Matthew
24
Copyright © 2004-2005 by Michael A. Fenemore
– Revised: 2005 Aug 28
Some teach that Matthew 24 was to be fulfilled
twice. This view recognizes a first-century fulfillment, but suggests a second
one with worldwide implications is unfulfilled. Even though Jesus said nothing
to indicate the Olivet Prophecy would be fulfilled twice, that is apparently,
what Dr. Oral Roberts believes. Immediately after the World Trade Center attack
on September 11, 2001, he stood up before the students and faculty of Oral
Roberts University and suggested the disaster was an indication that Matthew 24
was about to be fulfilled. However, Roberts must believe in a
first-century fulfillment, at least to some degree, simply because it’s
undeniable. History records that the destruction of the Jewish temple mentioned
by Jesus in the first two verses took place in AD 70. So Roberts’ futuristic
scenario requires a second fulfillment a new temple and its subsequent
destruction. This might sound plausible initially; however, on closer
examination, a verse-by-verse double-fulfillment proposal is exposed as absurd.
Keith A. Mathison of R. C. Sproul’s Ligonier Ministries says the
double-fulfillment theory cannot be “ruled out” (When Shall These
Things Be? (
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. (Matt. 24:14, NIV throughout)
Is the “great commission” to be fulfilled twice? Since “the end” was to come
immediately after, it must have already occurred following the first
fulfillment. Does the end come twice? If it does, the first one wasn’t the end,
was it? Some might suggest this “end” may refer to the end
of the Jewish age, and in a greater fulfillment, the end of the Church age.
However, nothing in Matthew 24 supports that interpretation. The modern second
fulfillment is usually presented as a worldwide catastrophe, but notice verse
20:
Pray that your flight will not take
place in winter or on the Sabbath.
What relevance would that have to anyone today? Outside of
modern-day
You must be on your guard. You will
be handed over to the local councils and flogged in the synagogues… (Mark 13:9a)
How could this be fulfilled today? This refers to the councils of
Pharisees and Sadducees in the first century. They no longer exist. There are
likely very few Christians in the world today, if any, who worry about being “flogged
in the synagogues.”
For then there will be great
distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now — and never to be
equaled again. (Matt. 24:21)
Since this time of trouble was “never to be equaled again,” how could it occur
twice? Some will protest that this kind of language is hyperbole, common in the
Old Testament (OT); it wasn’t intended to be taken literally. This is true. But
then, the same people should be able to accept that the rest of Matthew 24 is
replete with the same OT-style hyperbole. They should not require a second
fulfillment just because some events didn’t occur just the way Jesus described
them.
And he will send his angels with a
loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one
end of the heavens to the other. (v. 31)
This is referring to the “last trumpet” of 1 Corinthians
15:51-52, the Resurrection of the Dead and the moment when the living
Christians would be “changed.” Are the “elect” to be gathered twice? If all
of Matthew 24 was to be fulfilled twice, then clearly, the Resurrection must
have occurred during the first fulfillment within the lifetimes of Christ’s
listeners. But if all the dead in Hades were resurrected in the first century,
how could they be resurrected again at another time in the future? It’s
doubtful anyone believes any of this. Yet Oral Roberts, Keith Mathison and
countless others present double fulfillment as a viable option.
The double-fulfillment concept is an untenable fabrication created
in desperation, probably deemed necessary because its adherents expect literal
fulfillments of the highly figurative, cosmic predictions in Matthew 24 and
other places, which, of course, have never occurred (and never will). In some cases,
we find types and anti-types in Scripture. For instance, Israelite worship
under the Old Covenant was a type or “a shadow of the things that were to
come”
under the New Covenant (Col. 2:16-17). However, the New Covenant does not create
more shadows for greater fulfillments later. Here is an example of biblical
typology:
OT type:
An oracle concerning
New Testament (NT) anti-type:
O Jerusalem,
In Matthew 24, Jesus referred back to Isaiah to demonstrate that
sinful
It’s all fulfilled. There is no third fulfillment. Matthew
24 is not a type of something in the future; it’s an anti-type of something in
the past. The NT does not create new types that require future anti-types.
Types and anti-types might be considered double fulfillments by some, but if a
double-fulfillment rule should be applied without exception to all biblical
predictions, we should expect two Messiahs, two crucifixions, two Judgments,
two Kingdoms, etc. It gets ridiculous.
Evidently, many influential Bible teachers spend little time
testing the double-fulfillment model to see if it works before teaching it to
trusting Christians. They usually predict a rebuilt temple. They know Herod’s
temple was destroyed in AD 70, so they need to come up with another one. They
know the prophecies require a
as of 9-2005