Dispensational Futurism, a fresh look

[Daywalker]

Does Matt. 24's Olivet Discourse prove a problem for Dispensational Futurists???

As an OVT all you have to say is that the prophecy failed because Christ stated what WOULD have happened IF Israel were still the channel of blessing. We find that concept with Ninevah. Jonah said by the word of the Lord that Ninevah was to perish in 40 days. It never happened. Did God lie? No. He simply spoke everything as a truth KNOWING that since it would come to pass UNLESS something had happened to change it. Hence, he changed because THEY changed. He repented because THEY repented. IF God had EDF he would have lied, though. Thankfully he does not which mean he too has the FREE WILL to influence what could come to pass "IF". The Olivet Discourse was what to happen at the END of the age-some 500+ years into the future. What God did is he cut the age SHORT at the end of Acts (while his government was established only within the Body of Christ) for various reasons... But God will get back to it later....and yes, we will be here.

That temple (Matt. 24) WOULD have been supernaturally preserved through Dan. 70 WEEKS and the upcoming kingdom of God on earth till the Coming. Dan. 70 weeks never even started though. Even as Dan. told Neb. in Dan.2:28 -29, 45 that God's government would be set up ON EARTH first, but even so, it was in the LATTER DAYS and God would bring it TO PASS HEREAFTER. When the time came, Neb. would be the head of God as God had appointed him to be. Again, if God were speaking of ungodly apostate Babylon then he lied in saying that it SHALL COME TO PASS in the LATTER DAYS. Furthermore, it COULD NOT be the kingdom that he was in charge of because Neb. kingdom did not extend to the farthest reaches of the world as Dan. 2:37-38, 39 promised. People add to God's word to say that those kingdoms are Media-Persia, Greece, and then Rome. Again, NONE of them had a kingdom reaching around the world, and they got smaller in their influence as they went-none of them reached to the bottom of Darkest Africa or Farthest China. Not so in Daniel. That is what the Israelites would have understood. God would have "brought" the nations of the Gentiles through several stages (although really, it was NEB that was we know would have ruled the first stage with God's hand ON HIM) until it ended with Israel as the head of the nation.

Jesus would bring in his kingdom (After the Acts Period) with Israel as a channel of blessing, but only in a REMNANT state. The kingdom (government-according to Heb. and Greek and an English word study) of God would have come in through the nations FIRST before Israel got to be the superpower of Dan. 2:44. AFTER THIS the nations would rebel. They would bring about their own kingdom which Jesus would have to destroy. When they bring about their kingdoms of rebellion they will somehow get Israel to make an agreement with them, a covenant. Israel too will fall away even as II. Thess. 2 predicts in accordance with the book of Daniel. Dan. 7:1-28 covers this. They are two different visions for two different truths. God's coming government would be like that grand statue, the worlds rebellion would be as ravenous beasts devouring eachother. During that time, and overlapping in the same time frame, the 70 weeks of Daniel will begin. Dan. 9:1-2, 20-27. In order for their to be a falling away of the world, the world MUST be controlled by God, and THEN THEY FALL AWAY. God was not running the kingdoms of the world at that time, nor is he now. Today, we simply have the adminstration of GRACE, but the kingdom era will once again come. We still live in man's day according to Gal 1:4 and I.Cor. 4:3. In fact, it was only till Matt. 28 that Jesus even receives all power to bring that stage of prophecy about.

So, the temple of Cyrus's day could not have marked the beginning of the 70 weeks of Daniel.
You know that it is not the rebuilding of the temple under Cyrus that is in view for Dan. 70 weeks because the reign of Cyrus is already underway, yet in Dan. 10:1 it says that the time appointed was LONG. So, if the 70 weeks were to start in the next several years as both standard Futurists AND Preterists teach, that it would contradict the statement made by Daniel of the vision being appointed LONG (far off). It would not be LONG, it would be near. Furthermore, the Messiah (christ/annointed) is not Jesus in Dan. 9-it is David according to Dan. 9:25, 1-2; Jer. 30:1-10. This is why when John the Baptist (John. 1:20-21) came the people were looking for:
1. Elias, who was to come and restore all things-not just a TYPE of Elias. John 1:21, Matt.11:10,14; Mt. 17:11 =Jesus said that in the FUTURE Elias SHALL Come.
2. That PROPHET. This is the prophet like unto Moses, Jesus Christ
This leaves us with one person left who is different than the others, THE CHRIST of Daniel's 70 weeks...
3. The CHRIST that they looked forward to is a VISIBLE king, which is why they asked John if he were that Christ. That Christ of course, is David. He was promised to be the king (annointed/Christ) in numerous OT passages. The Israelites would have believed the texts as they stood. They found out that John was NOT David.

Furthermore, the only thing that Cyrus has rebuilt is the temple. This is a contradiction to the prophecy of Dan. 9. Dan. 9 stated that it was to restore and rebuild Jerusalem as well as the street. That did not happen in Cyrus's day. Moreover, IF Cyrus was carrying OUT THAT PROPHECY given in Dan 9 then he would have mentioned more than just a temple to be rebuilt, he didn't.

I honestly do not care to STICK AROUND and debate the whole issue because I am too busy to fool with it all. I am convinced that there are those here who dance to the tune of "I shall not be moved" and I really don't care to try to change them. Furthermore, there is a LOT of material to prayerfully think through.
Grace,
Mike Holt
Dispensational Futurist, OVT

[dizzle]

While DayWalker is not X9, I have debated several X9ers in the past on eschatology. I find that the heart and soul of a great deal of the argument centers around the conditionality issue as DayWalker presented.:


CONDITIONALITY

I, of course, believe in conditional prophecy. Any points made about Jonah are spot on. That was not a false prophecy, it had implicit conditionality. But can that idea of conditionality be applied to the Jesus’ prophecy of the Great Tribulation? Absolutely and unequivocally NO. This “escape clause” in prophecy has several underlying factors and presuppositions. Let’s take a look at the passage that gives rise to this doctrine:

Jeremiah 18:7-11 – The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it. Now therefore, speak to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, ‘Thus says the LORD: “Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and devising a plan against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.”

There are a lot of interesting things here.

The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it.

The portion teaches that the threats to destroy and pull down and pluck up are God’s response to the evil that a nation has done. If that nation then turns from its evil, God will not bring the disaster upon it.

And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.

God here speaks conversely to the truth already taught. Just as he will prosper an “evil” nation that turns from its evil, he will destroy a “good” nation” that turns from its good. In other words in this passage God is not talking about blessing an evil nation… it is presumed that when the blessing is pronounced, the nation is good, but if it turns evil, then the blessing is withdrawn. Even if that obvious presumption is denied, it matters not. If we speculate that God is trying to entice an evil nation to turn with promises of good, IF they continue in evil, God will withdraw the promised blessing. Even if we want to speculate a “lukewarm” nation, the same applies, IF evil is done, the blessing is withdrawn.

All of this is very important in this conversation. At the time that Jesus spoke the Olivet Discourse, He was not speaking of a “good” nation (ethnic Israel) upon whom He was now going to pronounce some blessing (taking for sake of argument the IMHO twisted argument that the days of vengeance were God’s blessing – more on that below). He was speaking of an evil nation that would soon demand that He be crucified rather than a bastardous murderer and cried out for His blood to be upon them and upon their children. They did not repent from those ways but continued in them, thus, even under the rubric of conditionalism there is no way out. The Great Tribulation was a first century event. That door is closed.


And continuing on the “escape” clause in prophecy, it is painfully apparent that this is ONLY valid when the reaction of the people prophesied about is not also the subject of the prophecy. For example, when God sent Moses to Pharaoh, not only did He tell Moses what to say, and what the consequences of Pharaoh’s refusal would be, He also told Moses that Pharaoh would in fact refuse. That closes any escape hatch. God has spoken the whole thing. Likewise, the rejection of Christ by the Jews (except for a Remnant, which is all that ever really existed as the people of God to begin with) was also foretold. Their rejection was certain.

Matthew 23:31-36 – Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers’ guilt. Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell? Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.

There is no way out of the context. The condemnation was placed upon the then living generation. The only way for it to be avoided (under any context) if them to repent and not do those things… but they did them all. Their fate was sealed. All of those things did come upon that generation.

I know that some will try and say that this is not a judgment passage in which repentance would be required for avoidance, but a blessing passage in which they were promised the Kingdom if they repented, but since they did not, God did not bring on the “purifying” Tribulation. However, none of the context whatsoever speaks of such a thing. The entire context speaks of their crimes, and the punishments that would come because of their crimes.

Luke 21:22 – For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people.

Vengeance and wrath.


Matthew 16:27 = 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.

If the Son of Man has not come in His Kingdom (see Luke 21:32), then there are some who alive and standing there back then that are still alive. This is the same “condition.” Some of you guys won’t die until you see this happen. This entire generation will not pass away into dust until all these things take place. The NT is utterly clear on this point of timing.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

:popcorn:

[Daywalker]

While DayWalker is not X9, I have debated several X9ers in the past on eschatology. I find that the heart and soul of a great deal of the argument centers around the conditionality issue as DayWalker presented.:


CONDITIONALITY

I, of course, believe in conditional prophecy. Any points made about Jonah are spot on. That was not a false prophecy, it had implicit conditionality. But can that idea of conditionality be applied to the Jesus’ prophecy of the Great Tribulation? Absolutely and unequivocally NO. This “escape clause” in prophecy has several underlying factors and presuppositions. Let’s take a look at the passage that gives rise to this doctrine:

Jeremiah 18:7-11 – The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it. Now therefore, speak to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, ‘Thus says the LORD: “Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and devising a plan against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.”

There are a lot of interesting things here.

The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it.

The portion teaches that the threats to destroy and pull down and pluck up are God’s response to the evil that a nation has done. If that nation then turns from its evil, God will not bring the disaster upon it.

And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.

God here speaks conversely to the truth already taught. Just as he will prosper an “evil” nation that turns from its evil, he will destroy a “good” nation” that turns from its good. In other words in this passage God is not talking about blessing an evil nation… it is presumed that when the blessing is pronounced, the nation is good, but if it turns evil, then the blessing is withdrawn. Even if that obvious presumption is denied, it matters not. If we speculate that God is trying to entice an evil nation to turn with promises of good, IF they continue in evil, God will withdraw the promised blessing. Even if we want to speculate a “lukewarm” nation, the same applies, IF evil is done, the blessing is withdrawn.

All of this is very important in this conversation. At the time that Jesus spoke the Olivet Discourse, He was not speaking of a “good” nation (ethnic Israel) upon whom He was now going to pronounce some blessing (taking for sake of argument the IMHO twisted argument that the days of vengeance were God’s blessing – more on that below). He was speaking of an evil nation that would soon demand that He be crucified rather than a bastardous murderer and cried out for His blood to be upon them and upon their children. They did not repent from those ways but continued in them, thus, even under the rubric of conditionalism there is no way out. The Great Tribulation was a first century event. That door is closed.


And continuing on the “escape” clause in prophecy, it is painfully apparent that this is ONLY valid when the reaction of the people prophesied about is not also the subject of the prophecy. For example, when God sent Moses to Pharaoh, not only did He tell Moses what to say, and what the consequences of Pharaoh’s refusal would be, He also told Moses that Pharaoh would in fact refuse. That closes any escape hatch. God has spoken the whole thing. Likewise, the rejection of Christ by the Jews (except for a Remnant, which is all that ever really existed as the people of God to begin with) was also foretold. Their rejection was certain.

Matthew 23:31-36 – Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers’ guilt. Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell? Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.

There is no way out of the context. The condemnation was placed upon the then living generation. The only way for it to be avoided (under any context) if them to repent and not do those things… but they did them all. Their fate was sealed. All of those things did come upon that generation.

I know that some will try and say that this is not a judgment passage in which repentance would be required for avoidance, but a blessing passage in which they were promised the Kingdom if they repented, but since they did not, God did not bring on the “purifying” Tribulation. However, none of the context whatsoever speaks of such a thing. The entire context speaks of their crimes, and the punishments that would come because of their crimes.

Luke 21:22 – For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people.

Vengeance and wrath.


Matthew 16:27 = 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.

If the Son of Man has not come in His Kingdom (see Luke 21:32), then there are some who alive and standing there back then that are still alive. This is the same “condition.” Some of you guys won’t die until you see this happen. This entire generation will not pass away into dust until all these things take place. The NT is utterly clear on this point of timing.
What would have happened is that God would have HEALED the earth by LIFTING THE CURSE of Gen. 3. Rom. 8 gets into this. Furthermore, men would have been HEALED by apostles and so forth which would have preserved their health. Again, life would have been extended. When this happens, man would have had their lives extentended and would have lived UP TO THAT DAY spoken of IN Matt. 24. This ofcourse did not happen. Why? Evidently God saw fit to repent of that program. That is that.

[Daywalker]

So there is no problem with the "present generation" of Matt. 24- even the unregenerate would have had their lives extended up to that day. That generation, then, never would have died out. It did though. In Acts 28:28 God authorized the kingdom program to the nations, that was when God changed things.

[Daywalker]

One last thing...
The TRIB will happen...God can give "the whole thing" and it get modified along the way and even change.
Dee Dee mentioned the situation of Moses and Pharoah, but what is often overlooked is the fact that Moses was told my God that he and the elders would go and do all of this. Ex. 3:18. This never happened, the elders never came, but Aaron did. Instead, the elders ridicule Moses upon his return. Ex. 5:1-2, 4, 15, 19-23. The Elders are the officers of the children of Israel. So, my arguement on Matt. 24 stands as is. Things can get modified, changed, revamped, and FAIL through and through.
"Thanks, John Sanders".