Rapture: The End-Times Error That Leaves the Bible Behind (24 page)

Jesus predicts the reaction of His followers to this new and concentrated form of persecution. “Many will fall away, and betray one another.… Many false prophets will arise and lead many astray.… Most men’s love will grow cold” (24:10–12). Jesus emphasizes again the coming of false prophets. He was obviously concerned about His young Church holding fast to the Truth. But the main focus in this sign is the reaction of His followers. Many Christians would desert the Christian community; some would turn upon their fellow Christians; some would fall into heresy; and “most” would find their love abating. We can call this sign 6.

We find evidence of this apostasy in the letters to the seven churches that St. John includes in The Apocalypse. The letter to the Hebrews was written in the decade preceding 70 A.D. and gives further evidence that all of this occurred as Jesus predicted.

Times would be extremely difficult during the Great Tribulation of 64 to 67 A.D. But Jesus predicts that even the Roman Empire will not be able to snuff out His Church. The Christians that endure the trials all the way to the end are assured of salvation by the Savior Himself: “He who endures to the end will be saved” (Matt. 24:13). We will encounter this promise in The Apocalypse as well.

All this is well and good, say rapturists. Perhaps much of this did occur in the first-century Church. But rapturists claim that the seventh sign proves that this passage is still speaking of a future fulfillment. Jesus predicts, “This gospel of the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, as a testimony to all nations; and then the end will come” (Matt. 24:14). The rapturist rests confident in the belief that even today the gospel has not been preached throughout the whole world, and so the end spoken of by Jesus cannot have come yet.

Is that a truly scriptural perspective? No. St. Paul states that in his lifetime, the Faith of the Church in Rome “is proclaimed in all the world” (Rom. 1:8). In Colossians 1:5–6, he writes, “You have heard … the gospel … as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and growing.” There was certainly no doubt in St. Paul’s mind, while writing under inspiration, that the gospel had gone out into the whole world.

Although some Christians seem confused on this point today, the early Church certainly understood that the gospel had been preached to the entire world before 70 A.D. Clement of Rome was bishop when the signs of the Olivet Discourse were being fulfilled (67–73 A.D.). He wrote that Peter and Paul had been martyred, but not before they “taught righteousness to the
whole world
, and [they came] to the extreme limit of the west”
(FEC)
. Since both Peter and Paul were martyred before the fall of Jerusalem, Clement must have believed the seventh sign was fulfilled before the fall of Jerusalem.

Justin Martyr, born around the turn of the first century, wrote that “from Jerusalem there went out into the world, men, twelve in number, and these illiterate, of no ability in speaking: but by the power of God
they proclaimed to every race of men
that they were sent by Christ to teach
to all
the word of God” (
FA
, XXXIX).

Eusebius even connected the seventh sign to Jerusalem’s desolation: “The teaching of the new covenant was borne to
all nations
, and at once the Romans besieged Jerusalem and destroyed it and the Temple” (
POG
, I:VI). Eusebius reiterated the relationship Jesus enunciated. He said that the gospel would be preached, “and then the end will come” (Matt. 24:14).

St. Bede adds that the Apostles determined to spend their lives fulfilling sign 7: “All the Apostles, long before the destruction of the province of Judea, were dispersed to preach the gospel over the whole world” (cited in
GCC
). They did this
specifically to remove any obstacle
to the fulfillment of Christ’s prophecy.

So, given this evidence from both Scripture and the early Church, how can rapturists be so confused about this point? In part, it is because they do not take stock of the two Greek words for
world
. The Olivet Discourse uses the word
oikoumene
at this point, which specifically means the civilized world, delineated at the time by the boundaries of the Roman Empire. In other words, the gospel would be preached throughout the entire empire. There is another word for
world
that designates the entire earth,
kosmos
. Rapturists act as though this word is used, but it is not.

Kosmos
appears later in this same chapter: “from the beginning of the world until now” (Matt. 24:21). Since both words are used in the same passage, it seems quite certain that the Apostles were fully cognizant of these two concepts. Therefore, we can be confident that Jesus taught His disciples that the “end” of the Temple would follow the preaching of the gospel throughout the civilized world, the Roman Empire.

Sign 7 is the first sign that seems to be linked rather closely in time to the end of the Temple. It was also the only sign over which the followers of Jesus had any control. They proceeded diligently to do their part.

All the signs up to this point have been preliminary warnings to the Christians that the time of the destruction of the Temple was coming. Sign 8 is the last sign. It is so closely associated with the end of the Temple that Jesus exhorts His followers to immediate action when it appears. Jesus urges Christians, “When you see the desolating sacrilege spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains” (Matt. 24:15–19). The previous signs have been a warning. Now danger is imminent for anyone near Jerusalem’s Temple.

We can easily miss the direct affront posed by this teaching to the Jewish leaders of Jesus’ day. The Jewish scholars at the time taught that Daniel’s desolation had been fulfilled in 167 B.C. by Antiochus Epiphanes, and there would never be another abomination in the Temple. But as St. Jerome pointed out, the desolation in the second century B.C. lasted only for three years, not the three and a half years that Daniel specifically predicted
(CID)
. Jesus specifically teaches here that there was yet another “desolating sacrilege” of Daniel that was still in the future.

The “sacrilege” Jesus spoke of in the discourse would be the result of the Jewish leaders’ rejection of the Messiah Himself. It would result in a change of covenantal relationship for ethnic Jews forever. Antiochus’s actions were a true abomination on the Temple, but at the same time they were merely a foretelling of worse things to come (GR3). The Seleucid Syrians of Daniel 8 and 11 were only a prophetic foretaste of the final desolation foretold in Daniel 9 and 12, when God allowed the Romans to destroy biblical Judaism forever.

Both Matthew and Mark add a phrase to Jesus’ prophecy that was obviously not spoken by Him: “Let the reader understand.” They evidently believed that this “desolating sacrilege” would be so obvious that the average Jewish Christian
of the first century
would automatically recognize it for what it was.

Luke gives us more specific direction as to what to look for in this “desolating sacrilege.” He writes, “When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near” (Luke 21:20). St. John Chrysostom illustrates that the early Church linked the Matthew and Luke passages. “The abomination of desolation means the army by which the holy city of Jerusalem was made desolate” (
ANF
on Matt. 24:15).

Even casual students of history are familiar with the desolation that foreign armies leave in their wake. But to a devout Jew, the mere presence of any gentile army in Judea would be considered a sacrilege. Add to this the fact that the Romans marched under the banner of an unclean bird, the eagle. For the Roman legions, “the entire religion of the Roman camp consisted in worshiping the ensigns, in swearing by the ensigns, and in preferring the ensigns before all the gods” (
APO
, XVI, 162). The Jews knew that the Roman legions would worship their ensign and their emperor upon victory.

So what does history tell us about these eight signs? In the summer of 66 A.D., the Roman general Cestius Gallus attacked Jerusalem in response to the cessation of the sacrifices for Nero in the Temple. He actually led his soldiers up to the gates of the Temple, and many Jews thought the Romans had won the battle. The Temple was about to fall. For some unknown reason, however, Cestius unexpectedly retreated.

At this sign of weakness, the Jews pursued the retreating army and killed hundreds of Roman soldiers while acquiring a great amount of war materiel. The Roman garrison, now an island in a sea of hostile territory, was promised safe conduct, but the Roman soldiers were slaughtered once they laid their weapons aside. This repulsion of the Roman army left Jerusalem with the impression that God would continue to protect His Temple, and that they could defeat Rome when it came to battle (
WJ
, II, 17–19).

Nero was livid when he was informed of this fiasco. He immediately declared war and dispatched Rome’s best general to Israel in February of 67 A.D. General Vespasian set about subduing Galilee and the Judean countryside. He was not about to make the mistake Cestius had. Vespasian fought a campaign in the summer of 67 A.D., and then again the following summer. Upon the completion of these campaigns, he planned to bring his entire army to the siege of Jerusalem.

Suddenly everything changed. Nero committed suicide in June of 68 A.D. Vespasian immediately withdrew from the battlefield. He had something more important on his mind: the emperor’s throne in Rome. Although ultimately successful in that quest, he had to leave Jerusalem unconquered in the meantime. Vespasian fought a third, very brief campaign in the summer of 69 A.D. By then his first rival, Galba, had been murdered (January 69 A.D.), and his second rival, Ortho, had been defeated and had committed suicide (April 69 A.D.). His third rival, Vitellius, arrived in Rome in July. The legions of the east declared Vespasian the emperor, and Vitellius was killed in the fall of 69 A.D. by his own troops. Vespasian’s son, Titus, finally returned to Jerusalem in 70 A.D. to complete the job his father had left undone.

What does this have to do with the escape of the Christians? During the initial withdrawal of troops at the news of Nero’s suicide, it seems that the Romans had left Jerusalem entirely free from siege. This error was quickly remedied, but there was a short period during which no Roman army was surrounding Jerusalem.

Vespasian’s exit did not stop the outlaw Zealots from waging war against each other. One group of them had holed up in Jerusalem for the relative safety it offered. Those within Jerusalem would not allow anyone to leave for fear they would help those outside the city. The outlaw Zealots outside the city would not allow any to leave for fear they were spies.

When Vespasian had secured Rome and its throne for himself, Titus could turn his full attention on Jerusalem. Titus was not about to leave undone the job his father had been enticed to abandon by the death of Nero. By this juncture, the rest of Judea had either sued for peace or been conquered, and Titus was now free to turn his full attention to this rebellious city of Jerusalem (
WJ
, IV, 10:5).

He paused to let the factions of Jews within the city further decimate each other. The Temple itself was controlled now by one of the groups of outlaw Zealots, battling the priestly class and city residents. The Idumeans, who were the descendants of Esau, had gained entry and were rampaging through the city. And a band of lawless Zealots, who had been encamped outside the walls, eventually got into the city and joined the fray (
WJ
, IV, 6:2).

The Romans built ramparts to breach the walls, just as Jesus had predicted. “Your enemies will cast up a bank about you and surround you, and hem you in on every side, and dash you to the ground.… They will not leave one stone upon another in you” (Luke 19:43–44).

Many Jews tried to escape the city once this final siege by Titus was underway, but the opportunity to flee had long gone. It seems that the only opportunity had been either during the brief retreat and pursuit of Cestius, or during the moment when Vespasian decided to seek the throne after Nero’s suicide. Vespasian momentarily pulled his entire army from Jerusalem at that point. Then he thought better of it and sent a portion back.

Jesus knew the margin for error would be razor-thin. “Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house; and let him who is in the field not turn back to take his mantle. And alas for those who give suck in those days! Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath” (Matt. 24:17–20). The Christians had to escape without hesitation when the opportunity presented itself.

Cestius came in 66 A.D. Vespasian came in 67, 68, and 69 A.D. Then Titus conquered in 70 A.D. In each of these instances, the Jewish people did what they had always done when invaded by foreign armies. They fled
into
Jerusalem and thanked God for its relative safety. It was a well-fortified city and had withstood attack throughout history more often than not.

So, Jesus’ admonition to His disciples in the Olivet Discourse was diametrically opposed to the instincts of every Israelite. He commanded His followers to “flee to the mountains” immediately when they observed the desolating abomination of Daniel, which Luke identifies as armies surrounding Jerusalem. The Christians were to flee
away from
Jerusalem! This advice would test the faith of even the most devout and trusting Christian of Jerusalem. Did the Christians follow their own best judgment and hide within the city walls; or did they obey their Master by leaving Jerusalem when they had the chance?