Both the Old and New Testaments Testify to
the Second Coming As a Fixed Event to Happen
in the Aftermath of the Jewish National
Rejection of Jesus Christ
by Mark Mountjoy
Introductory Remarks
CONTINGENCY IS A SITUATION WHERE something depends on other factors or events to happen. In other words, it means that an outcome or statement is not certain, but instead relies on specific conditions being met. For example, let’s say you want to go to the beach this weekend. This plan is contingent upon the weather being sunny and warm. If it rains, your beach trip might not happen as planned. Let’s discover what the Bible really teaches about the reasons for the Second Coming, the coming of the kingdom of God and the events that surround it and if there are any reasons the Bible gives that it might be delayed; once we understand that the Futurist concepts ‘brings’ ideas to the Bible that are not there and then assumes those ideas are valid, then we are able to study and look at Futurist beliefs objectively and make necessary attempts to sort out the difference between what the Bible declares from the persuasive but false expectations fostered by Futurism.
Faulty Reasoning
Faulty reasoning means making mistakes in the way you think, leading you to form wrong conclusions or beliefs. It happens when you use wrong or misleading information, jump to conclusions without enough evidence, or let your emotions cloud your judgment. There are many types of faulty reasoning, such as assuming something is true just because many people believe it or thinking that just because two things happen around the same time, one must have caused the other.
Faulty reasoning can make it hard to make good choices or understand things correctly. For instance, if you do poorly on a test and assume it’s because you’re not smart enough, that’s faulty reasoning. There could be other reasons, like not studying enough or the test being particularly hard. By recognizing and avoiding faulty reasoning, you can improve your critical thinking skills and make better decisions.
Futurist Eschatology is Eisegesis Built on Sand
Futurists believe that when Jesus first came to Earth, he planned to set up the kingdom of God right away. However, they say this plan was contingent upon the Jewish people accepting him as their leader. In other words, the Futurists claim that if the Jews had welcomed Jesus, he would have established the kingdom then and there, however, John 6:14-15 goes directly against this idea.
But since the Jewish people did not accept Jesus, the Futurists argue that the promise of the kingdom has been pushed back to a later time. They say that Jesus will fulfill this promise when he returns in the future.
Now, here’s where the faulty reasoning comes in. The idea of this “contingency plan” – that Jesus setting up the kingdom depended on the Jews accepting him – is not actually found anywhere in the Gospels or the rest of the New Testament. In other words, the Bible does not say that Jesus’ plan to establish the kingdom was contingent on the Jewish people’s acceptance of him. On the contrary, the New Testament attests that Jesus would set up the kingdom of God in spite of the Jews rejection of him - and cast those who rejected him into outer darkness (Matt. 3:2; 4:17; 8:11-12 cf. Luke 13:28 and John 8:24).
By claiming that this contingency exists when the Bible does not mention it, the Futurists are using faulty reasoning. They are making an assumption that is not supported by the biblical text. As a result, their belief that the kingdom promise has been delayed because of the Jewish people’s rejection of Jesus is based on a mistaken idea, not on what the Bible actually says (Matt. 16:27-28, Mark 8:38 and 9:1 and Luke 21:20-31).
The Futurists claim that Jesus’ establishment of the kingdom was contingent upon the Jewish people accepting him, and since they rejected him, the kingdom promise has been delayed, but no Futurist can point to a single chapter or verse anywhere in the Bible that says or implies that the events declared to be impending in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were postponed or delayed. The Gospels consistently present Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom and his Second Coming as events that would occur within the lifetime of his disciples and the generation living at that time (Matt. 4:17; 10:7; 21:43 and John 21:20-23).
Furthermore, Acts, the New Testament epistles and the Book of Revelation, which were written after Jesus’ earthly ministry, do not indicate any change in the timeline or suggest that these events had been delayed (Acts 14:22, 28:31 cf. Heb. 12:28 and Rev. 11:15). Instead, they continue to speak of the Second Coming and the establishment of the kingdom as imminent events (2 Tim. 4:1 cf. 2 Pet. 1:11). The absence of any clear biblical support for the idea of a postponement or delay undermines the Futurists’ claim. The belief that the kingdom promise and Second Coming have not already come is based on faulty reasoning and unsupported assumptions, rather than on the clear testimony of the New Testament.
Futurist Backward Thinking About
the Reason for the Second Coming
The Futurists also believe that the Second Coming of Jesus was originally supposed to happen in the first century. However, they say that because the Jewish people did not accept Jesus as their savior, this event has been delayed for over 2,000 years, just like the establishment of the kingdom of God. But this view is incorrect!
The New Testament actually teaches that the Second Coming was destined to happen as a result of the Jews rejecting Jesus, not in spite of it (Luke 23:27-31 cf. Rev. 6:10-17). In fact, the Second Coming serves two purposes: it brings about the kingdom of God, and it also brings punishment to the Jewish people who chose not to accept Jesus (Heb. 2:1-3 and Jude 13). These verses suggest that those who reject the great salvation offered through Jesus will face “everlasting destruction.” So, the Futurists’ belief that the Second Coming was delayed because the Jews rejected Jesus is based on faulty reasoning. They are making an assumption that goes against what the New Testament actually teaches. By using this faulty reasoning, the Futurists are misinterpreting the biblical message about the Second Coming and its relationship to the ancient Jewish people’s negative response to Jesus. The Futurist view of the reason why they believe the Second Coming did not happen when Jesus and the Apostles claimed it would is false and not supported by the teachings found in the New Testament.
The Olivet Discourse and Futurist Scripture Twisting
Futurists’ faulty reasoning affects their interpretation of three important chapters in the New Testament: Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. These chapters are known as the Olivet Discourse, where Jesus talks about the future and the signs of his return.
According to the passages, the Futurists interpret these chapters as talking about events that haven’t happened yet, even in our current time. They believe that Jesus’ words in these passages are about hypothetical future events, rather than things that have already taken place. However, the object at the center of each of these chapters is a discussion about the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem. This was a real historical event that happened between AD 66 - 70 when the took control of the Second Temple and ended when Romans recaptured the metropolis and destroyed the city and the Temple.
We can argue and demonstrate that the Futurists use questionable reasoning and eisegesis to “remove” this evidence from their interpretation. Eisegesis means reading one’s own ideas into a text, rather than drawing the meaning from the text itself. By doing this, the Futurists are able to ignore the clear connection between Jesus’ words and the destruction of the Second Temple. Instead of seeing the Olivet Discourse as a prophecy that was fulfilled in the downfall of ancient Jewish civilization, the Futurists claim it is about a speculative future event called the “pre-tribulation Rapture,” a seven year tribulation, and a Second Coming that may or may not happen in the 21st century - but this interpretation is a result of the Futurists’ fallacious reasoning. By removing the historical Second Temple context and clear evidence within the text, they are able to make Jesus’ words fit their own ideas about the future, even though this goes against the plain meaning of the passages.
In summary, the Futurists’ interpretation of the Olivet Discourse is based on faulty reasoning and eisegesis. By ignoring the clear connection to the questions of Peter, James, John, and Andrew about the destruction of the Second Temple, the abomination of desolation, and the coming of the Son of man in the clouds of heaven in their specific generation, Futurists are able to make these passages be about hypothetical future events, rather than seeing them as prophecies that have already been fulfilled in the downfall of ancient Jewish civilization.
The Futurist’s Futile Interpretation
of New Testament Data
The New Testament presents a different perspective on the contingency for the Second Coming than the one held by the Futurists. It argues that the Christian scripture teaches the opposite of what the Futurists believe.
According to the Futurists, the Second Coming was contingent upon the Jewish people accepting Jesus. However, the Word of God in the Gospels, epistles, and the Book of Revelation actually teach that the Second Coming happens because of the Jewish rejection of the Gospel and their persecution of the early Christian church. Several passages support this view: In Matthew 10:17-23 and John 16:1-4, Jesus warns his disciples that they will face persecution, beatings, and rejection from the Jewish authorities because of their faith in him. In 2 Thessalonians 1:4-10, Paul writes about how God will bring judgment and punishment on those who are persecuting the church when Jesus returns. And in Revelation 6:9-11, the martyred Christians, under the Altar of the Second Temple, cry out for God to judge and avenge their deaths, which will happen at the Second Coming.
These passages suggest that the Jewish rejection and persecution of Jesus and his followers cannot be a valid reason for any postponement, but rather a reason for everything to happen as declared from Matthew to the Book of Revelation. The Second Coming is portrayed as a time when Jesus judges those who have rejected him and to vindicate his faithful followers who have suffered for their belief in him (Luke 19:27 and James 5:1-9).
So, the Futurists have it backwards and by highlighting this discrepancy between the Futurist view and the biblical teaching, the Futurist interpretation of the Second Coming is directly confronted and challenged; their view is not based on a correct understanding of the contingencies laid out in the New Testament, but rather on faulty logic that goes directly against the clear declarations of the Bible and the well-known apocalyptic expectations of the first Christians.
Language translations:
አማርኛ عربي Ελληνικά Español فارسی
Français עִברִית 한국어 普通话 Svenska తెలుగు
Related
Eschatology Built on Sand and the
Dangers to Christianity in the West
Semantic Agreement Between Christians
Addressing Any Misgivings About the Atavist
Babylon the Great City—According to the Bible
Caption: Jesus distinctly promised to come "as a thief in the night" in the lifetime of the Apostles. This belief, along with the values and sensibilities surrounding it, is spreading rapidly among parallel groups of Christians, including Preterists and Atavists. We humbly acknowledge that we do not possess "all the facts." However, we simultaneously hold a deep-seated and abiding conviction that something extraordinary and amazing occurred in the past, which deserves our utmost confidence and trust. For this reason, we must defer to one another and engage in common studies, investigations, peer reviews, and intramural pursuits to further our understanding of these events and their significance.