Popular Beliefs Premillennialism, Part 2 Old Testament and Gospels I. Introduction A. We have been spending time looking into popular beliefs 1. It is important to understand what those who live among us believe 2. It allows us to better present the Gospel and to have a defense for the faith (Matthew 28:18-20, 1 Peter 3:15) B. Premillennialism is certainly a popular belief in our day 1. The Left Behind series and its popularity attests to it 2. We see it in churches and even in foreign policy in America! C. Previously we looked at what premillennialism is and some general issues 1. Premillennialism is a system of belief that posits that we are currently living before a reign of 1000 years by Christ that will be inaugurated by a series of events from Daniel and Revelation, among other passages 2. We saw that while premillennialists claim to hold to a "literal" reading of prophecy, such is strictly impossible a. all the visions have at least some level of figurative interpretation b. in the end, premillennialists actually pick and choose what they interpret literally and figuratively, and many times do not make good choices 3. We also saw that premillennialism holds to a "Jewish" view of Old Testament prophecy, minimizes Jesus' work and the church, and misunderstands the nature of Christ's Kingdom D. Let us now continue our analysis of premillennialism with some Old Testament passages and passages from the Gospels II. Passages in Daniel A. Premillennialists will often turn to some passages in Daniel to explain their system B. Daniel 2 1. The dream of Nebuchadnezzar interpreted by Daniel in Daniel 2:31-35, 40-45 is used to attempt to show the presence of the "tribulation" and the millennial reign 2. There is no disagreement regarding the gold, silver, bronze, and even the iron portions of the statue and their interpretation: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome 3. Premillennialists, however, posit a gap between the kingdom of iron and iron mixed with clay, and see the latter as yet to arrive-- it will arrive just before Christ's return 4. The text, however, requires no such gap: it makes more sense for the Rock to be Christ and His first coming, having a spiritual kingdom that stands forever C. Daniel 7 1. As with Daniel 2, so with Daniel 7 2. The beasts of Daniel 7:1-8, 15-28 are parallel to the statue in Daniel 2, and the same difference of interpretation is posited, and the little horn from the fourth beast is considered the "Antichrist" 3. But yet again, there is no gap mentioned! 4. Daniel 7:9-14 exhibits the nature of this Kingdom, and it is considered to be "forever," not 1000 years or any such thing 5. Just as Daniel 2 refers more to Jesus' first coming, so it is with Daniel 7 D. Daniel 9 1. Daniel 9:20-27 is an important passage, but its interpretation is inextricably tied with Matthew 24:15 2. Therefore we will consider Daniel 9 and Matthew 24 together E. Daniel 11 1. Daniel 11, with its discussion of the "king of the north" and "king of the south" in Daniel 11:36-45, is often considered to refer to the times of the Antichrist 2. Yet when we look at the history of the Seleucid and Ptolemaic kings of the third and second centuries BCE, Daniel's descriptions and the historical events correlate 3. Daniel, therefore, is manifestly speaking about the events around Judea in the Macedonian period, and there is no need to posit a future fulfillment F. The passages in Daniel, therefore, do not say what they are alleged to say III. Joel 2 A. Joel 2:28-32 is alleged to refer to the "end times" B. Interpretation of Joel 2:28-32, nonetheless, is made sure by Acts 2:16-21! 1. Notice that Peter says that "this is what was spoken of by Joel" 2. There is no sense of doubt or partiality in this passage! C. Either Peter is wrong, and therefore the Holy Spirit is wrong, or Peter and the Holy Spirit is right, and we have no need to posit this passage as referring to a future event! IV. Malachi 4:5-6 A. There is some question regarding Malachi's prediction of Elijah and his return B. Premillennialists allege that John's denial of that role in John 1:21 means that he was not Elijah, and the return of Elijah will come at the "end times" C. Nevertheless, Jesus explicitly identifies John the Baptist as the Elijah to come in Matthew 11:13-14 1. Is there a contradiction between John and Jesus? 2. Not necessarily; perhaps it was not revealed to John but it was to Jesus 3. Perhaps John was being humble V. The "Olivet Discourse" A. Matthew 24 and 25 represent the backbone of the premillennialist story B. Daniel 9, along with Matthew 24 and 25, are put together to tell a story 1. 7 years of tribulation 2. The Jewish Temple is rebuilt, the Antichrist comes and defiles it 3. Jesus then returns at the end of this period C. Since it is the linchpin of premillennialism, if it falls, so does the doctrine! D. The key to understanding Jesus' meaning is to compare Matthew 24-25 with parallel passages in Mark 13 and Luke 21 1. The sum of God's word is truth (Psalm 119:160), and this is no less true in the Gospel accounts 2. Let us notice how these three passages break down E. Matthew 24-25 1. vv. 1-2: Jesus indicates that the Temple will be destroyed 2. v. 3: disciples ask three questions: when will these things (i.e. Temple destruction) be, what will be the sign of these things, sign of end times 3. vv. 4-25:46 represent Jesus' answer F. Mark 13 1. vv. 1-2: Jesus again indicates that the Temple will be destroyed 2. vv. 3-4: disciples ask when will these things be and the sign of it being accomplished 3. vv. 5-37: parallel to Matthew 24:4-36 G. Luke 21 1. vv. 5-6: Jesus indicates that the Temple will be destroyed 2. v. 7: disciples ask when will these things be and the sign of it being accomplished 3. vv. 8-36: parallel to Matthew 24:4-36, Mark 13:5-37 H. Let us now put all of this evidence together 1. All three accounts show the disciples asking Jesus about the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 CE and the signs that this is about to take place 2. Only in Matthew, however, do the disciples ask regarding the "end times" 3. Matthew 24:1-36, Mark 13:1-37, and Luke 21:5-36 are parallel passages 4. Matthew 24:37-25:46, however, represent additional material not present in the parallel passages in Mark or Luke I. It is manifest, then, that the material in Matthew 24:1-36/Mark 13/Luke 21:5-36 refers to the events in 70 CE, and Matthew 24:37-25:46 refers to the "end times" 1. Some may disagree regarding the last verses of Matthew 24, but the point remains the same 2. The main events in the premillennialist scenario are played out in Matthew 24:1-36; therefore, seeing that such events in truth refer to 70 CE, and not the future 3. Tribulation, etc., would have occurred in 70 CE, not in the future sometime J. Having established this about the "Olivet Discourse," let us return to Daniel 9:20-27 1. As always, it is good to see what the passage can tell us about the audience 2. verse 24: 70 weeks as decreed for "your people and your holy city", i.e. the Jews and Jerusalem 3. With the breakdown of the 70 weeks, premillennialists yet again must posit a major gap, not indicated explicitly by the text 4. Furthermore, with the "abomination of desolation" identified in Matthew 24:15 with the Roman empire and the destruction of Jerusalem, there is no need to posit that the prophecy refers to anything else than the end of the Jews in Jerusalem and the sacrifices on Zion K. We can see, then, that the premillennialist interpretations of these Old Testament and Gospel passages is found lacking VI. Another Layer of Interpretation? A. Sometimes, some premillennialists would posit a second or even third layer of interpretation of some of these passages B. That the passages we spoke of refer to the events described is not doubted; instead, it is alleged that just as some prophecies refer to events within Israelite history and also later in terms of Christ or the church, so the prophecies we mentioned also refer to what will occur in the "end times" C. Is this possible? D. While we certainly believe that there must be multiple layers of interpretation for many prophecies of the Old Testament, normally we do so because of explicit New Testament evidence for such or in an attempt to color or illustrate what we are to be as God's people (cf. 2 Timothy 3:16-17) E. No such evidence exists for these passages, nor are there any indications that another layer is necessary F. Without any evidence, there is only speculation, and such is not acceptable VII. Conclusion A. We have continued our examination into premillennialism B. We have seen that the interpretation of Old Testament passages and passages in the Gospel in an attempt to project them into the future is untenable; all were fulfilled either in Christ and His Kingdom the first time around or in 70 CE C. Instead, as we can see in Matthew 25, Jesus' return will in fact be very fast and will catch many unprepared! D. Let us hold to God's truth regarding the end and always be prepared for the return of Christ! E. Songbook/invitation F. Be not deceived: Christ is returning, and it may be at any moment! G. If you have never obeyed Christ, come to Him now and be ready! H. If you are a Christian and struggling, let us help you be prepared! I. If you simply need encouragement, we're here for that! J. Whatever you need, let us help; come to the front as we stand and sing