Revelation? For what purpose? Who directly benefits from people NOT studying or taking seriously the Book of Revelation?
None, he never changed his mind, all went according to God's plan.
The prophets foretold a suffering savior.
Yes, I agree, but nothing in Premillenial theology is violated with this. So what's your point?
The people tried to make Jesus King and He wouldn't have it.
No, "He came to his own and his own did not receive him". They did not truly want Jesus as their king, but they did want freedom from Roman oppression, but only on their terms. They did want the Roman empire to be violently overthrown.
Somewhere in there He must have decided to have an earthly kingdom because according to your reading He changes His mind when He was about to be crucified.
The plan of God was always for there to be a "church age" before the millenial kindom of the Messiah. Why were the disciples (in Acts) still asking Jesus when the kingdom would begin, even after the crucifixion, if there would not be a physical earthly kingdom in the future? Jesus did not tell them it was not coming, but he did say it's timing was none of their business.
Besides the fact that He explicitly said His kingdom was not in a place that could be pointed to, but within us.
Yes, because for those he was talking to and us, that is how we become part of the kingdom, since it a future event.
How many scriptures have to mean something other than what they say for you to keep your view?
None. Now why did Jesus put the now in his statement (from my previous post) if there would not be a later physical millenial kingdom. And why did you leave that part of the verse out when you quoted it? You are avoiding my point. You don't want to talk about the Scriptures that show Preterism to be a sham.
100,000,000 horses and soldiers in an age of jets and nuclear weapons?
The correct number is 200,000,000 and the only reference is in Rev 9:16. The next three verses in Rev 9:17-19 actually state
The horses and riders I saw in my vision looked like this: Their breastplates were fiery red, dark blue, and yellow as sulfur. The heads of the horses resembled the heads of lions, and out of their mouths came fire, smoke and sulfur. A third of mankind was killed by the three plagues of fire, smoke and sulfur that came out of their mouths. The power of the horses was in their mouths and in their tails; for their tails were like snakes, having heads with which they inflict injury.
John does not say they were in fact horses. He says what he saw in the revelation looked to him like horses. Not quite the same degree of specific certainty as has been discussed here.
Further, at present there are only about 67 million horses on the planet, of which about 11 million are presently in China and Mongolia. While God could start up a human managed breeding program (presumably in China), making some assumptions about the foal rate for horses starting at 11 million to reach 200 million, and about mare to stallion ratios, breeding age of mare and average lifespan, and feed stocks, puts a population of 200 million in China to be decades away.
I believe (given that scripture is silent on essential details) that this is to be interpreted literally, not symbolically, but that it is not actual "horses" as we presume them, but something else. What that something else is, literally, is open to much discussion, and I don't have any further insight to offer.
Sheltonmac states:
The Hebrews of the time would have never assumed that the fulfillment of those 70 weeks would be thousands of years in the future. Looking at the timeline of events that occured after Daniel's prophecy, we can see the 70 weeks culminating with the birth, ministry, death and resurrection of Christ. But in order for the still-future fulfillment interpretation to hold up, a gap had to be inserted into the text.
This is misstated. Yes, there is a 'gap' between Daniel's 69 weeks and the 70th week. However, Daniel's prophecy of 69 weeks beginning with the decree of Artaxerxes I given to Ezra was fulfilled with the baptism (anointing) of Jesus Christ (Dan 9:25). Dan 9:26 refers to the cutting off of the anointed one (Christ's crucifixion) which is after the 69 weeks, and not included in the 69 weeks. This has already been explained here, and elsewhere. Specifically then, the incorrect phrase above is 70 weeks culminating with the birth, ministry, death and resurrection of Christ. It was 69 weeks and did not include Christ's ministry, death and resurrection. Yes, those happened, but not as part of Daniel's 69 week prophecy, and not as part of the 70th week either, as the math obviously doesn't work.
(Sheesh Starwind! Get it together!)
Just real pushed for time the next few days.
ALL THOSE RISING TO THE TASK WILL BE MUCH APPRECIATED, ARE MUCH APRECIATED.
Would appreciate prayers, too, as I work to get housemate baptized. . . and my closing comments to classes the next 3 days of this last week of classes. . . and so much more but I'd best rush along.
BLESSINGS TO ONE AND ALL WHO LOVE THE LORD.
And now that the evil empire is history, rather than rejoicing in the mighty victories of our Warrior King, the doom mongers assiduously seek other villains to cringe before! Does not compute!
Yes. True. God will not be mocked. Nations are, and will be, judged on the basis of how they receive/treat the messengers of the gospel, the "brethren" of the Lord, those who hear and obey God's Word. (Matt. 25)
So, in your theological construct, the New Covenant is inferior to the Old Covenant. Abraham was able to embrace God's covenant for himself, and for his household, and for his descendents. Peter's pentecost proclamation preached that the blessings of the New Covenant were "unto you, and your children, and as many as the Lord shall call." However, in your theological construct, there is no room for entities such as families, churches, or civil governments. All that exists is the solitary soul, enrapt in exclusive communion with God. In your theological construct, there can be no such thing as a Christian nation, or church, or family. Just individual Christians.
Do I understand your position accurately?
I would be very surprised, especially since God is supernaturally bringing the Chinese people to Himself, at the rate of about 50,000 new converts a day.
But of course, you're not talking about Real Human Beings with eternal destinies and great value in God's eyes; just no-account spear carriers in some end-time action flick.
I challenge you to find a single passage of Scripture that refers to a gap between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks. The fact is that there are none. What I find strange is that no premillennialist I have met has ever tried to argue in favor of a gap between the 7th and 8th weeks.
Let's take a look at a couple key portions of Daniel 9:
"There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks" (v. 25).Again, nowhere in Scripture will you find a reference to a gap after week 69. Messiah is cut off after week 69, which is another way of saying he is cut off during week 70.
This gives breaks up the first 69 weeks into two sections, yet no one is arguing for a gap after week 7. Why? If there were no gap between weeks 7 and 8, why not say "69 weeks" instead of "7 weeks and 62 weeks"? But to the premillennialist there is an obvious gap after week 69."And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off" (v. 26).
All rightly assume that this is talking about an event occuring after week 69. Now, I learned to count at a very early age and, unless things have changed since then, 70 comes after 69. So, if 69 weeks transpire with one week remaining, and something occurs after week 69, wouldn't it be safe to assume that the event described occurs during week 70, the week that comes immediatley after week 69?
For some interesting reading, check this out:
Daniel's 70 Weeks—Future or Fulfilled?
"Chosen generation," "royal priesthood," "holy nation," "His own special people," "the people of God"..... Sounds to me like Peter is describing the church with the same adjectives used to describe Israel. I find it puzzling why so many people insist on focusing on God's plan for national Israel when it is the spiritual Israel that is promised God's blessing. Christ tore the temple veil in two. All believers now have access to the Holy of Holies. Our bodies are temples for God's Holy Spirit. Why would He wish to once again return to a temple made of stone?
Ok, here's just part of what happens in the 70th week:
Dan 9:27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.Since the 69th is already shown to end with Christ's baptism 'about the age of 30' in 26 AD, and if as you argue, the 70th week immediately follows the 69th, and then please show the fulfillment of Dan 9:27 between 26AD and 33AD, the 70th seven. Please do cite the historically recorded events that occurred upon which you base your arguement.
Check out the article I linked to in post #256. The author gives a step-by-step fulfillment of the 70 weeks.
I did. The author does not show the fulfillment of Dan 9:27, the 70th week between 26AD-33AD. He claims it, but does not show it; he does not cite the historical events the would fulfill it. So again, if you would please do so?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.