The Second Coming of Jesus Christ (3)

My voice is going to hold out today.

We're in 1 Thessalonians 4 addressing this matter of the rapture of the church.

Now some of these things that we're talking about may be pretty familiar to you.

I hope they are. I hope we come to the place where everything we say is familiar to you, but these things are not familiar to everybody.

And I'm always mindful of that our notes go out and they go to I think 130, 135 now addresses we send them to.

Maybe, I don't know, 40 or 50 of them are pastors in India and Africa.

Not a week goes by I don't get a note from Central Africa somewhere from a pastor thanking us for the notes.

And got one last week, you know, please send more, you know. And I know that most of these people, even though they're in other nations, have been taught by American evangelicals and particularly their view of the end times.

And so, you know, these kind, what we have in our notes is probably something they've never seen or never heard before.

And they're finding it helpful and enlightening. And a number of, I don't know how many, but maybe a dozen pastors write me all the time and tell me they actually use our notes in their own teaching and preaching of their churches, which is amazing to me.

And so a word gets out. And so sometimes I'm mindful that I might be repeating some things that are familiar to you, but I'm thinking they're not familiar necessarily to some others.

And I'm a little reluctant to, you know, bring into mind those people also, but we've got a broader, you know, ministry and I think it's important to do what we can do.

And besides, repetition is good. We need to, if you cannot teach these things, then you need to hear them once again.

Okay, we really know them when we can teach them to others. Now, in our study of 1

Thessalonians 4, we arrived two weeks ago to our paragraph before us, chapter 4, verses 13 through 18.

We're not going to read it today. We've read it three or four times. But it describes, of course, the rapture of the

Lord's people to meet the Lord in the air, the second coming of Christ. And we've advocated that the rapture is not a separate event from the visible return of Jesus Christ, his second coming, but rather it is one event, that the rapture is the second coming of Jesus Christ.

And Paul's only concerned about revealing that aspect of the second coming where believers are rejoined with believers that have already died.

He's attempting to comfort and instruct these Christians in this matter. But having introduced the subject of the rapture, we found it necessary to explain and refute the commonly held belief of a pre -tribulation rapture of the

Church. This is such a common understanding that most Christians have never heard anything but this teaching.

And so I know that if you listen to Christian radio, you hear about it virtually every day.

A pre -tribulation rapture of the Church followed by a seven -year tribulation on earth.

But thankfully, they say the Church will escape that, will be raptured out, and that seven -year tribulation will fall upon all those who were left behind.

And so for some of you who may not be familiar with these matters, I know some of you are not.

You're fairly new in the Lord. I've set down the order of events that most evangelicals espouse today with regard to future events.

We've rehearsed these before, maybe not in this detail, but here is what most

Bible -believing Christians believe to be what Scripture foretells, prophesies.

They would argue that the rapture of the Church is the next event in God's calendar,

His plan. And after the rapture of the Church, when all Christians throughout the world are raised from the dead, and those who are alive and remain are transformed and caught up with the

Lord of the air, that they will enter a judgment seat, the judgment seat of Christ.

But it will not be a judgment seat which outcome is salvation or condemnation, but rather it's a judgment of works, they say.

They argue that Christians will never have to answer to God for anything bad they've done in this life, and they even try and argue that the

Greek word in the New Testament is the bema seat, and that is not a judgment seat of a judge passing judgment on condemned criminals or whatnot and exonerating the righteous, but it's a judgment seat like say at the

Olympic Games when a judge is conferring an award for a race having been successfully completed or won.

And so it's believed that judgment is the only judgment Christians will encounter, and the only outcome of that judgment would be degrees of rewards that are bestowed upon the

Lord's people. And then they say that the New Testament Christians, and once again the rapture of the church, they believe the church are only those believers from Pentecost until the rapture.

They will then undergo or experience what is called the marriage supper of the Lamb. Proponents of this view believe the church again includes only those who become

Christians between Pentecost and the rapture. We would differ from that. The rapture, when that occurs, it's going to be all the redeemed of all of history that will be caught up to be with the

Lord. Well, after the rapture, secondly, they argue that it will be followed on earth by a seven -year tribulation period for all those who are left behind.

And this is said to be the fulfillment of the 70th week of Daniel. You commonly read this.

An end -time Antichrist will arise and rule during this seven -year end -time tribulation.

And this Antichrist will persecute the Jewish people severely because the Christians are taken out of the world.

And so he'll persecute the Jewish people for, in the latter half of that seven -year tribulation, the three -and -a -half years, which is commonly referred to as the

Great Tribulation. He presents himself as a world leader of peace to the

Jews in the first three -and -a -half years. But then midpoint he changes and he turns upon the

Jews and persecutes them. And then it's taught at the end of this seven -year tribulation is the second coming of Jesus Christ, when

Jesus will return to defeat the world in the Battle of Armageddon, in which he will slay all who refuse to believe on him as Savior and Lord.

And at his second coming, fourthly, they say that he will establish a thousand -year millennium on earth, in which he will reign as the

Son of David over a restored kingdom of David for a thousand years.

And so at his second coming, Jesus will judge the nations that existed during the tribulation period, allowing some of those nations to continue into the millennium, to exist in the millennium with Jesus as king, but excluding other nations.

And they actually argue that the basis of judgment of these countries, of these nations, is how they treat the

Jewish people during the tribulation. Those nations that treated the

Jewish people favorably will be allowed to continue into the thousand -year millennium. Those who did not will cease to exist.

At that time, he'll raise Old Testament believers because they were not caught up in the church with the rapture, they would argue.

And they, along with those who became believers during the tribulation and survived, they would continue into the millennium.

They would populate this thousand -year revived kingdom of Israel during the millennium.

Well, after the thousand years, fifthly, at the end of the millennium, after a short period of rebellion against King Jesus, which to me is an amazing teaching on the part of these folks, they say that at the end of the thousand years, the people of the world will again rebel against King Jesus, who is literally, physically sitting on a throne in Jerusalem, they say.

But that rebellion will be just temporary, short -lived.

King Jesus will put it down, and then the end will come. And then lastly, you have the final

Great White Throne Judgment at the end of the thousand years, in which Christ will judge and condemn all the unsaved of all of history, after which they will be thrown into the lake of fire.

And they believe and teach that only the unsaved will come before Jesus Christ at the

Great White Throne Judgment. They don't believe there is a judgment in which separates Christians from non -Christians, but rather the judgment of Christians was a thousand and seven years before, and then at the end of a thousand and seven years, the seven -year tribulation, thousand -year millennium, you have this

Great White Throne Judgment only of the unsaved. And then finally, seventh, of course,

God will then, they argue, create a new heavens and a new earth in which his people will dwell with the

Lord forever. Those who believe in a two -stage second coming of Christ, the rapture at the beginning of the tribulation, the visible bodily return of Jesus at the second coming at the end of the seven years, espouse the above -order events that we just rehearsed.

They affirm a pre -tribulation, pre -millennial return of Jesus Christ to rapture's

Church, that the Church will then escape the seven -year tribulation that will come upon the earth, and they claim that our passage of 1

Thessalonians 4, 13 through 18, teaches their view. And I would argue you read that passage, and you're not going to find any of this even suggested in Paul's words.

Now, in contrast to that rather intricate scenario that involves a thousand -plus years, the view of historic

Reformed theology Protestants regarding the doctrine of the second coming of Christ is really quite simple.

And these are my words, but it basically describes our understanding of the future. The Bible foretells a single second coming of Jesus Christ when he will call unto himself his people from the grave in the world.

Jesus Christ will then bring all mankind into a general judgment over which he,

Jesus, will preside as judge. He will then separate the redeemed from the damned.

The redeemed will be granted entrance into the fullness of the kingdom of God, even the New Jerusalem and the new heavens and the new earth, in which they will dwell with their

Lord for eternity, and the damned will be consigned to eternal punishment. It's pretty simple, isn't it, in comparison to this intricate, detailed view of the end times.

Now, to show you that this is what Reformed folks are, and we could pull it from the

Westminster Confession or the Savoy Declaration, the Congregational Reformed Confession, or the

Heidelberg, you know, Catechism. We could find it anywhere. But here in the article on the

Last Judgment from our Baptist Confession of 1689, you have three paragraphs. And although there's more detail here, it basically says the same thing that I put in this paragraph we just read.

First, God has appointed a day wherein he will judge the world in righteousness by Jesus Christ, to whom all power and judgment is given of the

Father, in which day not only the apostate angel shall be judged, but likewise all persons that have lived upon the earth shall appear before the tribunal of Christ to give an account of their thoughts, words, and deeds, and to receive according to what they have done in the body, whether good or evil.

And probably most of you recognize the almost direct biblical language.

And then there are scripture references given. Two, the end of God's appointing this day is for the manifestation of the glory of his mercy in the eternal salvation of the elect, and of his justice in the eternal damnation of the reprobate who are wicked and disobedient.

For then shall the righteous go into everlasting life and receive that fullness of joy and glory with everlasting rewards in the presence of the

Lord. But the wicked who know not God and obey not the gospel of Jesus Christ should be cast aside into everlasting torments and punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the

Lord and from the glory of his power. And third, as Christ would have us to be certainly persuaded that there shall be a day of judgment, both to deter all men from sin and for the greater consolation or comfort of the godly in their adversity, so will he have the day unknown to men, that they may shake off all carnal security and be always watchful, because they know not at what hour the

Lord will come, and may ever be prepared to say, Come, Lord Jesus, come quickly. Amen.

Again, very simple, very straightforward scenario about future events. Now let's consider the relationship between the rapture and the seven -year tribulation.

Again, last Lord's Day, we began to show why the arguments of those who hold to a pre -tribulation rapture of the church run.

And so we addressed common expressions or phrases, words that they use, that they believe indicates there's a pre -tribulation rapture separate from the visible second coming.

And so we addressed how they are mistaken in their understanding of the biblical expression. The one taken is the one who's judged of God.

Disciples ask Jesus, where are they taken, Lord? They're taken where the vultures are gathered.

They're dead. That's where they're taken. The ones who are left behind are the blessed ones, the ones who survived.

And then we showed also the wrong belief in a secret rapture of the church, that they argue from the expression, he's coming like a thief in the night.

That's not the idea that Christ is coming secretly in a secret rapture, but rather he's coming suddenly and unexpectedly as a thief.

And then we explained their errant assertion that there will be two stages of the second coming of Jesus by their claim that Jesus is coming for his saints can be distinguished from his coming with the saints.

That is not biblical. And then lastly, we refuted their teaching that the Lord has promised that his people would not go through tribulation.

And we see everywhere in the New Testament that we're actually called to go through tribulation.

But I would like us now to consider a teaching that most evangelicals believe to be biblical with uncritical acceptance.

A doctrine which we, and when I say we, that is a rhetorical we, in other words, me,

I believe to be unbiblical. And I believe again, the burden of proof rests on me, because this is an understood, accepted belief of anybody and everybody virtually, except for a minority of people, like R .C.

Sproul, or Alistair Begg, but there's few that would espouse this that are well known across the country.

There are many that hold this view, but they're not necessarily widely known. But this doctrine,

I believe, which is unbiblical, is the belief the Bible teaches there will be a seven year tribulation period on earth, ending in the second coming of Christ.

Now, regardless of the rapture, okay, they teach a seven year end time tribulation, and I'm saying the

Bible does not teach that. Now, I'm not saying that there will definitely not be a time of tribulation before the second coming of Jesus Christ, there may indeed be.

There may be a period of intense trouble and persecution. Paul wrote to Timothy, you've carefully followed my doctrine, man.

Then he talks about persecutions. And out of them, all the Lord delivered me.

Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ will suffer persecution. And then he declares, but evil men and imposters will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.

This is what the course of this age is like. And there are periods when it gets very, very, very difficult, and then there is respite and times of revival.

And so tribulation may come, perhaps even great tribulation. But the argument that evangelicals put forward that there will be a seven year tribulation period as foretold in the scriptures is incorrect, in my opinion.

Those who hold to such a position, in other words, most evangelicals, I believe impose a false interpretation on passages that they wrongly believe speak to this matter.

Actually, the scriptures present this entire church age as a period of tribulation. The best commentary on the book of Revelation is a commentary on the

Greek text, and it's by Greg Beal, who used to be a professor at Gordon, has been a

Bowdoin conference speaker, is the best thing available. And repeatedly through his commentary on Revelation, he shows how it declares this entire church age is a time of tribulation, not just an end time seven year period.

Yes, at times more intense than another time. Jesus told one of the churches at the end of the first century says you will have tribulation 10 days, probably a reference to 10 periods of persecution.

And they were 10 periods of intense Roman persecution over the next two centuries. Our Lord Jesus told his disciples, these things

I've spoken to you that in me, you may have peace in the world, you will have tribulation. But be of good cheer,

I've overcome the world. But an end time tribulation of seven years is essential to the belief in a pre tribulation rapture.

They go hand in hand. The doctrine of an end time seven year tribulation is a doctrine on which everything they espouse rests and is measured.

arguments about the timing of the rapture are based on its relationship to this seven year tribulation.

The majority of evangelicals believe in a pre tribulation rapture that will occur before the onset of the seven years.

However, there are those who believe in a post tribulation rapture. They argue that the rapture and the

Second Coming or one event I think they're right in that, but they argue that it will take place after at the end of the seven year tribulation period.

And then there are those who espouse a mid tribulation rapture that Jesus returns for his church three and a half years into the tribulation and then he comes back bodily at the end of that seven year period.

And those who hold to one of these three positions will make this a very important matter. I mean, it becomes a test of fellowship to them.

They do not count you really as as worthy to be a member of their church if you don't hold say to a pre tribulation rapture.

And some might question that. However, the church I was converted into and Fort Bragg, California, small town up on the

North Coast, Calvary Baptist Church, a GRB church. That denomination

General Association of Regular Baptists in the latter 1950s adopted a statement of faith, which was the 1833

New Hampshire Baptist Confession of Faith, which is a great confession. But in their paragraph on end times, they gave a very detailed end time scenario like we rehearsed above.

And they made it a test of fellowship. They would not permit me to join their church today because I don't hold to a pre tribulation, pre millennial rapture of the church.

And people will dismiss you discredit, discredit you. I'm sure that there are people in our region.

All right, who view our church with suspicion, if not relegate us to a lower status, because we do not espouse.

And and, you know, everything we espouse, we do so publicly on the radio and television. You know, we don't espouse a pre tribulation rapture.

And people think that's weird. And errant, by the way, sometimes some when someone who changes their view on the pre tribulation rapture, they're, they're cut off from support of a local church.

Kevin was telling me about a missionary was in Ireland, Kevin, who got under Protestant teaching over in Ireland came to see that this whole view of dispensational end times was not biblical.

And he came back and expressed that to his denomination, and they immediately cut him off. He and his family were left in Ireland without support, because he changed his view.

People count this. When I was in Germany, and applying to churches in America, sending my resume, numbers of churches contacted me and we were in various stages of process in, in them searching, and they seem to be quite interested in me until we address in times.

And as soon as they heard I didn't hold a pre trib rapture. It was I was dismissed discredited.

I remember one church in Grand Junction, Colorado. I mean, you talk about the millennium, if they would have called me to Grand Junction, Colorado, it would have been a beautiful gig, so to speak.

And, and they were really serious about calling me. And I had to write them and said,

I don't hold to a pre trib rapture. And they wrote back this one fellow wrote back on this church committee. How can you possibly say this?

So I sat down and wrote a long essay, spelling it all out and send it back to him.

And he says, you've made our committee aware of some things that we never considered before.

We cannot call you because it would disrupt our church. But let me assure you, after we get after we call a pastor, we're going to work through these issues.

But it discredited me from being called there. This is this becomes a test of fellowship for people.

And so understand what we're saying. We're asserting here that the very doctrine of a future end time tribulation, seven year tribulation is based on a faulty interpretation of Scripture.

It's based upon an errant interpretation of Daniel's prophecy of 70 weeks. An interpretation which emerged in the late or mid 1800s became the predominant view among evangelicals early in the 20th century, with the publication of the

Schofield Reference Bible. But it is a major tenant of dispensationalism, which is a man -made belief system about the interpretation and understanding of Scripture.

And so let's consider Daniel's prophecy, upon which they claim their teaching is based, first upon the perspective of historic

Reformed understanding, Protestant understanding, and then secondly, from the perspective of modern day dispensationalism.

And so the historic Reformed understanding of Daniel's prophecy of 70 weeks.

Let's turn to Daniel 9. You may not all have the

New King James Version, which I have in front of us. You may have the ESV, which reads a little bit differently, and says the same thing, but in different words.

But here you have the prophecy of Daniel's 70 weeks in these four verses.

These were words of Gabriel the angel to Daniel. Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the

Most Holy. Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the command to restore and build

Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince, there shall be seven weeks and sixty -two weeks.

The streets shall be built again and the wall even in troublous times. After sixty -two weeks,

Messiah shall be cut off, but not for himself. And the people of the

Prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood.

Until the end of the war, desolations are determined. Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week.

But in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abomination shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation which is determined is poured out on the desolate.

Now that is a mouthful of words, isn't it? Let's work through this. First, let's understand the context.

Daniel had been deported among other young Jews after the Babylonian Empire defeated

Judah and destroyed Jerusalem. In 605 he was in one of the earlier deportations.

God's judgment was upon the nation for having broken its covenant with God. Daniel arrived in Babylon as a teenager, but God blessed him, and Daniel arose to become one of the leaders of Babylon.

He served there all his life. Years later, when Daniel was an old man, he was reading a copy of Jeremiah's prophecy regarding his people, and he learned of God's intention and promise to restore his people to their land after seventy years in exile.

We read in Daniel 9, verses 1 -3, In the first year of Darius, the son of Azarius, by descent of Mede, the

Medes defeated Babylon, who was made king over the realm of the

Chaldeans. In the first year of his reign,

I, Daniel, perceived in the books the number of years that according to the word of the

Lord to Jeremiah the prophet must pass before the desolations of Jerusalem, namely seventy years.

Jerusalem had been destroyed utterly by Babylon, and he sees that this exile, this judgment, was going to last seventy years.

And so here Daniel is an old man, and these seventy years are almost up, and you can imagine his optimism.

He expected that God was going to restore his people to the land. God had utterly destroyed

Jerusalem and the temple, but Daniel believed that their physical and spiritual condition was about to be restored.

He believed that upon their release from exile and return to their land, that the Messiah would appear and that the kingdom of Israel would be restored.

And so Daniel began to pray that God's will would come to pass for his people. But Daniel had been mistaken in thinking that at the end of the seventy years of exile, in Babylon, that all things would be restored, that the curse of God would be removed from the people, and that the kingdom of the

Messiah would be established. And so God sent his angel Gabriel, sent him to Daniel in order to reveal to Daniel the actual time that would transpire until the

Messiah would come, who would accomplish his work of salvation for his people, reconciling them to God.

And so we read in Daniel 9, verses 20 and following, Now while I was speaking, praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people

Israel, and presenting my supplication before the Lord my God for the holy mountain of my

God, yes, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, whom

I had seen in the vision of the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, reached me about the time of the evening offering, and informed me, and talked with me, and said,

O Daniel, I have now come forth to give you skill to understand. At the beginning of your supplications the command went out, and I have come to tell you, for you are greatly beloved, and therefore consider the matter and understand the vision.

And then it was then that Gabriel gave Daniel this prophecy of seventy weeks. And Gabriel told

Daniel it would not be immediately after seventy years of exile that their reconciliation before God would occur, that the promised kingdom of God would be inaugurated.

Gabriel told Daniel it would not be seventy years, it would be seventy weeks of years.

In other words, it would be 490 years. Seventy weeks, seventy times seven years, 490 years.

It won't be seventy years, Daniel, it's going to be 490 years before the

Messiah comes, reconciles your people, establishes his kingdom. Only then would their sins be fully forgiven, and their relationship with God would be restored.

Only then would all the promises of God, respecting their salvation, be realized. In other words, to seal up the vision and prophecy.

Only then would the Messiah come and accomplish their redemption from sin, removing

God's curse from his people, fulfilling his promise to inaugurate the promised kingdom of God.

Well, did this event occur? Of course it did. And the early Christian witness was that Jesus of Nazareth who fulfilled all that the holy prophets had foretold would come to pass, all that Gabriel declared to Daniel that would take place after 490 years,

God accomplished. He did reconcile his people unto himself. He did establish his kingdom through the life, crucifixion, resurrection, and exaltation of the promised

Messiah, Jesus Christ. The angel Gabriel gave detailed explanation to Daniel about the prophecy of the seventy weeks of years.

He told Daniel that the outset or the beginning point of this 490 -year time frame would begin with the going forth of the command to restore and build

Jerusalem. This is probably a reference to the formal decree of the

Persian emperor Cyrus, who gave permission for Jewish exiles to return and rebuild the city.

From this initial decree, which was the beginning point, until Messiah the

Prince, sixty -nine weeks of years or 483 years would transpire. At the end of 483 years, the

Messiah would appear. Gabriel divides this initial sixty -nine weeks into two divisions of seven weeks and sixty -two weeks.

The seven weeks, 49 years, speak of the time in which Jerusalem is rebuilt in troublous times.

We would argue that this was realized under the leadership of Nehemiah.

Nehemiah led the returning Jewish exiles to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem. You can read of the difficulty

Nehemiah and his people had during those troublesome times. After the city was reestablished in its fortifications, another sixty -two weeks or 434 years are specified until Messiah the

Prince. Now look at that expression. It is very important. Until Messiah the

Prince. He is the promised king. These sixty -nine weeks of Daniel's prophecy, therefore, take us from the official return of the

Jews from the seventy -year Babylonian captivity until the appearance of Jesus Christ the Messiah when he began his earthly ministry of proclamation and reconciliation.

Until Messiah the Prince. The sixty -nine weeks of years describe the period of history to the onset of Jesus' ministry.

Upon the public ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, the seventieth week of Daniel began.

The Messiah was performing his ministry in the regions of Galilee and later Judea. He served for three and a half years.

We would argue that is the first half of the seventieth week of Daniel. The sixty -nine weeks came to the onset, the appearance, of Messiah the

Prince. The seventieth week describes the ministry of Messiah. After the sixty -nine weeks, we read, after sixty -two weeks, that is after the forty -nine or the seven weeks,

Messiah shall be cut off but not for himself. Sometime after the sixty -nine weeks, we would argue that is in the seventieth week.

The Messiah would be cut off but not for himself. This is a clear reference to the crucifixion of Christ. Halfway through the week.

But what happens next? The Prince would then bring God's judgment upon Jerusalem and its temple, the desolation of which would be total and lasting, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.

The end of it shall be with a flood. Till the end of the war, desolations are determined. And we would argue that our

Lord pronounced judgment upon Jerusalem and its temple. He is the Prince. He declared to Jerusalem in Matthew 23,

Your house is left to you desolate. And then he announced to his disciples that the temple would be destroyed.

The opening words of Matthew 25. Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple. And Jesus said to them,

Do you not see all these things? Assuredly I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another that shall not be thrown down.

The Prince to come is the one who destroyed the city and the sanctuary. As King of kings and Lord of lords, he is the one who commanded the

Roman armies to come and lay siege to Jerusalem and destroy it. And of course, that was realized in AD 70.

I'm not going to take the time to read Matthew Henry's comments there. But just to show you this is a historic

Protestant Reform view. This is what Matthew Henry affirms. So I'm not saying anything new or novel here.

I'm saying something that's that is old and been forgotten and lost.

But what of Daniel 9 .27, which reads, Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week.

But in the middle of the week, he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abomination shall be one who makes desolate, even upon the consummation, which is determined is poured out on the desolate.

We would argue again that this is what takes place during the 70th week of Daniel. Which began with the onset of the public ministry of the

Lord Jesus. This last seven year period in Daniel's timeframe included our

Lord's entire three and a half year public ministry. And I would argue approximately three and a half years afterwards.

Although Daniel is not doesn't give emphasis to the second three and a half years. He really gives emphasis to the first three and a half years we should we should recognize.

We read that our Lord initially confirmed a covenant with many. Now reformed commentators actually have two opinions as to the meaning of this prophecy.

Some argue this is the new covenant that our Lord established with many. Just as he came to give his life a ransom for many, he established a new covenant with many.

Others, however, and I'm of this persuasion, argue that this alludes to Jesus Christ as a

Messiah who came to confirm. He didn't come. He confirmed the covenant.

In other words, he confirmed God's promise and commitment to the Jews that God said he would send them the

Messiah. And this is what Jesus did when he first came into Israel. He recalled the

Lord telling his disciples, you just go to the Jews. Don't go to the Gentiles.

Matthew 10, five and seven, he's 12. Jesus sent out instructing them, go nowhere among the

Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel and proclaim as you go, say in the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Now later he would tell a Gentile woman, I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

You see, he came and he confirmed the covenant with many with his people.

God had bound himself to send the Messiah to Israel and he came to Israel and only to Israel initially.

In fact, Paul wrote of this. Now I say that Jesus Christ has become a servant to the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the father.

He came to confirm a covenant with many and he did. But in the middle of the week, that 70th week of Daniel, Jesus Christ was crucified, having brought an end to sacrifice and offering.

When Jesus died, that veil in the temple was torn from top to bottom. He brought an end to the sacrifices of that temple.

The epistle to the Hebrews declares, but as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

But then the desolation of the temple in Jerusalem takes place. The city and temple that Daniel prophesied regarding would be rebuilt in troubled times.

On the wing of abomination shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation which is determined is poured out on the desolate.

What does that mean? Well, if the Lord Jesus was cut off, that is crucified in the middle of the 70th week, three and a half years into seven years, what of the second half of the seven -year period?

This is my opinion. Take it for whatever that is worth. I would argue that for the first three and a half years of this church age after the resurrection of Christ, the primary emphasis of mission took place among the

Jews. God was fulfilling his commitment and promise to them. Peter would himself declare to the gathered

Jews, God having raised up his servants sent him to you first, talking to Jews, to bless you and turning every one of you from your wickedness.

And so the early church went to the Jew first and then the Gentile. But about three and a half years after the resurrection,

I would argue at the end of the 70th week, the Lord Jesus appeared to Paul and called him to become an apostle to the

Gentiles. And later on Paul declared to the Jews, their refusal to hear and respond resulted in him turning to the

Gentiles. It was necessary. Why was it necessary, Paul?

It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you Jews. Why? Because God promised that he would.

But now since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we're turning to the

Gentiles. And hence I see that as the end of the 70 weeks of Daniel.

The Lord had confirmed the covenant with the Jews for one week, which was from the onset of our Lord's earthly ministry to his crucifixion through the ministry of the early church.

That 70th week had come to its fulfillment and God now determined that this gospel would be preached in all the world and the fall of Jerusalem would take place, which did indeed take place in AD 70 after, by the way, a three and a half year siege.

Now I just described the historic reformed or Protestant view of Daniel 9, 24 -27.

In quick summary, the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 is a prophecy of the first coming of Christ, his ministry in death, and then of a temporary ministry to the

Jewish people with the message of salvation. All 70 weeks of years, 490 years, were fulfilled from the decree to build

Jerusalem through the appearance of Christ at his baptism, his anointing for his ministry, his death for others, three and a half years of ministry to the

Jews before the gospel went chiefly to the Gentiles and then the desolation of Jerusalem that took place within that generation.

But very few evangelicals would affirm or agree with that position that we just put forward.

You don't hear it. You'd hear from R .C. Sproul and I could name a number of other reformed scholars but you wouldn't be familiar with their names.

Everybody else argues the 70th week of Daniel is a prophecy of a future seven -year tribulation on earth prior to the second coming of Christ.

This has only been a view, though, held since about the beginning of the 20th century by many people.

Now let's attempt to understand their interpretation of the 70 weeks of Daniel from their perspective.

And I think if you just listen carefully and consider carefully, you'll see the utter absurdity of their interpretation of Daniel chapter 9.

And so over against the historic reformed position and the interpretation of dispensationalism, they understand the 70 weeks to be two separate time periods, one 69 weeks, 483 years, and the other seven years, one week.

These two time periods are separated by a great parenthesis, which is this church age of 2 ,000 plus years.

They say, therefore, that the 70th week of Daniel is a prophecy of an end -time seven -year tribulation just before the second coming of Christ.

We would argue that their division and separation of the 70 weeks of Daniel into two separate periods of time renders

Daniel's time frame unclear and imprecise. 70 weeks, therefore, doesn't mean 490 years.

It means 2 ,490 years plus. It makes it indefinite. This dispensational view of the 70 weeks of Daniel claimed that because the

Jews rejected their Messiah, their promised King, which they did, the kingdom that Jesus offered the

Jews was postponed. And so at the end of the 69 weeks, they argue,

God's prophetic clock stopped or paused, and then these last 2 ,000 plus years have transpired.

They say this church age is a large parenthesis in God's program.

He was diverted from plan A, having to do with the nation of Israel, and went into plan

B, dealing with the church. But after the rapture of the church, he goes back to his original plan, with the nation of Israel, back to plan

A. And so they say that God's prophetic clock will resume again. The 70th week of Daniel's prophecy will begin to unfold after a secret rapture occurs in which

Jesus will take his church and meet him in the air. They claim, therefore, the prophecy of the 70th week of Daniel is a prophecy of the coming

Christ. How, then, do they interpret Daniel 9, 25 -27?

First, understand that they are in agreement with us in their understanding of verse 25. It is a prophecy of the coming

Christ. The Reformed and dispensational positions are in agreement here. However, there is a slight difference.

Whereas the Reformed view sees the end of 69 weeks at the onset of Jesus Christ's ministry when he was baptized, that is, anointed with the

Holy Spirit, the dispensational position believes the conclusion of the 69th week occurred at the crucifixion of Christ.

That has implications. The Reformed position understands Daniel 9, 26 as saying the

Messiah will be cut off, in other words, killed, sometime after the 69 weeks. We would argue that is halfway through the 70th week.

But here lies the major difference between the Reformed and dispensational interpretation.

The Reformed position understands verse 26 to speak entirely of Messiah the

Prince, who is identified in Daniel 9, 25. The dispensational interpretation does not believe this to be the case.

Take note that Daniel mentions the Messiah directly three times in verses 25 and 26.

First, he identifies Messiah the Prince in verse 25. Secondly, he again mentions the

Messiah in verse 26. And we would argue that the Reformed position refers to him as the

Prince who is to come, also in verse 26. It is logical.

Messiah the Prince, Messiah, the Prince. He is talking about one person, the

Messiah. And you see in your notes, if you are looking at the top of page 9, you have the text there where I have identified those three places.

Now this is the New King James Version. And if you will notice in your notes, the first reference until Messiah the

Prince, they have capitalized Prince as P. But notice in the next verse, number 3, the

Prince who is to come, that Prince is not capitalized, it is in lowercase. Now of course

Hebrew just has single letters, it does not have uppercase or lowercase. It was the translators of the

New King James Version, and I think there were some dispensationalists on the translation committee who insisted on making the second

Prince lowercase because they do not believe it refers to the Messiah. They believe that the

Prince who is to come is the Antichrist, not the Christ. Now consider that.

And I think this is devastating to the dispensational view. Rather than understanding verse 26 to be speaking throughout of the coming

Messiah, their interpretation introduces another person right in the mid -sentence.

They view verse 26 to be a prophecy of both Christ and the Antichrist, whereas they are right in doing verse 25 to speak of Messiah the

Prince. And in verse 26 the reference to Messiah is also understood rightly to be the prophecy of Jesus.

Amazingly they take the next reference, the Prince to come, not a reference to the

Messiah, the Prince, but the introduction of a new character, that being the Antichrist.

Now I would argue that grammatically and syntactically that is nonsense. And so they believe that between the clauses in one sentence, and the clauses in verse 26, with the end of the words, not for himself, and before the words and the people of the

Prince, one needs to really insert 2 ,000 plus years of Church history. And in my opinion, again, to make the second

Prince of verse 26 a different person than the first Prince of verse 25 is a terrible abuse of the context, and it ignores standard rules of grammar.

The Antichrist is nowhere spoken of in Daniel's prophecy of 70 weeks. And when we gave the historic

Reformed interpretation of those three verses, there was no room for the Antichrist. There's no suggestion of the

Antichrist. I know what they believe. They have trouble thinking that Jesus the Messiah is going to send armies to destroy

Jerusalem. They say that must be the Antichrist. But that's exactly what

Jesus did, didn't he? Behold, your house is left to you desolate. As King of kings and Lord of lords, he brought judgment upon Jerusalem.

The entire context of Daniel's 70 weeks is a prophecy of the coming Messiah, the Prince, who would remove the curse from his people through the sacrifice of himself, who would bring

God's judgment upon all those Jews who refused to acknowledge and submit to him. The elder

Simeon, remember when he saw the youth? He pronounced a prophecy, Behold, this child is appointed for the fall and rising of many in Israel.

And that's what Jesus did. Daniel 9 foretold this work of salvation and judgment.

But let's look at verse 27. Here's one more verse. And I know the time's getting late, but we're going to, we want to finish this, get it done in one shot.

Okay? Because it'd be really hard to pick up the context again three weeks from now and deal with it justly.

But look at verse 27. They don't believe this refers to the

Messiah. They believe this is a prophecy of the Antichrist. That itself just makes my skin tremble.

They're applying to the Antichrist the work of Christ. He shall confirm a covenant with many for one week.

But in the middle of the week, he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abomination shall be one who makes desolate even until the consummation of the covenant.

The Dispensational Interpretation sees this not as a prophecy.

It's claimed that the covenant the Antichrist confirms is with the Jews at the beginning of the future seven -year tribulation period, which is the 70th week of Daniel, they claim.

The Antichrist is the political leader and to reinstitute their

Old Testament sacrifices in Jerusalem. All the teaching about a rebuilt temple, it's all based on this spurious interpretation.

But in the middle of the seven years, the Antichrist reveals himself as the evil leader that he is.

He forbids the Jews from sacrificing any longer. He brings an end to sacrifice and offering.

That's not the crucifixion, they argue. No, that's the Antichrist who stops the Jews from sacrificing in a rebuilt temple in an end -time seven -year tribulation.

They say the Antichrist will then set up an idol of himself in the temple, which the Dispensationalists see as the abomination of desolation.

He will then persecute the Jews for the remainder of the tribulation period until Jesus returns the second time at the end of the seven years.

In contrast to that Dispensational interpretation, the Reformed view sees verse 27 as continuing to speak of the first coming of Christ.

Jesus came to confirm the covenant with many, the lost sheep of the house of Israel, fulfilling the promise of salvation to the

Jews. And in the middle of the week, Christ died on the cross.

And then Daniel foretells of the Lord's rejection of the Jewish leadership and of Jerusalem as an emblem of the

Jewish hegemony or leadership priority in the purpose of God. And that's what happened.

Jerusalem was destroyed. And with regard to its relationship before God, that city of Jerusalem over there has been desolate.

And I tell you what, spiritually speaking, it is still desolate. The book of Revelation says, spiritually speaking,

Jerusalem is Sodom. And yet how much focus is on that earthly city as though that's in the purpose and program of God.

Now God's concerned about a heavenly Jerusalem, a city whose builder and maker is God. Let's conclude.

Some might ask, why is this important? I mean, what's all this debate and speculation?

What difference does it make? It makes difference. I've listed six things that just came to my mind.

In my opinion, to deny the fact that God used Daniel to prophesy of the events surrounding the desolation of Jerusalem by the risen

Lord Jesus is to fail to give glory to God for the great things he's done in history. They say it's future.

No, we say this is what God has done in history. I think a dispensational view of Daniel 9 denies the glory due to his name.

It blames the Antichrist for unjust persecution upon Jews rather than glorifying

Christ for administering his righteous judgment upon a sinful nation. Secondly, it leads believers to focus wrongly and needlessly on imagined false views of the future.

There's tremendous waste of resources upon end -time prophecy that lulls people into thinking they're going to escape

God's dealings in history. We're not going to allow us to undergo tribulation.

Third, it fails to recognize a major manner in which the Lord was vindicated in his arrest, trial, and crucifixion.

The judgment of Judea and Jerusalem confirmed that Jesus had authority. Jesus told those

Jewish leaders, you shall see the Son of Man coming with clouds. That was a reference to AD Jerusalem.

When they saw Jerusalem fall at the hands of the Roman armies, it confirmed to them

Jesus is Lord. He was calling the shots. Fourth, the classical dispensational view teaches that our

Lord failed to anoint him because the Jews rejected him as king.

But the Bible teaches us that of course their rejection of Jesus was actually the cause of him being exalted.

In spite of their rejection, he was successful in establishing his kingdom.

Yet I have set my king on my holy hill of Zion, says Psalm 2, and Peter quoted that on the day of Pentecost.

But dispensationalists say basically Jesus tried to set up his kingdom, but they wouldn't let him. And now he's sitting there at the right hand passively.

I'm talking about the classic of the old dispensationalists like Schofield, Lewis Barry Shaffer, John Walbert, Charles Ryrie.

They said he failed to establish his kingdom because the Jews wouldn't accept him as king, and so the kingdom was postponed.

Jesus is sitting at the right hand of the Father, and it's as though the Father is going to tell him at the second coming, go at it again,

Jesus. You can do now what you failed to do 2 ,000 years ago, was basically the implications of it.

I think it's blasphemous, nearly blasphemous. And then, fifthly, I would argue that the dispensational view has led to political positions of evangelicals, whereby they give unqualified endorsement to the secular political state of Israel, to encourage

Israel to exclude non -Jews from borders that were at one time legitimate possessions of Jews.

Now I know I would immediately be called anti -Semitic. I am pro -Israel. They are our ally.

They are a democratic nation in the Middle East. They need to have secure borders.

They are loyal to us. I believe in every way we ought to support the nation of Israel. But I can't argue, you know, that the promises of God are to a physical people when the

Scriptures tell me that the promises of God are to the spiritual seed of Abraham, namely the one seed,

Christ, and all those who believe on Christ. They are the true children of Abraham. And lastly, we would conclude

Jesus is currently Lord of Lords and King of Kings. His kingdom was not postponed, but it was inaugurated.

And Jesus declared, All authority is given to me in heaven and earth. The Jews' rejection of Jesus did not thwart

Jesus Christ becoming King. Their rejection of him crucifying him was the very means and the ground upon which the

Father raised him from the dead and gave him all kingly authority in heaven and earth.

And therefore I believe the historic Reformed view of this 70 weeks of Daniel is so important.

And yet people are woefully ignorant about this matter. And they don't think about it critically.

And for the most part, none of them have ever heard anything differently. But they believe in this future seven year tribulation.

Again, there may be a tribulation. And times will grow worse and worse. But I find no place where it's declared there will be a seven year period of tribulation in the future.

It may be longer if there is one. It may be very intense and prolonged. I don't know.

It may be of short duration. I don't know. I don't think the Lord has given us indication into that.

I know people argue from a futurist view of the revelation. Oh, there's seven year tribulation suggested there in the revelation.

You know, I would argue completely differently that that is founded upon a futurist interpretation of revelation.

And the three and a half years mentioned here or there in the book of Revelation cannot be imposed upon Daniel's 70th week as an interpretation that is so clear, historic, and confirmed in scripture.

Daniel's 70 weeks was a time frame that God gave Daniel as to when the

Messiah would come and set up his kingdom. And he did so exactly as God had indicated.

Thank the Lord. Let's pray. Father, we pray that you would help us to understand these matters and sort them through and help us, our

Lord, of course, to be patient and understanding of those that may have not been taught these things.

May you help us understand them fully and be able to relate them accurately, our God, that your word,