David

John, in Revelation 9:1-11, describes a woe against mankind produced by the sounding of the trumpet of the fifth angel.  The angel releases a horde of locusts upon the earth.  The description of the locusts indicate that they are evil and controlled by evil.  First they come out of a bottomless pit from where smoke arises.  This source for them sounds like hell or some evil deep, dark place.  Second they  have a king over them named destruction or the destroyer.

Even though the locusts are described as evil and controlled by evil they are given two commands; one, only to harm those that are not sealed by God and two, to only torment and not kill.  Though the source of the commands is named it seems that these commands come from God, especially the first since it is a command to protect God’s people.  Though these locusts are evil and controlled by evil they really are controlled by God.  Even God’s enemies answer to Him and obey Him.  Much like when the demons obeyed Christ and went wherever He commanded, these locusts and all other beings only do as Christ commands them.  It also reminds me of God permitting Satan some degree of control over Job but providing a hard stop to that control.

In Revelation 7 John tells us that four angels are told to withhold judgment until the servants of God are sealed.  There are 144,000 servants to seal from the children of Israel.  In John’s vision he received an enumeration of the tribes and he recorded it by the Holy Spirit’s direction.  So there is something of importance in this enumeration.

Interestingly the list does not have anybody from the tribe of Dan.  Not only that but it specifically enumerates Manasseh and Joseph.  Israel had 12 sons including Joseph (in this post I will use son in the sense of being a direct child and not a later descendant).  However in dividing up the land, Joseph’s two sons Ephraim and Manasseh each received their own portion of land.  Manasseh is the only tribe in this list that is not a son of Israel.  I don’t know what significance, if any, there is to enumerating both Manasseh and Joseph in this list.  Nor do I know the significance of leaving Dan out of the list.  It is just an interesting observation that I made.

I’ve been reading Revelation, but have not posted in a few days.  One reason is that I would like to finish reading Revelation before analyzing much of what I’ve read.  Since much of what is written is mysterious it would certainly help to have the end in mind as I read through what is discussed.

Today I read Revelation 6.  I was particularly struck by Revelation 6:9-11.  In this passage the martyrs for Christ are crying out for God’s vengeance.  Martyrs are normally revered and this passage does not provide any rebuke for them so it seems as if their cries are justified.  However, they are told to wait and rest.  On earth I often feel this way as well when I see evil occurring.  I am reminded of what the preacher says in Ecclesiastes 8:11: “Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.”

Though there is much that can be said about Revelation chapter one I’m not wanting to examine it all in depth.  However I would like to point out two things that strike me regarding what John says about Jesus.

The first is that he is “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth” (Revelation 1:5, NKJV).  Notice that these are what Christ is now, what He was when John was writing, now what He will be.  In particular note that Jesus is the “ruler over the kings of the earth.”  Knowing this should be a great encouragement, especially to those under persecution.  Remember, Domitian was the Roman emperor at that time and was persecuting Christians until his death.  Yet, at that time, Christ was the ruler over Domitian.

The think that John says about Jesus which I would like to mention is that found in Revelation 1:7.  Christ “is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him”  I cannot think of any more public way to return than in the sky, but regardless, every eye will see Him.  This is inescapable.  John explicitly mentions that those that pierced Christ will see Him, but since that most likely occurred over 50 years ago, most of them were probably dead even by that time.  Christ still has not yet returned and those that killed Christ are now certainly dead.  Again, seeing Christ coming is inescapable.  Whoever is ruling the nations when Christ returns will see Him, as it is inescapable.  When He comes publicly in the sight of all He will demonstrate His rule over the the kings of the earth.

It is time for me to begin my study of Revelation.  First, I’d like to provide some historical context.  The book itself names the author as John and states that the vision therein occurred on the island of Patmos.  I completely believe that this John is the apostle though I know that this is sometimes in dispute.

I don’t know the exact dates of John’s banishment at Patmos, but I do have a good feel for the time range.  The church historian Eusebius chronicles that the tradition handed down was that the apostle and evangelist John was condemned to live on the island of Patmos during the persecution of the Roman emperor Domitian (Eusebius Book 3, Chapter 18).  He does not provided clarity on when the persecutions began or when John was exiled.  However, in introducing these persecutions he does say that “Domitian … at length established himself as the successor of Nero in his hatred and hostility to God” (Eusebius, Book 3, Chapter 17).  This indicates that the persecutions did not begin at the onset of his reign.

Regarding John’s return from Patmos, Eusebius provides us with the history provided by Tertullian who lived around 160 A.D. to 220 A.D.  Tertullian wrote that John returned from Patmos upon the death of Domitian.  Thus John could have arrived as early as the beginning of Domitian’s reign in 81 A.D. though it seems he was exiled later.  And he would have returned after Domitian’s death in 96 A.D.

Now that I have some dates for John’s vision, I will survey some of the history of the time to provide historical context.  First, by that time two great persecutions of Christians throughout the empire have occurred.  In fact, one was occurring at that time since Domitian was still alive.  The first was by Nero who reigned from 54 A.D. to 68 A.D.  During this persecution Nero also had both Peter and Paul killed.  The gospel had spread to much of the Roman world by that time and certainly in Asia Minor, Macedonia, Greece, and Italy.  The Romans had already laid siege to Jerusalem and captured it by 70 A.D. destroying the temple.  Of course there is more, but this is just my quick survey.

After my quick foray into Daniel chapter nine, I’d like to return to Matthew 24 (and parallel passages).  Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 both record Jesus quoting the “abomination of desolation” spoken of by the prophet Daniel.  Both authors also make an aside saying “whoever reads, let him understand.”  Since Matthew and Mark are not going to further elaborate and leave that to us, then I will attempt to understand.  In Daniel there are three passages that use the term abomination: Daniel 9:27, 11:31, and 12:11.  I shall examine these below.

In 9:27 the angel Gabriel says “on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate” (NKJV).  The NASB, RSV, and ESV are similar.  The NIV says “an abomination that causes desolation.”  These passages do not convey the same sense as the “abomination of desolation” does.  In these passage, except for the NIV, the “one” makes or causes desolation.  It is not the abomination that is causing or making desolation.  Rather, the “one” comes on the wing of abomination.  So abomination and desolation are related in this passage, but that relation is not the same as in “abomination of desolation,” in which there is an abomination and it is described as one of desolation.  The NIV comes closer by making abomination its own entity; an abomination which causes desolation (as opposed to one of desolation).  Thus, with the exception of the NIV translation, it is not clear to me that Jesus is quoting this passage.

Daniel 11:31 says “then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there an abomination of desolation” (NKJV).  The NASB says similarly.  The ESV and RSV both say “the abomination that makes desolation.”  The NIV again says “abomination that causes desolation.”  All of these passages are similar in that the subject is abomination and it is described either as one of desolation or one that makes desolation.  These passages, like the NIV translation of 9:27, all are more similar to Jesus’ quote in Matthew and Mark.  Though the quote is not exact except in NKJV and NASB, the structure is similar to Jesus’ quote; the abomination is of, causes, or makes desolation.

In each translation that I have read of Daniel 12:11, the phrase is the same as in 11:31.  So, if the abomination is of desolation in 11:31 it is of desolation in 12:11.  If it makes in 11:31, it makes in 12:11.  Not only that, but the context of these verses makes it clear that they are referring to the exact same event.  Chapters 10, 11, and 12 of Daniel are all of the same event – an angel has come to Daniel to explain a vision that Daniel had.  The explanation of the vision is found in chapters 11 and 12.  In 12:11, the speaker is telling Daniel about a time frame between the beginning of when the sacrifices are taken away and the abomination of desolation is setup to its end.  In 11:31 the events are foretold, but not time frame is given.  It is abundantly clear that in 12:11 the speaker is referring back to 11:31.  Thus, without a doubt, the “abomination of desolation” in 12:11 is the same as that of 11:31.

So then, what is Jesus talking about in Matthew in Mark.  I believe he is quoting Daniel 11:31 and 12:11.  There may be a strong relationship between these passages and 9:27, in which case that passage is brought along as well.  What is the “abomination of desolation” in Daniel 11 and 12?  I believe it is the alter to the Greek god Zeus which Antiochus IV had setup in the temple in 167 B.C.  (see I Maccabees 1:54).  Antiochus IV also removed the sacrifices (see I Maccabees 1:45), which is placed alongside the abomination of desolation in Daniel 11:31 and 12:11.  Almost exactly three years later the Maccabees rededicated the temple in 164 B.C.  This lines up well with the 1,290 days (about 3 1/2 years) which is prophesied between these two events.

In summary I believe that Jesus is quoting Daniel 11:31 and 12:11 in these passages from the gospels.  The event which Daniel prophesied in those passages was Antiochus IV erecting the pagan alter in the Jewish temple.  Daniel 9:27 may be related, but that relationship is not as strong based on four of the five translations I read.

As part of my study of eschatology I am going back into some chapters of Daniel.  I was recently part of a study of Daniel which lasted a whole school year.  I finished that study with a fairly strong conviction that the book of Daniel is primarily a collection of prophecies which culminate in Christ’s first coming and possibly extend as far as 70AD in which the temple was destroyed by the Roman general Titus.  (I believe I am the only one in the group to end up with this conviction so it is not reflective of our study.)  The only passages that I felt could possibly be about Christ’s second coming were Daniel 9:24-27 and some of Daniel 12.

Now I am returning to Daniel chapter nine to try to determine to what it refers.  The reason I have left this open as a prophecy of Christ’s second coming is that it is a difficult passage to interpret and I could not hold tightly to the belief that it refers to Christ’s first coming only.  Most other prophecies in Daniel are very clear in my opinion, but that is a topic for another time.  For the present I will delve into Daniel 9:24-27.

First, Daniel chapter nine begins with Daniel revealing that he came to understand the prophecy of Jeremiah found in Jeremiah 25:11-14.  In short the prophecy is that the Jews will be held by Babylon for seventy years and then Babylon will be punished.  Daniel seems to understand this prophecy only when the Persians conquer Babylon.  He then prays to God asking for forgiveness and for God to turn away His wrath.  During this prayer the angel Gabriel is sent to give Daniel a message.  The passage in question, verses 24 through 27, is Gabriel’s message.

The prophecy from Gabriel involves several time periods.  These time periods are called “sevens.”  Many interpreters take these “sevens” to be periods of seven years, likely after the Sabbatical years (that is, a week of years).  Other interpreters seem to take these to be symbolic time periods, at least the last “seven.”  I find that however you understand the “sevens,” interpretation from that is difficult and unclear.

The starting point of the timing may be Cyrus’ decree that Jerusalem be rebuilt.  Cyrus made that decree in 537 B.C.  The ending point most certainly seems to be Christ’s advent on earth.  If we take 70 “sevens” to be 70 times 7 years we have a total of 490 years.  This would bring us to 47 B.C.  That is a ways off from the birth of Christ, but not too significantly to where it would not fit at all.  It shows too much error for me to hold that strongly.  Not only that, but the timing between the decree and Messiah the Prince is actually 7 and 62 “sevens” which would be 483 years.  That would put the time at 54 B.C.  Interestingly, both of these time periods roughly correspond with the Roman conquest of Judea.

There are also other interpretations for starting and ending points.  However, the focus of this study into Daniel chapter nine is to determine what prophecies, if any, this passage has for the end times.  Of the views that Daniel 9 has end-time prophecies the primary explanation is that the seventieth “seven” is an indeterminate amount of time in between Christ’s first and second comings.  In this view the “people of the prince who is to come” normally is thought to refer to the Antichrist and his followers.  Though I find the time line presented above difficult, I find this interpretation even more difficult.  The primary reasons are as follows.  First, the time line for this view is even more troubling.  It is as if I were to say that since things don’t fully align in one view, everything should be completely rearranged.  Second, because the rest of prophecies are of Christ’s advent as a glorious event for God’s people I don’t want to move further beyond that unless compelled to.  If the evidence were strong I would move that way, but since it is not I find that the context and natural rendering of the book as a whole lend to staying with Christ’s first coming.  Third, aside from time line difficulties which still exist in the Antichrist view, this passage could easily refer to Christ and either Antiochus IV or Titus (or maybe even both?).  Fourth, the 70th “seven” is found in verse 27.  If this “seven” was a period of at least 2000 years, then how could the middle be the point at which sacrifice were brought to an end?  The last temple sacrifice was in 70 A.D. which would be the beginning of this indeterminate time period.  It seems that can only refer to Christ ending sacrifices forever, or to Antiochus IV or Titus forcibly stopping sacrifices.

In conclusion I will not use Daniel chapter nine as a text in my study of eschatology.  I tend toward understanding this chapter as ending no later than 70 A.D.  I will not hold this tightly though and am very open to further inquiry, especially if other passages in other books cause me to reconsider.  Furthermore, this does not exclude the passage from having some end time implications.  Any of the people or events prophesied may be types of end time figures or events.

In Matthew 24:1-2, Mark 13:1-2, and Luke 12:5-6, Jesus tells His disciples (and maybe others) that the temple in Jerusalem would be destroyed.  They use the word buildings in the plural as the disciples discuss the beauty of the temple, so I believe they are referring to the entire temple complex and not just the main sanctuary.  Jesus spoke this sometime around 30 AD and the temple he was at was built by Herod the Great and completed not even 50 years earlier.  This same temple was later destroyed by the Roman general (and later emperor) Titus in 70 AD.  Keep in mind that this is not the first temple which is the one built by Solomon.

After Jesus told the disciples this they ask Him some questions.  Matthew, Mark, and Luke all tells us that they first asked the question “When will these things be?”  They are evidently asking when will the temple be destroyed.  As Jews the temple was integral to their religious life, in a way that I don’t understand not being in a similar situation.  It is not surprising then that they would want to know when this temple which is of such importance to them will be destroyed.

The second question recorded in these three Gospels is different in each one.  Matthew tells us that they asked “What will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”  Mark and Luke each tell us a roughly similar question; “What will be the sign when all these things will be fulfilled?” and “What sign will there be when these things are about to take place?”

In Matthew they are asking two very different questions – one about the destruction of the temple and the other about the sign of Christ’s coming and the end of the age.  However considering the importance of the temple to them and that they ask them together there is obviously some correlation between the two questions in their mind.  Another possible reason that the disciples saw this correspondence is because at least Peter has already acknowledged that Christ is the Messiah.  I don’t know Jewish eschatology, but it seems likely that somehow having the Messiah would make another destroying of the temple different from previous incidents.  Jesus seems to confirm the correlation to some degree by giving one answer.  It is a long answer, but there is no clear division between one question and the other.

Today I’m continuing with II Thessalonians 2:5-11.  Paul provides more detail about the second event which Paul discusses must occur before Christ returns: the revelation of the man of sin.  First off, I am at a complete loss to what Paul is talking about in verses six and seven.  He speaks of something restraining, though what is restraining or what it is restraining are unclear.  It seems to be restraining the man of sin until it is time for him to be revealed.  The NKJV capitalizes “He” when referring to what is restraining, indicating that the restrainer is God.  However, this does not seem to fit because “He is taken out of the way.”  Thus it seems the restrainer is forced to lose its restraint, which would not be God.

Paul then reveals that this man will be destroyed by the Lord.  Again, Paul normally uses Lord to speak of Christ, so I believe he is saying Christ will destroy the man of sin.  Not only that, but the man of sin is destroyed by the “brightness of His coming.”  So Christ will destroy the man of sin when He returns.

Finally, Paul tells us that this man of sin comes according to the working of Satan speaking lies and displaying power and signs.  Then God will cause those that do not believe to fall for this lie.  It seems that though the man of sin comes with power and signs he is not necessarily very believable.  After all, Paul says that God will “send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie.”  Perhaps they only are deceived because God deludes them.  So the coming of the man of sin brings further condemnation on those that do not believe in Christ.  Perhaps this is the purpose in his coming?  There of course may be other purposes.

It seems that the Thessalonians were often concerned about missing out on Christ’s coming.  Now in II Thessalonians 2:1-12, Paul is assuring them that they have not missed out on Christ’s coming.  He informs them that two things must occur before the day of Christ’s coming.  The first is the “falling away” (NKJV).  The second is the revelation of the “man of sin” (NKJV).

Paul does not elaborate on the first event, the “falling away” in this passage.  The NASB translates this phrase as “the apostasy.”  Though falling away seems somewhat ambiguous, apostasy makes it clear that the falling away is Christians falling away from Christianity.

The second event, the revelation of the man of sin, receives much more attention.  Paul calls him the “man of sin” (or “man of lawlessness” in NASB) and the “son of perdition” (or the “son of destruction” in NASB).  The next thing that Paul tells us about the man of sin is that he will exalt himself above every man-made god and against the one true God.  In verse four, Paul says that he will exalt himself as God in the temple of God.  It seems clear that here he is referring to the Judaic temple in Jerusalem because he calls it the “temple of god.”  He does not call it the “temple of man” or the “temple of that called god.”  As a note, the original Greek would not have capitalized the word god even if it referred to the one true God.

Paul’s discussion continues in verses five through eleven, but my discussion will end here and pick up with those verses in my next post.