The
Promise of His Coming
Clarence Larkin says at the beginning of
his book, “There is no fact in history more clearly established than the fact
of the ‘First Coming’ of Christ. But as
His ‘First Coming’ did not fulfill all the prophecies associated with His
‘Coming,’ it is evident that there must be another ‘Coming’ to completely
fulfill them.” (The Second Coming of Christ, p. 5).
Dr. Tim LaHaye begins one of his books by
calling that promise the “great expectation” (No Fear of the Storm, p.
13). Allen Beechick ends his book by
saying, “The last page of the New Testament leaves ringing in our ears a
prophecy of the coming of Christ” (The Pre-trib Rapture, p. 276).
There can be no doubt whatsoever in the
minds of any unbiased reader that the promise of His coming involves not only
certainty but also the element of speedily occurrence.
“Behold, I come QUICKLY He which
testifieth these things said, Surely I
Come QUICKLY. Amen. Even so, come, Lord
Jesus.” – Rev. 22:7, 20
Indeed, the whole end time events are
expressed in the same promise of quickness,
“The Revelation of Jesus
Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto
his servants things which must
shortly come to pass…things which must
shortly be done….for the time is
at hand.” – Rev. 1:1; 22:6,10
The nature of such a promise led the early
churches to believe that Christ would return very quickly and put down Rome and
set up His kingdom on earth – This was the expectation of the early churches.
This expectation can be seen clearly in the epistles of Paul where he includes
himself as one who expected to be alive to see the coming of the Lord:
“Behold, I shew you a mystery;
WE shall not all sleep, but shall all be
changed” – I Cor. 15:51
Indeed much of the language of the
promise of His coming not only seemed to require a quick return but an any
second expectation – imminence:
“Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye
think not the Son of
man cometh.” – Mt. 24:44
“Watch therefore: for ye know not
what hour your Lord doth come.” -
Mt.
24:42
The Predicted
Scoffers of His Promise
“Knowing this first, that there shall
come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying,
WHERE IS THE PROMISE OF HIS COMING?” – 2 Pet. 3:3-4a
The Holy Spirit instructed Peter
concerning a major concern in the last days. This major concern had to do with
those who would scoff at “the promise of His coming.” The Holy Spirit revealed to Peter the exact reason why these
persons would scoff at the promise of His coming. The exact reason would be
that prior to this period identified as the “last days” long periods of time would intervene between
the giving of that promise and the fulfilling of it. It is this long
intervening period of time that provided the grounds for their scoffing
accusation about the promise of His coming “quickly.”
“And saying, Where is the
promise of his coming? For since the Father’s
fell asleep, all things
continue as they were from the beginning of the
creation.” – 2 Pet. 3:5
They would argue that in spite of
such promises, time continued to march uninterrupted from creation right up to
“the last days” and nothing has happened and therefore nothing will happen in
their own day or after that.
Peter makes two charges of ignorance
concerning the argument of these scoffers.
The first charge of ignorance is aimed at these scoffers while the
second is aimed directly toward Christians.
The scoffers were ignorant concerning
the facts of history. There was an interruption of time between creation and
“the last days.” There was a judgment of God that occurred in the flood. God
came in judgment upon the pre-flood world. Likewise, the implication is that
God will again come in judgment upon this post flood world.
However, Peter directs the second charge
of ignorance against Christians. Christians were partly to blame for the
scoffing that will come in the last days. Christians ignorantly assumed that
the language of the promise was to be understood according to how men count
time.
“But, beloved, be not
ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with
the Lord as a thousand years and
a thousand years as one day. The
Lord is not slack concerning
His promise as SOME MEN COUNT
slackness…” – 2 Pet. 3:8
The Christian would repeatedly assert
before the lost world that Christ promised to come “quickly” and His promise
was reckoned to be imminent. The lost man repeatedly heard this interpretation
by Christians and yet generations would come and go and nothing happen until in
the “last days” the world would scoff at such a promise. Peter blames the Christian for being “ignorant
of this one thing.”
By two swift blows, Peter falls this
twofold ignorance (1) The scoffer is
ignorant of the facts of real history – things have not continued
without interruption since creation;
(2) The Christian is ignorant of “this one thing” that His promise is
not to be interpreted as “some” men count quickness but according to how God
counts it. He counts a thousand years as a day. When counted thus, Jesus has only been gone for a couple of days
whereas with men it has been 2,000 years. Peter prophecies that it will be the
wrong interpretation by Christians that provide the basis for those in “the
last days” to scoff at the promise of Christ’s return.
How the
Promise is to be Counted
The proper expectation can be discovered
by first identifying the improper or wrong view. How do men naturally count such terms as “quickly” and “looking
for” or “watch” or “ye know not when” or “is at hand”?? According to human
counting such terms would naturally be considered the language of “imminency.” Naturally, Christians would be most prone to
understand such language accourding to how men would count such terms. Therefore
according to how men count such terms, the natural expectation that would be
drawn from such language is that Christians expected his return in the first
century. Some Christians at the church
of Thessalonica fell into this same error of human reckoning. Some had stopped working
believing that the promise of Christ’s coming was imminent. Paul replied,
“Now we beseech you, brethren, by
the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ even our gathering together unto him. That
ye neither be shaken in mind….as that the day of Christ is imminent. Let
no man deceive you by any means for that day shall not come, except there come
the apostasy first, and that man of sin be revealed the son of perdition.”
2 Thes. 2:1,2,3 (more literal translation)
Two modern interpretations of “the promise of His coming” make the same mistake as early Christians
did. The Postmillennial theory bases it whole interpretation of the book of
Revelation on the assumption that the language of His promise indicates that
His return would occur in the first century. Indeed, they argue that the
promise of His soon return was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in
A.D. 70 (See The Days of Vengeance by David Chilton). The other prominent theory that makes this
same mistake is the Pretribulational theory. The Pretribulation rapture theory
makes its case on the so-called language of “imminency.” Pretribulational scholars refer to the
language used in “the promise of His
coming” as terms of “imminency” and argue that such language denies anything must prevent His return at any
second from the time He ascended into heaven.
However, the obvious problems to the “any
second” intepretation are so clear in scripture that even one
of the leading Pretrib scholars openly admits that neither Paul nor Peter could
have believed in the Pretrib doctrine of imminency:
“In the first century the concept of
imminency was qualified by certain predictions relating to individuals such as
Peter and Paul. Peter was told that he would die an old man (John 21:18,19).
Paul was informed that he had a great ministry ahead in Corinth (Acts 18:9-11),
which actually continued for eighteen months; for a brief time Paul could
conclude that the rapture would not occur. Later the Lord revealed to Paul in
custody in Jerusalem that he would live long enough to visit Rome (Acts 23:11),
which occurred two full years later (Acts 24:27).” – John F.
Walvoord, The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation, p. 73
Walvoord clearly understood that any necessary
preceding events destroy the idea of Pretrib imminency. How then, does he
manage to get around such obstacles? Walvoord argues that “some events
predicted were not clearly related to the rapture, such as the destruction of
Jerusalem in A.D. 70; at the time of its prediction this event could have
either preceded or followed the rapture” (p. 72). However, he either
forgets or wishes to ignore that Daniel predicted this destruction would not
only occur before the 70th week begins (Dan. 9:26) but that
Christ predicted that the times of the gentiles would continue after
this destruction for a long time before the 70th week began
(Luke 21:24). Walvoord sees the magnitude of such inspired prophecies to the doctrine of imminency. He
tries to make an end run around these difficulties by assuming they are
exceptions to the rule – “no such problem exists today in the doctrine of imminency.”
(p. 73).
As Walvoord rightly admits, Peter did not
expect an imminent return of Christ. Why? Simply because Jesus told him that he
would die before Jesus returned.
“Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When
thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself,
and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but
when thou shalt be old, thou shalt
stretch forth thy hands, and another
shall gird thee, and carry thee whither
thou wouldest not. This spake he,
signifying by what DEATH he should glorify
God…” – Jn. 21:18-19
Notice that when Christ said this to Peter
that he was neither “young” nor “old.” Hence, he was middle aged and knew that
he would grow to be old. Walvoord and other pretribulationalists argue that
“As
far as the church at large was concerned, the information given to Paul and
Peter did not deter their belief in eminency because on a given day few would
know whether or not Paul or Peter were alive, and most of them were not
informed about the predictions” (ibid., p. 73).
However, is this statement by Walvoord
accurate and true to the word of God? John published this statement about Peter
in his gospel and Walvoord assumes that Christians at large didn’t read it?
Peter writes to “to them that have obtained like precious faith” (2 Pet.
1:1) and says,:
“Knowing that shortly I must put
off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord
Jesus hath showed me….after my decease…” – 2 Pet. 1:14,15
His
first epistle was addressed to those “scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia,
Cappadocia, Asia and Bithnynia” (1 Pet. 1:1) but this second epistle is
written to a much wider audience – all
believers. Peter and John
published this personal fact to all Christians near and far and yet Walvoord
claims that nobody but a few knew of it????
Peter realized that Jesus could not
possibly come back prior to his death unless Jesus was a false prophet. Indeed, such preceding prophecies were not
limited to personal applications of individuals as Walvoord attempts to argue.
Immediately after the Lord’s ascension into heaven there were many other such
unfulfilled prophecies that absolutely prevented any expectation of a coming
that NOTHING must precede. (1) Isaiah
had predicted the completion of the Biblical cannon through his apostles prior
to the Lord’s return – Isa. 8:16-18; (2) Jesus had predicted world wide
evangelism prior to His return (Acts 1:8; Mt. 24:15). (3) Isaiah and Jesus had predicted the second return of Israel to
Palestine after the destruction of Jerusalem but before the 70th
week of Daniel during the times of the gentiles (Isa. 11:11; Lk. 21:24). This
return occurred in 1948.
Inspiration says these things “must come
to pass” whereas Pretribbism says NOTHING must come to pass that would prevent
the return of Christ at any second after His ascension into heaven. Peter not only condemns the Pretrib
interpretation of “the promise of His coming” as “ignorance” but he goes on to
show that such language is consistent with NECESSARY PRECEDING events.
“Nevertheless we, ACCORDING TO THE
PROMISE, look for new heavens and a new earth….” – 2 Thes. 2:12
Peter uses what many today call the
“terms of imminency” (“looking for”)
and demonstrates that such terms do not conflict with necessary preceding
events. The new heavens and earth that
Peter is “looking for” are not imminent but nevertheless he is still “looking
for” them in spite of the fact that multitude of necessary preceding events
must occur first before that hope can be realized.
Jesus also uses these so-called terms
of imminence in a context that is consistent with necessary preceding events.
Speaking of His coming which ushers in
the millennial kingdom he says
“wilt thou at this time restore the
kingdom to Israel?…it is not for you to know the times or the seasons,
which the Father hath put in his own power.” – Acts 1:7
This claim that none can know but the
Father is a real problem to Pretribbism as the very same claim is made in
Matthew 24:26 and there the Pretribber demands this claim must mean that Jesus
is speaking of an imminent expectation that cannot be preceded by predicted
events. Yet, here the Lord makes the
same claim about the arrival of the kingdom which is immediately preceded by the tribulation events. In both
places Jesus is speaking of the same kingdom coming. The Pretribber fails to
understand that Christ in both places is only denying that such knowledge is
unknown RIGHT NOW before all these things come to pass which usher the Kingdom
in. However, after these things begin
to come to pass, THEN, all who are watching can know:
“Now
learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and
putteth forth leavens, ye KNOW that summer IS NIGH.
SO LIKEWISE ye, when ye shall see
all these things, KNOW that it is near, even at the doors.” – Mt. 24:32-33
Both Peter and Christ use the so-called
language of imminency to demonstrate that such language is not only consistent
with necessary preceding events but MUST include such events or you are not
really watching for Christ at all.
Therefore to “count” or “reckon” such terms in such a way that necessary preceding prophetic events are ruled out is what
Peter claims to be “ignorant.”
Indeed, such preceding events herald His
coming and thus increase the expectation of the saints just as Jesus says,
“And
when these things BEGIN to come to pass, THEN look up, lift up your heads; for
your redemption DRAWETH NIGH.” – Lk. 21:28
“Nigh” means “near” but not “here” (look
at same word in verse 30). These things
are the signs of the times and thus are encouragements to our expectation. Some of you get paid once a week or once
every two weeks or once a month. Your payday might be a week or two weeks away,
but nevertheless you are LOOKING FOR that day. Sure there are necessary
preceding events (days and work) to that expectation but with the passing of
each day your expectation only increases rather than decreases. Many of us have
had loved ones who have had to go to visit family for several weeks. We look
for their return even though we know exactly what time they will come home. My
point is simply this, preceding events do not lessen our expectation for
something we cherish, indeed, and they only increase our expectation of that
day.
The Biblical expectation for the Lord’s
return is not a any second expectation that denies necessary preceding events.
The Biblical expectation is one that includes all the scriptures and all the
prophecies. The so-called language of imminence is the product of counting time
terms according to human reckoning. Peter condemns this kind of understanding
of such language as ignorance. Such ignorance pits scripture against scripture
as the most ardent of Pretribulationalist is forced to admit:
“In the first century the concept of
imminency was qualified by certain predictions relating to individuals such as
Peter and Paul. Peter was told that he would die an old man (John 21:18,19).
Paul was informed that he had a great ministry ahead in Corinth (Acts 18:9-11),
which actually continued for eighteen months; for a brief time Paul could
conclude that the rapture would not occur. Later the Lord revealed to Paul in
custody in Jerusalem that he would live long enough to visit Rome (Acts 23:11),
which occurred two full years later (Acts 24:27).” – John F.
Walvoord, The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation, p. 73
My friend, if both Peter and Paul could
not have embraced “any secondism” then neither could they have taught such
through their epistles. The problem is that modern interpreters have construed
the language of the second coming in terms of human reckoning and thus the
error of imminence has arisen. However,
such an error was necessary as the prophetic scriptures foretold that in the
“last days” there would be scoffers of the promise of His coming precisely
because Christians would be “ignorant of this one thing.”