(a) Christ's Role as a True Prophet
The
destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD was the
vindication of Christ's claim to the role of a true prophet and completed the
proof of His identity as the Messiah. When Christ was
proven to be a true prophet, those who had rejected, and killed Him, were
condemned and became guilty of innocent blood as well as blasphemy and
deicide. Those who had charged Him with
being a false prophet because He had foretold the destruction of the city and
the temple were now themselves proven guilty.
It was morally imperative that this event take place immediately
because Christ had predicted that the generation who heard Him pronounce the
prophecy would live to see its fulfillment and that generation was fast passing
away by AD 70.
Jesus had predicted the
destruction of Jerusalem and made the
statement that "...this generation will not pass away till all these
things take place." (See Matthew
24:34 and Luke 21:20-32. RSV). This is construed by dispensationalists as
having never yet been fulfilled, but awaits a yet future coming, appearing, or
revelation. Christ's promise of a contemporary fulfillment must rather be
seen in the perspective of the tests commonly required of a prophet in that
time to determine whether or not he was indeed a true prophet; tests advised by
Scripture as well as good sense.
The
three proof tests required of a prophet were: First, He should cause signs and wonders to come to pass. This is seen as
evidence of the prophetic calling from Moses to the
Apostles. Jesus clearly qualified
under this test. But signs and wonders
alone did not suffice for proof of the prophetic office, as stated in
Deuteronomy 13:1-5. Secondly, even though the prophet could do
miracles, he also must turn the people from their evil ways according to
Jeremiah 23:22, and not to strange gods. Again, Jesus qualified eminently under this
rule.
The third test is illustrated in Deuteronomy 18:18-22 and
Jeremiah 28:9: the true
prophet would be proven when his words came to pass; whereas if he made
predictions that did not happen, then he was known to be a false prophet. That this attitude toward the office of a
prophet was prevalent in the New Testament era is evidenced by the words of
Gamaliel to the Sanhedrin when he said:
Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if
this counsel or this work be of men, it will be overthrown: but if it is of
God, ye will not be able to overthrow them, lest haply ye be found even to be
fighting against God. (Acts 5:33-39.)
These
three tests had served the nation well for many years, but when false prophets
proliferated at the time of the exile they began to say, (perhaps citing such
works as the book of Daniel), that their prophecies were for a distant time, and
that they were not to be judged by their own generation. This situation created a crisis such as
described in Zechariah 13:1-5 wherein
parents were to slay their own child if he claimed to be a prophet, and Amos was ashamed to be
called a prophet, asking only to be known as a herdsman and gatherer of
sycamore fruit.
The
prophet could not, however, forbear prophesying simply because the people
rejected his message and continued in their sins or ridiculed him. When the Lord told Amos to "Go, prophesy" he went, for "The lion hath roared, who will not
fear? The Lord God hath spoken, who can
but prophesy?"
Ezekiel also was directed
by the Lord to speak "whether they
hear or refuse to hear." Either
way, the time would come when "they
will know that there has been a prophet among them." It was not required that they turn the whole
nation, nor even a majority, to righteousness.
It was only required that those who did heed their words would be turned
from sin.
The
fourth and final proof test of a prophet was that their predictions should not
only be proven true, but be proven true within the generation who
heard the prophet speak the prediction.
The prophet was to give a signal prediction by which he would be
proven. Ezekiel 12:25:
But I the Lord will speak the word which I will speak and
it will be performed. It will no
longer be delayed, but in your days, O rebellious house, I will
speak the word and perform it, says the Lord God. [Emphasis mine.]
It is
in this context that we see the implications of Christ's words concerning the fulfillment of His prediction in
"this generation." Jesus would have been
judged a false prophet if His prediction of the fall of Jerusalem had not happened
within the time frame of the life of the contemporary generation. He offered this as the signal prediction
by which His prophetic calling would be proven.
In this context, the very event of the destruction of Jerusalem was itself a revelation of Jesus
Christ because it proved His prophetic anointing.
Jeremiah had proven to be
a true prophet in his own lifetime when he predicted the fall of Judah and the
destruction of the temple and the Babylonian exile. He was also given a prophecy that the nation
would be restored after an appointed time of 70 years, not an indefinite time which could not be
determined. It was therefore a provable
prediction, one that could not be avoided by saying that it was for some
indefinable future time, even though most or all of his generation may have
passed away.
Daniel had proven to be
a true prophet in his own generation when his interpretation of the
dreams of the kings of Babylon came to pass,
(Daniel 2 through 5). He, too, was given
another prophecy that was not for his generation, but was to be sealed
for an appointed time. (Daniel 7
through 12). Again, this was for an appointed
time, not an indefinite future event.
It was provable, although not in his generation. By the
time of Christ the appointed
time of Daniel's sealed book of prophecy was nearing its
completion. A view consistent with
Scripture is that the sealed book of Revelation 5 and the opening
of the seals in Revelation 6 through 18 portray the fulfillment of
the "time of the end" which
Daniel foresaw, that is, the end of the fleshly nation of Israel, and
their holy city, Jerusalem. Daniel's
prophecy was to be "sealed until the
time of the end," (Daniel 12:9).
That end was to be
at an "appointed time,"
and the book of Revelation begins by saying that that "the (appointed) time is near,"
(Revelation 1:3.)
It was the "end of the age," for the fleshly nation, not the end of the whole planet.[1] This "end" established the pattern for the end of the whole world at some future time. This is consistent with 1Corinthians 10:1-11, that is, that the experiences of the fleshly nation serve as an example to the Church, even to the end.[2]
The end which Daniel foresaw was the end of "your people and your holy city," (9:24). At the time of the end which Daniel saw, (11:40), there would be the "time of trouble" or the "great tribulation," (12:1). Jesus related this "great tribulation" to the time of the destruction of Jerusalem, (Matt. 24, see especially verse 21, "since the beginning of the age [world]," i.e., the age of Israel's national existence; "nor ever shall be," i.e., since the nation was ceasing to exist it would never again endure such a time. Although this is apparent in Jesus' words, we may also refer to the writings of Josephus regarding the Wars of the Jews:
This lesson will be continued next week. It is taken from my book Revelation in Context pages 78-80. Revelation in Context is available at Amazon.com or XulonPress.com or locally at the Living Word Bookstore in Shawnee, Oklahoma. Free downloads are also available at www.revelationincontext.sermon.netThat neither did any other city ever suffer such miseries, nor did any age ever breed a generation more fruitful in wickedness than this was, from the beginning of the world (Wars 5.10.5).[3]
[1] Note that the Hebrew word translated "earth" is also
alternately translated "land."
Therefore, the prophecies concerning the end of the "earth"
may just as well have been translated "land."
[2] Lightfoot, (CNT, vol.
4 pp. 248-9), points out that the blood of the Passover lamb in Exodus was given before the law was established. The blood of the cup which Jesus presented to His disciples was the sanction of
the New Covenant. It marked the end of Judaism. (Emphasis mine.)
[3] The famine that resulted from the siege of Jerusalem caused so many deaths that they could not bury
them (Wars, 5.13.7).
The deaths from the civil war were so great
in the space round about the temple, that it was compared to a cemetery (Wars 6.2.3).
No comments:
Post a Comment