|
WHAT SHOULD BE THE NATURE OF THE "GREAT TRIBULATION"? |
|
BACKGROUND SCRIPTURES |
In the New Testament Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus was asked by His disciples about the signs that would accompany the end of the age and time of His return. Since they were on the Mount of Olives at the time, the conversation is referred to as the "Olivet Discourse". You can find that discourse in (Matthew 24-25; Mark 13; and Luke 21), with those portions relevant to the Great Tribulation reading as follows:
|
(Matthew 24:1-3) |
Jesus' response at first described the general nature of troubles leading up to the End Times, then He focused their attention on a time when an Abomination of Desolation and Great Tribulation would occur, seemingly just prior to His apocalyptic return.
|
(Matthew 24:15-30) (Luke 21:20-27) |
The Matthew and Mark scriptures pertaining to the time of the Abomination of Desolation and Great Tribulation are almost identical, so only the Matthew text is displayed above. The Luke scripture that relates directly to those in Matthew and Mark is shown because it is worded differently. Although it omits the terms Abomination of Desolation and Great Tribulation, it speaks of a military siege against Jerusalem followed by an extended period of distress to befall the Jewish people, then also concludes with the Lord's return in power and great glory. Thus it deals with the same overall time period in question.
|
THE "ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION"
AND "GREAT TRIBULATION" |
Bible historians are nearly unanimous in their view that the Olivet Discourse was at least partly fulfilled by the first century AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. One of many is quoted:
|
"This abomination of
desolation, refers to the Roman army; and this
abomination standing in the holy place is the Roman army
besieging Jerusalem; this is what was spoken of by Daniel
the prophet, and so let everyone who reads these
prophecies understand them; and in reference to this very
event they are understood by the rabbis. The Roman army
is called an abomination, for its ensigns and images,
which were so to the Jews. Josephus says, the Romans
brought their ensigns into the temple, and placed them
over against the eastern gate, and sacrificed to them
there. The Roman army is therefore fitly called the
abomination which makes desolate,---" |
This interpretation, identifying that first century Roman invasion as an abomination, is supported by reading (Luke 21.20), which is also concordant with (Matthew 24.15; Mark 13.14), for the Luke verse makes it clear that the "Abomination" speaks of a time when Jerusalem is to be surrounded by armies. Moreover, the following verses indicate that that event would set the stage for the Jews being led away captive into all nations.
The historic record is clear; a Roman army surrounded Jerusalem in AD 70 after first destroying much of the rest of Israel. The ensuing destruction of the city and Temple resulted in a terrible carnage of the Jewish people with about one million people being killed during the onslaught. The nation of Israel was essentially annihilated at that time, resulting in the scattering of the Jews among the nations, never to return to their homeland as a reformed nation until 1948.
Matthew and Mark indicate that the occurrence of the Abomination of Desolation would be an event apparent to all in Judea, prompting some to flee to the mountains East of the Jordan river. That early Jewish believers read this prophecy literally is suggested from history which records that when a Syrian general by the name of Cestius first laid siege to Jerusalem in AD 66 and then retreated, many Jewish believers took that opportunity to flee across the river to the Perean mountains. Although the final siege by Titus did not begin until February, AD 70, those believers who earlier took the prophecy literally were saved from that final desolation.
Additional connections like the following ones further support the notion that the Olivet Discourse prophecy can be at least partly explained by the first century Roman invasion and destruction of Israel:
The
angel Gabriel, when detailing to Daniel the "70 Weeks"
determined upon his people, indicated that the next major event
following the AD 32 coming of Messiah would be the destruction of
Jerusalem and the Temple. This was surely fulfilled by the Roman
destruction just 38 years later.
By a not-so-amazing "coincidence", the Lunar Levitical dates for the destruction of Solomon's Temple in 586 BC by Nebuchadnezzar, and Herod's second Temple in AD 70 by Titus, fell on precisely the same date of AB 9, again suggesting that the Roman destruction was prophetic.
|
BUT THE "ABOMINATION OF
DESOLATION" AND "GREAT TRIBULATION" |
Several years ago, I happened to be listening to a radio program where two Bible scholars debated the subject of the prophecies in the Olivet Discourse. One scholar advanced the points just summarized above, arguing that the prophecies were completely fulfilled in the first century, whereas the second scholar maintained that they would be fulfilled only at some future time.
I felt that the argument by the scholar who took the historic view was actually superior to the End Times proponent until he reached those verses pertaining to the Lord's return. At that point, the historic view seemed to break down, because it became necessary to spiritualize the Lord's return to be something other than a visible apocalypse. Since there are numerous scriptures, like the following ones, that make it evident that His return will be manifest on a physical level apparent to everyone, it became obvious that a purely historic interpretation of the Olivet Discourse is incomplete.
|
(Matthew 26:57, 63-65) (Revelation 1:7-8) NKJV |
Since it is abundantly clear that a restricted historic interpretation of the Olivet Discourse has much merit yet cannot explain these other scriptures describing the Lord's physical return, how can the Olivet Discourse be satisfactorily interpreted?
|
Prophecies about the Lord's coming typically have dual fulfillments |
If we were to study Old Testament prophecies related to the coming of the Lord, we would discover a very interesting commonality. They all tend to blur the time of His coming, making it all but impossible a priori, to distinguish between His first coming as Savior versus His second coming as King and Judge. This ambiguity so confused many Old Testament rabbis that they could not tell whether these prophecies spoke of a single Messiah who would fulfill the entire prediction, or multiple Messiah's who would fulfill each part.
Review the following Old Testament prophecies, with the verses artificially divided between Messiah's first and second coming, to see how this feature is characteristic of all of them.
|
(Isaiah 9:6-7) |
The divisions show that the first part of each of these prophecies was fulfilled during Messiah's first century coming, but the part following the division will not be fulfilled until His second coming. The division is particularly descriptive in the (Isaiah 61.1-2) prophecy when Jesus Himself highlighted the division by the following statement to the people in His hometown of Nazareth.
|
(Luke 4:16-21) |
Notice that Messiah curtailed His quote of Isaiah half-way through verse 19, so as not to misrepresent the purpose of His first coming as Savior.
|
THEREFORE THE OLIVET DISCOURSE MIGHT ALSO BE EXPECTED TO HAVE A DUAL FULFILLMENT |
If we will read carefully the disciples original question to Jesus in (Matthew 24.3), it clearly involves two separate events, i.e. (a) the destruction of the Temple, and (b) the Lord's return at the end of the age. Of course, the disciples had no way of knowing that these two events would be separated by many centuries, but Jesus' precise answer to their question required that the Olivet Discourse must have a dual fulfillment, just like those Old Testament prophecies cited above. Consequently, that portion of their question pertaining to the destruction of the Temple was surely fulfilled by the Romans in AD 70, but that second portion about the Lord's return is still future to our time.
This duality complicates our ability to easily sort out all of the verses in the Discourse. While it is clear that the Lord's return will occur only once in the End Times, it must become the subject of additional study to determine which of the other events (or parts of them) leading up to His apocalypse have application to both the first century and the End Times. For example:
The first century Roman
destruction constituted an Abomination of Desolation
and Great Tribulation against
the Jewish people, but now we know that it was not the greatest
ever to occur, because the Jewish Holocaust during World War II was much worse.
While that first century Abomination of Desolation and Great Tribulation against the Jews must be charged to the Romans, another prophecy in (Daniel 12.11), pertaining to Daniel's "70th Week", requires that we also search for some final manifestation of this Abomination of Desolation in the End Times.
Nevertheless, our search for such End Time events to dually fulfill provisions of the Olivet Discourse is made somewhat easier by observing that their End Times fulfillment should occur during the Times of the Gentiles (When Should the "Great Tribulation" Occur?), and should have the Jews as a primary target.