End Times. Part 4. Rapture and Great Tribulation

 

December 13, 2023

               In this article, part 4, we will explore various topics related to the end times and their interpretations. We will look at the following:

• Dispensationalism
• The rebirth of the nation of Israel in 1948
• The Rapture
• The Great Tribulation period of seven years
• What is the preterist view and its history?
• When was the book of Revelation written?
• Cast of characters such as antichrist, man of sin, the two beasts, the two women, and the dragon.

Introduction

It seems like most Christians in the USA believe that there is going to be seven years of Great Tribulation in the not-too-distant future. Not to worry, though, for carnal and lukewarm Christians can rest easy. They will be raptured into heaven before the time of persecution and tribulation. They began their Christian walk without cost and will end it in ease, just like they started it. They started their walk with God in the darkness of unrepentant sin and will end the same way, but in heaven and not hell.

Their ‘blessed hope’ is that it will never cost them anything to be a Christian and to go to heaven. For these Christians in name only (CINOs), that is their blessed hope: a free ride to heaven with no strings attached. They will not be required to give up their sins or pay any price to be a Christian. And for that half-hearted commitment to Christ, their reward will be a rapture to heaven, avoiding physical death and the persecution and tribulation that follow the rapture.

This thinking is what I find objectionable about this pretribulation rapture dogma. Their rapture teaching is a reward to carnal Christians. They get heaven and are saved from persecution. Think of all the past and present-day Christian martyrs who suffer unbelievable torture and tribulation. They were not raptured in the distant past. And they are not raptured in the recent past centuries or in the present hour. They gladly suffer all things for the blessed privilege of knowing Jesus Christ. That godly thinking is anathema to many Christians today, I fear.

In many nations today, becoming a Christian comes at a significant cost. But not here in the USA, it costs nothing at all to declare yourself to be a Christian, according to many Bible teachers. This is one reason why I do not believe in the pretribulation rapture and the theology that gave rise to this unorthodox belief, known as the pretribulation rapture and dispensationalism.

The Rise of Dispensationalism

What we know today as dispensationalism probably began in earnest in the 1830s with John Nelson Darby. This was a time of ‘relative prosperity and ease’ when this idea was born. Christians were told that God loves us so much that He would never want us to suffer for His great name. Never mind the numberless martyrs before them, who gladly paid the ultimate cost for their allegiance to Jesus Christ. I think it was Bible teacher and radio host of “The Narrow Way”, Steve Gregg, who told the story about a Christian telling him that if the pretribulation rapture is not true, then they might not continue to be a Christian. And even worse than that statement is the idea that these folks are actually real Christians to begin with. They have been deceived and are unaware of it.

John Nelson Darby, according to Wikipedia, “He lived in the 1800s and died in 1882. He was an Anglo-Irish Bible teacher, one of the influential figures among the Original Plymouth Brethren, and the founder of the Exclusive Brethren. He is considered to be the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism. Pre-tribulation rapture theology was popularized extensively in the 1830s by Mr. Darby and the Plymouth Brethren, and further popularized in the United States in the early 20^th century with the widespread acceptance of the Scofield Reference Bible. Dispensationalists believe there is a distinction between Israel and the Church and that Christians are not under the Mosaic Law. They believe in a future restoration of the nation of Israel. And before the return of Christ, the rapture will happen just before the tribulation period.”

This dispensational teaching spread across the United States through the ministries of men such as D. L. Moody and the Moody Bible Institute, as well as Lewis Sperry Chafer and Dallas Theological Seminary. Some of the most renowned Bible teachers of the last 50 years are graduates of these seminaries. For years, my Bible was a NASB Ryrie study Bible. Other study Bibles carry the same dispensational message. When I began my Christian journey, these men were my early spiritual mentors. They told me that the rebirth of the nation of Israel in 1948 was the fulfillment of an unconditional promise God made thousands of years ago. I believed them. The revival of the country of Israel in 1948, after approximately 1900 years in exile, marked the beginning of the final countdown to this age and the return of Jesus Christ, according to them. They also informed me about the pre-tribulation rapture, the seven-year Great Tribulation period, the Antichrist, and the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. I believed them. They knew much more than I did and seemed like such godly men.

Unfortunately, those who made projections about when all this was to happen were always wrong, but that never stopped them from tweaking their models and explaining things away so that we never stopped to think about their fundamental presuppositions. As I mentioned earlier, because individuals like Hal Lindsey were incorrect about the return of Christ in 1988, I set aside my interest in eschatology. I focused on the fundamentals of what it means to be a Christian. I am only returning to this study of the end times because I believe God has laid it on my heart. Otherwise, I would not be doing this. Let us examine some of the foundational ideas associated with dispensationalism.

Was the rebirth of the nation of Israel in 1948 based on an unconditional promise of God? Did that event mark the start of the final countdown?

It is essential to recall that all the promises of restoration to the nation and people of Israel in Scripture were made before or shortly after 586 BC. That date marked the final destruction of Jerusalem, Judah, and the Temple by the Babylonians. Bible teacher Steve Gregg and others maintain that every promise regarding the restoration of Israel has already been fulfilled. The rebirth of the nation of Israel in 1948 is not one of those promises. After considering the matter, I am inclined to agree. These promises about the restoration of Israel, after the 70 years in Babylon, have been fulfilled already hundreds of years before the birth of Christ. Those promises do not apply to the founding of the nation of Israel in 1948. That event, in 1948, was not a fulfillment of prophecy as dispensationalists claim. (Dr. Michael Brown, a Jewish believer in Christ, disagrees. I will read his material and if he can demonstrate that God made unconditional promises to Israel, I will change my mind.)

Even if Steve Gregg and others are correct, that doesn’t mean that God had no part in the rebirth of the nation of Israel. Dr. Brown made the point that when God scatters, no one can regather. When God closes or opens a door, no man can shut the door or open it. Therefore, if in 70 AD, God scattered Israel, no man or no nation, not even the United Nations, can regather Israel without God. I agree.

God left Solomon’s son, Rehoboam, two tribes for the sake of King  David. How many times in the Old Testament did God relent when dealing with apostate Israel for the sake of the patriarchs? Originally, God promised Abraham the land unconditionally. There were many times when God was ready to abandon Israel. For instance, God was prepared to destroy the nation and make a great nation out of Moses. Moses interceded, and God relented. After wandering in the wilderness of unbelief for 40 years, God brings the nation of Israel, under Joshua, into the promised land. God fulfilled His unconditional promise to Abraham. That said, God had conditions attached to keeping the land. Moses made all that very clear. When the children of Israel went into and captured the promised land, they all knew that there were conditions attached to keeping the land. In fact, God promised to destroy the nation of Israel and the people if they did not meet the conditions of obedience and faith. God told them He would scatter them abroad if they did not comply with the conditions.

 That is exactly what happened more than once. In 722/1 BC, the Assyrians destroyed the 10 Northern Tribes of Israel and took captive many Jews and brought them into the land of Assyria. In 586 BC, God brought the King of Babylon into the Southern two tribes of Israel to destroy them, the nation, the city of Jerusalem, and the temple. God promised to restore Israel after 70 years of captivity in Babylon. But only a remnant returned. Then centuries later, Christ came to His own and His own received Him not. In 70 AD, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the temple. And until 1948, the Jews were scattered across the globe. All this and more demonstrate that there were conditions attached to keeping the land promised to Abraham. Dr. Michael Brown believes that God promised to return them to the land of Israel even in unbelief. I will look into this further and report back if I find merit in his position.

Jesus Christ, when He walked this earth, promised the destruction (not restoration) of the city of Jerusalem and the nation of Israel, which occurred in AD 70 by the Romans. This was a result of their rejection of their Messiah. Jesus made no clear or explicit promises about a future restoration of the nation of Israel, nor did any of the apostles, so says Steve Gregg. I think Mr. Gregg is correct. Dr. Brown disagrees. (And I wonder about my early credulity in just accepting what I was told on face value and not checking it out for myself long ago.)

Obviously, dispensationalists disagree with Steve Gregg and use the following scripture (and others) to support their beliefs. In Ezekiel chapters 36-37, dispensationalists find support for their belief that God will regather Israel in 1948.

I will only address chapter 36 of Ezekiel. Please read Ezekiel chapter 36:16-38. In this section, God is talking about His destruction of the nation of Israel, for their continual apostasy. In verse 19, God says He will “scatter them among the heathen, and they were dispersed through the countries.” God also said that for His great name He would, “For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land”, in verse 24.

Let us remember that Ezekiel was a captive in Babylon from about 593 to 571 BC. (I refuse to use BCE, ‘before the common era’.) The final and complete destruction of Judea, Jerusalem, and the Temple was accomplished in 586 BC by the Babylonians. (Jews were being taken to Babylon from around 607 to 586 BC.) In the Book of Jeremiah, we are told that God was going to send the Jewish nation into exile for 70 years, which would mean that until at least 516 BC (586-70 = 516), Israel would be scattered among the heathen. We are also told, in the Book of Daniel, that the nation would be regathered, just as God promised, based on the decree of King Cyrus (Book of Isaiah). Obviously, Ezekiel was not talking about a regathering in 1948 but the regathering of the Jews after the 70 years of Babylonian captivity based on the express and explicit promise of Jehovah. That time period spans from approximately 516 BC to 458 BC. Dispensationalists may infer from that a much later fulfillment, applicable to 1948, but that is only a wish and a dream, not a promise from God.

Chapter 37 of Ezekiel is the chapter about the dry bones in the valley.  This is about the regathering of the Jews in Jerusalem after the end of the Babylonian exile, not about a very distant regathering in 1948. We may, in hindsight, see in this 1948 regathering a glimpse of Chapters 36 and 37. But that is not a prophetic fulfillment. Again, that does not mean that Jehovah had nothing to do with this 1948 regathering. Let us remember that the Jews who were regathered in Jerusalem during the 400-500 BC time frame were those who returned to faith in Jehovah, based on His promise to regather them and rebuild the city and the temple. That is not the case for the Jews regathering in 1948, not even close.

What about Israel today?

As mentioned, Israel’s restoration in 1948 is not a fulfillment of an unconditional promise from God. So how is it explained? At the very least, God allowed it to happen. But did God actually make it happen? Could this happen without God’s help and approval? I do not think so. But it is not based on an unconditional promise from God that was yet to be fulfilled, as something God owed the Jews.

Could it be that this 1948 restoration of the nation of Israel comes from God’s mercy and compassion toward the Jewish people who lost 6 million of their loved ones in WW 2, which ended May 8, 1945, when Germany surrendered, and September 2, 1945, when Japan surrendered? Could it be that God was moved with compassion toward the Jewish people, without it meaning that this was an unconditional promise, which obligated God to bring them back to the land that was once their homeland? Could it be that God remembered His promise to the patriarchs, and that moved Him to regather them one more time?

This restoration in 1948 is, to a considerable extent, the result of dispensational Christianity in America and England. It’s like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Dispensationalists had been preaching about it long before it happened. They believed it was an unconditional promise by God, but it really wasn’t if Steve Gregg is correct. Their dispensational fervor moved many people to help Israel. Those included some key politicians. Even if all that is true, it doesn’t mean God was not the key mover and that it was not His will.

About half of the Jews in the world today live in Israel. Of the Jews living in Israel, only about ½ of 1% are likely born-again Christians. Of the remaining Jews, most are secular, and the others are observant Jews at about 20%. The Jews in Israel today are not a religious nation by design. This new nation of Israel is not part of the covenant nation of Israel devoted to Jehovah, but a gathering of Jews in the land that was once theirs by a promise from God. They lost the land and the covenant with God by their continued whoredoms. God divorced Israel. That is a relationship that has ended, not just a simple break in fellowship. The Jews who regathered in Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity regathered in faith in Jehovah. That is not Israel today.

The United Nations gave Jews the land. Apparently, the United Nations gave 52% of the land to the Jews and 48% to the Arabs. Arab Muslims included a minority that were and still are Christians. Jews had been moving to the promised land and purchasing land some time before Israel became a nation in 1948. The Zionist movement began as an organized one under Theodor Herzl in 1897. He was concerned for the survival of the Jewish people without a homeland of their own.

So, how do we explain their return in 1948 under the approval of the United Nations? Can a nation be born in a day? Can a woman give birth without first having travail? Isaiah 66 implies a strong ‘no’ to that question, unless God is behind it, for nothing is impossible to God. In other passages, especially the book of Daniel, we are told that God sets up kingdoms and their rulers (kings) who are very often ‘the basest of men.’

I agree with those who maintain that there was no unconditional promise to Israel about returning to the land after the last destruction in 70 AD. Therefore, their return to the land of Israel is not a fulfillment of Biblical prophecy as dispensationalists believe. Dr. Brown may yet prove me wrong. Stay tuned.

As mentioned, that does not mean God had nothing to do with it. It does mean that God did not owe them anything or make any promises to them. Let us remember that God’s initial promise to the Jews was conditioned on their faithful obedience to His covenant laws. And as a whole, the Jews today are as godless, lawless, and unrighteous as they were when Jesus lived on earth. The Jews are back in Israel, but are as apostate and wicked as they have ever been.

Jews rejected their Messiah and put Him to death. In the Book of Romans, we are told that they (Israel, Jews) can be grafted back into the branch if they believe. And Gentiles will be broken off if they ever become apostate, like the Jews.

A few others, before Darby, believed in the restoration of the nation of Israel, but most of Christianity did not, according to Mr. Gregg. Dr. Brown disagrees. Most of Christianity did not believe in a pre-tribulation rapture either, according to Steve Gregg. Today, I suspect that most Christian churches adopt both views. The website Christianity states that about 36% of American Christian pastors are dispensationalists who believe in a pretribulation rapture. How many or what percentage of their congregations hold the same view as their pastor? I suspect most of them do. That, I think, translates to a large majority of Christians who believe in a pretribulation rapture. This site also states that 25% of Christian pastors believe the rapture is not to be taken literally, and about 1% are preterists. I’m not sure if these estimates are accurate, but I think they must be close to the real number.

The Rapture

Under dispensationalism, terms are not used consistently. The terms ‘return or coming’ of Christ are an example. They believe Jesus returns (comes) in the rapture and returns (comes) again at the end of the age. They believe Christ comes again and again. One return is a secret return in the clouds, and one is a public return to planet Earth. Terms are used as needed to support their position, according to Steve Gregg. I agree with him and have noticed the same thing myself.

          Those who believe the rapture will occur before the start of the seven-year tribulation period are part of the pre-tribulation rapture crowd. Still others believe that Christians will be around for 3.5 years and raptured in the middle of or toward the end of the seven-year tribulation period.

A smaller number believe the rapture occurs at the end of the tribulation period and when Jesus returns at that time. In that final return, both the rapture and Jesus come back at the same time. That is His second coming.

What scriptures are all this based on? I have listed a few of the most often used scriptures, but they also use others. Most of these passages are wide open to other interpretations because they lack specificity. But these are the most direct passages in reference to the rapture of the church and the tribulation period.

“But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep (dead), that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds (rapture), to meet the lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17, emphasis added.

In this passage, it says;

• Nothing at all about a Great Tribulation period of seven years or the exact timing of the rapture. It certainly does not place the rapture at the beginning or in the middle of the Great Tribulation.
• It does indicate that a ‘caught up’ (rapture) will occur when the “Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God.” Those ‘caught up’ will meet the Lord in the air. Again, that does not imply that the rapture will occur before the Great Tribulation period or during its middle. It might mean that those caught up to meet the Lord in the air is the same event as the second coming of Christ to earth.
• This passage doesn’t say that Jesus returns to earth bodily, as many Christians believe. (Jesus promised, when He ascended into heaven, to return in like manner.) This passage states that He returns in the air and brings the dead in Christ first, “then those who are alive and remain are caught up with Him in the air.” This passage doesn’t state that Jesus comes secretly in the air one time and then publicly when He returns to earth, the second coming of Jesus Christ.

For most of the Christian church’s history, I do not believe that a pretribulation rapture was taught or believed. See the ChatGPT comments immediately preceding the section on Mathew 24. These comments validate that the early church was unaware of a secret rapture and a seven-year Great Tribulation period.

 That alone doesn’t make it incorrect, but it does raise a question about why that is the case. Below is another verse of scripture that is used to support a futurist and dispensational interpretation of a rapture. It is certainly more credible than most of the other ones.

“Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God: neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed for this corruptible must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.”1 Corinthians 15:50-54, emphasis added.

• Nothing is said about a 7-year tribulation period.
• It does support the idea of a rapture, but doesn’t indicate the time frame of it. It does not state that the Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ occur at two different times. Nor does it say the rapture happens at any time in the seven-year tribulation period or before this Great Tribulation. In other words, this passage doesn’t suggest the saints will avoid tribulation by means of a rapture. (We shall not all sleep, but we shall be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump).

What exactly does a pretribulation rapture eschatology look like?

The website titled “Got Questions” represents a pre-tribulation rapture viewpoint. By that, they mean their theory of end times is based on 1 Corinthians 15:52 and the following sequence of events. My comments will be in bold print if I have any.

• The rapture of the church. “Christ comes in the clouds to snatch away” (rapture) all those who trust in Him. At the same time, the “dead in Christ” will be resurrected and taken to heaven, too.

My comments. Please note that this scenario involves two comings of Jesus Christ. The first is in secret, as He comes in the clouds and raptures the children of God. The Second Coming of Jesus is at the end of the Tribulation period and is a highly public event. This view, which separates the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ into two distinct events, was not widely held by most of the Christian church until the 1800s, according to Steve Gregg.

See the ChatGPT comments toward the end and before comments on Matthew 24 for support of that comment.

• “The rapture is imminent. No other biblical prophecy needs to be fulfilled before the rapture happens.” According to the author of this site.
• The very next thing that happens is that, “a satanically empowered man will gain worldwide control with promises of peace (Revelation 13:1, Daniel 9:27). This man will be aided by another man, called the false prophet, who heads up a religious system that requires worship of the Antichrist, Revelation 19:20”.
• Next up is the seven (7) year tribulation period. “God’s judgment is poured out on sinful humanity (Revelation 6-16). The antichrist’s rise to power is associated with this 7-year period.”
• During this seven-year period the church age saints are in heaven because they were raptured, but during the tribulation there are new believers in Jesus Christ. These new saints will be forced to receive the mark of the beast and if they don’t get the mark of the beast, they will not be able to buy or sell. Life will be very difficult. Life will be filled with persecution and tribulations even to the point of death.

My comments. Perhaps most of these new Tribulation believers will suffer greatly and be martyred for their faith in Jesus Christ. Note the bitter irony here. The pretribulation believers, many of whom are carnal, lukewarm, or half-hearted Christians, will be spared tribulation and suffering. They will be raptured into heavenly bliss, so they will not be required to suffer for Jesus Christ. But those who come to faith in Christ during the tribulation period will most likely suffer greatly, be tortured, and killed. How does that make sense to anyone?

• This website states that during these seven years, the Judgment seat of Christ and the marriage Supper of the Lamb will happen in the heavenly realm. (2 Corinthians 5:10, Revelation 19:6-10.)
• The Battle of Gog and Magog takes place in the first part of the Great Tribulation period. A great army out of the North, with all allies from the Middle East and Africa, attacks Israel. God defeats this great army in battle. (Some of these theologians believe this battle takes place just before the start of the tribulation.)
• At the 3.5-year mark into the Great Tribulation period of 7 years, there is the “abomination of desolation.” The antichrist breaks his promise with Israel. The Jews are scattered, and many of them turn to Jesus Christ as they recognize Him as their savior.
• There is a great persecution of those who came to faith in Christ after the rapture. (Daniel 12:11, Mark 13:14, Revelation 12:17).

See my comment above regarding the persecution and death of tribulation saints, as well as the fact that church-age saints will be spared suffering and death. God rewards these carnal believers for their unfaithfulness, and He takes them to heaven so they do not suffer and die. Something is very wrong about this kind of thinking. Persecution of Christians has been and continues to be practiced all around the globe today and from the very beginning of the Church of Jesus Christ. Jesus Himself told us that we should expect persecution.

• Next up is the Battle of Armageddon at the end of the 7-year tribulation period. Jesus returns to earth with His army from heaven (Mark 14:62). He saves Jerusalem from destruction while defeating this army of mankind. The antichrist and the false prophet are defeated and thrown alive into the lake of fire. (Revelation 19:20).
• Next is the judgment of the nations of the earth. Christ will separate the righteous from the unrighteous (Matthew 20:1-3). (Some think that it is at this time that Old Testament saints will be raised from the dead.) The righteous enter the literal 1000-year reign of Christ called the Millennium. The wicked will be cast into hell.
• Next event is the binding of the serpent or Satan. Satan is bound and held in a bottomless pit for the next 1000 years (Revelation 20:1-3).
• Jesus Christ reigns on earth throughout the Millennium. His capital city is Jerusalem. These will be years of peace and prosperity (Revelation 20, Isaiah 60-62). Memorial sacrifices will be offered in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. (Ezekiel 40-48).

My comments. Does it not seem strange to you that during the reign of Jesus Christ on earth, for a thousand years, there will once again be ‘memorial’ sacrifices on the altar and in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem? In the Book of Hebrews, we are told that all these Old Testament sacrifices and offerings have been done away with because Jesus died once for all the sins of mankind. Because Jesus suffered and died for us, we now have direct access to the throne of God the Father. Why in heaven’s name would Jesus want to restart sacrifices and offerings? He is the lamb of God, the one perfect sacrifice never to be repeated, who takes away the sins of the world. It makes no sense to me whatsoever.

In the Book of Romans, chapter 12, we are told, “….that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service”, verse one. We are to present ourselves as a living sacrifice, not present to God a lamb or a goat or whatever. Could anyone really believe that we are going to, in any way, return to the Old Testament sacrifices and offerings? And could anyone think that God Almighty would be pleased with that, when the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ has already been made? One last point about the rebuilt temple idea. In the New Testament, we are told that our bodies are the temple of God, not a building or a temple made of wood, brick, or stone. I find this very hard to accept and believe.

• The last Battle will happen at the end of the 1000 years. Satan is released for a short period of time. Once again, he will deceive the nations of the earth. The rebellion he incites will be quickly defeated. (Revelation 20:7-10). Satan is cast into the lake of fire, never to appear again.
• Next event is the Great White Throne Judgment. All in hell will be brought forward to face the final judgment. (Revelation 20:11-15). Sinners are cast into hell or the lake of fire.
• Finally, Jesus Christ brings forth a new creation. He completely remakes both the heavens and the earth. God wipes away all pain and tears, death and sorrow. The New Jerusalem descends from heaven, and God’s children enjoy eternity with God. Revelation 21-22.

Obviously, if a person believes in a mid-tribulation rapture, things unfold differently. In this brief review, many essential details must be put aside for the moment. The same principle applies to those who believe that the rapture and the second coming of Christ occur simultaneously or at the end of the 7-year tribulation period; events will unfold differently. And not everyone agrees about the millennium either, so their unfolding will be different. I believe the most popular view is the pre-tribulation rapture, which is why I used this as an example.

We now turn our attention to the seven-year Great Tribulation period. Where does the idea of seven years of the Great Tribulation come from?

          Did you notice the reference to Daniel 9:27 (second bullet point) in relation to the 7-year Great Tribulation? That is where they derive a period of 7 years for the Great Tribulation, which is the 70^th week of years that Daniel prophesied about. As you will recall, the 70^th week, or the last 7 years, as described in Daniel 9, does not even come close to stating or implying that there will be a seven-year period of Great Tribulation, many centuries into the distant future. As far as I know, this passage in Daniel 9 is their primary source for the seven-year Great Tribulation period.

The Great Tribulation that futurists and dispensationalists talk about?

There are approximately 25-30 places in Scripture that use the word tribulation. In the KJV, there are 22 passages, but in the NKJV, there are more uses, approximately 29, of the word “tribulation.”  None of them, to my knowledge, talks about a Great Tribulation of seven years. Jesus told His disciples to expect persecution and tribulation. The history of the church is one long example of Christian persecution and tribulation over 2,000 years, not just 7 years.

          As previously mentioned, futurists and dispensationalists use Daniel 9 and the 70th week of years to support a seven-year Great Tribulation period yet to come. Please refer back to my comments about Daniel, chapter 9, contained in another article, Part 2. This chapter in Daniel does not state what they want it wants to state. Moreover, I do not believe that the 70^th week or final 7 years is detached from the other 69 weeks of years by a gap of 2,000 years or more. All of the prophecy in Daniel 9 was already fulfilled with the first advent of Jesus Christ. I think that is the most accurate interpretation of this chapter.

          Many, but not all, view the 7 years as the Tribulation period, and the last 3.5 years as the Great Tribulation. See the Got Questions website. This site claims that Jesus Himself used the phrase ‘Great Tribulation’ in Matthew 24:21. While that is true, Jesus never mentions the seven-year length of the Great Tribulation in Matthew 24 or elsewhere. Throughout our Christian history, there have been many instances where saints of God have suffered great tribulation. In Matthew, Jesus told them to expect great tribulation as persecution was close at hand.

Preterist and futurist views

As mentioned, preterists believe that Matthew 24 addresses the fall of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70, under the Roman Emperor Nero. Preterists argue that Jesus said, “This generation will not pass away until all this is accomplished.” Did Jesus really mean what He said, or did He mean “that” generation (not ‘this’ generation) that comes into existence, many centuries from now, will not pass away until all these things are accomplished? That is hard to reconcile and believe. But what if Matthew 24, verses 1 through 35, are about the destruction of Jerusalem in A. D. 70, and verses 36 through the end of the chapter pertain to the end of the world? Theologian Ian Paul suggested that. Additionally, I have a few thoughts on this matter, which I will outline under the heading “Matthew 24 and Luke 21, more to consider.”

Interestingly, scholar and theologian Ian Paul states the following in reference to Revelation 13:1-4 and the beast. “The beast from the sea looks very much like the dragon, which is described in chapter 12 – and both together combine the features of the four beasts that emerge from the sea in Daniel 7, which many commentators believe symbolize the four great world empires of Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome”.

This beast is not written about as someone in the very distant future who is very mysterious. John wants to help his readers understand who this beast is by assisting them in calculating the number of his name. (the Greek term psephizo, which is the title of his blog and website).  The number is the name of a man. Mr. Ian Paul states that many scholars have arrived at a consensus that 666 refers to Nero. They use a numerology known as gematria or isopsehism. Nero’s name was apparently spelled with a final n; ‘Neron Caesar’ when written in Greek, but transliterated into Hebrew letters that add up to 666. Supporting this is the fact that using the Greek word for beast adds up to 666, thus making it clear that the number of the beast is 666. According to Ian, this beast is not identified with the ‘man of lawlessness’ in Paul’s writings nor with the ‘antichrist’ in John’s writings. And neither term (man of lawlessness or antichrist) occurs anywhere in the Book of Revelation. Interesting. We will revisit these subjects.

According to Daniel 9, Jesus died in the middle of this ‘tribulation week’ and ended the sacrifices by offering Himself as the lamb that takes away the sins of the world, once for all. Daily sacrifices are no longer needed or appropriate. Preterists believe the abomination of desolation in Matthew 24 points to A.D. 70 when Roman armies (see Luke 21 parallel passage) surrounded the temple. That is how Luke describes the abomination of desolation. Mr. Gregg believes that Luke wrote from a non-Jewish perspective so that his readers might better understand what is being addressed.

In Matthew 24, Jesus was asked when these things would be. He said when you see the abomination of desolation (or the Roman armies surround Jerusalem), that is when, according to the preterist.  And Jesus said all this would happen in this generation. This generation, not that future generation, shall not pass away until all these things are accomplished.

According to Mr. Gregg, in AD 66, the Romans were attacked by Jews, and for about 3.5 years, there was a very bloody war, and Jerusalem was destroyed. Christian Jews saw what was coming and fled before it was all too late. How do we know this? Mr. Gregg indicated that Eusebius (died 339 AD), the father of Christian History, wrote about this time regarding the destruction of Jerusalem, stating that Christians were told to flee the Roman armies, and they did go to Pella.

Evangelical Dispensationalism: Expanded Survey with Patristic Excerpts and Orthodox Contrast by ChatGPT

Introduction

This expanded survey presents (1) the nineteenth‑century rise of evangelical dispensationalism and its diffusion, (2) extended patristic excerpts that illustrate early Christian millennial expectation without modern dispensational distinctives, and (3) the Eastern Orthodox Church’s eschatological teaching in contrast to dispensationalism. Citations are provided in endnotes.

Part I — Origins and Diffusion of Evangelical Dispensationalism

• Time and place: The system commonly called modern dispensationalism arose in the late 1820s–1830s within the Plymouth Brethren of the British Isles, especially through the teaching and writing of John Nelson Darby (1800–1882). Darby articulated distinct biblical ‘dispensations,’ a sharp Israel/Church distinction in prophecy, and an imminent, often pre‑tribulation, expectation of Christ’s return.¹

• American reception: Darby’s repeated visits to North America (1860s–1870s) catalyzed a Bible‑conference network, with the Niagara Bible Conference (1875–1897) serving as a primary conduit. Through these conferences, prophecy charts, and study notes, dispensational ideas spread among evangelicals and fundamentalists.²

• Popularization: The Scofield Reference Bible (1909; rev. 1917) embedded a seven‑dispensation framework in widely read KJV study notes, cementing the system at the lay level and shaping curricula at emerging Bible institutes and seminaries (e.g., Dallas Theological Seminary), later refined by figures like Lewis Sperry Chafer and Charles Ryrie.³ (For many years, I used the Ryrie Study Bible.)

Part II — Patristic Witness: Millennial Hope Without Dispensationalism

Many second– to fourth–century writers voiced a ‘chiliast’ (historical premillennial) hope: a single, public Parousia followed by a millennial reign. They did not teach a secret pre‑tribulation rapture, nor a rigid separation of Israel and the Church as two parallel peoples of God. Representative excerpts follow (public‑domain translations).

Papias of Hierapolis (early 2nd c.) — as cited by Eusebius

Papias’s own writings are lost, but Eusebius preserves his chiliast expectation. Papias reportedly taught that in the age to come, the earth would yield superabundant fruit and that there would be a literal fulfillment of prophetic promises.⁴ Eusebius summarizes Papias’s millennial expectations in *Ecclesiastical History* 3.39.

Justin Martyr (c. 100–165) — Dialogue with Trypho 80–81

“I and others, who are right‑minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, as the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare.” (ch. 80)

“But I and many others are of this opinion, and believe that such will take place… whereas many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise.” (ch. 80–81)⁵

Note: Justin acknowledges legitimate diversity among orthodox Christians regarding the millennium; he nowhere posits a two‑stage coming or a pre‑tribulation rapture.

Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–202) — Against Heresies V

“For it is fitting that the righteous… should receive in the very creation in which they toiled, the reward of their labors; and that in the times of the kingdom, the creation, having been renovated and set free, should bring forth an abundance of all kinds of food…” (V.33.3)

“The promise of God belongs equally to the Church and to Abraham’s seed through faith, since all are reckoned as one in Christ.” (V.32.2)⁶

Note: Even while affirming a future earthly kingdom, Irenaeus stresses the unity of God’s people in Christ, not a permanent Israel/Church bifurcation.

Hippolytus of Rome (c. 170–235) — Treatise on Christ and Antichrist

Hippolytus reads Daniel and Revelation futuristically, expecting a final Antichrist and tribulation preceding the public appearing of Christ. He exhorts the faithful to endurance amid persecution, not to the expectation of a secret removal from the earth. For example, he says the saints will be “delivered up to tribulation” before the Lord’s appearing (paraphrase of sections 60–67).⁷

Tertullian (c. 160–225) — Against Marcion / On the Resurrection

Tertullian links the ‘new Jerusalem’ hope with a future kingdom on earth and the resurrection of the flesh (e.g., *Against Marcion* 3.24; *On the Resurrection of the Flesh* 25–26). He treats the Church as the continuation/fulfillment of Israel’s promises in Christ, without a two‑peoples schema.⁸

Lactantius (c. 250–325) — Divine Institutes VII

Lactantius provides one of the most extensive ancient treatments of a sabbatical millennium, depicting an age of peace after the overthrow of the unjust, followed by the general resurrection and judgment (Divine Institutes 7.14–26). He anticipates no secret rapture; the sequence is public and cosmic.⁹

Augustine’s Later Influence (for context)

Though outside the ‘early Fathers’ window, Augustine (354–430) popularized an amillennial reading in *City of God* (XX), interpreting the “thousand years” symbolically. This contributed to the fading of chiliastic language in later patristic and medieval theology, long before modern dispensationalism arose.¹⁰

Summary Contrast

• Early Fathers: Often chiliast (Justin, Irenaeus, Papias, Hippolytus, Lactantius), expecting one public Parousia, resurrection, judgment; no pre‑tribulation rapture; no fixed seven‑dispensation scheme; the Church understood as the people of God in continuity with Israel through Christ. (Note that comment, for I think it is important).
• Dispensationalism: Nineteenth‑century system formalizing multiple dispensations, a pronounced Israel/Church distinction in prophecy, and (in many forms) a pre‑tribulation rapture before a tribulation period and a Jewish‑centric millennium.
• Conclusion: Dispensationalism is historically novel vis‑à‑vis patristic consensus and Orthodoxy, even where both affirm a future kingdom or speak of the millennium. (Another critical comment).

Part III — Eastern Orthodox Teaching on the Last Things

The Orthodox Church confesses one Second Coming (Parousia), one general resurrection, and one Last Judgment. The Creedal expectation is eschatological sobriety: “I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come.” Orthodox catechesis rejects a two‑stage return or a secret ‘rapture’ as a modern theological construct foreign to patristic tradition.¹¹

Orthodox writers sometimes acknowledge that a few early Fathers used chiliast language, but the Church does not teach a detailed prophetic timetable. Speculation about dates and hidden schedules is discouraged; the emphasis is watchfulness, repentance, and participation in Christ’s life through the mysteries.¹²

Endnotes

1. See standard summaries: Encyclopedia Britannica, ‘Dispensationalism’; ‘John Nelson Darby.’

2. On the Niagara Bible Conference network (1875–1897), see historical overviews in Britannica and conservative evangelical histories of the Bible conference movement.

3. C. I. Scofield, The Scofield Reference Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1909; rev. 1917). For later systematization, see Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology; Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism.

4. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3.39 (on Papias).

5. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 80–81 (ANF 1).

6. Irenaeus, Against Heresies V.32–33 (ANF 1).

7. Hippolytus, Treatise on Christ and Antichrist (sections 60–67 for tribulation/Antichrist).

8. Tertullian, Against Marcion 3.24; On the Resurrection of the Flesh 25–26 (ANF 3).

9. Lactantius, Divine Institutes VII.14–26 (ANF 7).

10. Augustine, City of God, Book XX (NPNF 1st series, vol. 2).

11. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (GOARCH), catechetical resources on the Second Coming, resurrection, and Last Judgment.

12. See, e.g., Kallistos (Timothy) Ware, The Orthodox Church (latest ed.), on Orthodox eschatology and rejection of rapture theology.

Matthew 24: A Closer Look

          This chapter is often used to validate both the seven-year Great Tribulation period and the Rapture. Futurists, dispensationalists, and preterists all interpret this passage in very different ways. We shall consider them.

“Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Now learn the parable of the fig tree; when his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: so likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.” Matthew 24:29-36, emphasis added.

What does this passage tell us?

• Even though the word tribulation is used in verse 29, it doesn’t tell us that this is the seven-year Great Tribulation period that we hear so much about. In Matthew 24:21, Jesus does use the words ‘great tribulation’. However, it doesn’t state that it is a 7-year tribulation. It also must be noted that ‘great tribulation’ means intense persecution. Christians have experienced numerous periods of ‘great tribulation’ since the death of Jesus Christ over the last 2,000 years. Christians are still intensely persecuted in some countries around the world.
• If you are a preterist, this passage in Matthew 24 describes the fall of Jerusalem in 66-70 AD. A full preterist believes everything prophetic in the Bible was fulfilled by 70 AD, all of it. The return or second coming of Jesus Christ happened already in AD 70 according to the full preterist. Neither this passage nor the Book of Revelation has any prophetic relevance to us today, except as an example for the full preterist.
• The apocalyptic language, in this passage, is mainly symbolic if you agree with the preterist and idealist interpretation. For example, the sun shall be darkened, the moon shall not give its light, and the stars shall fall from heaven. To the preterist, this means God’s physical judgment on Jews, Jerusalem, and the temple occurred by 70 AD. Was that figurative and or literal language?

The Roman Empire destroyed Jerusalem and the temple and killed many Jews. The fires of destruction ravaged the city. Can you imagine the smoke and the color of the sky during this time? A few years ago, in Oregon, we had to evacuate our home for a couple of weeks due to forest fires. In the middle of the day, the sun was darkened, and it looked like the end of days. And sometimes great fires bring a red tint to the moon at night. In this instance, what might appear to be symbolic can actually be literal.

Should we not take this language literally? Or must it be taken as symbolic? Is some of it literal and some symbolic? Almost all Christians believe that Jesus will return physically to earth, don’t they? Isn’t this language what we would expect to hear? If you are a full preterist, you think all this language describes the coming destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Christ returns in wrath only and not bodily, according to the preterist.

• If you disagree with the preterist and are a futurist, then you think that all this is yet to happen in the Great Tribulation 7-year period or shortly thereafter. You believe that, even though this passage does not say that explicitly.
• The preterist interprets the phrase, “this generation shall not pass away until all these things take place,” to mean the generation that heard this from Jesus Christ personally. It is an excellent point.
• Or might this chapter be talking about both the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 and the end of the age? It is ‘both-and’ not just ‘either-or.’ As mentioned just moments ago, theologian and scholar Ian Paul brought this out in one of his posts, which can be found at psephizo.com, an article about the antichrist, the man of lawlessness, and the beast. Dr. Ian Paul mentioned the idea that the first 35 verses of Matthew 24 might be about the AD 70 destruction. That seems to make some sense. And verses 36 through 51 might be about the end of the age. We will come back to this.
• Others might point out that there is no reason to believe the preterist interpretation because there is no historical evidence that Jesus returned as indicated in this passage. For example, “all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” It is hard for me to believe that this is merely symbolic language. It seems to indicate something more than that. And if that happened in history, why is there no historical evidence of it or of something that might resemble it? However, as apocalyptic language, it might just be mainly symbolic. But is the second coming of Christ merely symbolic? That is hard to accept.

“Then shall two be in the field: the one shall be taken, and the other left.” Matthew 24:40.

This passage, Matthew 24:40, is obviously used to support a rapture belief by futurists and dispensationalists. Again, if this event happened by 70 AD, like preterists believe, why is there no supporting historical evidence of something like a rapture happening? The preterist responds by saying that if this is merely the language of a coming judgment, then it might be explained that judgment takes one or the other. Not everyone is killed; some are taken captive. It might have nothing at all to do with a rapture.

Matthew 24 and Luke 21, more to consider:

When Jesus left the temple with his disciples, he commented on the magnificent buildings they were in awe of. Jesus responded and said, “See ye not all these things? Verily I say unto you, there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down,” verse 2. At the time, this temple was one of the Seven Wonders of the World, as I understand it. It was impressive, yet Jesus was not impressed and cautioned His disciples not to focus on the temple itself. As usual, the disciples were focused on form and not substance. Religious people are constantly distracted by forms of spirituality, not the substance of it.

Naturally, the disciples wanted to know what Jesus was referring to. They came to him and asked him, 1) “Tell us when shall these things be? And, 2) what shall be the sign of thy coming, and, 3) of the end of the world?” Jesus then proceeded to answer their questions.

My reading is that there are really just two questions: 1) Tell us when these things shall be?  This relates, I believe, to the phrase “there shall not be left one stone upon another.” This appears to be prophetic about the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. The other questions (2 and 3) are basically the same question about the end of the age and the coming of Jesus Christ. I think it is appropriate to believe that Jesus did, in fact, answer their questions. However, did Jesus answer the second question before the first question?

This is what Jesus said,

• “Let no one deceive you, for many shall come in my name, saying, I am the Christ; and shall deceive many” in verses 4 and 5. People, both then and today, are continually deceived by false prophets and those who claim to be Christ. Is Jesus answering the first or the second question, or both? If you are a preterist, you believe that “many came in Jesus’ name, saying I am the Christ” from about AD 33 to AD 66, when war broke out in Jerusalem. That appears to be a stretch. I find it more believable that this is about the end of the age and the second coming than about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
• “Ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet” in verse 6. Again, is this about AD 70 or the end of the age and the second coming of Jesus? It could be both.
• “For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes in divers places,” in verse 7. Again, is that about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD or about the coming of Jesus at the end of the age? That makes me think of the Second Coming and the end of the age, rather than the destruction of the temple in AD 70.
• “All these things are the beginning of sorrows,” verse 8.
• “Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake. And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another,” verses 9, 10. Again, is Jesus talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or about the end of the age and His second coming? In AD 70, were Christian Jews “hated of all nations for my name’s sake?” That seems like a stretch.
• “And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But he that endures unto the end, the same shall be saved.” verses 11-13. This could apply to both the destruction of Jerusalem and the second coming of Christ. That is different than the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. Preterists believe that the fall of Jerusalem and the second coming are the same event. I am not convinced.
• “And this gospel of the kingdom be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come,” verse 14. I really do not see how this could apply to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem: the “gospel of the kingdom be preached in all the world as a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” By AD 66 or so, was the gospel really preached to all nations? I do not believe it. In my mind, this applies to the question about the end of the age and the second coming of Jesus Christ.
• “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains:” verse 16. It goes on to say that the person on the roof of their house should not come down or take anything out of the house, and the person out in the field should not come home to retrieve their clothes. He also said woe to those who are with child. “But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter; neither on the sabbath day:” in verse 20. Again, is this about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70 or about the end of the age and the second coming of Jesus Christ? Could this verse be a transition from the second coming of Jesus Christ to the more immediate destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70?
• “For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, nor ever shall be. And except those days be shortened, there should be no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.” Verses 21, 22, emphasis added. Note, there is no indication of seven years of the ‘great tribulation’ that dispensationalists talk about. Again, is this about the AD 70 destruction or about the end of the age? Seems like it fits both.
• Then if anyone says to you Here is Christ, believe it not. “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect,” verses 23, 24. This seems to apply to both questions.
• Jesus was telling them, His coming will not be in secret; everyone shall see it. We are clearly referring to the second question, not the first. “For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.” This is verse 27.

A futurist would likely see this language as literal but not take a literal interpretation of “this generation will not pass until all these things are fulfilled”. The pretribulation crowd would say this statement is literal, but it doesn’t apply to the generation Jesus was talking to back then; instead, it applies to the generation alive in the distant future that begins to see these things come to pass. Seems like a stretch.

A preterist might say that all this was fulfilled in AD 70 when Emperor Titus destroyed Jerusalem. But how does the language really apply to the second coming that the preterist believes in? The preterist thinks the second coming is in secret wrath, not something obvious and bodily, such as, “For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.” V. 27.

Let us assume that the statement, “This generation shall not pass away until all these things be fulfilled,” applies to that current generation alive when Christ spoke these words. How many of that generation would still be living some 40 years later when Jerusalem would be destroyed? Many of that generation would be dead from natural causes, so not everyone, or even most of them, of that generation would be alive and see this AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. Isn’t that true? Some would still be alive and see it. I think that is all that is meant by this phrase.

 The preterist and idealist might also recognize the apocalyptic language of Jesus, which is not to be taken literally. The following bullet points provide further clarification.  

.

• “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory,” verse 30. Refer back to my comments about the raging fires of our present day, which darkened the sun at midday and were visible at night, making the moon appear a light red. Again, which of the two questions is Jesus answering? It seems to be an answer to the second question, not the first. It also seems to indicate two separate events.
• “And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory,” in verse 30. Therefore, according to the preterist, the events that occurred in A.D. 70 are a fulfillment of this. Did all of the tribes of the earth mourn, and did the sign of the Son of Man appear in heaven at the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem? That is a stretch in my mind.
• “And he shall send his angels, with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other,” verse 31. The language in the last few verses, which preterists claim is merely apocalyptic, does prompt one to consider the actual end of days, not just AD 70. Is this a ‘both-and” situation or is it really just “either-or?” Could both of these be true? Could it be that Jesus was talking about AD 70 and the actual end of this age when Jesus returns to earth? At this point, I am still questioning all this. I am not sure what to believe.
• Jesus told them to learn the parable of the fig tree and when it has leaves. The fruit is close behind. “So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors,” verse 33. If Jesus meant to say ‘far’ and not ‘near’, why did He not say, “know that it is far”?
• “Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” Verse 34, emphasis added. Heaven and earth will pass away, but nothing Christ said will pass away. Did Jesus mean ‘this’ generation, or did He mean ‘that’ generation in the distant future? It is not believable to me that Jesus only meant ‘that’ generation to come many hundreds of years in the future. However, when I consider the two fundamental questions, this appears to be an answer to the second question, rather than the first. If that is true, then it may indeed mean “that” generation and not only “this” generation currently alive. It appears to have dual application.

I looked up what Albert Barnes had to say about the meaning of “this generation, till all these things.” The following quote is from his commentary.  “Until these things shall be accomplished. Until events shall take place which shall be a fulfillment of these words, if there were nothing further intended. He does not mean to exclude that reference to the (final) judgment, but to say that the destruction of Jerusalem would be such as to make appropriate the words of the prediction, were there nothing beyond. Compare the notes at Matthew 1:22-23. So when “death” was threatened Adam, the propriety of the threatening would have been fulfilled, had people suffered only temporal death. At the same time, the threat has a “fullness of meaning” that would also cover and justify eternal death. Thus, the words of Christ describing the destruction of Jerusalem had a fulness of signification that would meet also the events of the (final) judgment, and whose meaning would not be “entirely fill up” until the world was closed”, emphasis added. Mr. Barnes believed that Jesus was answering both questions in this verse: the destruction of Jerusalem and the coming again of Jesus at a later date. Could it really be that “this generation” applies to both the generation alive when Jesus uttered these words and the generation alive at the consummation of the age and Christ’s return?

• “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but My Father only.” Verse 36.
• Jesus told them that as in the days of Noah so it will be when He returns. Before the flood, people were eating and drinking, and marrying up to the time when Noah entered the ark. The flood came and took them all away. See verses 37, 38, and 39. Jesus is answering the second question about the end of the age and His return. As mentioned, the full preterist believes that the Second Coming and the destruction of Jerusalem occurred simultaneously in AD 70. We are not to look forward to the second coming. That is a tough pill to swallow.
• Then shall two be in the field and one shall be taken and one left. Women grinding at the mill, one will be taken and one left. Watch therefore because you do not know when the Son of man is returning, verse 42. Pretribulationists find in this a rapture, but if it is not meant for the future, but rather for the destruction of Jerusalem during Titus’s time, then being left behind is better than being taken into captivity by Rome. Refer to Luke 21:24 below.

Luke 21 is similar to Matthew 24, but there are a few notable differences. Luke 21:24 says the following, “And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” This appears to be the ‘abomination of desolation’.

See Appendix 7 for the ChatGPT analysis of Matthew 24 as viewed by the Early Church Fathers and the Eastern Orthodox Church. There is much more to dig into in Luke 21 and elsewhere, but this will need to wait for another time.

What about the Preterist position?

One pastor I listened to recently mentioned that Preterism is new and started in the 1960s. This is a YouTube video debate between Don K. Preston and Pastor Jason Wallace, which took place approximately 8 years ago. Therefore, neither the apostles nor the leaders of the Christians who followed them down through the many centuries believed in the Preterist view. This was probably just shorthand, as Pastor Wallace must have been more familiar with the history (below) of the preterist view.

Don K. Preston is a great debater and knows the Bible better than almost everyone I know. He is brilliant and seems like a great man of God, like the Pastor. However, I still can’t accept full preterism as Don Preston teaches. He believes everything prophetic has already been fulfilled in AD 70 or before. That is hard to believe.

Some of my lingering questions are: Is this world today the new heavens and the new earth? Did Jesus really return in AD 70? I do not believe it. Did God leave us with nothing prophetic after AD 70? Is the book of Revelation really all about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70? If it is, why didn’t God reveal this to us like He revealed the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 586 BC? The prophets of that time, such as Jeremiah, received a word from God that was very direct and clear, unlike the word given to us in the Book of Revelation, which is almost filled with symbolic, figurative, and apocalyptic language. Both in 586 BC and 70 AD, the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple were predicted. Both events were horrific in every way. If John was warning them of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, the symbolic, figurative, and apocalyptic language does make sense to me. There is more to the Book of Revelation than the destruction of Jerusalem, the temple, and the scattering of the Jews. Just as there is more to the 1948 regathering of the Jews in the new nation of Israel, if this regathering and rebirth is not a fulfillment of a promise of God, then it is God working out of compassion and or His love for the patriarchs or to glorify His Holy name. 1948 didn’t just happen. We are told that God raises nations and kings, and “sets over them the basest of men.”

I will continue to think through these issues and to read what others believe.

According to the Encyclopedia MDPI website, the following overview is provided. “Preterism was first expounded during the Counter-Reformation. The preterist view served to bolster the Catholic Church’s position against attacks by Protestants, who identified the Pope with the Antichrist, October 11, 2022.”

Definition of Preterist or preterism

According to Wikipedia, this is what is stated regarding preterism. “Preterism is a Christian eschatological view or belief that interprets some (partial preterism) or all (full preterism) prophecies of the Bible as events which have already been fulfilled in history. This school of thought interprets the Book of Daniel as referring to events that happened from the seventh century BC until the first century AD, while seeing the prophecies of the Book of Revelation, as well as Christ’s predictions within the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24), as events that happened in the first century AD. Preterism holds that Ancient Israel finds its continuation or fulfillment in the Christian Church at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.”

Wikipedia also states the following. “Historically, preterists and non-preterists have generally agreed that the Jesuit Luis de Alcasar (1554-1613) wrote the first systematic preterist exposition of prophecy ‘Vestigatio arcani sensus in Apocalypsi’ published during the Counter-Reformation.” This term originates from the Latin “praeter,” which denotes something past or beyond.

It is interesting to note that a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest developed this view as a counter to the Protestant Reformation. It was not received well by most Historicist Protestants because it was an obvious Catholic defense against Protestantism. “Kenneth Newport, in an eschatological commentary in 2000, described preterism as a Catholic defense against the Protestant historicist view, which identified the Roman Catholic Church as a persecuting apostasy.” Wikipedia.

Acceptance of the preterist view gained acceptance slowly in the Protestant world. It appears that mainly those Protestant liberal theologians and ecumenical believers advanced this idea. This is an idea that none of the early church fathers and those Christian leaders throughout the centuries believed in or taught as truth. “Nevertheless, the interpretive outcomes of this liberal school (German Praeterist School) are the ones evangelical preterists primarily follow today.” From the website, Israelmyglory.org,” This website states that around 1970 (1960 according to the pastor I mentioned above), the preterist school of thought began its rise in American Evangelicalism. The Churches of Christ are one denomination that took up the mantle. The most significant impetus to the acceptance of the preterist view has been within the ranks of the Christian Reconstruction movement.

Christian Reconstructionism is a fundamental Calvinist theonomic (the state of an individual or society being in sync with the divine nature) movement. Greg Bahnsen and Gary North are two proponents. This movement maintains a distinction between the spheres of authority of self, family, church, and state. Reconstructionism proposes that the contemporary application of the laws of Old Testament Israel is the foundation for reconstructing society today as the Kingdom of God. They believe in addressing social issues as part of their quest to create a better society. Not sure why these folks are so big on preterism. I may look at that later.

When was the Book of Revelation written?

From this same website, Encyclopedia.org. MDPI, which asks this next question, we get the following. When was Revelation written? We have this response. “Almost all New Testament scholars now take the view that Revelation was written during the reign of Domitian, sometime around 95-96.” If that is true, the preterist position is incorrect because the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple occurred in AD 70, before John revealed the Book of Revelation to the world.

The preterist must attempt to prove that the Book of Revelation was written before AD 70. That is hard to do. Eusebius (Christian Historian, exegete, and Christian polemicist from AD 260/5 to 339) writes that John was imprisoned on Patmos during the reign of Domitian, which was in AD 95-97. Irenaeus (born AD 120-130) writes that the Book of Revelation first appeared at the end of the reign of Domitian. Irenaeus was a student of Polycarp, who in turn was a student of John, the saint who is credited with authoring the Book of Revelation. Therefore, the word of Irenaeus must be given great weight. Seems like a stretch to believe that Irenaeus, who was a native of Asia Minor, might be mistaken about things about John. And his testimony was accepted as gospel truth until the time of Constantine (313), approximately two hundred years later. Until that time, the church fathers agreed that the Book of Revelation was written after the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70 and pertained to things to come. The church fathers believed in a coming Millennium. Some of these names are: Papias, the Epistle of Barnabas, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Lactantius. This was summed up by Justin Martyr (AD 150), who said that “John prophesied that the believers in our Christ shall live a thousand years in Jerusalem.”

There is New Testament support for the belief that AD 70 is not the end of the prophetic calendar. The apostolic and early Church did not consider the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 to be the fulfillment of prophecy concerning Israel, as do the preterists. Romans 11 is the supporting evidence. In this epistle, Paul assures the readers that God is not finished with Israel in the flesh because they can be grafted back in if they believe in Jesus Christ. In the meantime, Gentiles are grafted into the olive tree based on faith. Paul said that someday all Israel will be saved. God is not done with those of Israel who believe and trust in Him. (I took much of this information, the last few paragraphs, from a book written by Theodore Winston Pike, Israel – Our Duty – Our Dilemma, page 219, published by Big Sky Press, Oregon City, Oregon).

Objections by Preterists to the belief that Revelation was not written until 95-96 AD.

If it was written in 95-96, then why didn’t John mention it in the Book of Revelation? That is a question posed by some preterists. The answer might be this simple: this was a Revelation of Jesus Christ given to John. As such, this is not about why John didn’t mention the destruction of Jerusalem, but why Jesus didn’t say it. Yes, it was a cataclysmic event in 70 AD, but so was the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple in 586 BC. To pose a question that man might ask is not convincing, as the Revelation of Jesus Christ was not a word by man to man but a prophecy from the Son of God to the seven churches. Man’s ways are not God’s ways. I do not think it is strange that Jesus didn’t mention the destruction of Jerusalem. He had already done that in the gospels. 

The preterist view is that the Book of Revelation was written well before AD 70, specifically in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem. Therefore, it was probably written in AD 65 or 66 at the latest.

Revelation was written before AD 70, according to Steve Gregg’s interpretation. Others agree with him. Dispensationalists, Futurists, and Historicists don’t believe that is correct. Most of these individuals claim that Revelation was written around AD 95-96. If it were written late in the first century, and after the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, then the prophecy in the Book of Revelation can’t pertain to AD 70 but must be about the future, even a distant future.

Mr. Gregg provides evidence of an early date, but notes that there are scholars who believe in an early date and those who do not. It is hard for anyone to be dogmatic about it, he says. There are other important reasons to believe in an early date and that the book of Revelation was written primarily for what was about to happen to the Jews living in that generation of Jesus Christ, and the destruction of the temple in AD 70, and the apostles, according to Gregg.

Until recently, it was believed that the Book of Revelation was written during the time of Emperor Nero. Nero killed himself in AD 68. In the 20th century, some scholars and theologians began to think that the Book of Revelation was written during the time of Emperor Domitian, according to Mr. Gregg. Mr. Pike provided evidence to the contrary.

Mr. Gregg’s history differs significantly from what I found online. If what I found online is true, it is the exact opposite of what Mr. Gregg believes. Dometian’s reign ended in AD 96. Many, perhaps most, Study Bibles today claim that the Book of Revelation was written around AD 96. And if that late date is valid, then it can’t be true that the Book of Revelation is a prediction of the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. That means the preterist position is false. The date the Book of Revelation was written is of great importance, but there is no consensus.

Steve Gregg affirms that there are scholars on both sides of the debate; yet, no scholar can say precisely what took place near that time that the book of Revelation describes, which recounts these events. When John the Revelator said these things will happen hereafter or must shortly come to pass, are we to ignore that comment by the apostle? It has been two thousand years, and are we still waiting for what he prophesied about as being near or coming to pass shortly?

John, in Revelation 13:18, wrote about counting the number of the beast, or the Antichrist, for it is the number of man, and his number is 666. The number associated with the Hebrew name for Caesar Nero is 666. John disguised the name by using Hebrew, rather than Latin or Greek, as Romans were familiar with those languages and would recognize what and who John was referring to. John didn’t want to broadcast that Nero is the beast. According to Steve Gregg, this suggests that an early date is likely accurate. Interesting. (Dr. Ian Paul appears to agree about Nero but not about the early date for the writing of Revelation.)

In this next section, I will examine what former Pastor David Servant teaches regarding the preterist view. This video title is “How can we be sure that Preterists are wrong about Jesus returning in A.D. 70? This is his argument, which I found somewhat compelling. If we combine Matthew 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13, we see that the disciples basically asked four questions in total, according to Mr. Servant. Jesus answered the questions they asked. (I suggested that there were really only two questions.)

Remember that the partial preterist believes Jesus will return physically to earth again, while the full preterist believes Jesus already returned in 70 AD. Full preterists believe we are now living in the new heavens and new earth. Partial preterists believe that 3 or 4 of the last chapters of the Book of Revelation are yet to be fulfilled, whereas full preterists believe that all the Book of Revelation is fulfilled. They believe that Jesus already returned, in wrath, in 70 AD. They say that it is the second coming of Christ, and we should not look for another. I find that hard to believe.

Back to the questions. Mr. Servant states that there were two events, not just one event, as preterists believe. The two events are the destruction of Jerusalem, which would happen about 40 years later, and the second event would be the return of Jesus at the end of the age. Preterists believe that Jesus came in wrath in 70 AD, combining both basic questions into one event. Specifically, the disciples asked Jesus what the sign would be of these stones being torn down and His coming again at the end of the age. The apostles’ expectation of the Second Coming was a visible, bodily, and physical return, not an invisible, secret, non-bodily return in wrath only, as the preterists believe. If this means coming in wrath, then God has literally gone in wrath many times throughout human history. He came in wrath in Noah’s day. He came in wrath with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. He came in wrath multiple times in the period of the judges, and so forth. Clearly, it doesn’t mean that.

Preterists seem to think the apostles were asking about the sign of the end of the Jewish age, not the end of the world, when Jesus would come back. That is hard to accept, very unlikely, and improbable. Judging Jerusalem and coming back are two, not one, events. Preterists object and say that the disciples didn’t believe He was going away to begin with, so why would they ask about His second coming? The disciples knew what Jesus taught about His death, but had a hard time accepting it and believing it. They also learned about the final judgment that awaits them at the end.

Mr. Servant makes a good observation. When Jesus warned His disciples that many would come in His name, we are to understand that these false Christs would come visibly and bodily, not spiritually. See verses 24:3-5. Then again, in Matthew 24:23-27, the warning is reiterated that they should not follow any false Christ who appears visibly and bodily on the scene. In verse 27, Jesus says As the lightning is in the east and shines even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of man be. In other words, the coming of Jesus will be bodily and visible for all to see. Preterists believe that the coming of Jesus was not visibly seen in His person but only seen in His wrath poured out. The text argues for something else. I think that is a valid point. Nor did all the tribes of the earth mourn (not just in Jerusalem) in AD 70 as far as we know. Nor were the elect gathered from the four winds in AD 70 according to Mr. Servant.

Mr. Servant has other points to make that refute the preterist position. I also examined several different sites that attempt to disprove the preterist position. Some of their arguments were not that convincing. I may revisit this at a later date.

Please refer to Appendix 8 for a ChatGPT analysis of the date the Book of Revelation was written.

To-do list

And I may find other books or websites that dispute the preterist position. I may also conduct further study in Matthew 24 and Luke 23, as well as other passages.

My closing comments about the preterist viewpoint and the date the Book of Revelation was written.

• It appears that all sides agree on the origins of the preterist belief. The origin of it is from a counter-reformation movement started by a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest in the 1500s.
• It still has appeal to liberal theologians and those with an ecumenical bent.
• Both of these points give me great concern. Even today, we have evangelical compromisers of the Word of God, all in an effort to hold hands with as many “Christians” and other religions as possible. For example, we have evangelicals who believe in Chrislam, the blending of Christianity and Islam. We have evangelicals who embrace the apostate Roman Catholic Church. Roman Catholics and some evangelicals believe that we serve the same God as do Muslims. There are many ordinary Catholics and Muslims who know precious little about what their religion believes. I am not talking about the rank-and-file Catholic or Muslim, but the institutions and those who lead these two religions.
• It appears the church fathers and most of Christian history are against the preterist belief system. That alone is not determinative, but it is interesting and may actually be correct.
• It seems to me the history of the Christian church supports a date of 95-96 for the writing of the Book of Revelation, contrary to what Steve Gregg believes. It does appear authentic that there are scholars on both sides of the issue, but so what? Taking a liberal scholar’s belief about anything scriptural seems to be foolish to me. Even worse is to take the word of a Jesuit priest or a compromised evangelical. Everything that comes from a polluted river must be cleansed. Likewise, any news from the Main Stream Media must be verified and confirmed before it is believed. Most of its news is progressive, yet often full of lies, half-truths, omissions, and deception.

Refer to Appendix 8 for the ChatGPT analysis of the early or late date for the writing of the Book of Revelation.

Summary of the Rapture and the Great Tribulation

          The pretribulation rapture of the church, especially of the carnal members of the church, is wishful thinking at its best. This type of theology has brought us a ‘church’ full of unsaved people. These souls are told that they are “Christians” and that they are safe and secure in their sins. This is one of the reasons why the Christian Church in America is spiritually bankrupt.

          The passages of scripture that are used to support these two beliefs are weak at best. There are reasonable explanations why most of their interpretations do not stand up to careful examination.

          Some of the main arguments used by pretribulation rapture believers follow. I found the piece on the Tribulation produced by Service Christi helpful in outlining the following bullet points.

• The rapture belief is comforting to Christians, and God wants us to be at peace. God is very interested in our comfort. Therefore, the pretribulation rapture must be true. But many truths of scripture are not comforting at all. The reality that there is a hell is not comforting. The truth that unless we repent of our sins and believe, we will not go to heaven, is not comforting. The truth that the Bible tells us that those who live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution is not reassuring. It is not comforting to be told by Jesus that we are to expect persecution. It is not comforting to the flesh, but is still true. We know that most of the apostles were martyred for their faith in Christ. We understand that the world hates Jesus and hates real Christians. That is not comforting. Other doctrines give false comfort to Christians, and as a result, many of them will die in their sins and be lost forever. I am thinking of the doctrine of eternal security, which is a significant part of dispensational pretribulation rapture theology. Extending a false sense of security and comfort to impenitent Christians is not truth and is not love. It is a sweet poison, don’t swallow it.
• God would not allow His bride to suffer tribulation.  This is patent nonsense, as significant periods of persecution of Christians are a part of the history of the Christian church for nearly two thousand years. Our hope is knowing that those who die in tribulations and persecution will be comforted in heaven, where they will be reunited with loved ones and be in the presence of Jesus Christ. Our blessed hope is not that we will escape tribulation or persecution by a rapture. Indeed, God will not pour out His wrath on His children, but tribulation and persecution are the history of the Christian Church. Thinking that believers, especially believers in these last days who are lukewarm Christians (think of the Laodicean church in the book of Revelation), will be raptured is a very arrogant and dangerous belief.
• Escaping from the tribulation of the last days by a rapture is our blessed hope, according to some of these folks. However, that is not the blessed hope of the Church of Jesus Christ. The blessed hope is the return of Jesus Christ. “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ;” Titus 2:13. See also Revelation 1:7.
• They say rapture is true because Jesus could come at any time (Imminent), and this knowledge causes us to be holy and walk circumspectly. If that is actually the case, with anyone, that would shock me. We already know that we might die at any time or in the very near future. If that knowledge doesn’t cause us to walk in holiness (and it is often overlooked, even among Christians), then believing that Jesus could return at any time will have no impact on making our walk with Christ holy. At the same time, these folks teach eternal security, which most definitely does not produce a more holy walk with God. Many of them also teach other doctrines (imputed obedience) that extend a false comfort to believers and most definitely do not cause anyone to walk more circumspectly. The idea that the rapture causes Christians to be more holy is wishful, even delusional, thinking, and is undone by all the other false doctrines they promote.
• They say that after chapter 3 or 4 in the book of Revelation, the church is never mentioned again, and that proves that the pretribulation rapture occurs. The church is no longer mentioned; therefore, the rapture of the church before the tribulation period is indeed true. As many of us are aware, the Greek word for church is ‘ecclesia’ (meaning congregation). After chapter 3 or 4, you will not find that word in the Bible because the church, according to them, has been raptured to heaven. The error of this idea is that around 25% of the New Testament doesn’t use this word, but clearly, the ‘church’ is present in history and the thinking of those who wrote the New Testament. When words such as brethren, body of Christ, and the beloved are used, they refer to the Church or the ecclesia of God.

When we approach the Bible with preconceived notions of what we want to find support for or prove, we will overlook context, logic, and reason. We will find texts that can be ‘used’ to support our position.  This phenomenon occurs frequently in all areas of theology, not just in the field of eschatology.

          At this point in my investigation, I have reached the following tentative conclusions regarding the rapture and the tribulation.

• There will be a ‘rapture’ of genuine believers at the same time Jesus returns to earth as He promised.
• There is no secret rapture in the clouds before or during the tribulation period.
• There is no tribulation period of seven years, and there is no Great Tribulation of 3.5 years. Daniel 9 does not support this interpretation, in my opinion. Dr. Ian Paul states that the New Testament (NT) never mentions a seven-year tribulation. (He also states, and it appears correct, that the NT never identifies the ‘man of lawlessness’ with the ’antichrist’ and the NT does not describe a rapture of the church. That is interesting. More on all this later.
• 1948 is an important date, but it did not start the final countdown to the rapture and the Great Tribulation of seven years. At this point, I do not believe that this restoration was based on unfulfilled promises of God to Israel. I am inclined to think this 1948 regathering is an exhibition of the mercy and compassion of God toward the Jewish people who suffered so much over the years, especially during the Second World War.
• Christians should expect persecution and tribulations. The historic church has endured these times and has faced tribulation at its most extreme and intense moments. Over the centuries, millions upon millions of Christians have been martyred for the faith. Many others have suffered much tribulation and persecution, even if they did not die a martyr.
• As the enemies of God become stronger and the believers become weaker and less fruitful, we can expect more tribulation and persecution.

The cast of characters in the Book of Revelation, which includes the following, is essential to know and understand in relation to eschatology.

• The antichrist
• The man of sin, the son of perdition
• The First beast in Revelation 13 comes out of the sea
• The Second beast in Revelation 13:11-15 comes from the land
• A woman clothed with the sun
• The woman on the beast, the great whore

Antichrist or The Antichrist

There are only four passages of Scripture that use the word “antichrist.” We will look at each one. (There is some repetition in what follows.)

          In 1 John 2:18, it is written, “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.”

          The apostle says that it is the last time twice. Matthew Henry states that this is the last dispensation of grace, continuing until the end of time. That could be accurate, hard to say definitively.

Mr. Henry also says, “It seems to have been a long after this that the name of antichrist was appropriated to that grand adversary of Christ, “the man of sin” 2 Thessalonians 2:3, in St. John’s sense, that is, antichristianism, has been spreading from his time till now; and will do so, till that great adversary arises, and is destroyed by Christ’s coming.”

          Many years later, theologians began to associate the antichrist with the title, ‘the man of sin’ in 2 Thessalonians. That association may or may not be appropriate. We shall see.

In 1 John 2:22, it is written, “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son”.

The Jewish nation of Israel and most of its citizens are antichrist because they do, in fact, reject the claim that Jesus is the Christ and the Messiah. Some think that Judaism, the unrepentant Jewish people, and or the nation of Israel is the antichrist. This verse certainly supports that belief.

There are many today who do not believe that Jesus is the Christ. Some attend a Christian church, while others do not. Anyone who denies that Jesus is the Christ is antichrist and is a liar. Antichrist denies both the Father and the Son.

In 1 John 4:3, it is written, “And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof you have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.”

There were some people, in John’s time, who denied that Jesus Christ came in the flesh because they believed all flesh was corrupt; therefore, God would never become sinful flesh and blood. Many others over the centuries have believed that same lie.

In 2 John 1:7, it is written, “For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.”

Anyone who denies the truth that Jesus Christ (God) has come in the flesh is a deceiver and an antichrist. Again, the Jewish people and nation of Israel fit this description, as do other groups. I include the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Mormons, and all other unbelievers as antichrist.

We are told that there are many antichrists. There is not just one antichrist but many. That is important. Even the 1 John 2:18 statement, “that antichrist shall come,” might be correctly understood to mean that many antichrists are here and will continue to come during these last days. But is there one top dog (Matthew Henry describes as the ‘grand adversary’, who is the Antichrist?) Almost everyone I have listened to believes that to be the case. I am not yet convinced. These verses define the antichrist with excellent specificity.

The man of sin, the son of perdition

          In 2 Thessalonians 2:2-12, it is written, “that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition. Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped: so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom, the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders. And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” Emphasis added.

          Contrary to the imminent belief of pretribulation rapture, is this passage of scripture. You will recall that the pre-tribulation rapture could come at any moment; nothing has yet been revealed. Yet in verse three we are told “let no man deceive you by any means, for that day shall not come, except there come, 1) a falling away first, and 2) that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition” emphasis added.

          By having Christ come or return twice, secretly at first, and lastly in public with the second coming at the end of the tribulation period, the falling away and the man of sin are revealed midway through the tribulation period. This is how they might explain this section: The day of the Lord is not yet at hand.

          The ‘man of sin’ opposes all that is God. He exalts himself above God, all that is worshipped, and claims to be God. He sits in the temple of God, showing himself to be God. Roman emperors claimed to be God, and they demanded worship.

Might this be a reference to Antiochus Epiphanes? What about Nero or Titus? What about the papacy? After all, the pope claims to be God. Matthew Henry believed that the Pope of Rome lays “indisputable claim to these titles” and acts. Mr. Henry went on to say that the Pope commands angels and puts kings under his feet. The pope claims the highest power, the highest honor, and the prerogatives that belong only to the one true God. That is the very definition of blasphemy.

Mr. Henry thinks the power of the Roman emperors is that which restrains (“only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way”). When this power and authority are taken away, the ‘man of sin’ will be revealed, and not before. This is in reference to the papacy of the Roman Catholic Church, as described by Matthew Henry.

According to Mr. Henry, the mystery of iniquity is the opposite of the power of godliness. This mystery is already at work in the lust for money, power, and honor. It led to the subversion of the truth and of the gospel. It is not confined just to the Roman Catholic Church. It includes the traditions of man over the written word of God. “Mere outward performance put in the room of faith and love,” so says Mr. Henry. You may recall that I refer to this as “form over substance.” It includes other mediators besides Jesus Christ, such as the Roman priesthood, Mary, and the saints. All these lies, plus bloodshed and idolatry, are the direct result of adding traditions to the word of God, according to Mr. Henry. That is actually what cults do, and the Roman Catholic Church has done for centuries. In fact, the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church are of equal, if not greater, authority than the written word of God. That is what Catholic leadership believes.

“Only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way,” verse 7. Matthew Henry says this refers to the potentate of the applicable empire, whether it be the Roman Emperor or some other empire, who is taken out of the way. In other words, the power of government is taken away, and there is no longer any restraint on ‘the man of sin’, or the Pope. That is the way Matthew Henry saw it. Mr. Henry was well aware of all the evil by the Roman Catholic Church and its popes over the centuries, including the period known as the Dark Ages. It is then, when the power of a restraining government is taken away, that the ‘man of sin’ is revealed, verse 8. In the next verse, we are told that the Wicked One shall be destroyed by “the brightness of his coming”. “The man of sin,” whose coming is after the working of Satan,” with all power, sign and wonders, verse 9. Because they did not receive the love of the truth, God will send on them strong delusion that they may believe a lie. All will be damned because they did not receive the love of the truth.

I have heard, more than once, that the expression, “he that restraineth,” is the Holy Spirit, and when He is taken away, at the pretribulation rapture of the church, the man of sin will be revealed. Mr. Henry and others believe that is the rule of governmental law. It is fascinating to note the breakdown in law and order in our own country right now. When the retraining power of the law is taken away, the ‘man of sin’ takes to the streets in lawlessness. The man of sin is the man or woman who is lawless by choice. Many today are lawless by choice. Each one is the man or woman of sin because the government no longer upholds the rule of law.

          There is nothing in this description of the ‘man of sin’ that indicates that he is the antichrist. For example, the Roman Catholic Church and the papacy are ‘the man of sin’, which some of the most admirable men of God have believed for many centuries. The antichrist title doesn’t apply to the Catholic Church because the church says they believe in Jesus Christ, God in the flesh. Antichrist, by definition, claims that Jesus is not the Christ and did not come in human flesh. Neither of these things applies to the Roman Catholic Church. But as you will see, everything that is said about the ‘man of sin’ applies to the papacy of the Roman Catholic Church.

          Albert C. Barnes is another individual whom I find trustworthy. Let us remember that no man or woman is without error, no matter how smart he or she is. And no one has a perfect understanding of the Word of God. That said, some Christian men and women are better than others. His commentary is excellent, and I think his perspective is helpful and should be given serious consideration. Mr.  Barnes lived from Dec. 1, 1798, to Dec. 24, 1870. He was an American theologian, clergyman, abolitionist, temperance advocate, and author. Barnes is best known for his extensive Bible commentary and notes on the Old and New Testaments, published in a total of 14 volumes in the 1830s.” Information taken from Wikipedia.

Over the centuries, there have been a variety of explanations for the great apostasy and the ‘man of sin,’ according to Barnes. He says that most Protestant commentaries have believed that the great apostacy is under the Roman papacy and the man of sin is the Roman Pontiff. In the 1880’s he wrote the following, “Eighteen hundred years have passed away since the Epistle was written, and the ‘day of the Lord’ has not yet come, and we have an opportunity of inquiring, whether in all that long tract of time any one man can be found, or any series of men have arisen, to whom the description here given is applicable.” (Barnes’ commentary on 2 Thessalonians chapter 2).

Mr. Barnes then goes on to say that if it can be found, through honest and fair methods of interpretation, that the conclusions point to the Roman Catholic Church, then it must be seriously considered. ‘Man of sin’ is a Hebraism, meaning a man of eminent wickedness: one distinguished for depravity, so states Mr. Barnes.  Does this expression ‘man of sin’ refer to only one person or to a succession of persons and their general characters since the time of the apostles? He provides evidence that it should be applied to a succession, not just to one person. No one man can do so much evil as this passage describes, but the ‘man of sin’ should be recognizable in the not-so-distant future from the writing of this epistle. He asks the question, Can this be applied to the Papacy? Is the Pope the man of sin? He then says that 1) there is no question that the apostacy of the early church and the purity of the simple gospel was evident to those familiar with the rise of the Roman Catholic Church and the papacy, 2) the office of the papacy itself is an example of that apostacy, 3) the pope is the primary reason for this apostacy of the papacy to continue and other forms of wickedness to grow, 4) there are many examples from history regarding the lives of popes of Rome (and the priests) that verify, without any doubt, that, he is the ‘man of sin’.

Barnes goes on to say the following. Through the office of the papacy, as the head of the Roman Catholic Church, 1) superstition grew, 2) other vices, of the most disgusting nature, flourished by the works of the church, such as celibacy, indulgences, monasteries, and absolutions. Barnes goes on to provide several examples of specific evil popes from a long line of such individuals. He admits that there may have been some exceptions, but the general rule is not good. He says there has never been a succession of godly popes. These vile sins, which were and have continued forever through the entire Catholic priesthood, include adultery, fornication, incest, homosexuality, cruelty, greed, lusts of all kinds, and murders. “To no succession of men who have ever lived could the appellative, ‘the man of sin’ be applied with so much propriety as to this succession.”

Fast forward to today, and consider all that the world has learned in the last two centuries about the Roman Catholic Church and its claims to be the church of Jesus Christ. What have we learned? Did we know anything about the Catholic Church and its centuries-old sexual abuse of children and adults? Did we learn anything about the role of the Catholic Church in starting or fomenting regional, national, and worldwide wars across the globe (fornication with the kings of the earth), including wars on our land? Did we learn anything about the papacy’s arrogance in such matters of faith and the church’s pronouncements about papal infallibility and the dogmas regarding Mary, to mention a few false doctrines invented recently by the Romish Church?

Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. The Roman Catholic Church disguises itself as a Christian Church, just like an angle of light and its father, the devil. I may be crazy, but how could it be any clearer?

God, through the prophet Daniel, hundreds of years before it came to be, told the future about the rise of kingdoms after the fall of Babylon. That included the Roman Empire and its aftermath. He also said something about the timing of the first advent of Christ. God also revealed the future to us through His Son and the apostles.

The papacy continues to set aside and change the Word of God, all the while it claims that it is the one true church of Jesus Christ. There is no other entity that has ever existed in our history and in the present that provides so much evidence of its satanic character as does the church of Rome and the papacy. Lastly, think of the millions of real Christians tortured and murdered by the Roman Catholic Church over the centuries.

          Who is the man of sin? Many claim this is the future Antichrist, but that is not the title given to him in this passage. These folks say we do not yet know who the ‘man of sin’ (or the antichrist) is at this time. Moreover, they think that the great apostasy is yet to come. They must not realize the bankrupt state of the American church and the church in many nations. It is hard for me to believe that the church could become any more corrupt than it already is. Apostasy is not limited to just the overtly apostate Roman Catholic Church, but to most other “Christian” denominations.

          I also find it hard to believe that most Christians believe the Roman Catholic Church is a genuine Biblical Christian denomination. The Catholic Church is a non-Biblical Christianized form of paganism. It has very little to do with Biblical Christianity. It uses many of the same names, terms, and expressions, but is vastly different in the meaning of those persons, names, and functions. The Catholic Church has done a great job in deceiving the masses into believing there is not much difference between the Catholic Church and other genuine Christian Churches. See my articles on the Roman Catholic Church.

The First beast in Revelation 13 comes out of the sea.

          John stood on the seashore, and he saw a beast rise out of the sea. This beast had seven (7) heads and ten (10) horns. On these horns were 10 crowns, and on his head was the name of blasphemy, as stated in verse 1. Does that remind you of the book of Daniel 7:25? “And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints…..” The papacy fits this description perfectly.

          “And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon (Satan) gave him power, and his seat, and great authority,” verse 2. In this brief description, we are given a glimpse of the beast, and it includes elements from the vision Daniel wrote about centuries earlier. This beast in Revelation 13 is apparently the combination of the first three beasts in Daniel chapters 7 and 2. Daniel wrote these prophecies during the Babylonian Empire. The only one missing is the fourth beast, also known as the Roman Empire. This fourth beast (Rome) was not like a bear, a lion, or a leopard. John wrote this during the time the Roman Empire was in power.

          The fourth beast in Daniel 7 had 10 horns, and the little horn (some say that is the antichrist) comes into the forefront. The 10 horns are the 10 kingdoms of the Roman Empire. The little horn subdues three of the ten other horns. This little horn had the eyes of a man and a mouth speaking great things. This little horn made war with the saints of God and prevailed over them, but when the Ancient of Days comes, the little horn will be destroyed. Again, this is a perfect description of the papacy.

          The little horn in Daniel 7:25, “and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time, and times and the dividing of time.” The stone (Jesus Christ) in Daniel’s vision shall destroy the little horn and its kingdom.

          In Daniel chapters 2 and 7, we get a picture of the third beast, the third king, and the third kingdom. It is the brass of the image or the empire of Greece. In chapter 7, the third beast is like a leopard with four wings on its back and four heads.

In Daniel chapters 2 and 7, we are told that the second beast is the silver of the image, and in chapter 7, we are told that the Medes and Persians are the second kingdom, represented by the second king. This bear has three ribs in its mouth, and the bear was told to devour much flesh.

The first beast, the first king and kingdom is Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. He is the head of gold in chapter 2 and in chapter 7. He is the first beast and is like a lion, which had two eagle’s wings. This beast was given the heart of a man. Just like a man, it would have 10 toes.

Back to Revelation chapter 13. “And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed; and all the world wondered after the beast,” verse 3 of Revelation chapter 13.

“And they worshipped the dragon (Satan) which gave power unto the beast (first beast that comes out of the sea): and they worshipped the beast, saying, who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make war with him? And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and power was given unto him to continue forty-two months. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations”. Revelation 13:4-7, emphasis added.

In Daniel 7:11, we are told that the little horn of the fourth beast or the Roman Empire, “I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn (little horn) spake:…”. In verse 25, we are also told this about the little horn, “And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High….” In Daniel 7:21, we are told that the little horn made war with the saints and prevailed against them.

I must conclude that it seems pretty clear that the little horn beast of Daniel 7 is the same as the first beast out of the sea in Revelation Chapter 13. In both Daniel 7 and Revelation 13, this beast is never referred to as the antichrist, contrary to what some believe.

Daniel 7. The fourth beast has ten horns, which represent ten kingdoms. Out of this comes a little horn which subdues three horns. Now compare that description with Revelation 13. The first beast has seven heads and 10 horns. Both Daniel and Revelation see a beast with 10 horns. The fourth beast in Daniel 7 is most likely the Roman Empire. John, who was given the Revelation of Jesus Christ, lived during the time of the Roman Empire and would have been familiar with Daniel’s prophecy.

In part two of his teaching on Thessalonians (both 1st and 2^nd)  

The author and teacher, Steve Gregg, relates the following.

The ‘man of sin’ is someone who will set himself up as God and in the temple of God to be worshipped. (This is precisely true of the papacy.) Paul, who sent these letters and wrote in our New Testament epistles, states that we are the temple of God and the church. The temple of God is our hearts and minds. It is not a building. Nonetheless, this ‘’man of sin’ will set himself up as God and be worshipped as God. The Papacy is the fulfillment. Furthermore, this person will set himself in the temple of God. The Papacy demands blind loyalty, and the conscience of man must submit to the Pope and the Church. The Pope sets himself in the temple of a man’s heart (we are the temple of God) and demands blind devotion. ‘The man of sin’ appears to be the ‘little horn’ in Daniel 7. Both will persecute the saints of God and boast of great words against the Most High. The temple is in us, not in Jerusalem, as many dispensationalists believe.

Who is it that restrains the ‘man of sin’? Many dispensationalists teach that it is the Holy Spirit who restrains the man of sin. The Holy Spirit currently resides in the church (believers), but when the rapture occurs, the Holy Spirit is removed with the rapture of the church. But scripture says the opposite in these two books. The falling away must happen first, and then the man of sin is revealed before Christ returns.

Another view is that the Roman Empire (or the then-reigning government) must be taken away, as it is the one that now restrains. Some early church fathers believed this was the Roman Empire before it was actually taken away. That event was 2 or 3 centuries in the future. If that is true, and the Roman Empire was removed, why didn’t Paul identify this beast? Paul was alive as a Roman citizen during those days. Possibly, he was being careful not to offend the Roman Empire and curtail his ministry to the Gentiles. The Church fathers were aware of the prophecies in Daniel regarding the little horn.

According to this view, the little horn comes after the restrainer is removed. That gives rise to the little horn of the Papacy of the Roman Catholic Church. This is when the great falling away came, after Constantine made Christianity a legal religion, and he began to make compromises to truth. This is the falling away, which occurs before the Papacy is established. The Papacy is in itself evidence of the falling away. Church fathers and many giants of the faith after them (John Wesley, John Calvin, Martin Luther, and so on) believed the Pope is the little horn. He fits all the descriptions, including signs and wonders. Some of these signs and wonders include the numerous apparitions of Mary and the miracles or signs associated with various shrines. Many Catholics report such signs and wonders. Then there is the Eucharist, where the priest of Rome miraculously creates the real body and blood of Jesus Christ every time the Mass is said. Christ is crucified each time afresh when the Mass is said. In our present day, we hear of signs and wonders in the Catholic Church, such as speaking in tongues and other so-called manifestations of the spirit.

Additionally, the little horn is said to make war against the saints of God and prevail. One estimate, that I am aware of, credits the Roman Catholic Church with the murder of 50 million souls. That is to say nothing about the role the Roman Catholic Church had in the creation of Islam, which is still killing saints today. That is to say nothing about the sexual abuses and physical abuses of the priests and nuns over many centuries. I am not sure how large the number of murders might increase to, if the count included all the wars the Catholic Church started or helped start over the many centuries. This account, which ties it to the papacy and the Church of Rome, fits Paul’s description very well. I think Steve Gregg is yet uncertain, but inclined to agree, about the papacy being the little horn because he has no other viable candidate. The evidence is quite strong that the little horn, the man of sin, is the Papacy. (I repeat myself. The Catholic Church is home to many kind, generous, and morally upright individuals. This article by me and those I quote is not about them. It is about the Roman Catholic Church organization, its leadership, and its theology.

Futurists say the ‘man of sin’ is yet to be revealed. Preterists say the ‘man of sin’ was shown, but we are not sure who it was. Dispensationalists say that the little horn or the man of sin is a man who is not yet known. That is true but incomplete. The person who occupies the position of the Pope is not yet known, but we believe that the man of sin will be one of the Popes of the Roman Catholic Church.

In the preface of the King James Bible of 1611, the translators thank King James and dedicate this Bible to him, stating that this work is a blow to the ‘man of sin’, the pope. Steve Gregg mentioned this, but qualified it by saying that this is a Protestant Bible. Why he felt that comment necessary is a marvel to me, praise God it was a non-Catholic Bible for the Catholic Church tried for many years to keep the word of God from the ordinary person lest they read it and see all the false doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. In addition, the Roman Catholic Church repeatedly corrupted the scriptures and added the apocrypha to the canon of scripture. The Roman Catholic Church has repeatedly demonstrated its hatred toward the word of God over many centuries.

If the Roman church couldn’t destroy the word of God and keep it out of the hands of ordinary citizens, then in future translations, they would get involved and make as many changes favorable to the Roman Catholic Church as possible, and that is what they have done. For anyone to think that the Roman Catholic Church can be trusted with respect to the Bible and the word of God shows the compromise and deception that is rampant today in evangelical Christianity. Remember the origin of the preterist system? It was a Jesuit priest of the Roman Catholic Church.

The second beast, in Revelation 13:11-15, comes out of the earth and not the sea like the first beast.

          “And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, who deadly wound was healed,” verse 12. This beast does great wonders and even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, verse 13. In the next verse, it is written that the beast deceives those who dwell on the earth by his miracles. This power was given to him by the first beast. He told people to make an image of the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live yet. By his power, this beast gave life to the image that he had made. The image then spoke, requiring that anyone who would not worship the image of the beast would be killed (verse 15).

          This second beast then caused everyone to receive the mark of the beast in their right hand or in their foreheads, verse 16. This was necessary if anyone wanted to buy or sell. Only those who had the mark of the beast could buy and sell. The mark is the name of the beast or the number of his name. The number of the beast is 666, which is the number of a man, as stated in verse 18.Preterists believe this refers to Nero, whose name is 666. Others think this is the Papacy, whose name, Pontific Maximus, adds up to 666. Others have different opinions, many of them.

If you research this section of scripture, you will probably find that many commentators today do not identify this false prophet or the second beast except by way of the characteristics revealed in scripture. Are we not able to be more precise? If we assume that this beast is yet to be revealed sometime in the future, we might think this beast is not alive and working today. Dispensationalists love gaps. That would cause us to pay little or no attention to our own world history and miss the obvious. But what if this beast is alive and moving even today? What if this beast has always been around?

          This beast is different from the first one, but both bear a strong resemblance to each other. This beast had two horns like a lamb. That is, in some respects, it resembles a lamb. Like a lamb, it appears to be kind, gentle, and safe. Albert Barnes makes the following comments. “It is hardly necessary to say that this is a most striking representation of the actual manner in which the power of the papacy has always been put forth – putting on the apparent gentleness of the lamb; or laying claim to great meekness of the lamb, even when deposing kings, and giving away crowns, and driving thousands to the stake, or throwing them into the dungeons of the Inquisition.”  

          The second beast spoke like a dragon. His words were harsh, haughty, and cruel; all the while, they resembled a lamb. Albert Barnes writes, “How appropriate this is, as a symbol, to represent the papacy, considered as a spiritual power, it is unnecessary to say. It will be admitted, whatever may be thought of the design of this symbol, that if it was in fact intended to refer to the papacy, a more appropriate one could not have been chosen.”

          It is written that the second beast exercises all the power of the first beast. This indicates that these two beasts are nearly identical. Barnes writes the following. “In the fulfillment of this, we should naturally look for some government whose authority extended far, and which was absolute and arrogant in its character, for this is the power attributed to the first beast. This description found remarkable fulfillment in the papacy, considered a spiritual dominion. The relation to the secular power is the same as would be indicated by these two beasts; the dominion was as widespread, the authority was as absolute and arrogant. In fact, on these points, they have been identical. The one sustained the other; either one would long since have fallen if it had not been upheld by the other. The papacy, considered a spiritual domination, was in fact a new power emerging from the same place as the old Roman dominion, to give life to that as its ascendency over the world. These two things, the secular and the spiritual power, constituting the papacy in the proper sense of the term, are in fact but the continuance or the prolongation of the old Roman dominion – the fourth kingdom of Daniel – united so as to constitute in reality but one kingdom, and yet so distinct in their origin, and in the manifestations, as to be capable of separate contemplation and description, and thus properly represented by the two “beasts” that were shown in vision to John.” When was the last time you heard a more reasonable and satisfying answer?

The dragon empowers the ‘man of sin’ and the two beasts in Revelation 13.

A woman clothed with the sun

“And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: and she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.” Revelation 12:1,2

Albert Barnes mentions that this symbol may represent the church of Jesus Christ, as most other commentators do. Twelve may represent the 12 tribes of Israel or the 12 apostles. It seems that this may represent the early church, which struggles to stay alive amidst persecution and the enemy’s designs, the great dragon.

“And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. And she brought forth a man-child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.” Revelation 12:3-6.

Albert Barnes’ understanding of this section follows. The red dragon is Satan, as indicated in Rev. 12:9 and 20:2. Red indicates the bloody persecution of Christians. The seven hills point to the Roman Empire in Rome, which was built on seven hills, and the world described

this way, the 7-hilled city. (Jerusalem was also built on seven hills.). Three hills were added to arrive at the number 10. The 10 horns were emblems of power, 10 sources of power that belong to or come from Satan. At one time, the dragon became a prominent symbol of the Roman Empire in the second and third centuries. It didn’t replace the eagle but was commonly used as a Roman symbol. It was covered with purple cloth and adorned with precious stones.

The dragon standing before the woman is interpreted to mean that Satan would attempt to prevent the spread of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Much of Mr. Barnes’s interpretation must go unnoticed for now.

The woman on the beast, the great whore

“And there came one of the seven angels, which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters: With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.” Revelation 17:1,2, emphasis added.

          John then describes a woman, the great whore, who sat upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven 7 heads and ten 10 horns, verse 3. The red dragon has seven (7) heads and ten (10) horns. The first beast had seven (7) heads and ten (10) horns. Daniel’s vision also talks about the fourth beast or the Roman Empire with ten (10) horns, and the little horn arises from this beast and removes three of the ten horns.

Albert Barnes’ comments are worthy of notice. The fornication referred to is spiritual adultery. “The meaning is, that papal Rome, unfaithful to God, and idolatrous and corrupt, had seduced the rulers of the earth, and led them into the same kind of unfaithfulness, idolatry, and corruption…All the princes and kings of Europe in the Dark Ages, and for many centuries were, and not a few of them are now, entirely under the influence of papal Rome.”

“And the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.” The alluring cup, which, as a harlot, she had extended to them……It is said that Babylon, referring to the same thing, had “made them drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication”; that is, of the cup that led to wrath or punishment. Here it is said that the harlot had made them “drunk with the wine of her fornication”; that is, they had been, as it were, intoxicated by the alluring cup held out to them. What could better describe the influence of Rome on the people of the world, in making them, under these delusions, incapable of sober judgment, and in complete fascination and controlling all their power?” Mr. Barnes is referring to the Roman Catholic Church and the papacy.

“And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. And I saw a woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration. And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee they mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven (7) heads and ten (10) horns. The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. And here is the mind that has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings…….” Revelation 17:4-14.

The angel goes on to tell John that the waters that he saw, where the whore sits, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. Verse 15. Verse 16 states that the 10 horns shall hate the whore and shall make her desolate and naked and shall eat her flesh and burn her with fire.

In verse 17, God has put in their hearts to fulfill his will and to agree and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled”.  Verse 18. And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

Barnes comments that this is the city of Rome, whether as a pagan city or a Christian city, which during the days of the Apostle John would be understood to be the great city. He goes on to say, “Europe needs but little further provocation, and the fires of liberty, which have so long pent up, will break forth, and that storm of indignation which has expelled the Jesuits from all the courts of Europe; which has abolished the Inquisition; which has more than once led hostile armies to the very  gates of papal Rome, will again be aroused in a manner which cannot be allayed, and that mighty power, which has controlled so large a part of the nations of Europe for more than a thousand years of the world’s history, will come to an end.”

Mr. Barnes was well aware of the following. The French Revolution began in 1789, the French Republic was established in 1792, the Reign of Terror commenced in 1793, and the Napoleonic era began in 1799. Many explanations of this revolution today do not even mention the role that the Roman Catholic Church played in bringing it about. The result of the revolution was that the Roman Catholic Church was greatly hurt, very much like a mortal wound to the head from which it appeared it would never recover. The church was suppressed, the Catholic Monarchy was abolished, the new republic took Catholic Church property, about 30,000 priests were exiled, and many were killed as well. It was the dechristianization of France, in considerable measure caused by the papacy and the Roman Catholic Church.

Very few commentators or Bible teachers today would see the Roman Catholic church as the whore of Babylon. For instance, from the website Got Questions, we read the following. “The whore of Babylon is an evil world system, controlled by the AntiChrist, during the last days before Jesus’s return. The whore of Babylon also has religious connotations-spiritual adultery with the beast being the focus of an ungodly end-times religious system.” This site says that this whore of Babylon “cannot refer exclusively to Rome.”

The Crosswalk website states the following. “Some theologians have suggested that perhaps this also represents Rome. According to Matthew Henry, “Rome clearly appears to be meant in this chapter. Pagan Rome subdued and ruled with military power, not by art and flatteries.” Depending on whether a believer believes in typology, one could assert that the whore of Babylon could represent both Rome as well as our modern world. No matter the case, the whore of Babylon represents everything debased, sinful, and that strays away from God. Which sounds a lot like our culture today.” Sounds like the whore of Babylon is Europe, the United States, Canada, and almost every other country in the entire world. If that sounds reasonable to you, then fine. I find this explanation weak at best. It ignores history and the obvious at the same time.

The BibleRef website states the following. “Revelation 17 zeroes in on God’s judgment of Babylon as the center of religious corruption in the tribulation. The target of this wrath seems to be an eclectic form of all apostate religions. This might be a concrete, single religion. Or it might be a near-religious blending or equalizing of all spiritual beliefs. God views religious Babylon as the great prostitute that has support from heads of state. This system is both prosperous and murderously guilty of martyring saints. It has passed and a renewed existence as a religious-political system.”

How they can write this and not identify the Roman Catholic Church as the whore of Babylon is a marvel to me. How does the Roman Catholic Church match up with its key characteristics mentioned above? The Roman Catholic Church is 1) a syncretistic religious system combining Christianity and paganism from the beginning, 2) the Roman Catholic Church has most heads of state bowing to the church for support even today, 3) the Roman Catholic Church is rich beyond our wildest imaginations, and 4) the Roman Catholic Church has murdered 50 million saints (some say much more) over the centuries. It is baffling that they can’t figure out who the Whore of Babylon is. Maybe they do know but do not dare to state the many ways in which the Catholic Church matches what the Bible says about the whore of Babylon.

You get the drift. Perhaps most evangelical Christians today do not believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon. Yet many of these same people think we are quickly approaching the Rapture of the Church and the start of the Great Tribulation. Therefore, something dramatic or even miraculous must happen very soon to produce this whore of Babylon and a different or new religious system. And the whore and the beast just laugh.

Reading through these explanations has only confirmed to me that evangelicalism today is compromised and deceived in many respects. The Roman Catholic Church as the woman on the beast, the great whore, and the papacy as the ‘man of sin’ is the best explanation I have heard thus far. It fits the historical evidence the best and the very words of God the most accurately. Still, if I hear or see a better, different interpretation that I think is more biblically sound, I will change my mind.

The preterist believes that all of this was fulfilled by 70 AD and has no bearing on our history after AD 70 or our future. The man of sin, the woman riding the beast, were expressions relating to AD 70, not beyond.

As mentioned already, the prophet Daniel predicted the fall and rise of the nations of Babylon, Media Persia, Greece, and Rome many years, even centuries, into the future. Daniel probably wrote this book around 530-540 BC. Daniel also predicted the dismantling of the Roman Empire centuries into the future. The date of the fall of the Roman Empire is debated, like most dates in ancient history. Rome fell over time, not in just one battle. Some historians place the last date at around 476 AD. The Roman Empire survived for approximately 500 years, which was considerably longer than the Babylonian, Persian, and Greek empires.

God gave Daniel a look into the future, spanning thousands of years. The division of the Roman Empire is also predicted, and some aspects of the very distant future (up to the present day) were also anticipated. I think many Christians believe that is true. I do. I suppose Daniel saw the little horn of the fourth beast, which represents the Roman Empire and the pagan religious system that developed from it. This little horn is similar to the Roman Empire, including its religious paganism. It has survived even longer than the political and military Roman Empire. The Roman Catholic Church, more than all other possibilities, past and current, represents the little horn. The Roman Catholic Church is at least 1,500 years old. If you are a Catholic, you date the church at around 2000 years old. We are seeing the fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy 2500 years ago! I think that is the most reasonable position.

Daniel and Isaiah prophesied the coming of King Cyrus, who would issue the decree to rebuild the temple. God gave His prophets a picture of the near and distant future. When I consider what many of the theologians and Bible teachers, of a dispensational viewpoint, believe, it seems to me that their view of the future and the past leaves out the long and continuous history of the little horn. I consider that to be another gap in their theology. This dispensational gap, plus the 70^th week gap, seems to describe their “gap” eschatology. And that makes it questionable, in my mind.

The following articles will revisit the Book of Revelation and examine each chapter in detail.

• Part 5 will consider Revelation chapters 8-10 based on Steve Gregg’s book, The Four Views of Revelation. It will address the seven trumpets, the little book, and the seven thunders.
• Part 6, Revelation chapters 11-13, will consider the two witnesses, 1260 days, the two women, and the two beasts. The Appendix will review the Seventh-day Adventist view that the USA is one of the two beasts, specifically the second beast. I may not include this; just be aware of the SDA interpretation.
• Part 7, Revelation chapters 14-16, will consider the seven last plagues and the 144,000.
• Part 8, Revelation chapters 17-19, will consider the fall of Babylon, the vision of the harlot, and the marriage of the lamb.
• Part 9, Revelation chapters 20-22, will consider the 1,000-year millennium.
• Part 10, the almost final article, will wrap things up. There is still work to be done before I return to a final writing position paper, if that is even possible. At this point, I am not sure if it is possible.