The Longest Hour
[EDITOR'S NOTE: This article, written by Larry Siegle appeared in the very first issue of The Covenant Messenger, September 15, 1992. The simplicity of the presentation strikes at the very heart of why preterist theology is a sound approach to the study of Bible prophecy. Some of the points from the original article are developed more fully in this updated version of the original article].
James Burton Coffman in his commentary on the espistle of First John dates the book between A.D. 60-65 [1]. It was his conviction that all of the inspired books of the New Testament were completed "before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.," a fact many expositors have been reluctant to admit [2].
The dating of First John could well have a profound effect on the manner in which one interprets the message of the book itself. If the book is dated prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, then logically its message may have reference to that very event. However, if the book is dated after A.D. 70, its message would refer to events related to some other time-frame. Therefore, determining the actual dating of the book is quite important for proper exegesis of the message therein contained. Internal evidence suggests strongly that the epistles written by the apostle John contain the identical subject matter, and were written during the same period as II Peter, Jude, and II Timothy. All four of the inspired writers address "false teachers" whose pattern of behavior and characteristics are similar in nature--and written in that period of time identified as the "last days" of the Jewish age (II Tim. 3:1, 2; II Pet. 3:3; Jude 17-18) [3].
THE NEW TESTAMENT "TIME STATEMENTS"
Those who are familiar with Covenant Eschatology (the biblical view that all prophecy was fulfilled by A.D. 70), are well acquainted with the New Testament 'time statements' and their overall significance in understanding the meaning of Bible prophecy.
John the Baptizer foretold of a fiery judgment that was "soon" to come on the Jewish nation for their rebellion against God and the rejection of Christ as Messiah (Matt. 3:7-11; 23:39; Mark 11:9, 10). Jesus warned the people that the city of Jerusalem would soon face God in judgment with the Roman armies acting as the Divine Executioners (Matt. 23:31-36; Luke 21:20-22).
The time limitation for these events to occur would be within the span of a "generation." "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things are fulfilled" (Matt. 24:34). The testimony of secular historians is more than abundant with documented references to what took place in confirming the accuracy of everything Jesus had prophesied. "All" was fulfilled just as He said it would be, in the way He said it would be!
In thid connection, the expectation of the return of Christ comes into focus. When Peter, James, John and Andrew inquired about the destruction of Jerusalem they phrased the question this way: "...Tell us, when will all these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" (Matt. 24:3; Mark 13:3, 4; Luke 21:7). There is no indication that the disciples present, or that Jesus Himself had any other event than that which would be fulfilled in A.D. 70 in view. The question as recorded in Mathew's account would have been understood by the Jewish audience to whom it had been directed. They would have better understood the concept of His "coming" as referring to that which would occur at the end of the Jewish age--and not to something destined to happen thousands of years in the future.
Regarding the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, Jesus used apocalyptic language to describe what is commonly referred to as His "second advent": "Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory" (Luke 21:27). The dark "clouds" of national judgment would soon loom just over the horizon for those rebellious, first century Jews. The Kingdom of God would finally be manifested with "power" forever vindicated over the Jewish adversaries (Matt. 16:27, 28; Mark 8:38-9:1).
That the coming of Christ in the destruction of Jerusalem is a central focus of New Testament writers cannot be denied. On the day of Pentecost, the apostle Peter quoted the prophecy of Joel 2:28ff, and applied it to the "last days" of Judiasm (Acts. 2:16-21). On that same day, Peter warned the Jews who listened intently to the words of his message to, "...Be saved from this perverse generation" (Acts 2:40) It was "this perverse generation" to whom Jesus had referred previously that would soon face God in national and spiritual (covenantal) judgment. The apostle Paul, speaking in the city of Athens, indicated the nearness of the impending judgment: "Because He did set a day in which He is about to judge the world in righteousness, by a man whome He did ordain, having given assurance to all, having raised him out of the dead" (Acts 17:31 YLT). The "world" under consideration was that of covenant Israel. Who more than the Jews were opposed to the message that Jesus Christ had been raised from the dead? What better proof of the authenticity of His resurrection than for the foretold destruction of Jesusalem to take place exactly as He had predicted, within the "generation" Jesus said would not pass away until "all these things are fulfilled" (Matt. 24:34)?
When James, the fleshly half-brother of Jesus wrote his epistle in A.D. 61, his expectation was that the coming of Christ was close "at hand." To those first-century saints who were suffering intense persecution, he wrote: "Therefore, be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord...Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand...Behold, the Judge is standing at the door" (James 5:7-9). What possible comfort could it have been to these suffering saints to know that Jesus was coming thousands of years in the future? To reach such an absurd conclusion is to destroy the very argumentation of James! He told them specifically to "be patient,"--that is, to hang on, because the time of the deliverance was close "at hand" (Luke 21:28).
The apostle Peter, feeling the urgency of the time in which he lived, wrote: "But the end of all things is at hand; therefore be serious and watchful in your prayers" (I Pet. 4:7). His call to watchfulness no doubt reminded him of the admonition given to the disciples by Jesus Himself: "Therefore, watch for you do not know the day or the hour in which the Son of Man comes" (Matt. 25:13).
The writer of Hebrews told the Jewish Christians to remain steadfast, and to not fall away from their faith--returning to an Old Covenant system that could never save them. His admonition was based upon the nearness of the coming of Christ. "For you have need of endurance, so that after you have done the will of God, you may receive the promise: For yet a little while, and He who is coming will come and will not tarry" (Heb. 10:36, 37). Earlier in this same chapter, the writer exhorted his audience to not give up the habit of assembling together. Why? Because "...you see the Day approaching" (Heb. 10:24, 25). The "day" under consideration was the coming of Christ in A.D. 70 with "power and great glory" (Matt. 24:30; Luke 21:27).
The apostle John did not speak of the "last days" in his writings as did others since the proximity and time perspective were different. Instead, he spoke of having finally arrived at the "last hour" of prophetic time (I John 2:18).
If the "last hour" does not refer to the nearness of expectation with respect to time, within the constraints of that "generation" then the New Testament time statements are unintelligible and had absolutely no real meaning to those to whom they were first addressed.
Logically, either God has faithfully kept His word, or humankind has been in the midst of history's "longest hour" since the first century A.D.! Does it not seem far more reasonable to conclude that these and the other powerful statements in the New Testament had reference to the A.D. 70 fall of Jersualem and not to some other "yet future" day, thousands of years later?
When the apostle John received the "Revelation of Jesus Christ" (Rev. 1:1), He understood the nearness of the return of the Lord. At the conclusion of the book Jesus pronounced His intention to come soon: "Surely I am coming quickly." The response of John was, "Even so, come, Lord Jesus!" (Rev. 22:20). No room can be found in this dialogue to infuse thousands of years into the equation. Jesus promised to return, and return He did, at the destruction of Jerusalem!
Those who await some "yet future" second coming of Jesus Christ do so in vain. The "last" prophetic "hour" has long ago past and humanity has been ushered into a "new heavens and a new earth wherein dwells righteousness" (II Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1ff). The integrity of the word of God stands sure despite the efforts of skeptics unwilling to accept the meaning of the text and the time-frame in which it was written and fulfilled. May God awaken the hearts of those weary and discouraged who have not yet come to embrace the beauty and reality of all that God has promised. May each of us strive to see time as God sees it and not according to the traditions and precepts of men.
=====
END NOTES:
[1] James Burton Coffman, James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, Jude (Abilene, TX: A.C.U. Press, 1979), 349.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Arthus Ogden, The Development of the New Testament (Louisville, KY: Ogden Publications, 1983) 47-48.
James Burton Coffman in his commentary on the espistle of First John dates the book between A.D. 60-65 [1]. It was his conviction that all of the inspired books of the New Testament were completed "before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.," a fact many expositors have been reluctant to admit [2].
The dating of First John could well have a profound effect on the manner in which one interprets the message of the book itself. If the book is dated prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, then logically its message may have reference to that very event. However, if the book is dated after A.D. 70, its message would refer to events related to some other time-frame. Therefore, determining the actual dating of the book is quite important for proper exegesis of the message therein contained. Internal evidence suggests strongly that the epistles written by the apostle John contain the identical subject matter, and were written during the same period as II Peter, Jude, and II Timothy. All four of the inspired writers address "false teachers" whose pattern of behavior and characteristics are similar in nature--and written in that period of time identified as the "last days" of the Jewish age (II Tim. 3:1, 2; II Pet. 3:3; Jude 17-18) [3].
THE NEW TESTAMENT "TIME STATEMENTS"
Those who are familiar with Covenant Eschatology (the biblical view that all prophecy was fulfilled by A.D. 70), are well acquainted with the New Testament 'time statements' and their overall significance in understanding the meaning of Bible prophecy.
John the Baptizer foretold of a fiery judgment that was "soon" to come on the Jewish nation for their rebellion against God and the rejection of Christ as Messiah (Matt. 3:7-11; 23:39; Mark 11:9, 10). Jesus warned the people that the city of Jerusalem would soon face God in judgment with the Roman armies acting as the Divine Executioners (Matt. 23:31-36; Luke 21:20-22).
The time limitation for these events to occur would be within the span of a "generation." "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things are fulfilled" (Matt. 24:34). The testimony of secular historians is more than abundant with documented references to what took place in confirming the accuracy of everything Jesus had prophesied. "All" was fulfilled just as He said it would be, in the way He said it would be!
In thid connection, the expectation of the return of Christ comes into focus. When Peter, James, John and Andrew inquired about the destruction of Jerusalem they phrased the question this way: "...Tell us, when will all these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" (Matt. 24:3; Mark 13:3, 4; Luke 21:7). There is no indication that the disciples present, or that Jesus Himself had any other event than that which would be fulfilled in A.D. 70 in view. The question as recorded in Mathew's account would have been understood by the Jewish audience to whom it had been directed. They would have better understood the concept of His "coming" as referring to that which would occur at the end of the Jewish age--and not to something destined to happen thousands of years in the future.
Regarding the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, Jesus used apocalyptic language to describe what is commonly referred to as His "second advent": "Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory" (Luke 21:27). The dark "clouds" of national judgment would soon loom just over the horizon for those rebellious, first century Jews. The Kingdom of God would finally be manifested with "power" forever vindicated over the Jewish adversaries (Matt. 16:27, 28; Mark 8:38-9:1).
That the coming of Christ in the destruction of Jerusalem is a central focus of New Testament writers cannot be denied. On the day of Pentecost, the apostle Peter quoted the prophecy of Joel 2:28ff, and applied it to the "last days" of Judiasm (Acts. 2:16-21). On that same day, Peter warned the Jews who listened intently to the words of his message to, "...Be saved from this perverse generation" (Acts 2:40) It was "this perverse generation" to whom Jesus had referred previously that would soon face God in national and spiritual (covenantal) judgment. The apostle Paul, speaking in the city of Athens, indicated the nearness of the impending judgment: "Because He did set a day in which He is about to judge the world in righteousness, by a man whome He did ordain, having given assurance to all, having raised him out of the dead" (Acts 17:31 YLT). The "world" under consideration was that of covenant Israel. Who more than the Jews were opposed to the message that Jesus Christ had been raised from the dead? What better proof of the authenticity of His resurrection than for the foretold destruction of Jesusalem to take place exactly as He had predicted, within the "generation" Jesus said would not pass away until "all these things are fulfilled" (Matt. 24:34)?
When James, the fleshly half-brother of Jesus wrote his epistle in A.D. 61, his expectation was that the coming of Christ was close "at hand." To those first-century saints who were suffering intense persecution, he wrote: "Therefore, be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord...Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand...Behold, the Judge is standing at the door" (James 5:7-9). What possible comfort could it have been to these suffering saints to know that Jesus was coming thousands of years in the future? To reach such an absurd conclusion is to destroy the very argumentation of James! He told them specifically to "be patient,"--that is, to hang on, because the time of the deliverance was close "at hand" (Luke 21:28).
The apostle Peter, feeling the urgency of the time in which he lived, wrote: "But the end of all things is at hand; therefore be serious and watchful in your prayers" (I Pet. 4:7). His call to watchfulness no doubt reminded him of the admonition given to the disciples by Jesus Himself: "Therefore, watch for you do not know the day or the hour in which the Son of Man comes" (Matt. 25:13).
The writer of Hebrews told the Jewish Christians to remain steadfast, and to not fall away from their faith--returning to an Old Covenant system that could never save them. His admonition was based upon the nearness of the coming of Christ. "For you have need of endurance, so that after you have done the will of God, you may receive the promise: For yet a little while, and He who is coming will come and will not tarry" (Heb. 10:36, 37). Earlier in this same chapter, the writer exhorted his audience to not give up the habit of assembling together. Why? Because "...you see the Day approaching" (Heb. 10:24, 25). The "day" under consideration was the coming of Christ in A.D. 70 with "power and great glory" (Matt. 24:30; Luke 21:27).
The apostle John did not speak of the "last days" in his writings as did others since the proximity and time perspective were different. Instead, he spoke of having finally arrived at the "last hour" of prophetic time (I John 2:18).
If the "last hour" does not refer to the nearness of expectation with respect to time, within the constraints of that "generation" then the New Testament time statements are unintelligible and had absolutely no real meaning to those to whom they were first addressed.
Logically, either God has faithfully kept His word, or humankind has been in the midst of history's "longest hour" since the first century A.D.! Does it not seem far more reasonable to conclude that these and the other powerful statements in the New Testament had reference to the A.D. 70 fall of Jersualem and not to some other "yet future" day, thousands of years later?
When the apostle John received the "Revelation of Jesus Christ" (Rev. 1:1), He understood the nearness of the return of the Lord. At the conclusion of the book Jesus pronounced His intention to come soon: "Surely I am coming quickly." The response of John was, "Even so, come, Lord Jesus!" (Rev. 22:20). No room can be found in this dialogue to infuse thousands of years into the equation. Jesus promised to return, and return He did, at the destruction of Jerusalem!
Those who await some "yet future" second coming of Jesus Christ do so in vain. The "last" prophetic "hour" has long ago past and humanity has been ushered into a "new heavens and a new earth wherein dwells righteousness" (II Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1ff). The integrity of the word of God stands sure despite the efforts of skeptics unwilling to accept the meaning of the text and the time-frame in which it was written and fulfilled. May God awaken the hearts of those weary and discouraged who have not yet come to embrace the beauty and reality of all that God has promised. May each of us strive to see time as God sees it and not according to the traditions and precepts of men.
=====
END NOTES:
[1] James Burton Coffman, James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, Jude (Abilene, TX: A.C.U. Press, 1979), 349.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Arthus Ogden, The Development of the New Testament (Louisville, KY: Ogden Publications, 1983) 47-48.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment