Semi-Random Musings (50)

Partial Preterists argue that Futurists misinterpret the symbolic language of scripture. Where a Futurist understands imagery like that of Matthew 24:29 (the darkening of sun and moon, stars falling from heaven, etc.) to refer to the apocalyptic finale of our present age, Preterists exhaust the meaning of the Lord’s words in the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. For Preterists, most or all of the events prophesied in that chapter have already taken place.

The issue, Preterists say, is that Futurists fail to understand “Old Testament prophetic de-creation language”.

To Preterists, de-creation imagery is merely hyperbolic, concerned with the fall of individual cities and kingdoms in times past, not an apocalyptic end to our present age.

An anonymous Preterist author at Medium.com has an explanatory post on the subject that’s useful in understanding his position on Matthew 24:29. He writes:

“Jesus was predicting the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., and thereby used the apocalyptic language of OT prophets.”

He points to similar language in Isaiah 13:10, which I think all prophetic schools would agree found at least partial fulfillment in the historic destruction of Babylon, and Isaiah 34:4, which concerns the fall of Edom. Likewise, in context Ezekiel 32:7-8 refers not to the termination of our present age but to the conquest of Egypt. He cites several other examples.

Our readers may or may not be surprised to find I have no difficulty with what he’s saying here. Hyperbole is a recognizable feature of OT prophecy, and I have no hesitation in agreeing that in their original contexts, the prophecies our unidentified Preterist cites from Isaiah and Ezekiel relate to Babylon, Edom and Egypt notwithstanding the apocalyptic imagery through which they are expressed, just as he says. Purely on that basis, applying the Lord’s words in Matthew 24 to the destruction of Jerusalem seems, on the face of it, a reasonable position for him to take.

I do have one simple question: Given that the OT prophets had already dialed the apocalyptic imagery up to eleven, if our Lord personally in Matthew (or through John in Revelation) were actually foretelling the hyper-violent conclusion of the Age of Grace, what sort of language should he have used to get his point across?

Think about it. He could hardly dial it back a notch compared to the OT prophets and still make his point effectively. He needed to go to eleven-plus.

Let me suggest we should expect Jesus to use the traditional idiomatic de-creation language with which his disciples were familiar, just as he did. What else could he have used in its place? Of course, to reinforce that the situation he was foretelling was one of a kind, he would also need to buttress the de-creation language with a qualification so strong it was all but impossible to misinterpret. Only by doing so could he convince his disciples, and eventually his readers, that he was not merely predicting the conquest of a single city like Babylon or even an empire like Egypt, but rather a disaster unparalleled in human history, a unique event.

Something like this, maybe:

“For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.”

Or, in the context of Revelation:

“Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”

Something like that might get the point across, assuming we trust our Lord to speak the truth.

*   *   *   *   *

Speaking of coming disasters, a reader at Doug Wilson’s blog recently floated the theory that when the Christians began selling their real estate in Jerusalem in Acts 4:34, the primary motivation was their expectation (on the basis of the aforementioned prophecy in Matthew 24) that the destruction of Jerusalem was imminent, soon to render their properties worthless.

That seems unlikely to me for a couple of reasons. The first is that Luke plainly associates the believer’s sale of excess real estate not with any concern that the temple and city were about to be destroyed, but rather with meeting practical needs. The second is even simpler: the disciples didn’t leave Jerusalem. It took the savage persecution that followed Stephen’s murder to drive members of the early church to begin obeying the mandate the Lord had given them to “Go therefore, and make disciples of all nations.” There’s not even a hint in Acts of any movement whatsoever within the church in Jerusalem to take the gospel to the world prior to that point, let alone to flee the city because the expectation of its destruction loomed.

That’s not to disparage the general character of the Christians in Jerusalem. I much prefer Luke’s explanation that they sold their excess real estate out of love for their needy fellow believers. But the fruit of the Spirit is goodness, not pragmatism.

*   *   *   *   *

With oil prices skyrocketing and rhetoric flying, support for the American alliance with Israel in the messy and potentially disastrous war with Iran is speedily eroding across almost every demographic apart from that of Dispensational evangelicals.

This might be a good time to remind ourselves that the Lord doesn’t need Donald Trump or anyone else to maintain Israel as a viable entity on the world stage. He has been doing it for millennia despite Jews being the target of some of the most virulent expressions of genocidal hatred in human history. Israel’s survival over the centuries is not due to its brilliant strategic minds, shrewd alliances or even the cunning deceptions of which they are so frequently accused, but to the grace and faithfulness of God despite his nation’s apostasy. Contrary to the convictions of some Christian commentators, Israel will not cease to exist shortly after America retires to lick its wounds and re-evaluate its role in the Middle East, notwithstanding the threats posed to it by Iran, Turkey, Lebanon and a rogue’s gallery of sworn enemies.

Moreover, the end-times repentance and revival of Israel can only come about through its isolation, persecution and an ever-escalating series of crises that threaten the nation’s very existence. That is what the scriptures teach. What we are seeing is exactly what we ought to expect.

I trust no Christian wants to stand in the way of that. Especially not Dispensationalists.