I understand that many people will want to reject this understanding because it is not what the Reformers, or the scholars of their denomination have taught.
Understanding of the End times, will mostly come at the time of the end
Scripture tells me, that the understanding of certain prophecies will remain secret until the time of the end. So no matter how inspired the scholars are, they could not have the understanding of those passages. The closer we get to the fulfilment, the greater the illumination from the Holy Spirit we can expect.
But you, Daniel, keep these words secret and seal the book until the time of the end….Go on your way, Daniel, for the words are secret and sealed until the time of the end.
Daniel 12:4, 9
I believe we are very close to the end.
I believe what I have written here is grounded solidly in interpretation consistent with the Apostles’ methods, and provable by history. I ask that you not cling so tightly to your favourite eschatology, but ask yourself two questions:
- Is this coherent with known historical facts?
- Is this internally consistent with accepted hermeneutics?
Physical fulfilment trumps allegorical fulfilment
You’re hard pressed to find any prophecy that we know the fulfilment of (i.e., Jesus or the Apostles told us), that is purely symbolic, spiritual, or allegorical. The promise of the Messiah was physical reality, not allegorical or spiritual. The return of Christ will be a physical reality according to the angels who told the disciples that Jesus would return in the same manner he had gone.
There are grand traditions, particularly of the reformers, who provided much of the allegorical, spiritual, or symbolic understanding of prophecy that exists today. While I greatly value their contribution, their insight was veiled because the time was not yet. Reformers had no knowledge of many things, such as the return of Israel (yes I know many don’t even believe that a physical Israel matters any longer). So in order to make sense of prophecy, they turned to allegory and spiritual explanations. We have the benefit of much historical knowledge that even the Reformers didn’t have access to.
Unecessary spiritualising or allegorising leads to disbelief
Allegorical, figurative, and symbolic interpretation of prophesy, without clear Biblical precedence or justification, leads to disbelief. For example, if Israel is held to be the “suffering servant” of Isaiah, then Jesus is not the fulfilment. If belief that the second coming of Christ has already happened, it means we disbelieve when we’re told that he will return in the same manner we saw him leave. When we believe that the Abomination of Desolation may be “inside” us, if God intends it to be literal, we miss key signs of Jesus’ return and, in effect, disbelieve God’s word. Overly allegorising, or spiritualising prophecy is dangerous, and can lead to disbelief.
Of course, there is symbolism in prophecy, and figurative explanations. However, if there is a physical fulfillment, that meets the criteria, it is a sign of disbelief to disregard actual fulfilment.
Likewise, holding that there must be a literal fulfilment (as distinct from physical fulfilment), when there is a clear practical symbolic-yet-physical fulfilment, that may also cause you to miss the Messiah, Elijah before the Messiah, etc.
I believe that the most consistent way to interpret Scripture and prophecies for yet future events is to have a similar interpretive style as we have for prophecies that most Christians already agree have been fulfilled.
Some things are clearly symbolic, but usually have an interpretation either in the context or elsewhere.
Translations are not authoritative
English translations are not authoritative. I think it is axiomatic to say that what God actually said, not what translators think it meant, matters. Worse is when we hold onto a poor translation or even translator’s interpretation and take that as literal and insist that this prophecy must be fulfilled exactly as the bad translation of a prophetic text said it should. This is without judgement on the translators, I think they’ve tried to convey the text as they understood it, the fault is on our side, taking what they wrote as authoritative, not what God wrote.
In summary, I want to apply a mostly literal interpretation starting with some key events that we were told to watch for. This is not an exhaustive explanation, but a possible understanding of the fulfillment of prophecy, that I believe is critical to discuss as a Church.
Acknowledgements:
I would like to thank Ellis Skolfield. I read his works many, many years ago, and while I don’t always agree with this reasoning, it opened my eyes the the importance of understanding history. http://www.beholdthebeast.com/contents_tfp.htm and ellisskolfield.com
For understanding Islam, I would like to thank Daniel Scot for his ministry Ibrahim Ministries International, that helps Christians share the gospel with Muslims. http://imi.org.au
Other people who have unknowingly helped me:
Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch
Walid Shoebat
Millard Erikson, especially his small book “A Basic Guide to Eschactology”
Wayen Grudem