Keep sharing good news without ads.
Dr. Lars Larson
I trust 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 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 I 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 kinds, 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 commonly
held belief, 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, and 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.
You commonly hear 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, 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 -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.
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 and 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 or Protestants historically believe, we
can pull from our own confession of faith, and we can pull it from the Westminster Confession or the Savoy
Declaration, the Congregational Reformed Confession, or the Heidelberg Catechism.
We can 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 is 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 their 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 shall be cast aside
into everlasting torment 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 are unbiblical.
So we addressed common expressions or phrases, words that they use, that they believe indicate
there is 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 one will be taken, the other left.
The one taken is the one who is 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.
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, you know, 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, you know, 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, manner of life, purpose, faith, long -suffering,
love, and 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 impostors 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 is 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 at other times.
Jesus told one of the churches at the end of the first century, he says, you will have tribulation ten days,
probably a reference to ten periods of persecution, and there were ten periods of intense Roman
persecution over the next two centuries.
Our Lord Jesus told his disciples, these things I have spoken to you, that in me you may have peace, in the world you will have
But be of good cheer, I have 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 are one event, but they argue that
it will take place after or 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 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 in Fort Bragg, California, a small town up
on the North Coast, Calvary Baptist Church, a GARB 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 you.
I'm sure that there are people in our region who view our church with suspicion,
if not relegate us to a lower status because we do not
espouse, and everything we espouse we do so publicly on the radio and television.
We don't espouse a pre -tribulation rapture.
And people think that's weird and errant, by the way.
Sometimes when someone who changes their view on the pre -tribulation rapture, they're cut off
from support of a local church.
Kevin was telling me about a missionary, was it 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 of it.
How many 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
them searching, and they seemed to be quite interested in me until we addressed end
times.
And as soon as they heard I didn't hold a pre -trib rapture, 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, that would have been a beautiful gig, so to
speak, 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 the
church committee, how can you possibly say this?
So I sat down and wrote a long essay, spelling it all out, and sent 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
call a pastor, we're going to work through these issues.
But it discredited me from being called there.
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 tenet 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.
Says the same thing, but in different words.
But here you have the prophecy of Daniel's 70 weeks in these
four verses.
I want to read them.
These were words of Gabriel the angel to Daniel.
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 troublest 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's a mouthful of words, isn't it?
Now let's work through this.
First, let's understand the context.
Daniel had been deported among other young Hebrews, 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.
And 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 70 years in exile.
We read in Daniel 9, 1 -3,.
In the first year of Darius, the son of Azarias, by descent of Mede, the Medes defeated Babylon,
who was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans.
That's another term for Babylonians, 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 end of the desolations of
Jerusalem, namely 70 years.
See, Jerusalem had been destroyed utterly by Babylon.
And he sees that this exile, this judgment, was going to last 70 years.
And so here Daniel is an old man, and these 70 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 70 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, that would be the kingdom,
yes, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the visions beginning, being caused to
fly swiftly, reached me about the time of the evening offering.
And he 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 70 weeks.
Gabriel told Daniel it would not be immediately after 70 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 70 years, it would be 70 weeks of years.
In other words, it would be 490 years.
70 weeks, 70 times 7 years, 490 years.
It will not be 70 years, Daniel, it is 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 70 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.
We see that in verse 25 of Daniel 9.
This is probably, and there's difference of opinion, but 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, 69
weeks of years or 483 years would transpire.
At the end of 483 years, the Messiah would appear.
Gabriel divides this initial 69 weeks into two divisions of 7 weeks
and 62 weeks.
The 7 weeks, 49 years, speak of the time in which Jerusalem is rebuilt in troublous
And we would argue that that was realized under the leadership of Nehemiah.
Nehemiah led the returning Jewish exile to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem.
And you can read of the difficulty Nehemiah and his people had during those troublesome
And then after the city was reestablished in its fortifications, another 62
weeks or 434 years are specified until Messiah the Prince.
Now look at that expression.
It's very important.
Until Messiah the Prince.
He's the promised king.
These 69 weeks of Daniel's prophecy, therefore, take us from the official return of the Jews from the 70 -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 69 weeks of years describe the period of history to the onset of Jesus' ministry.
And upon the public ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, the 70th 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's the first half of the 70th week of Daniel.
69 weeks came to the onset, the appearance, of Messiah the Prince.
The 70th week describes the ministry of Messiah.
After the 69 weeks, we read, after 62 weeks, that's after the 49 or the
7 weeks, Messiah shall be cut off, but not for himself.
Sometime after the 69 weeks, we would argue that's in the 70th 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.
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's 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.
His disciples came up to show him the buildings of 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 A .D. 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 Reformed view.
This is what Matthew Henry affirms.
So I'm not saying anything new or novel here.
I'm saying something that is old and forgotten and lost.
But what of Daniel 9 .27 which reads,.
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 time frame 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 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 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 the Jewish Messiah who came to confirm.
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.
You recall the Lord telling his disciples, you just go to the Jews.
Don't go to the Gentiles.
Matthew 10, 5, and 7.
These twelve Jesus sent out instructing them to 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 saying 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 seventieth 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 would
nevertheless be destroyed once again.
On the wing of abomination shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation which is determined is
What does that mean?
Well, if the Lord Jesus was cut off, that is, crucified in the middle of the seventieth 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 that seventieth 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 have thrust it aside and judged yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning
to the Gentiles.
And hence I see that as the end of the seventy 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 seventieth 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 A .D. 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 seventy 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 seventy 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 it 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 seventieth 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 twentieth century by
many people.
Now, let's attempt to understand their interpretation of the seventy 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 seventy weeks to be two separate time periods, one sixty -nine 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 two thousand plus
years.
They say, therefore, that the seventieth 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 seventy weeks of Daniel into two separate periods of time
renders Daniel's time frame unclear and imprecise.
Seventy weeks, therefore, doesn't mean 490 years, it means 2 ,490 years plus.
It makes it indefinite.
This dispensational view of the seventy 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 sixty -nine weeks, they argue, God's prophetic clock
stopped, and then these last two
thousand 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 seventieth 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 seventieth week of Daniel is a prophecy of a culminating in the visible
bodily second coming of Jesus Christ.
How, then, do they interpret Daniel 9, 25 -27?
First, understand they are in agreement with us in their understanding of verse 25.
It's 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 sixty -nine 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
sixty -ninth 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 sixty -nine weeks.
And we would argue that's, you know, halfway through the seventieth 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, with the Reformed position, thirdly, he refers to him as the Prince who is to come,
also in verse 26.
It's logical.
Messiah the Prince, Messiah the Prince.
He's talking about one person, the Messiah.
And you see in your notes, if you're looking at the top of page 9, you have the text there where
I've identified those three places.
Now, this is the New King James Version.
And if you'll notice in your notes, the first reference until Messiah the Prince, they've
capitalized Prince as P.
But notice in the next verse, number 3, the Prince who is to come, that Prince
is not capitalized, it's in lowercase.
Now, of course, Hebrew just has single letters, doesn't 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
don't 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 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 is 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 is 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 is what Jesus did.
Daniel 9 foretold this work of salvation and judgment.
Let's look at verse 27.
Here is one more verse.
I know the time is getting late, but we want to finish this.
Get it done in one shot.
Because it would 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 are applying to the Antichrist the work of Christ.
He shall confirm a covenant with many for one week.
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.
The dispensational interpretation sees this not as a prophecy of Jesus Christ in his ministry but a prophecy of
the Antichrist at the end of the age.
It is 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 of the Western world, it is claimed who gives permission to the Jews to rebuild their
temple and to reinstitute their Old Testament sacrifices in Jerusalem.
All the teaching about a rebuilt temple is 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 is not the crucifixion they argue.
No, that is 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.
And 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, which brought an end to sacrifice and offering.
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
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 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 going to be raptured out of the world.
God's 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 inaugurate the Kingdom of God
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 Schaeffer, 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.
It's 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 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.
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 think the Lord has given us indication into that.
I know people argue from a future's view of the Revelation, Oh, there's seven -year tribulation suggested there in the Revelation.
No, 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 in 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, Lord, would go forth in truth.
For we pray in Jesus' name, amen.