An Interpretation of Matthew 24-25 (Part 13)
Dr. Thomas Ice
"Thereforewhen you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Danielthe prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),"
-Matthew 24:15
We have nowreached the midpoint of the tribulation in the chronological progress of thispassage. Christ mentions the keyevent upon which the entire passage turns when He speaks of the abomination ofdesolation. What is He speakingabout?
The Abomination ofDesolation
The key passagesin Daniel that mention the term "abomination of desolation" are Daniel 9:27,11:31 and 12:11. This is atechnical term, which means that it has a precise and consistent meaning in allthree passages. The phrase refersto an act of abomination that renders, in this case, the Temple, somethingunclean. Daniel 11:31 speaks of anact that was fulfilled in history before the first coming of Christ. Dr. John Walvoord explains:
InDaniel 11:31, a prophecy was written by Daniel in the sixth century b. c. about a future Syrian ruler byname of Antiochus Epiphanes who reigned over Syria 175-164 b. c., about 400 years afterDaniel. History, of course, hasrecorded the reign of this man. Inverse 31, Daniel prophesied about his activity: ". . . they shall pollute thesanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shallplace the abomination that maketh desolate." This would be very difficult to understand if it were notfor the fact that it has already been fulfilled. Anyone can go back to the history of Antiochus Epiphanes anddiscover what he did as recorded in the apocryphal books of 1 and 2Maccabees. He was a greatpersecutor of the children of Israel and did his best to stamp out the Jewishreligion and wanted to place in its stead a worship of Greek pagan gods. . . .
Oneof the things he did was to stop animal sacrifices in the temple. He offered a sow, an unclean animal, onthe altar in a deliberate attempt to desecrate and render it unholy for Jewishworship (cf. 1 Macc. 1:48). FirstMaccabees 1:54 specifically records that the abomination of desolation was setup, fulfilling Daniel 11:31. Inthe holy of holies Antiochus set up a statue of a Greek god. . . . In keeping with the prophecy the dailysacrifices were stopped, the sanctuary was polluted, desolated and made anabomination.[1]
Dr. Randall Priceagrees: "In my own study of thephrase in the context of Temple desecration I discovered the phrase served as atechnical reference to the introduction of an idolatrous image or an act ofpagan sacrilege within the Sanctuary that produces the highest level a ofceremonial impurity, Temple profanation."[2]
This passage setsthe pattern and provides details about what the abomination of desolationconsists of. The Daniel 9:27passage says that this abomination is to take place in the middle of a sevenyear period. The passage says, "inthe middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; andon the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate." "In other words, the future prince willdo at that time exactly what Antiochus did in the second century b.c."[3] But Daniel goes on to say that the onewho commits this act will be destroyed three and a half years later. Daniel 12:11 provides "the precisechronology."[4] The text says, "And from the time that the regular sacrificeis abolished, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days."
In addition tothe three passages in Daniel, the two references by our Lord in Matthew andLuke, 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and Revelation 13:14-15 also have this event inview. Therefore, the abominationof desolation, which the reader is to understand, includes the followingelements:
1. It occurs inthe Jewish Temple in Jerusalem (Daniel 11:31; 2 Thessalonians 2:4).
2. It involves aperson setting up a statue in place of the regular sacrifice in the holy ofholies (Daniel 11:31; 12:11; Revelation 13:14-14).
3. This results inthe cessation of the regular sacrifice (Daniel 9:27; 11:31; 12:11).
4. There will be atime of about three-and-a-half years between this event and another event andthe end of the time period (Daniel 9:27; 12:11).
5. It involves anindividual setting up a statue or image of himself so that he may be worshippedin place of God (Daniel 11:31; 2 Thessalonians 2:4; Revelation 13:14-15).
6. The image ismade to come to life (Revelation 13:14).
7. A worshipsystem of this false god is thus inaugurated (2 Thessalonians 2:4; Revelation13:14-15).
8. At the end of thistime period the individual who commits the act will himself be cut off (Daniel9:27).
PreteristMisinterpretation
Predictably, Dr.Kenneth Gentry believes that the famous "abomination of desolation" in Matthew24:15 (cf. Mark 13:14) was fulfilled in the first century destruction ofJerusalem.[5] Even though there are similaritiesbetween the past destruction of Jerusalem and a future siege, there are enoughdifferences to distinguish the two events.
Despite thisspecific information about the abomination of desolation, Dr. Gentry identifiesit as simply the Roman invasion and destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in a.d. 70.[6] Rather than going to Daniel for anunderstanding of what our Lord wanted the reader to understand, Gentry goes toLuke 21:20-22, with a little help from Josephus, to conclude that Christ iswarning of Jerusalem's devastation by military assault, not just the temple'sdesecration by profane acts".[7] Let's see if this interpretationmeasures up to the Biblical explanation concerning the abomination ofdesolation.
An Answer To Preterism
Luke 21:20-24does refer to the a. d. 70destruction of Jerusalem. Therefore, when verse 20 says, "when you see Jerusalem surrounded byarmies, then recognize that her desolation is at hand," it is describing inclear language the destruction of Jerusalem. This is vindicated by the language of the rest of thepassage, especially verse 24: "and they will fall by the edge of the sword, andwill be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampledunderfoot." In context, thedesolation is the destruction of Jerusalem; it is not a technical term relatingto the Temple, as Dr. Gentry suggests.
In contrast, theMatthew 24:15 passage has a context of its own which differs from the Luke account. Matthew says, "when you see theabomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet (notLuke), standing in the holy place." Comparison of the description inMatthew and Daniel with the passage in Luke yields differences, which provethat they are two separate events.
Inthe a.d. 70 destruction ofJerusalem there was . . .
• no image set upin the holy place.
• no worship ofthe image was required.
• nothree-and-a-half year period of time between that event and the coming ofChrist. This is especially truesince the destruction of Jerusalem occurred at the end of the siege byRome. It was over in a matter ofdays. D. A. Carson notes, "By thetime the Romans had actually desecrated the temple in a.d. 70, it was too late for anyone in the city to flee."
• no image came tolife and beckoned men to worship it.
Josephus tells usthat Titus did not want the Temple burned. However, the Roman solders were so upset with the Jews thatthey disobeyed his orders and burned the temple anyway. All Titus was able to do was to go inand tour the holy place shortly before it burned.[9] This does not comport with the biblicalpicture of the image to be set up on the altar in the middle of Daniel'sseventieth week, resulting in cessation of the regular sacrifice and a rivalworship system set up in its place for three-and-a-half years. Dr. Stanley Toussaint says,
Because Christ specifically related the prophecy of theabomination of desolation to Daniel's prophecy, it seems best to see somecorrespondence between the abomination of desolation committed by AntiochusEpiphanes and that predicted by Christ. If this is so it would entail not only defilement on the altar bysacrifices offered with impure hearts, but also an actual worship of anothergod using the Temple as a means for such a dastardly act. Those preterists who agree with thistake it to be the worship of the Roman standards in the Temple precincts. However, if this interpretation istaken, Matthew 24:16-20 is difficult if not impossible to explain. By then it would be too late for thefollowers of the Lord Jesus to escape; the Romans had already taken the city bythis time.
Ifthe abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel 9:27 and 12:11 isforeshadowed by Antiochus Epiphanes (11:31), it would be best to say it is adesecration carried out by a person who sacrilegiously uses the Temple topromote the worship of a god other than Jehovah. This is what is anticipated in 2 Thessalonians 2.
Another majordissimilarity between Gentry's preterism and Matthew 24 is that according toMatthew "neither the city nor the temple are destroyed, and thus the twosituations stand in sharp contrast."[11] The Luke 21:20-24 reference does record the "days ofvengeance" which befell Jerusalem. Let us look at some other details related to the fact that the futurefulfillment of Matthew 24 is one in which Christ delivers the Jews, rather thandestroying them, as in a.d. 70.
First, as Lukeshifts from the a.d. 70destruction of Jerusalem in 21:20-24, to the second coming of Christ in21:25-28, he tells them in verse 28 to "straighten up and lift up your heads,because your redemption is drawing near." This is the language of deliverance from the threat of the nations, notdestruction. This language ofdeliverance is reflected in Zechariah 12-14.[12] These three chapters include threeimportant factors: 1) Jerusalemsurrounded by the nations who are seeking to destroy it (12:2-9; 14:2-7); 2) theLord will fight for Israel and Jerusalem and defeat the nations who have comeup to lay siege against the city (14:1-8); 3) at this same time the Lord willalso save Israel from her sins and she will be converted to Messiah-Jesus(12:9-14).
(To BeContinued . . .)
Endnotes
[1]John F. Walvoord, "Christ'sOlivet Discourse on the Time of the End: Signs of the End of the Age." Bibliotheca Sacra (Vol. 128, Num. 512, Oct-Dec,1971), pp. 318-19.
[2] J. Randall Price, "Historical Problems with aFirst-Century Fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse," in Tim LaHaye and ThomasIce, editors, The End Times Controversy: The Second Coming Under Attack (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2003), p. 387.
[3]Walvoord., "Olivet Discourse," p.319.
[4]Walvoord., "Olivet Discourse," p.319.
[5] Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Perilous Times: A Study in Eschatological Evil (Texarkana, AR: Covenant Media Press, 1999), pp. 22-26.
[6] Gentry in Thomas Ice and Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., TheGreat Tribulation: Past orFuture? Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1999), pp. 47-48.
[7] Gentry in Ice and Gentry, Great Tribulation, p. 47.
[8]D. A. Carson,"Matthew", The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Vol. 8 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984), p.500.
[9]See David Chilton, ParadiseRestored: An Eschatology ofDominion (Tyler,TX: Reconstruction Press, 1985),pp. 274-6.
[10]Stanley D. Toussaint, "A Critique Of The PreteristView Of The Olivet Discourse," an unpublished paper presented to the Pre-TribStudy Group, Dallas, Texas, 1996, n.p.
[11]Walvoord, "Olivet Discourse," p.317.
[12] For more on Zechariah 12-14 and the fact that itwill be fulfilled in the future see Arnold G Fruchtenbaum, "The LittleApocalypse," in LaHaye and Ice, editors, The End Times Controversy, pp. 251-81.