Tag Archives: prophecy

Who is the “he” in verse 27? Dispensationalism’s Interpretive Fallacy

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. (Daniel 9:24-27 KJV)

Exegesis of Daniel 9:27: A Grammatical-Historical Interpretation Demonstrating Christological Fulfillment

The prophecy of the Seventy Weeks in Daniel 9:24–27 constitutes one of the most precisely structured oracles in the Hebrew Scriptures, delivered through the angel Gabriel in response to Daniel’s prayer of repentance during the Babylonian exile (Dan. 9:1–23). Situated historically in the first year of Darius the Mede (ca. 539 B.C.), the vision extends Jeremiah’s prognostication of a seventy-year desolation upon Judah for sabbath violations (Jer. 25:11–12; 29:10; cf. 2 Chron. 36:21; Lev. 25:2–4, 8–12), transposing it into a schematic of seventy “sevens” (שִׁבְעִים שָׁבֻעִים, šiḇʿîm šāḇuʿîm)—a heptadic intensification denoting 490 years of divine determinative action (ḥāpaḵ, “decreed”) upon “your people and your holy city” (Dan. 9:24a), viz., Israel and Jerusalem. This pericope employs the grammatical-historical method’s imperatives: attending to the Masoretic Text’s syntax, semantics, and poetic parallelism within its sixth-century B.C. Sitz im Leben, while anchoring fulfillment in verifiable first-century A.D. events without recourse to allegory or typological foreshortening. The structure unfolds chiastically across vv. 24–27, with v. 27 serving as the apex: an antithetical parallelism wherein the Messiah’s covenantal confirmation (A) antitheses the cessation of sacrifices (A’), framed temporally by the “one week” (B/B’) and its midpoint (C). The six soteriological teloi of v. 24—(1) to restrain (kallāʾ) transgression (pešaʿ), (2) to seal up (ḥātam) sin (ḥaṭṭāʾt), (3) to atone (kāpar) for iniquity (ʿāwōn), (4) to introduce everlasting righteousness (ṣedeq ʿôlāmîm), (5) to seal up vision and prophet (ḥāzam wənāḇîʾ), and (6) to anoint a most holy (qōdeš qādāšîm)—converge eschatologically in the Anointed One (māšîaḥ nāḡîd, “Messiah the Prince,” v. 25), whose vicarious excision (kārēṯ, v. 26) effects these ends.

Grammatically, the pronominal antecedent of wəhiḡbîr (“and he shall confirm,” Hiphil perfect of ḥāḡaḇar, “strengthen”) in v. 27a is the nearest masculine singular subject: māšîaḥ (“Messiah”) from v. 26a, not the distal “prince who is to come” (nāḡîd… lābōʾ, v. 26b), whose “people” (ʿam)—the Romans—wrought Jerusalem’s devastation in A.D. 70. This syntactic proximity, reinforced by the chiastic unity of vv. 25–27, precludes an abrupt shift to a futurist interloper; the Hebrew’s revelational pattern of repetition-with-elaboration (v. 26 || v. 27) integrates the Messiah’s “cutting off” (yikkāreṯ, Niphal imperfect, denoting violent extirpation; cf. Isa. 53:8) into the seventieth week’s midpoint (ḥāṣî haššāḇûaʿ, “midst of the week”). The “covenant” (bərîṯ) thus confirmed is not a novel pact (kāṯar, “cut,” would denote initiation) but the Abrahamic-Mosaic edifice (Gen. 15:18; Exod. 19–24) intensified eschatologically as the New Covenant (Jer. 31:31–34; Ezek. 36:26–27), ratified by the Messiah’s blood for “the many” (lārabbîm, partitive genitive denoting the faithful remnant; cf. Isa. 53:11–12; Matt. 26:28). Temporally, šāḇûaʿ ʿeḥāḏ (“one week”) evokes a literal heptad (19x in the OT as temporal units; LXX hebdomas), symbolizing seven prophetic years via the day-year principle (Num. 14:34; Ezek. 4:6), commencing with Artaxerxes I’s decree to restore Jerusalem’s polity (Neh. 2:1–8; 445/444 B.C., Nisan). The aggregate 490 years (70 × 7 × 360-day years) yield 173,880 days to Christ’s triumphal entry (A.D. 33), marking the terminus of the sixty-ninth week (7 + 62 = 483 years; Dan. 9:25).

Historically, this timeline aligns impeccably: from 457 B.C. (adjusted for the 360-day calendar and intercalations) to Christ’s baptismal anointing (A.D. 27; Luke 3:1, 21; Acts 10:38), fulfilling the māšîaḥ nāḡîd presentation. The seventieth week (A.D. 27–34) encompasses Christ’s 3.5-year ministry (higbîr bərîṯ lārabbîm, confirming the covenant through parables, healings, and didactic discourses to the “many” disciples), culminating midway (A.D. 31) in his crucifixion (yāšbîṯ, Hiphil imperfect of šāḇâṯ, “cause to cease”), which obsoletes the Levitical cultus (zeḇaḥ wəminḥâ, “sacrifice and oblation”; Heb. 10:1–18). The veil’s rending (Matt. 27:51) and apostolic witness (post-resurrection preaching to A.D. 34, Stephen’s martyrdom; Acts 7) complete the week, sealing the teloi: Christ’s *kāpar* atones universally (Rom. 3:25), inaugurating ṣedeq ʿôlāmîm via justification (Rom. 3:22), authenticating prophecy (Heb. 1:1–2), and anointing the heavenly qōdeš qādāšîm (Heb. 9:11–12, 24). The “overspreading of abominations” (šiqquṣê šōmēm) and desolation (məšōmēm) evoke the “abomination of desolation” (šiqqûṣ šōmēm, v. 27c; cf. 11:31; 12:11), fulfilled proximally in the Roman encirclement and temple profanation (A.D. 70; Luke 19:41–44; 21:20–24; Matt. 23:37–38; 24:15), a divine kālâ wəneḥărēṣ (“consummation and that determined,” v. 27d) poured upon apostate Israel (šōmēm, “desolate one”; cf. Lev. 26:31–33; Deut. 28:49–52). Christologically, this excision—anticipated in the Suffering Servant (Isa. 53:4–12)—transitions typology to antitype: the paschal Lamb (John 1:29; 1 Cor. 5:7) terminates shadows (skia; Col. 2:16–17; Heb. 10:1), reconciling Jew and Gentile in one body (Eph. 2:13–16), abolishing the “law of commandments in ordinances” (dogmata, ceremonial diataxeis) through his flesh.

Thus, Daniel 9:27 unveils the Messiah’s telic agency: not mere prediction, but the grammatical-historical nexus wherein Yahweh’s covenant fidelity (ʾĕlōhîm nēʾēmān, Dan. 9:4) irrupts soteriologically in the incarnate dābār (John 1:14), fulfilling the exile’s redemptive arc from Babylonian šôʾâ to eschatological šālôm.

Addendum: Dispensationalism’s Interpretive Fallacy in Transmuting a Messianic Oracle into an Antichrist Prognostication

Dispensationalism, emergent in the nineteenth century via John Nelson Darby and systematized in the Scofield Reference Bible, bifurcates Daniel 9:24–27 by interposing an unheralded “gap” (mystērion, per Eph. 3:3–6) of indeterminate duration (ca. 2,000 years) between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks, relegating the latter to a futurist tribulation wherein the “he” (hûʾ) of v. 27 denotes not the Messiah but a Roman-derivative Antichrist (ho anthrōpos tēs anomias, 2 Thess. 2:3–4; Rev. 13:1–10). This “prince who is to come” (nāḡîd… lābōʾ, v. 26b) ostensibly confirms a seven-year covenant (bərîṯ) with Israel, only to abrogate it midway via temple desecration, inaugurating the “Great Tribulation” (Matt. 24:21). Such exegesis, while purporting literalism, contravenes the grammatical-historical method’s canons, imposing an eisegetical schema that transmutes a quintessentially Christotelic pericope (cf. early patristic consensus: Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.25–26; Hippolytus, Treatise on Christ and Antichrist 6–7) into a futurist excursus.

Grammatically, the antecedent fallacy is patent: wəhiḡbîr (v. 27a) cannot leapfrog the proximal *māšîaḥ* (v. 26a) to alight upon a subordinate “prince,” violating Hebrew pronominal concord and chiastic cohesion; the LXX’s kai krataiōsei diathēkēn pollōis (“and he will strengthen a covenant with many”) preserves this Messianic tether, unelided by any disjunctive waw. Contextually, the teloi of v. 24—atonement and righteousness—demand a divine agent (kāpar, ṣedeq), not a satanic parody; the Antichrist’s covenant would subvert, not confirm (ḥāḡaḇar), Yahweh’s bərîṯ (v. 4), rendering the Hiphil causative incoherent. Historically, this futurism traces to Counter-Reformation Jesuit Francisco Ribera (1585), who decoupled the weeks to deflect Protestant identifications of papal Antichrist (cf. Luther, Smalcald Articles II.4; Calvin, Institutes 3.25.6), later Protestantized by Darby amid millennialist revivalism. The “gap” lacks exegetical warrant—Daniel’s consecutive heptads (7 + 62 + 1) mirror the exile’s unbroken seventy years (Dan. 9:2)—and analogical appeals to Isaiah’s “anointed” dual fulfillment (Isa. 61:1–2; Luke 4:18–21) falter, as Daniel’s chronology is explicit, not poetically telescoped.

Theologically, Dispensationalism’s arithmetic undergirds this error: insisting on literal 365.2422-day years for the seventieth week’s halves (3.5 years = 1,278 days, not the symbolic 1,260 of Dan. 7:25; Rev. 11:3; 12:6), it yields an 18-day discrepancy, vitiating the purported precision of a halved tribulation (42 months ≈ 41.5). This selective literalism—eschewing the year-day principle (Num. 14:34)—privileges a pretribulational rapture (harpazō, 1 Thess. 4:17) and Israel-church dichotomy, obfuscating the New Covenant’s grafted unity (Rom. 11:17–24; Eph. 2:11–22) and the historical terminus in A.D. 34. By displacing Christ’s yāšbîṯ (cessation of sacrifices) to an eschatological impostor, Dispensationalism dilutes the cross’s once-for-all efficacy (Heb. 9:26–28; 10:14), projecting unfulfilled teloi indefinitely and engendering chronometric “time warps” that evade first-century realization (Acts 3:18–26).

In sum, this hermeneutic—born of confessional polemic, not textual fidelity—eclipses the māšîaḥ‘s luminous fulfillment, subordinating soteriology to speculative futurism.

The above article was Groked under the direction of Jack Kettler and perfected using Grammarly AI. Using AI for the Glory of God!

“For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.” (2 Corinthians 10:4-5)

Mr. Kettler, an author who has published works in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum, is an active member of the RPCNA in Westminster, CO, with 21 books defending the Reformed Faith available on Amazon.

The Imminent Eschatological Fulfillment in Matthew 24:34: A Preterist Exegesis of Christ’s Prophecy

Jack Kettler

Abstract

This study examines the temporal language of Matthew 24:34, where Jesus declares, “This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled,” considering its first-century context and the broader apocalyptic discourse of the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24–25; Mark 13; Luke 21). Using lexical, historical, and theological evidence, this paper argues for a preterist interpretation, suggesting that Christ’s prophecy was fulfilled during the first-century destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, rather than referring to a future parousia. This interpretation challenges C.S. Lewis’s assertion of prophetic error in Matthew 24:34 and offers a strong defense of the text’s integrity through a literal understanding of “generation” (Greek: genea) and the apocalyptic genre. The study draws on scriptural texts, lexical data, and historical commentary to support the idea that Christ’s “coming” signifies divine judgment upon apostate Judaism, aligning with the urgent language found in Revelation and other New Testament passages.

Introduction

The temporal specificity of Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 24:34 — “Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled” (KJV)—has provoked significant theological debate, particularly regarding its eschatological implications. C.S. Lewis famously labeled this verse “the most embarrassing verse in the Bible,” suggesting that Jesus erroneously predicted an imminent second coming within the lifetime of His contemporaries (Lewis, 1960, p. 385). This study contends that such a critique misinterprets the text’s apocalyptic context and the semantic range of “generation” (genea). By employing a preterist hermeneutic, this paper argues that Matthew 24:34 refers to the divine judgment enacted through the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, fulfilling Christ’s prophecy within the first-century generation. This approach preserves the integrity of the text and aligns with the imminent language found in parallel passages (e.g., Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32) and Revelation (e.g., Revelation 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10).

Methodology

This study adopts a historical-grammatical approach, prioritizing the original linguistic and cultural context of the first-century audience. Lexical analysis of key terms, such as genea (generation), erchomai (to come), and tachos (speed, quickly), is conducted using Strong’s Concordance and other standard references. Historical evidence, including Roman accounts of the Jewish War (66–70 CE), is consulted to corroborate the fulfillment of apocalyptic imagery. Theological commentary from both preterist and non-preterist perspectives is evaluated to assess interpretive traditions. The study also engages the apocalyptic genre, drawing parallels with Old Testament prophetic literature (e.g., Daniel 7:13-14; Isaiah 13:10) to elucidate the symbolic nature of Christ’s language.

Exegesis of Matthew 24:34

The Semantic Range of Genea (Generation)

The crux of Matthew 24:34 lies in the interpretation of genea, translated as “generation.” Strong’s Concordance (NT 1074) defines genea as:

·         A group of people living at the same time, typically spanning 30–33 years.

·         A family or stock, emphasizing descent or genealogy.

·         Metaphorically, a perverse or righteous group characterized by shared traits (e.g., Matthew 17:17).

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia further clarifies that genea in the New Testament consistently refers to contemporaries or a specific temporal period, not an ethnic race (Orr, 1986, p. 1199). For instance, Matthew 23:36 (“All these things shall come upon this generation”) unequivocally addresses the first-century audience facing divine judgment. Proposals to render genea as “race” (i.e., the Jewish people enduring indefinitely) are linguistically strained, as no New Testament usage supports this meaning (Chilton, 1987, p. 3; DeMar, 1996, p. 56). Such an interpretation also fails to resolve the temporal urgency of Christ’s words, which are reinforced by phrases like “immediately after” (Matthew 24:29) and “soon” (Revelation 1:1).

Apocalyptic Context and the Destruction of Jerusalem

Matthew 24:34 is situated within the Olivet Discourse, a response to the disciples’ inquiry about the temple’s destruction and the “end of the age” (Matthew 24:1-3). The discourse employs apocalyptic imagery drawn from Old Testament prophetic texts, such as Isaiah 13:10 and Daniel 7:13-14, to depict cataclysmic events. Preterist scholars argue that these images symbolize the socio-political upheaval of Jerusalem’s fall in 70 CE, not a literal cosmic dissolution or physical second coming (France, 1994, pp. 936–937). The “coming of the Son of Man” (Matthew 24:30) echoes Daniel 7:13-14, where the Son of Man ascends to divine authority, signifying Christ’s vindication over apostate Israel rather than a parousia.

Historical records, such as those of Roman historians Tacitus and Cassius Dio, document supernatural phenomena during the Jewish War (66–70 CE), including celestial signs and mass visions, which align with the apocalyptic imagery of Matthew 24:29-31 (Morais, n.d.). The destruction of the temple, described as leaving “not one stone upon another” (Matthew 24:2), was fulfilled when Roman forces razed Jerusalem, marking the culmination of God’s judgment on the covenant-breaking nation (Sproul, 1998, p. 16).

Imminent Language in Revelation

The Book of Revelation reinforces the temporal immediacy of Matthew 24:34. Passages such as Revelation 1:1 (“things which must shortly come to pass”) and Revelation 22:10 (“the time is at hand”) employ terms like tachos (speed, quickly) and eggus (near), indicating events imminent to the first-century audience (Strong’s NT 5034, 1451). The contrast between Daniel’s sealed prophecy (Daniel 12:4) and John’s unsealed prophecy (Revelation 22:10) underscores the nearness of fulfillment, as Daniel’s prophecy spanned centuries, while John’s was imminent (Gentry,1998). These texts collectively affirm a first-century fulfillment, consistent with the preterist interpretation of Matthew 24:34.

Addressing C.S. Lewis’s Critique

Lewis’s assertion that Jesus erred in predicting an imminent second coming stems from a misidentification of the “coming” in Matthew 24:34 as the parousia. Preterist exegesis resolves this by distinguishing the “coming in judgment” (a spiritual, covenantal event) from the final, physical return of Christ. The former is rooted in Old Testament depictions of divine judgment (e.g., Isaiah 19:1, where God “rides on a cloud” to judge Egypt), while the latter is addressed in passages like Matthew 25:31-46. Lewis’s embarrassment is thus unwarranted, as the prophecy was fulfilled within the temporal framework Jesus specified (Ellicott, n.d., p. 150).

Counterarguments and Rebuttals

Critics of preterism often cite 2 Peter 3:8-9 (“with the Lord one day is as a thousand years”) to argue that divine temporality transcends human understanding, rendering “soon” and “quickly” flexible. However, this passage, referencing Psalm 90:4, encourages patience amid persecution, not a redefinition of temporal language (Strong’s NT 1019). Peter’s assurance that “the Lord is not slow” (2 Peter 3:9) aligns with the imminent expectation of judgment, possibly referencing the impending destruction of Jerusalem, as 2 Peter is dated circa 68 CE (Carson et al., 1994, p. 936). Moreover, attributing different meanings to God’s words risks epistemological skepticism, undermining the reliability of divine revelation (Clark, 1984, pp. 161–162).

Theological Implications

The preterist interpretation of Matthew 24:34 affirms the trustworthiness of Christ’s prophetic word, countering liberal critiques of biblical inerrancy. By recognizing the fulfillment of these prophecies in the first-century judgment on Jerusalem, believers can rejoice in God’s covenantal faithfulness rather than grapple with unfulfilled predictions. This view also highlights the continuity between Old Testament judgment motifs and New Testament eschatology, reinforcing the coherence of biblical theology.

Conclusion

Matthew 24:34, when interpreted in its first-century context, does not present an embarrassing error but a fulfilled prophecy of divine judgment on apostate Judaism, culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. The literal understanding of genea as the contemporary generation, coupled with the apocalyptic genre and historical corroboration, supports a preterist reading. The imminent language of Revelation further substantiates this interpretation, aligning with the temporal expectations of the early church. Far from being a source of theological embarrassment, Matthew 24:34 stands as a testament to Christ’s prophetic accuracy and God’s covenantal justice.

References

·         Carson, D. A., France, R. T., Motyer, J. A., & Wenham, G. J. (Eds.). (1994). New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Inter-Varsity Press.

·         Chilton, D. (1987). The Great Tribulation. Dominion Press.

·         Clark, G. H. (1984). God’s Hammer: The Bible and Its Critics. The Trinity Foundation.

·         DeMar, G. (1996). Last Days Madness. American Vision.

·         Ellicott, C. J. (n.d.). Bible Commentary for English Readers. Cassell and Company.

·         France, R. T. (1994). Matthew 24 commentary. In New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition (pp. 936–937). Inter-Varsity Press.

·         Gentry, K. L. (1998). Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation. American Vision.

·         Lewis, C. S. (1960). The world’s last night. In The Essential C.S. Lewis (p. 385). Touchstone.

·         Morais, D. (n.d.). Matthew 24 commentary: That generation shall not pass. RevelationRevolution.org.

·         Orr, J. (1986). Generation. In International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (p. 1199). Eerdmans.

·         Sproul, R. C. (1998). The Last Days According to Jesus. Baker.

Declaration

“For transparency, I acknowledge the use of Grok, an AI tool developed by xAI, and Grammarly AI for editorial assistance in drafting, organizing, and refining this manuscript’s clarity and grammar. All theological arguments, exegesis, and interpretations are my own, and I take full responsibility for the content.” – Jack Kettler

The Imminent Eschatological Fulfillment in Matthew 24:34: A Preterist Exegesis of Christ’s Prophecy

Jack Kettler

Abstract

This study examines the temporal language of Matthew 24:34, where Jesus declares, “This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled,” considering its first-century context and the broader apocalyptic discourse of the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24–25; Mark 13; Luke 21). Using lexical, historical, and theological evidence, this paper argues for a preterist interpretation, suggesting that Christ’s prophecy was fulfilled during the first-century destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, rather than referring to a future parousia. This interpretation challenges C.S. Lewis’s assertion of prophetic error in Matthew 24:34 and offers a strong defense of the text’s integrity through a literal understanding of “generation” (Greek: genea) and the apocalyptic genre. The study draws on scriptural texts, lexical data, and historical commentary to support the idea that Christ’s “coming” signifies divine judgment upon apostate Judaism, aligning with the urgent language found in Revelation and other New Testament passages.

Introduction

The temporal specificity of Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 24:34 — “Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled” (KJV)—has provoked significant theological debate, particularly regarding its eschatological implications. C.S. Lewis famously labeled this verse “the most embarrassing verse in the Bible,” suggesting that Jesus erroneously predicted an imminent second coming within the lifetime of His contemporaries (Lewis, 1960, p. 385). This study contends that such a critique misinterprets the text’s apocalyptic context and the semantic range of “generation” (genea). By employing a preterist hermeneutic, this paper argues that Matthew 24:34 refers to the divine judgment enacted through the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, fulfilling Christ’s prophecy within the first-century generation. This approach preserves the integrity of the text and aligns with the imminent language found in parallel passages (e.g., Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32) and Revelation (e.g., Revelation 1:1, 3; 22:6, 10).

Methodology

This study adopts a historical-grammatical approach, prioritizing the original linguistic and cultural context of the first-century audience. Lexical analysis of key terms, such as genea (generation), erchomai (to come), and tachos (speed, quickly), is conducted using Strong’s Concordance and other standard references. Historical evidence, including Roman accounts of the Jewish War (66–70 CE), is consulted to corroborate the fulfillment of apocalyptic imagery. Theological commentary from both preterist and non-preterist perspectives is evaluated to assess interpretive traditions. The study also engages the apocalyptic genre, drawing parallels with Old Testament prophetic literature (e.g., Daniel 7:13-14; Isaiah 13:10) to elucidate the symbolic nature of Christ’s language.

Exegesis of Matthew 24:34

The Semantic Range of Genea (Generation)

The crux of Matthew 24:34 lies in the interpretation of genea, translated as “generation.” Strong’s Concordance (NT 1074) defines genea as:

• A group of people living at the same time, typically spanning 30–33 years.

• A family or stock, emphasizing descent or genealogy.

• Metaphorically, a perverse or righteous group characterized by shared traits (e.g., Matthew 17:17).

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia further clarifies that genea in the New Testament consistently refers to contemporaries or a specific temporal period, not an ethnic race (Orr, 1986, p. 1199). For instance, Matthew 23:36 (“All these things shall come upon this generation”) unequivocally addresses the first-century audience facing divine judgment. Proposals to render genea as “race” (i.e., the Jewish people enduring indefinitely) are linguistically strained, as no New Testament usage supports this meaning (Chilton, 1987, p. 3; DeMar, 1996, p. 56). Such an interpretation also fails to resolve the temporal urgency of Christ’s words, which are reinforced by phrases like “immediately after” (Matthew 24:29) and “soon” (Revelation 1:1).

Apocalyptic Context and the Destruction of Jerusalem

Matthew 24:34 is situated within the Olivet Discourse, a response to the disciples’ inquiry about the temple’s destruction and the “end of the age” (Matthew 24:1-3). The discourse employs apocalyptic imagery drawn from Old Testament prophetic texts, such as Isaiah 13:10 and Daniel 7:13-14, to depict cataclysmic events. Preterist scholars argue that these images symbolize the socio-political upheaval of Jerusalem’s fall in 70 CE, not a literal cosmic dissolution or physical second coming (France, 1994, pp. 936–937). The “coming of the Son of Man” (Matthew 24:30) echoes Daniel 7:13-14, where the Son of Man ascends to divine authority, signifying Christ’s vindication over apostate Israel rather than a parousia.

Historical records, such as those of Roman historians Tacitus and Cassius Dio, document supernatural phenomena during the Jewish War (66–70 CE), including celestial signs and mass visions, which align with the apocalyptic imagery of Matthew 24:29-31 (Morais, n.d.). The destruction of the temple, described as leaving “not one stone upon another” (Matthew 24:2), was fulfilled when Roman forces razed Jerusalem, marking the culmination of God’s judgment on the covenant-breaking nation (Sproul, 1998, p. 16).

Imminent Language in Revelation

The Book of Revelation reinforces the temporal immediacy of Matthew 24:34. Passages such as Revelation 1:1 (“things which must shortly come to pass”) and Revelation 22:10 (“the time is at hand”) employ terms like tachos (speed, quickly) and eggus (near), indicating events imminent to the first-century audience (Strong’s NT 5034, 1451). The contrast between Daniel’s sealed prophecy (Daniel 12:4) and John’s unsealed prophecy (Revelation 22:10) underscores the nearness of fulfillment, as Daniel’s prophecy spanned centuries, while John’s was imminent (Gentry,1998). These texts collectively affirm a first-century fulfillment, consistent with the preterist interpretation of Matthew 24:34.

Addressing C.S. Lewis’s Critique

Lewis’s assertion that Jesus erred in predicting an imminent second coming stems from a misidentification of the “coming” in Matthew 24:34 as the parousia. Preterist exegesis resolves this by distinguishing the “coming in judgment” (a spiritual, covenantal event) from the final, physical return of Christ. The former is rooted in Old Testament depictions of divine judgment (e.g., Isaiah 19:1, where God “rides on a cloud” to judge Egypt), while the latter is addressed in passages like Matthew 25:31-46. Lewis’s embarrassment is thus unwarranted, as the prophecy was fulfilled within the temporal framework Jesus specified (Ellicott, n.d., p. 150).

Counterarguments and Rebuttals

Critics of preterism often cite 2 Peter 3:8-9 (“with the Lord one day is as a thousand years”) to argue that divine temporality transcends human understanding, rendering “soon” and “quickly” flexible. However, this passage, referencing Psalm 90:4, encourages patience amid persecution, not a redefinition of temporal language (Strong’s NT 1019). Peter’s assurance that “the Lord is not slow” (2 Peter 3:9) aligns with the imminent expectation of judgment, possibly referencing the impending destruction of Jerusalem, as 2 Peter is dated circa 68 CE (Carson et al., 1994, p. 936). Moreover, attributing different meanings to God’s words risks epistemological skepticism, undermining the reliability of divine revelation (Clark, 1984, pp. 161–162).

Theological Implications

The preterist interpretation of Matthew 24:34 affirms the trustworthiness of Christ’s prophetic word, countering liberal critiques of biblical inerrancy. By recognizing the fulfillment of these prophecies in the first-century judgment on Jerusalem, believers can rejoice in God’s covenantal faithfulness rather than grapple with unfulfilled predictions. This view also highlights the continuity between Old Testament judgment motifs and New Testament eschatology, reinforcing the coherence of biblical theology.

Conclusion

Matthew 24:34, when interpreted in its first-century context, does not present an embarrassing error but a fulfilled prophecy of divine judgment on apostate Judaism, culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. The literal understanding of genea as the contemporary generation, coupled with the apocalyptic genre and historical corroboration, supports a preterist reading. The imminent language of Revelation further substantiates this interpretation, aligning with the temporal expectations of the early church. Far from being a source of theological embarrassment, Matthew 24:34 stands as a testament to Christ’s prophetic accuracy and God’s covenantal justice.

References

• Carson, D. A., France, R. T., Motyer, J. A., & Wenham, G. J. (Eds.). (1994). New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Inter-Varsity Press.

• Chilton, D. (1987). The Great Tribulation. Dominion Press.

• Clark, G. H. (1984). God’s Hammer: The Bible and Its Critics. The Trinity Foundation.

• DeMar, G. (1996). Last Days Madness. American Vision.

• Ellicott, C. J. (n.d.). Bible Commentary for English Readers. Cassell and Company.

• France, R. T. (1994). Matthew 24 commentary. In New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition (pp. 936–937). Inter-Varsity Press.

• Gentry, K. L. (1998). Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation. American Vision.

• Lewis, C. S. (1960). The world’s last night. In The Essential C.S. Lewis (p. 385). Touchstone.

• Morais, D. (n.d.). Matthew 24 commentary: That generation shall not pass. RevelationRevolution.org.

• Orr, J. (1986). Generation. In International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (p. 1199). Eerdmans.

• Sproul, R. C. (1998). The Last Days According to Jesus. Baker.

Declaration

“For transparency, I acknowledge the use of Grok, an AI tool developed by xAI, and Grammarly AI for editorial assistance in drafting, organizing, and refining this manuscript’s clarity and grammar. All theological arguments, exegesis, and interpretations are my own, and I take full responsibility for the content.” – Jack Kettler

Gary DeMar: An Overview and Analysis of “Prophecy Wars”                 By Jack Kettler

Biographical Background:

Gary DeMar is a significant figure in Christian theological scholarship, particularly noted for his contributions to eschatology and Christian worldview studies. Born in 1950, DeMar graduated from Western Michigan University in 1973 and later earned his Master of Divinity from Reformed Theological Seminary in 1979. He further pursued his studies, obtaining a Ph.D. in Christian Intellectual History from Whitefield Theological Seminary in 2007. DeMar is known for his role as an author, speaker, and president of American Vision, an organization focused on promoting a comprehensive biblical worldview.

Thematic Focus:

DeMar’s scholarly work predominantly explores themes of eschatology, biblical prophecy, and Christian reconstructionism. His approach often contrasts with popular interpretations of the end times by emphasizing preterist views, which assert that many biblical prophecies, especially those related to the end times, were fulfilled in the first century AD.

“Prophecy Wars: The Biblical Battle Over the End Times” – Overview:

“Prophecy Wars” represents a pivotal work in DeMar’s oeuvre. It was published following his participation in a symposium titled “Revelation: An Evangelical Symposium” in Reno, Nevada, on February 23, 2013. This book serves as a response to the presentations and discussions from this event, where DeMar, alongside theologians Sam Waldron and James Hamilton, debated the interpretation of eschatological texts, particularly from the Book of Revelation.

Content and Structure:

·         Time Texts and Audience Reference: He dissects the temporal indicators in the Gospels that suggest prophecies were directed at the first-century audience, specifically concerning the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21.

·         Prophetic Signs: DeMar argues that the signs Jesus described were fulfilled in the context of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

·         The Use of “This Generation”: He challenges interpretations that extend this term to future generations, proposing instead that it refers specifically to the generation contemporary with Jesus.

·         Critique of Contemporary Eschatology: DeMar counters common misinterpretations by engaging with theological arguments from both historical premillennialism and amillennialism, as presented by his symposium co-participants.

Engagement with Critics:

DeMar directly addresses the criticisms and claims made by scholars like James Hamilton, particularly the contention that preterism (the view DeMar advocates) relies heavily on post-event historical accounts by Josephus rather than scriptural exegesis. DeMar defends his position by returning to the biblical text, emphasizing its internal evidence for first-century fulfillment.

Theological Implications:

The book not only attempts to clarify and defend preterist interpretations but also aims to encourage a re-examination of how Christians understand and apply eschatological teachings. DeMar’s critique extends to the broader implications of eschatological beliefs on Christian living and political involvement, advocating for an active, transformative presence of Christians in society rather than a passive wait for apocalyptic events.

Critical Reception:

While “Prophecy Wars” has been received positively by those within the preterist and Christian Reconstructionist communities, it has spurred debate among those holding to dispensational premillennial views of eschatology. Critics often question DeMar’s hermeneutical approach, particularly his handling of the term “generation” and his dismissal of future-oriented prophecy. Conversely, supporters applaud the book for its scholarly rigor and its challenge to what they see as overly speculative end-times theology.

Conclusion:

Gary DeMar’s “Prophecy Wars” is not merely a defense of preterism but an academic call to revisit biblical prophecy with an emphasis on historical context. It serves as a significant contribution to the ongoing scholarly debate on eschatology, urging a reconsideration of long-held interpretations in light of textual evidence and historical events. Through this work, DeMar continues to shape discussions on how Christians interpret the end times and engage with the world from their theological stance.

For more study: The meaning of “this generation:”

“Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled.’ (Matthew 24:34) (Bolding and underlining mine)

To exegete Matthew 24:34 using the grammatical-historical method, particularly in light of Preterism, one must consider the text’s linguistic, cultural, and historical contexts:

Textual Analysis:

Translation: “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” (KJV)

Greek Text: “Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη ἕως ἂν πάντα ταῦτα γένηται.”

Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν (Amen legō hymin) – “Truly I say to you,” a phrase used by Jesus to emphasize the truth and certainty of what follows.

οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ (ou mē parelthē) – A double negative construction (“not, not”), indicating a strong negative assertion, “will certainly not pass.”

ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη (hē genea hautē) – “This generation,” where “γενεὰ” (genea) is the focal point.

ἕως ἂν πάντα ταῦτα γένηται (heōs an panta tauta genētai) – “until all these things happen,” with “πάντα ταῦτα” (panta tauta) referring back to the events described earlier in the chapter.

Grammatical Considerations:

Genea (γενεὰ): This Greek word can mean:

·         A single generation in time (about 40 years, based on human lifespan).

·         A race or family line.

·         A class or kind of people.

In Matthew, “genea” is consistently used to refer to the contemporary generation, those living at the time of Jesus’ ministry:

·         Matthew 11:16 uses “genea” to describe the people Jesus was speaking to.

·         Matthew 12:41, 42 contrasts the current generation with those of Jonah and Solomon.

·         Matthew 17:17 and 23:36 also imply the generation contemporaneous with Jesus.

·         Contextual Use: In Matthew 24, Jesus directly addresses His disciples about signs and events leading up to the destruction of the temple, which historically occurred in AD 70.

·         The use of “this generation” here would naturally refer to those alive during His discourse.

Historical Context:

·         Audience and Timing: Jesus’ audience included His immediate disciples and others who would have understood “this generation” as their own. The discourse in Matthew 24 responds to questions about the temple’s destruction and His coming, events that, from a Preterist perspective, were fulfilled within the first-century context.

·         AD 70 Destruction: Preterists see the Romans’ destruction of the temple as the fulfillment of “all these things.” This historical event aligns with the timeframe of “this generation,” if one interprets “generation” as the period from approximately 30 AD to 70 AD.

Support from Matthew’s Usage:

·         Consistency: Matthew uses “genea” in contexts where it undeniably refers to the contemporaries of Jesus (e.g., Matthew 11:16, 12:41-42, 17:17, 23:36). This consistent pattern supports the Preterist view that “this generation” in Matthew 24:34 refers to the generation of Jesus’ time.

·         Prophetic Fulfillment: Preterists argue that the signs and events described in Matthew 24 (false prophets, wars, famines, etc.) were all witnessed by that generation, culminating in the fall of Jerusalem, thus fulfilling the prophecy within the lifetime of those to whom Jesus was speaking.

Conclusion:

Applying the grammatical-historical method to Matthew 24:34, the term “this generation” aligns with Preterist interpretations by focusing on the immediate historical context and the consistent use of “genea” in Matthew’s Gospel to refer to Jesus’ contemporaries. This interpretation sees the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy within the first century, specifically with the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70, rather than projecting it into a distant future.

The above study was Groked, under the direction of Jack Kettler, and perfected using Grammarly AI.

“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)

Mr. Kettler is an author who has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife, Marea, are active Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church members. Mr. Kettler’s extensive work includes 18 books defending the Reformed Faith, which are available for order online at Amazon.