Is the anti-Christ coming?

[tyndale1946]

Just a short note for everyone:

More religious groups have their origin because of end time prophecy. Check out through history and you will find out this is a fact. Church Of Christ, Jehova Witness, Mormons, Assemblies Of God just to mention a few.

The church creeds of every church according to the preterist view are not valid because the preterist view supersedes it.
There are 3 basic books to every Preterist library... The Bible, The Works Of Josephus and The Parousia... A study of the new testament doctrine of our Lords second coming... by J. Stuart Russell circa 1887.

What in a nutshell is the preterist view... All things mentioned in the book of Revelation was fulfilled in the 2nd coming of Christ in the beginning of the early church... The Resurrection Of The Dead, The Last Throne Judgement... All Of It!

What does the Bible say about this?
1 Timothy 1:19-20 Holding faith and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.

What did these men do? 2 Timothy 2:16-18 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase into more ungodliness.
And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus:
Who concerning the truth have erred, saying the resurrection is past already and have overthrow the faith of some.

I studied this erroneous view for over ten years and I know whereof I speak. When it comes right down to it God has kept his children in darkness for 2,000 years and this is the hidden wonderful truths you never knew.

Gods children have better things to study than this perversion of doctrine... Brother Glen

[ October 11, 2001: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

1. To my knowledge, I signed no creed in order to post on this board, and for the record, never will.

2. I lean toward the beliefs of John Noe. I believe that what he believes is supported by a wealth of scripture and does have definite important theological implications. I do not have the time or energy to debate this on the board however. If you would like to discuss this further, please e-mail me.

3. This is not vanity. It is important to stand up for the truth of the Bible. Just because you don't agree with me doesn't make you automatically right and make me automatically wrong.

 

[Phillip]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gina:
Good answers guys. Thanks.
Joseph--it's like this. It was prophesied a Savior would come. He did. It was prophesied he would die for us. He did. It was prophesied he would rise again. He did. It was prophesied he will come again. He hasn't. We are still waiting for that prophecy to be fulfilled. There are many others that do not seem to have come to pass. If I didn't misunderstand you, you said the anti-Christ has already come. What else do you believe about the prophesies of the end times has already happened?
Doesn't the Bible say watch and be ready, for when you see these things come to pass, the time is nigh for Christ's return?
I guess in a way my faith IS based on prophecy. The prophecy that Jesus is coming again, the prophecies already fulfilled.
Gina<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gina,
Do NOT believe everything you read. There have long been many views of the end time prophecies. Preterest views are one of those.

I cannot remember all of the exact nomenclature, but to sum it up without writing a novel here are the basic beliefs.

1. The anti-Christ has not yet come, the tribulation has not yet come, and the rapture will come before the tribulation followed by 1000 years of peace with Jesus reigning on earth.

2. The anti-Christ has not yet come, the tribulation has not yet come, the rapture will come somewhere--possibly in the middle of the rapture followed by 1000 years of peace.

3. The anti-christ has not yet come, the tribulation hsa not yet come, the rapture will come and christians will kind of yoyo back when Jesus comes back and 1000 years of peace

4. The anti-Christ came when Nero was on earth, The rapture occurred in the events leading to and through the destruction of Jerusalem (based on the fact that Math 24 seemed to tell the Jews to run for their lives and that this generation would not pass before these things happened which may have been talking about this incident, but not necessarily the end -- then he talked about coming back)

5. The Bible pertains to people and has things for people of all ages (periods of time) and it is possible Jesus was referring to the destruction of Jerusalem and also the tribulation to come.

As you can see there are many views to the end of time. Baptists tend to believe that the rapture will come followed by seven years of tribulation and the return of Christ. Although, these are ALL interpretations by men and should be considered as such. The ONE thing we ARE sure of is that Christ has NOT returned and THAT will happen in the future, rapture, tribulation or not. Our friend has simply read books on the beliefs he is claiming that Christians do not understand, but I can provide you with as many references (if not more) of scholars who believe he is wrong.

Luke 17:24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.

By the way, many of these prophecies have been developed and changed and re-interpreted over the years since the Bible and Revelation was written. Revelation and some of the old Testament books seem to indicate that the GREAT tribulation has not occurred yet and whether or not we Christians will have to live through it is not exactly clear (although I will get huge arguments from many well meaning preachers on this statement).

If I am not mistaken (can't remember the verse--help me pastors) that Jesus is not sure of his coming, but only the Father knows. There may be signs, but even Paul expected the Lord to come back in his life.
Paul indicated that we should work as if he would return any moment.

Mathew 24:
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Notice the last line "they shall deceive the very elect." or in a little more readable English "they shall even deceive Christians".

So, I wouldn't get too wrapped up in exactly when or where or what, but who and the great commission which tells us to tell the world the good news. I hope this helps a little.

 

[Phillip]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JBotwinick:
The anti Christ has already come during the time of Emporer worship (Nero or Domitian). The Bible is not just one big prophecy. That is not the BASIS of our faith. The basis of our faith is the Love of God as revealed to us through scripture and fullfilled through Jesus. The Old Testament is divided into three basic sections:

1. Torah (Law)
2. Nabyiam (Prophets)
3. wacothobim (the writings...poetry, wisdom literature)

The whole idea that Prophecy in the Bible is somehow related only to knowing future events (especially those of the end of the world Tim Lehaye Left the Scripture Behind variety) are foriegn to scripture. Many prophets were merely ancient preachers who proclaimed the word of God. Many times when they did predict the future, it was usually in the context of proclaiming the judgment of God on Israel which were fullfilled not too long afterwards. My faith is not based on prophecy...is yours?

Joseph<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Considering that over 1/3 of the Bible relates to prophecy, I don't think you can make such a blunt statement that your faith is not based on prophecy. A lot of people's faith has been (at least the seed planted) by reading the prophecies of Jesus coming the first time and the fulfillment. I am not going to argue with your beliefs of the end times, but the coming return of Jesus (tribulation, rapture or not) is a prophecy that many people look forward to, including Paul, one of the greatest Christians who ever lived.

 

[Phillip]

Dr. Griffin started the name calling? All I saw was a statement that many liberal Baptists believe this way. Does this mean that you are conservative? Good for you. But I call this name calling too, considering you are lumping me in because I am Southern Baptist and I have never ever said anything bad to you:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The official Catholic-Baptist Church does endorse this and everyone else is a liberal heretic.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bottom line, Joseph ,you get angry when your beliefs are challenged.

I agree with Dr. Griffin, study the scriptures carefully that he gave you, let the Holy Spirit guide you and you won't go wrong. Joseph
said he would allow you to do that, but he would disagree with you, so I guess his connection with the Holy Spirit is better than yours. Your views are actually quite OLD and are not new and were around when people believed the sun circled the earth. It is not a new breakthrough, but as scholars have continued to study, most agree with the beliefs of Dr. Griffin.

Joseph, if you want to argue theology -- SB against whatever you are then you are in the wrong forum.

 

[Phillip]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sim:
My reply:
I am afraid that modern day Christians have a misunderstanding of what Jesus meant when he talked about last days. When Jesus talked about his second coming, I think he was talking about events during the Roman Empire. I don't believe he was talking about a bodily return, but a time of judgment and wrath. This is pretty much known as the preterist point of view. If you would like to learn more about this view, I would recomend the following sources of information:

I'm having a "book" pubished, sometime "early next year", you need to read, It's named "Days of God".

It's very "plain and simple" to understand and the "Graphs" gives a Visual explanation of what's being said.

I think you'll be surprised to learn exactly what Ec 1:9 really means.

Ec 1:9 The thing that hath been,(before) it is that which shall be;(again) and that which is done (before) is that which shall be done: (again)

It should be "on the market" sometime around Feb, March, 2002.

Dorrence publishing Company is the publisher.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

SURE, Your recommending YOUR book.

I would too -- haha, but it is an old theory and hashed over since I was a little boy to no avail. I'll review it for free, but I ain't payin' hard-earned money for it. Sorry.
God Bless you though--understanding of prophecy is not a prerequisite to eternal life (thank goodness). Unless you have come up with some alien information while working at Area 51 that explains your Bible differently than mine, I'll pass -- thanks anyway.

 

[Gina B]

Thank you for your reply Phillip. I was doing a quick read through first and had been reading your post to me with the thought you were stating what you believed, lol. Oh my goodness! I thought for a sec you were the most confused person on earth until I re-read that you were listing different views.
A lot of what I believe is still affected by Mormon doctrine, but still, can't say just because of that it's wrong, but tyndale bringing that reference up does given me reason to question if there's more than just my own thoughts going on here. I keep realizing over and over how much of their teachings are still in my head.
Gina

 

[Phillip]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gina:
TI thought for a sec you were the most confused person on earth
Gina<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

HaHa, you and my wife have something to agree on. I am the most confused person in the world. I think maybe everybody is right. Nah, I was just trying to help by listing all the beliefs you are going to hear on a Baptist board and I don't think ANYBODY has a definitive answer to which one is the exact way things will go. I also understand your problem with the Mormonism, my brother's in law are all Mormons and boy they can be convincing if you don't take the time yourself to study the history. I can understand what you have been through--but only slightly.

Don't get too wrapped up in the anti-christ coming soon, because that has been said since Paul's time. It is possible he is alive today--it is also possible he won't show up for 1000 years or more. We don't know. You can try to read seasons all you want, but let's face it, there have been tough times from the church in the past that far exceed what we have seen today.
The only part that concerns me today is a statement my pastor made--which makes America stand out among other nations of the world -- especially since it was founded on freedom. He said: "The United States is a pagan nation founded on Christianity"

The second thing I heard that bothered me terribly was the General who was in charge of the ground troops invading Afganistan. If you can ever go to a church where he speaks--GO, he is great. He said that now that Russia has accepted Christianity everywhere and he showed films of Russian Officers in the military singing church hymns, then he asked us a question. He said all his life he had been trained to take over America, but it would be difficult because we believed in a God who answered prayers. Now that Russia has brought God in, America has kicked him out of its schools. Coming from a Russian high ranking general---is there something wrong with this picture?

 

[ellis]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dajuid:
No disrespect intended, but I believe you are the one with the misunderstanding.

In order for Revelation to be a prediction of the future (Rev. 1:1,3,11,19;22:6-10,16,18-20), and in order for it to be fulfilled by August A.D. 70, then the book had to have been written by A.D. 67. for the preterist interpretation to be even a remote possibility.

The Apostle John was imprisoned on the Isle of Patmos during the reign of Domitian (A.D. 81-96). During his imprisonment, he was given the message by Jesus Christ. This message is what we now know as the book of Revelation. So, whether it was written around A.D. 81 or A.D. 96 (most scholars agree it was written A.D. 95), it was written well after the A.D. 70.

It also must be remembered that the book of Revelation is a vision John received about future events. John is clearly transported in some way to a future time in order to view the events as they will unfold. Why else would the word "saw" be used 49 times in 46 different verses in Revelation? John witnesses future events. A.D. 70 is obviously past events.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. John is transported to heaven, to see events as they will unfold, according to the book of Revelation itself, what must soon take place (1:1) and in verse 3 of the same chapter, because the time is near.

2. If this is the Apostle John, he could not possibly have written this work much past the year 66 or 67 A.D. as he would have been so old and so far beyond the average life span of his day. The early 90's isn't even a remote possibility, since he would have been over one hundred years old. In an age when men lived to be 50 and were considered "aged", that's unlikely.

3. The most significant prophecy ever made by Jesus was that of the destruction of the Temple, recorded in three of the four gospels. This is a historical fact, from the year 70 A.D. Had that event occurred before John wrote Revelation, then why would he not devote a significant amount of space to record its fulfillment and thus prove the prophetic accuracy of Jesus? The fact is, no New Testament writer mentions it, a clear indication that the entire New Testament was written prior to the year 70 A.D.

4. In Matthew 24 (and in the other three gospels), Jesus clearly tells those he was speaking to that "this generation" would not pass away until all of the things he was speaking of in that discourse had come to pass. To apply parts of that discourse to an event more than 2000 years in the future is to take it out of context. Jesus uses the identical term "this generation" at least fifteen other times in the NT and the context is clearly those to whom he is speaking. There is not a shred of evidence that he is referring to "this race" or to a generation alive at another time.

5. The fig tree argument is moot. Nowhere is the fig tree ever used as a symbol for national Israel or its restoration.

I support the preterist view. Especially since the term "antichrist" is not used in reference to the book of Revelation, and the code for figuring out who "666" and "Babylon" were is clearly given in the book. He's talking about Nero and Rome.

 

[Chris Temple]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gina:
The people around me are panicking. I received an e-mail this morning telling me it is now May, and we have through September, and sometime in there (gasp) the anti-Christ will arrive. It's all very interesting, and I don't doubt that it may be true, and I'm suprised it hasn't happened already, but is there a Biblical basis for this? And I thought we were in the sixth day. What do you think?
Gina<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In answer to the original question, antichrist has come, is here, and will be here until the Lord returns.

Matthew 24:5 (ESV)
For many will come in my name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and they will lead many astray.

Matthew 24:23-24 (ESV)
Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There he is!' do not believe it. [24] For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.

Matthew 24:26 (ESV)
So, if they say to you, 'Look, he is in the wilderness,' do not go out. If they say, 'Look, he is in the inner rooms,' do not believe it.

Mark 13:6 (ESV)
Many will come in my name, saying, 'I am he!' and they will lead many astray.

Mark 13:21-22 (ESV)
And then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'Look, there he is!' do not believe it. [22] False christs and false prophets will arise and perform signs and wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the elect.

Luke 21:8 (ESV)
And he said, "See that you are not led astray. For many will come in my name, saying, 'I am he!' and, 'The time is at hand!' Do not go after them.

2 Thes. 2:3-12 (ESV)
Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, [4] who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. [5] Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? [6] And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. [7] For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. [8] And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming. [9] The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, [10] and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. [11] Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, [12] in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

1 John 2:18 (ESV)
Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.

1 John 2:22 (ESV)
Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.

1 John 4:3 (ESV)
and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.

2 John 1:7 (ESV)
For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist.

 

[ellis]

If I read all of these scriptures correctly, then the definition of "antichrist" is directly connected with the denial that Jesus is the incarnate God, which would include his purpose and ministry on earth.

If this is specific, and not just encompassing all non-Christians, then cults like Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, and a world religion like Islam, would be specific related to these references since they each acknowledge Jesus' existence, but deny that he was the incarnate God.

Mormons claim that God had other sons. Thus Jesus, as one of them, could not be God in the flesh. JW's deny his deity. Islam claims he was one of the greatest of all prophets, which still denies his deity. In fact, the Koran goes to great lengths to discredit the idea that Allah could have a human son.

Interesting thoughts.

 

[John Wells]

John wrote that several antichrists existed already in his day—false teachers who denied the deity and the incarnation of Christ—but that the supreme Antichrist of history would appear at some future time. There are antichrists (many who have come and are today) and then there will be The Antichrist, also called “the lawless one” (2 Thes 2:9), and the Beast in Daniel 7 and The Book of Revelation.

The Antichrist will display “all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders” (2 Thess. 2:9, NIV). The Antichrist will be the sum total of the beasts referred to in Daniel 7 (Rev. 13:1–4). He will speak arrogant, boastful words; and he will be aided by a FALSE PROPHET, who will make the entire earth worship him (Rev. 13:11–12) and receive his mark (Rev. 13:16–17). These events will all occur during The Great Tribulation, which fulfills Daniel’s prophecies (Daniel 7–12). It will be a time of evil from false christs and false prophets (Mark 13:22) when natural disasters will occur throughout the world. There will be catastrophic events that will wipe out 2/3 of the world’s population; perhaps a large meteor that causes worldwide flooding (like in the movie) and which will cause a chain reaction of intense volcanic activity.

Those haven’t started last time I checked the news! So The Antichrist has not come yet, but you can rest assured he will because God's Word says so!

[ October 13, 2001: Message edited by: John Wells ]

 

[ellis]

The "Antichrist" is not called such anywhere in the scripture. It is a major mistake to take these passages and connect them, and insert this term because the original writers don't do this. The "lawless one" or "man of lawlessness" is a figure of speech.

If some of Daniel's prophecies are related to the "end times", then Jesus' claim in Matthew 5:17 is a false one.

What is happening is that the Christian faith is once again getting out on the same "we know the future, trust us" limb that it originally climbed out on prior to the first spasm of "end times" hysteria that it went through back at the beginning of the twentieth century, and even before that. The Millerite disasters should have been fair warning. But the same hysteria came along around the first, then the Second World War when Christian writers nailed Adolf as the Antichrist. I've read many of the "end times" works of that period and they were just as certain, "with the way the world is heading today", back in their day as the end times prognosticators are today.

Hal Lindsey, Tim Lahaye and several others all have early works which raised the hype and hysteria once again in the 1980's, because they were "sure" that the 1948 independence of Israel was a "sign" and that the "rapture" absolutely had to occur by 1988 because that was a generation of 40 years. They knew for sure that the antichrist would come from the Soviet Union because "godless communism" was his breeding ground.

Y2K produced yet another wave of Christian hysteria over the end times. The WTC bombings have simply enhanced the hype.

Personally, I have some advice:

You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD?" If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message that the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him. Deutoronomy 18:22

[ October 14, 2001: Message edited by: ellis ]

 

[Chris Temple]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John Wells:
John wrote that several antichrists existed already in his day—false teachers who denied the deity and the incarnation of Christ—but that the supreme Antichrist of history would appear at some future time. There are antichrists (many who have come and are today) and then there will be The Antichrist, also called “the lawless one” (2 Thes 2:9), and the Beast in Daniel 7 and The Book of Revelation.

The Antichrist will display “all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders” (2 Thess. 2:9, NIV). The Antichrist will be the sum total of the beasts referred to in Daniel 7 (Rev. 13:1–4). He will speak arrogant, boastful words; and he will be aided by a FALSE PROPHET, who will make the entire earth worship him (Rev. 13:11–12) and receive his mark (Rev. 13:16–17). These events will all occur during The Great Tribulation, which fulfills Daniel’s prophecies (Daniel 7–12). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

John:

Are you familiar with the Roman Catholic Church? Most of the Reformers believe that these prophecies are fulfilled in it, and the office of Pope is the man of lawlessness.

Most reformers and the Puritans held to a historisict view of revelation; that it represents the history of the church until Christ returns. They also believed that the Tribulation began in the 1st century and continues until the Second Coming.

 

[Gina B]

Chris T.: Thanks for your input too. I've been learning a lot from you the last few months!
Gina

 

[John Wells]

Ellis said, “If some of Daniel's prophecies are related to the "end times", then Jesus' claim in Matthew 5:17 is a false one.”

Have you read Daniel 9-10 with a good study Bible? And what does Matt 5:17 have to do with Dan 9-10? Are you in the Holy Bible or the Koran?

Ellis said, “The "Antichrist" is not called such anywhere in the scripture. It is a major mistake to take these passages and connect them, and insert this term because the original writers don't do this. The "lawless one" or "man of lawlessness" is a figure of speech.”

We have a little minor peculiarity around here. We like people’s opinions to be prefaced upon scripture. Otherwise it is just that, opinion! Sound exegesis links the beast and the lawless one as AN antichrist. To claim otherwise is to ignore systematic theology.

 

[ellis]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John Wells:
Ellis said, “If some of Daniel's prophecies are related to the "end times", then Jesus' claim in Matthew 5:17 is a false one.”

Have you read Daniel 9-10 with a good study Bible? And what does Matt 5:17 have to do with Dan 9-10? Are you in the Holy Bible or the Koran?

Ellis said, “The "Antichrist" is not called such anywhere in the scripture. It is a major mistake to take these passages and connect them, and insert this term because the original writers don't do this. The "lawless one" or "man of lawlessness" is a figure of speech.”

We have a little minor peculiarity around here. We like people’s opinions to be prefaced upon scripture. Otherwise it is just that, opinion! Sound exegesis links the beast and the lawless one as AN antichrist. To claim otherwise is to ignore systematic theology.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Jesus claimed that all prophecy was fulfilled in him (Matthew 5:17). Therefore, any exegesis which takes something from Daniel and projects it into the future is not sound.

What exegesis links the title of the Antichrist to references to the "man of lawlessness" and others to "the beast" in Revelation 17? Only that of futurists, which lays a presupposition down first, then claims to be doing exegesis. That is not sound exegesis, it is merely a presupposition. The fact of the matter is that without the futurist presupposition, there is no way to link all of these things together.

I've read through just about all the works of futurists like Hal Lindsey and Tim Lahaye. I had to stop about a third of the way through the second "Left Behind" book because, well, frankly, its just not very good literature and the plot reveals itself very early in the book. But I did thoroughly read and study "Revelation Unveiled" which is very well written. I just disagree with the whole premise because the principles of historical-literal interpretation, which Lahaye holds to for every other book of the Bible, have to be completely abandoned to come up with his view of Revelation. Good exegesis, as you put it, demands a Biblical context to switch methods of interpretation. In this case, there isn't such a context.

If you are interested, and are willing to go over and read something from another view (I won't browbeat you into it, but I don't mind letting you know that I do this before I come to an absolute conclusion about something ) there is a book out by Gary DeMar called Last Days Madness which sticks with a consistent hermeneutic in its interpretation of the book of Revelation. Rather than posting it in a thread here, I'll just suggest that you find it and read it and after you've done that, come back over here, email or post, and let me know what you think.

If you're not really willing to do that, then there's no reason to continue the discussion.

[ October 14, 2001: Message edited by: ellis ]

 

[John Wells]

First of all, in Matt 5:17 Jesus says He came to fulfill “the Law” and the “Prophets.” He fulfilled all the OT laws and all the OT prophesies concerning Him. If you are claiming Jesus has fulfilled ALL prophesy, then we’re doomed! There will be no Second Advent, no “new heaven and new earth.” You are reading into Jesus’ statement something that isn’t there.

Here is a reference in Daniel to end times. Notice many other Daniel references in MacArthur's note:

Daniel 9:27 (NKJV)
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 abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.”

This is clearly the end of the age, the Second Advent judgment, because the bringing in of righteousness did not occur 7 years after the death of the Messiah, nor did the destruction of Jerusalem fit the 7-year period (occurring 37 years later). This is the future 7-year period that ends with sin’s final judgment and Christ’s reign of righteousness; i.e., the return of Christ and the establishment of His rule. These 7 years constitute the 70th week of Daniel. “He” is the last-mentioned prince (v. 26), leader of the Roman sphere (cf. chaps. 2 and 7), the Antichrist who comes in the latter days. The time is in the future tribulation period of “one week,” i.e., the final 7 years of v. 24. He confirms (lit., causes to prevail) a 7 year covenant, his own pact with Israel for what will turn out actually to be for a shorter time. The leader in this covenant is the “little horn” of 7:7,8,20,21,24–26, and the evil leader of NT prophecy (Mark 13:14; 2 Thess. 2:3–10; Rev. 13:1–10). That he is in the future, even after Christ’s First Advent, is shown by 1) Matt. 24:15; 2) by the time references that match (7:25; Rev. 11:2,3; 12:14; 13:5); and 3) by the end here extending to the Second Advent, matching the duration elsewhere mentioned in Daniel (2:35,45; 7:15ff.; 12:1–3) and Rev. 11:2; 12:14; 13:5. middle of the week. This is the halfway point of the 70th week of years, i.e., 7 years leading to Christ’s second coming. The Antichrist will break his covenant with Israel (v. 27a), which has resumed its ancient sacrificial system. Three and a half years of tribulation remain, agreeing with the time in other Scriptures (7:25; Rev. 11:2,3; 12:14; 13:5, called “Great Tribulation,” cf. Matt. 24:21) as God’s wrath intensifies. abominations … one who makes desolate The Antichrist will cause abomination against Jewish religion. This violation will desolate or ruin what Jews regard as sacred, namely their holy temple and the honoring of God’s presence there (cf. 1 Kin. 9:3; 2 Thess. 2:4). Jesus refers directly to this text in His Olivet discourse (Matt. 24:15). See note on 11:31. the consummation. God permits this tribulation under the Antichrist’s persecutions and ultimately triumphs, achieving judgment of the sin and sinners in Israel (12:7) and in the world (cf. Jer. 25:31). This includes the Antichrist (11:45; Rev. 19:20), and all who deserve judgment (9:24; Matt. 13:41–43). - MacArthur, J. (1997, c1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (Electronic ed.) (Da 9:27). Nashville, TN: Word Pub.

I cannot say that I’ll get to your book suggestion. It’s not that I don’t want to or am not interested, but I have a long list of “must read” books that take precedence over eschatological studies, which are interesting when one has the time. It’s just that I am focused on something else at the moment.

[ October 14, 2001: Message edited by: John Wells ]

 

[Bob Landis]

Fear not the evil one. If you are saved, you will be raptured with the church before the antichrist rears his ugly head.