Victor Hernandez asks: According to the previous question on dating Revelation, 95 AD points to a still future tribulation. Where would a 68 AD dating place the tribulation? Would that not place the Tribulation of Matthew 24 in 70 AD?

Hi Victor,

The reason for the different views on tribulation, is simply due to some people not accepting the very words of Jesus, or simply not being aware of important ancient historical events. Instead, the meaning of Jesus' words are changed to fit a specific view. These grammar violations are extremely easy to spot when they are pointed out. Unfortunately, many teachers refuse to touch the subject. Let us explain:

In Matthew 24, Jesus tells his disciples that the tribulation was going to happen when the destruction of the temple that he was pointing at took place, and that not one stone would stand. He also told them that they would know that the desolation was near, when they saw the armies surrounding Jerusalem. Jesus told the readers that they were to escape by fleeing to the mountains, and that he prayed it would not happen in the winter. In the parallel gospel of Luke, Jesus told them that they would fall by the sword, and that these things would happen when the gospel finished spreading through the Roman Empire. Lastly, they were ensured by Jesus that their generation would not pass away until they saw those things happen.

Historical note: Within their generation, 37 years after Jesus accurately prophesied those things, in the summer of 70 AD, the Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem and destroyed the city and the temple Jesus spoke of, thus fulfilling the prophecy. According to the eyewitness Josephus Flavius ("The Jewish War" 37-100 AD), not one stone stood upon another, as gold melted through the stones, and each one was thrown down in order to collect the gold. Josephus also wrote that he had seen the fulfillment of the destruction of the temple as prophesied by Daniel. Possibly the strongest evidence to date, predating the statement of Irenaeus. (The Antiquities of the Jews, 10.276).

(Before continuing, do yourself a favor and Read Matthew 24, and Luke 21)

Here are the grammar violations:

1. Changing context to fit a view and ignoring the context usage throughout the book.

Jesus told the disciples that their generation would not pass away until those things took place.

Matthew 24:34 "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."

According to Tim Lahaye (creator of "Left Behind") and the futurist contemporaries, "this generation" does not mean the generation that Jesus was speaking to at the moment. Instead, Jesus is supposedly talking to "the generation that sees these things happen in their lifetime". While there is no support to render the text in that fashion, it is the only time in the entire book of Matthew, where the meaning of "this generation" is applied to a future generation, rather than to the generation that Jesus was actually speaking to.

Again, Lahaye agrees that "this generation" in all other verses, are to be applied to the generation of the disciples, except for Matthew 24:34. Here are some of these verses:

Matthew 11:16 “To what can I compare this generation?"

Matthew 12:41 "The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation"

Matthew 12:42 "The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation"

Matthew 12:45 "That is how it will be with this wicked generation.”

Matthew 17:17 “You unbelieving and perverse generation,”

Matthew 23:36 "Truly I tell you, all this will come on this generation."

2. Ignoring context as used throughout the book again!

This same logic is applied by Lahaye and his contemporaries to the word "you". Throughout the entire book of Matthew, "you" is rightly understood in reference to the people being spoken to at the time, but in Chapter 24, "you" is to be understood as "you future Jews". Again, no support for this rendering, unless you are trying to make the text fit a particular view. ("The Truth Behind Left Behind", Mark Hitchcock and Thomas Ice; "Bible Prophecy for Everyone" Tim Lahaye).

3. Ignoring context clues, and replacing context.

Luke 21:24 "They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled."

While both Matthew and Luke, give context clues that the setting takes place in the first century ("fall by the sword", grinding with a hand mill), the "Left Behind" theology pushes the notion that in verses like Luke 21:24, or like in the battle of Armageddon in Ezekiel 38 and 39, that the interpretation of first century weapons such as: swords, horses, javelins, and arrows are to be understood as guns, horse power, jets, tanks and missiles ("Bible Prophecy for Everyone" Tim Lahaye). While we don't feel the need to dive into this type of faulty interpretation (which fails common sense), errors allow for more errors.

After admitting that this kind of interpretation might have been a bit of a far stretch, their ever evolving eschatological system now teaches that the book of Matthew and the book of Luke are parallel (a view held by all Protestant theological systems) except for Matthew 24 and Luke 21. Their view now, is that Luke 21 is speaking of the Great Tribulation of 70 AD, while Matthew 24 deals with a future Great Tribulation. ("The Truth Behind Left Behind", Mark Hitchcock, Thomas Ice, Lahaye).

4. Greek Word Context Ignored.

Matthew 24:14 "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come."

While the futurists view holds that this must happen in our future, because the Gospel could not have been preached to the whole world in the first century, the Greek word chosen by the author in order to give proper context is completely ignored.

While the Greek word choice for speaking about the literal whole world in the Bible is "Kosmos" (meaning the whole world), in this very verse, the author chooses the use of the Greek word "Oikomene" meaning (the known inhabited world) the Roman Empire.

In order to give you the proper understanding of how the word "Oikomene" is always used in scripture in reference to the Roman Empire, here are the verses that use the word: (you can verify verses using the Greek lexicon):

Luke 2:1 "In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world [oikomene].

Luke 4:5 "The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world [oikomene].

Acts 11:28 "One of them, named Agabus, stood up and through the Spirit predicted that a severe famine would spread over the entire Roman world [oikomene]. (This happened during the reign of Claudius.)"

Acts 24:5 “We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world [oikomene]. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect"

(Acts 19:11, Romans 10:18, Hebrews 1:6, Revelation 3:10, Revelation 12:9, Revelation 16:14)

Therefore, in accordance with the proper use of the chosen word by the author, the readers of the first century would have immediately understood that when the Gospel was spread thoroughly within Roman Empire and surrounding cities, that the tribulation was about to take place. Again, this is explicitly evident by the words of Josephus in his claim that the vision of Daniel about the destruction of the temple had occurred before his very eyes (The Antiquities of the Jews, 10.276).

Lastly, while the Great Tribulation of Matthew 24, has always been understood as the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 AD, based on the accurate account written by an eyewitness (Josephus Flavius),

John Nelson Darby in the 1830's was the first person to claim that the Tribulation was still a future event. Darby stated that he first noticed this when the Holy Spirit showed him the difference between Jews and Gentiles. In Darby's eyes, they Jews have a different plan of salvation than the gentiles. However, this notion is directly opposed in scripture.

Galatians 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Hope this clears things up. God bless you.

Comments:

Pedro Guzman: If this doesn't take place in the future, then how do you explain the "one will be taken and one will be left in Matthew?

BRC Hosts Joey and Chris: Hi Pedro, while futurists believe that one will be taken to heaven and one is left behind, according to Zachariah 14:2 "the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped. Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city". The same thing is found in Luke 17:30-35 and Matthew 24:36-41. In fact, Josephus the eyewitness, in "The Jewish War" explains this very thing. That the Romans took half of the city captive and left the rest to die. That women were eating their children, and that Christians fled to the mountains just before the Romans surrounded the city.

Victor Hernandez: Thanks for the answer.

BRC Hosts Joey and Chris: No problem Victor.

Pedro Guzman: I've never heard such thing. I will buy that book simply to fact check you on that.

BRC Hosts Joey and Chris: Pedro, by all means brother.

Chanell Ortiz: But didn't Irenaeus say that Revelation was written in 95 after the destruction of the temple?

BRC Hosts Joey and Chris: Hi Chanell, you need to read the previous question on "when was Revelation written?", but Josephus was an eyewitness who directly said that he witnessed the vision of Daniel being fulfilled in his day in his book "Antiquities". That is one of the biggest evidence found to date.

Chanell Ortiz: Yeah, not sure I agree.

Dennis Jocobson: You can't disagree with the fact that Josephus said he saw Daniel's vision being fullfilled.

Chanell Ortiz: I haven't read any of his books. I just never heard this point of view, yet you all claim that it is the "futurists" that have a newer view.

BRC Hosts Joey and Chris: Chanell, the futurists view is not new. It's been around for a long time, but it is considered a newer view because the view was invented in 1830. Just because it's new it doesn't mean it's wrong, but it if you test the view and fact check us, I think you will find that it is contradicting the fact that the Tribulation of Matthew 24 took place in AD 70.

Chanell Ortiz: I will be checking. But I'm definitely not in agreement. I think the word still needs to be preached to the whole world. Not sure 100% if the oikumene applies as you say.

BRC Hosts Joey and Chris: Well, we can also point you to Colossian 1:23 where it clearly says "This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant."

Galatians 3:28

"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."