“And as they heard these
things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and
because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear. He said
therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a
kingdom, and to return. And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten
pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.” (Luke 19:11-13)
“And he said unto them,
It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put
in his own power.” (Acts 1:7)
Christians should occupy
till Jesus comes and stop obsessing over things they do not and cannot know;
the Bible does not teach any visible or verifiable signs that precede the
Second Advent. It is important to remember that the schedule or timetable for
the fulfillment of prophetic events is God’s business, not ours. We should also
keep in mind that when Christ does return it is likely that we will learn that
we were all wrong on at least a few points.
All too often
preoccupation with theories about the timing of the return of Christ leads to
neutrality and isolation regarding community affairs and the culture and
society in which one lives. Regardless of when Christ returns Christians must
occupy till He comes and when He returns the redeemed will be judged regarding
what they have been doing while He is not physically present. (Luke 19:11-13; I
Corinthians 3:13-15) Salt cleanses, purifies, preserves, and makes people
thirsty, and light dispels darkness; government corruption and social maladies
are signs of a lack or decline in Christian influence or an increase in
exposure of corruption. Regardless of when Christ returns, Christians are
supposed to be a cleansing and illuminating influence, impacting society and
culture for righteousness. (Matthew 5:13-16. Prophecy preachers and theorists
often predict a world where demonised and satanic people hold public offices
after the rapture, but this has been a characteristic of the world for
thousands of years; consider Matthew 4:8-10. A careful study of history reveals
that changes for the better were the result of Christian influence.)
Whenever a preacher
reminds Christians that Christians have a duty to impact society and culture
for righteousness there are usually professed Christians insisting that
Christians should not do that or be concerned about that because there isn’t
time to accomplish anything or because this would contradict their pet theories
and speculations about things they do not and cannot know. It is often
difficult to convince modern Christians that God is not obligated to submit to
any schedule they have set for Him.
Many modern theories
promote a neutrality or isolation that rejects or prevents interaction between
Christianity and culture and encourage believers to withdraw from society and
be neutral because of preoccupation with speculations about things which they
obviously do not and cannot know. (Consider Acts 17:6-7) Those who study Bible
prophecy merely to find a schedule of future events have missed the purpose of
prophecy: Prophecy (even prophecies fulfilled long ago) teaches us about God
and His truths, principles, standards, and Providence. (Ephesians 1:11) Rather
than seeing history as HIS story and recognising God as the present ruler of
the earth Who intervenes in human history and ultimately controls everything,
many have adopted a worldly view of history, such as the Humanist, Cyclical,
and Marxist views of history. (Romans 12:2; Colossians 2:8) Many even believe
that Satan rules the Earth; Satan rules in the hearts of unbelievers, "the
wicked world system," but God is the present ruler of the Earth and
nothing in the Bible ever indicates that God has ever abdicated His throne and
turned rulership over to Satan. (I Chronicles 29:11-12) Using theories about
the fulfillment of Bible prophecy to justify apathy ignores the implications of
the arguments being used to justify the apathy being promoted: The longer you
keep a sinking ship afloat the more time there is left to rescue the perishing.
The alleged signs of the
second coming or signs of the end times have no Scriptural basis. For example,
where does the Bible explicitly say that the establishment of the modern nation
of Israel relates to the second coming or the end or fulfillment of "the
times of the Gentiles?" Fulfilled Bible prophecies are often applied to
the Second Advent (e.g., Return from Babylonian captivity, destruction of
Jerusalem in 70 AD, etc.). When someone makes a ministry of making predictions
and one or some of his predictions come true it is often assumed that this puts
him and his teachings above scrutiny. (Making a correct prediction amidst wrong
predictions could be considered inevitable if someone keeps making predictions.
This certainly is not rightly dividing the Word of God but is putting men and
theories of men above God’s Word.)
Let us take a closer look
at passages often used to support the view that the New Testament says we can
know the Second Advent is near:
“Not forsaking the
assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one
another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.” (Hebrews 10:25)
“The day approaching” obviously refers to the destruction of Jerusalem and the
temple in 70 AD. Hebrews was written before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70
AD; note that the temple was still in operation when the Epistle of Hebrews was
written. (Hebrews 8:4; 13:10)
What is the basis for
insistence that Philippians 4:5 does not say “the Lord is at hand” in the sense
that God is near His people? (Psalm 46:1; 145:18)
What is the basis for
insistence that “the end of all things” in I Peter 4:7 is not an obvious
reference to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple around which the Jewish
world revolved in the first century?
“He which testifieth
these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord
Jesus." (Revelation 22:20; etc.) While many use this and similar passages
to support their theory about an assumed nearness of Christ’s return, Bible
skeptics point to passages like this as evidence of error in Scripture since
this was written nearly two thousand years ago. It could appear to be an error
and could appear to be saying when Christ will come until you examine the
meaning of words and grammar. For example, “quickly” (Greek: Tachu) does not
necessarily mean that the action will take place immediately or even soon but
can also be a description of the speed or suddenness of the action once the
action has been initiated. It is a mistake to get so involved in the debates
and controversies over the interpretation of the Book of Revelation that one
misses the main points or truths unveiled by the Book of Revelation: God is
sovereign, Jesus Christ is the present ruler of the Earth, and this world is
not the ultimate reality.
Do references to the
“last days” give signs or conditions to indicate to people of our generation
that the end of the world is near, or does the term "last days" refer
to the Christian era? (Compare Joel 2:28-32 & Acts 2:16-21; II Timothy 3:1;
Hebrews 1:1-2; II Peter 3:2-3. Christ was upon the earth during the “last
days.” -Genesis 49:1 & 10;
Hebrews 1:1-2; Hebrews 9:26. The instruction "from such turn away"
indicates that the previously described conditions in chapter three of Second
Timothy existed at the time this epistle was written. -II Timothy 3:5)
If II Timothy 3:2-5 is a
list of signs or conditions prior to the rapture, then how many times has the
rapture occurred over the last two thousand years?
If God wanted II Timothy
3 to be a warning or reminder that the advance of Christianity would be
accompanied by efforts of enemies of the Gospel to thwart the Lord’s work,
through persecution from without and corruption from within, and a warning of
perilous times resulting from conditions that have been characteristic of the
world in greater and lesser degrees throughout Christian history, how would he
have changed the wording of II Timothy 3?
How do you reconcile the
teaching that in Matthew 24:4-33 Christ gave signs of the Second Advent to be
seen by people living centuries later with Matthew 24:34? (After verse
thirty-four the subject changes to the second coming of Christ and the
discourse does not give us any visible signs or verifiable events to precede
the Second Advent except people carrying on with their lives unaware. -Matthew
24:36-39)
What is the basis for
insisting that “This generation” in Matthew 24:34 did not refer to people then
living? (Consider Matthew 11:16; 12:39; 17:17; 23:36)
If Christ wanted Matthew
24:34 to mean that Matthew 24:4-33 would be completely fulfilled within the
lifetime of people then living how would he have changed the wording of Matthew
24:34 and the context thereof?
How is Matthew 24:14 the
Great Commission given in Matthew 28:18-20? (In any language words often have
various possible meanings which depend on context. Matthew 24:14 is part of a
prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and is saying the gospel
would be preached throughout the Roman Empire before the destruction; compare
the use of word "world" elsewhere. For example, did Caesar Augustus
tax everyone on the entire planet or everyone in the Roman Empire? [Luke 2:1]
Matthew 28:18-20 refers to the entire inhabited earth and verse twenty refers
to the Second Advent as Christ began with "All power is given unto me in
heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore ...." Matthew 24:14 was fulfilled
before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. [Romans 1:8; 16:25-26; Colossians
1:5-6, 23])
If Matthew 24:30-31
refers to the Second Advent why is the Greek word Erchomia (“coming”) used in
the Greek text of Matthew 24:30 instead of Parousia? (Christ used figurative
language to say that people would see the evidence or sign of His coming in
judgment against Jerusalem in 70 AD. Followers of Christ were destined to
occupy all nations and gather the elect from all peoples, and Christianity did
spread and prevail after this period.)
For a long time in
Christian circles a popular trend in the study of eschatology has been to
interpret the historical and poetic books of the Old Testament and the Gospels
and Epistles of the New Testament in the “light” of pet theories about the
interpretation of passages of prophecy in prophetic books (especially Daniel,
Zechariah, and Revelation), interpret passages of Bible prophecy through the
lens of current headlines, distort facts and scriptures to make every passage
of Bible prophecy appear to be a literal narration of end time events, try to
make every current event fit the mold of pet theories about the fulfillment of
Bible prophecy, and support theories and predictions by cross referencing
unrelated passages of Bible prophecy. What is wrong with this? Scripture
itself, comparing Scripture with Scripture, is the key to understanding
Scripture: Bible passages must be understood in relation to context and the
whole Bible, and difficult passages must be understood in relation to clear
passages. (Psalm 119:130; I Corinthians 2:13; II Timothy 2:15)
Many assume that their
pet theories and the assumed relation of current events to their
interpretations of passages of Bible prophecies are above scrutiny and make
their pet theories into criterion for Christian fellowship and base their
plans, goals, and decisions on things they obviously do not and cannot know and
are not revealed in Scripture, and this tends to detract from important truths
and issues and make Christianity look silly. (Consider Acts 1:6-8; Matthew
23:24; Romans 14:1; I Timothy 1:5-7)
