10 Myths in Futurist Eschatology (End Times)

#1) “End of Time” or “The End of Time” is a Biblical teaching?

Neither of these terms appear anywhere in the Bible, nor does this teaching.

Ecclesiastes 1:4 “One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever” This verse says the earth abides or continues forever!

Isaiah 9:7 “Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this

God’s Government, Peace & Kingdom shall never cease to grow, it will increase forever. How does the Kingdom continually grow? When souls pass from this life, to eternity: whether or not this is meant as a spiritual application (when one is born again) or if it refers to our moving on into the Kingdom once we physically die, its’ increase is forever. Increase can not occur unless there is something to increase with (additional souls)

#2) Scripture clearly states through Prophecy, a 3rd Temple must be built in Jerusalem before Christ will return?

I believe the greatest argument used for this is Ezekiel 40-48 however; I see something completely different being mentioned in these chapters. Ezekiel is in the 25th year of the Babylonian Captivity (Ezekiel 40:1) probably around 580-570 BC. Ezekiel is given visions of a Future Temple wherein there will be priests and sacrifices. Why would God order carnal sacrifices to begin again, after Christ came as the ultimate, final, and only spotless, perfect sacrifice?

Most Christians, who profess to know these chapters, really don’t. This is a section of Scripture that requires study for discernment and it’s been my experience that the greater majority of society has the attention span of a gnat. I know I’ll get blasted for such a statement but oh well, my opinion is that, mine.

The most obvious explanation I can see for these chapters is that Ezekiel is being given visions of the Second Temple, which was finished and/or dedicated around 516 BC (50-70 years later) which is said to have been built by or through Ezra, Nehemiah & Zerubbabel who all led different bands of the children of Captivity from Babylon back to Jerusalem after the 70 years was accomplished in Babylon. As life expectancy was not very high in these times; 70 years would have been sufficient to purge out most of those who were held responsible and sent into the Babylonian Captivity. Ezekiel receives these visions 45 years before the captivity would end; roughly, a generation had to pass by.

Some Preterists like to spiritualize (Allegorize) the language and make this a Spiritual Temple; with Spiritual sacrifices, I see no need for this as I believe the language is clearly referring to a Physical Temple, future of Ezekiel but past to us. Many wish to argue “The dimensions used in Ezekiel 40-48 do not line up with other Scriptures (believed to be of the second Temple) and that they also do not line up with the dimensions of Herod’s Temple, which must mean there is yet to be another one built, due to Prophecy. I cordially offer the re-institution of Animal Sacrifices (after the sacrifice of Christ) not to be Biblical Prophecy (Ordained by God) meant to come about after the sacrifice of Christ.

#3) The Great Battle of Armageddon has not been fought yet?

This of course assumes there is a Prophesied Battle in, of or at Armageddon in the Bible; I say this is another misunderstood area of Scripture.

Revelation 16:16 and he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.

This word is formed by joining two Hebrew words “Har or Ar” meaning Hill, Mountain, Mount, Hill Country, etc… and “giddown, megidone or better known as Megiddo” an ancient city of and in Cannan. Scripture mentions Megiddo by name twice: Revelation 16:16 & Zechariah 12:11 neither which mentions a battle taking place there. Revelation simply mentions this is where “they” were gathered together.

Interestingly; History does record a major gathering here “for a battle” (source) “Josephus had recorded how Titus, the Roman General and son of the Emperor, led his troops out of Egypt, north along the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, bypassing the region of Jerusalem, and how he came to the vicinity of Caesarea, bordering Mount Megiddo. Titus and his famous Roman tenth legion waited there for other troops to arrive from beyond the Euphrates River to the northeast and from Rome to the northwest. Once the troops were assembled at Har-megeddon, Titus gave instructions and they marched against the city of Jerusalem” Josephus has been discredited by many but so is anyone who makes statements that stand in opposition to those others make & promote (such as the false belief these things have not yet happened) additional historical records also record this “gathering” but the number of sources is irrelevant if they are all to be discredited.

See also  What is 2nd Wave Feminism?

#4) There’s going to be a New Earth, with no sin or dying?

“New Earth” appears 4 times in Scripture: 2 in the OT; Isaiah 65:17 & 66:22 and 2 times in the NT; 2nd Peter 3:13 & Revelation 21:1. I see no reason to presume these are coincidences and completely irrelevant to one another. Notice what Isaiah says about the New Earth in Isaiah 65:20 “there shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed” Sinning, dying & being accursed in the New Earth?

A New Heaven?

Provided we’re thinking about “Heaven” as in Gods’ home somewhere in the air or out in the Universe, I have questions. What was wrong with the original Heaven? Did God do something wrong to begin with that would merit a New Heaven? Provided Heaven is God’s home, where would God exist in between the doing away with the old and producing the new?

#5) The Resurrection hasn’t occurred yet?

This would also depend upon one’s interpretation, understanding & teaching of just what resurrection is, would it not?

I will readily admit that the majority of the “Church” since the time of Christ believes in Physical Resurrection for all or at least; all believers, since Christ was resurrected physically. Christ is the Messiah, Son of God; His earthly Ministry was not finished until His ascension (40 days after resurrection) and irrespective of all these mitigating factors, 2 possible fates would have awaited the leaving behind of the body of Christ. It would have eventually been destroyed or placed in a Museum.

Resurrection simply defined means life from death and while we do have examples of physical resurrection in the Bible; it is only these examples and the misinterpretation of other Scriptures that are used to propose this Hypothesis as a yet future reality for all people or all believers.

I think Paul sums it up best for me: 1st Corinthians 15:37 “And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be” If you do believe this “body” in this verse relates to our body, it plainly states: “The body you have now, isn’t the same one you’re going to have” Ecclesiastes 3:20 “All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again”

Genesis 3:19 “for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return”

#6) Jesus was/is to return bodily to the earth and establish a physical, earthly kingdom for 1,000 years?

Acts 1:9-11 “And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; which also said, ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven”

Revelation 1:7 “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen”

The section in acts is always centered on this section: “in like manner” What does manner mean? Merriam Webster says it is kind, sort, fashion, custom, style, behavior. What about the Greek word that was translated into “manner”? #5158- tropos and is defined as manner, way, fashion, character, deportment.

Neither the English nor the Greek mentions body, shape, image or even form or likeness but rather they agree that it means manner, way, and/or fashion. This verse doesn’t even come close to mentioning Christ would return in the same body, shape, form or image as he left but rather says He would return in the same manner, fashion or way that He left.

See also  The L.A. Kings Hockey Season Redux: Newbie No More - Coach Change

So I’ll ask: What manner, way or fashion did Christ leave in? “And a cloud received him out of their sight” Christ left in a Cloud; doesn’t Scripture also say He would return with or in the Clouds? Revelation 1:7 Behold, his cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Which brings us to our next point: “The Scripture clearly says, every eye shall see Him” Unfortunately; this is how most introduce this verse, they forget “they also which pierced Him” Didn’t 1st Century people pierce Him in the beating He took: the spikes driven into his hands & feet or how about the Spear that pierced His side? How are 1st Century people supposed to see Him “COMING” when they’re dead? Many try to skirt around this by saying we (mankind) pierced Him with our sins. How would infants born at that moment see Him?

Luke 17:20 “And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation” Most consider “New Jerusalem” to be that Kingdom (the physical city that’s supposed to fall out of the sky one day)? If it comes without observation, why is the futurist Church told to look for it? Didn’t Paul say “The Kingdom is not meat & drink”? (Physical)?

#7) There will be an “End of the/this world”?

“End of this world” appears 1 time in the NT: KJV Bible

Matthew 13:40 “As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.”

“End of the world” appears 5 times in the NT: KJV Bible

Matthew 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.

Matthew 13:49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,

Matthew 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Matthew 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Hebrews 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

The word “World” in all these examples “End of this/the world” comes from the Greek word Aion; # 165 in strong’s and means either eternity, universe or age. Is there an end (cessation) of eternity? Is there an end (cessation) of the universe? Is there an end (cessation) of an age?

The last verse here begs a question: Since we’re still here; 2,000 years later, was Christ born in the end of the world? Or was He born in the end of an age?

#8) Stars are going to fall on the earth?

Revelation 6:13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.

A simple search for the size of stars would disprove this theory: Not the Scriptures, I’d like to be clear on that. I am not disputing Scripture but mans’ understanding of this language. If 1 star hit the earth, the earth would be destroyed, so how are many stars going to fall to or on the earth?

#9) The Millennial reign will last ONLY; and Satan/Devil will be locked away for 1,000 years?

Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Revelation 20:2 and he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

We have Greek words in the NT that properly translate into 2,000 years, 3,000 years, 5,000 years, 7,000 years and even 10,000 years. There is not located in the NT; any phrase as 1,000 years, not even in the original language. These phrases; much like 2nd Peter 3:8 all say (A THOUSAND) when you look it up in the Greek: #5507 chilioi and is clearly defined as “A plural of uncertain affinity” Not a set number but instead represents a period of time; undefined, except as to bring to completion. Consider these 2 verses from the OT.

See also  The Many Benefits of Moving to Colorado

Psalms 50:10 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. Does this say 1,000 hills? Who owns the Cattle on all the other hills?

Deuteronomy 7:9 Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations; Again; does this say 1,000 generations? Is God going to stop keeping Covenant & Mercy with those who love Him after 1,000 generations?

You can’t accept the meaning in one place, but refuse to accept it in another when the context is quite clearly the same thing; this is justifying one’s self and making one’s self, right. Self-Right? Self-Righteousness?

#10) Living Saints will be Raptured/Taken out of the earth?

Proverbs 10:30 The righteous shall never be removed: but the wicked shall not inhabit the earth.

If this verse does not demonstrate symbolic / illustrative / figurative / metaphorical / parabolic / poetic language, I’m completely lost on the Scriptures. The Righteous shall NEVER be removed? Wouldn’t that mean there is and will always be righteous people on the earth? What do we do with the second part? “The wicked shall not inhabit the earth” You mean there’s NEVER been a wicked person living on the planet? No; this word is not inter-changeable with inherit!

John 17:15-20

I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

The typical Futurist who believes in and promotes a Rapture/Taking out of living believers from the earth must believe that this prayer; by Christ, was in vain, dumb, stupid or ignorant. Christ prayed to the Father that He would not take them/believers out of this world. Why? This planet is Gods’ creation and we also are God’s creation. Why would Christ or God not want believers on this planet?

This is by no means an exhaustive list, nor is it meant to provide a complete answer or repudiation of why or how I or others believe as we do in opposition to the majority belief that the “Time of the end, last days, latter days, end times” are yet to occur. Many embrace this belief; many abhor this belief, many embrace Futurism, many abhor Futurism, many enter & leave Preterism, many enter & leave Futurism.

Neither has Spiritually Significant Supremacy over the other in regards to granting, guaranteeing or denying a person’s Salvation. Eschatology-The Study of the time of the end is a secondary issue in regards to Salvation. Preterism & Futurism are simply views of Eschatology. Being secondary doesn’t mean it’s not important: A Preterist’s Eschatology is primarily focused on the very words spoken by Jesus Christ. In most cases; no changes or alterations are needed to properly understand. Futurist’s on the other hand, have 6 primary words or phrases that they have to change or alter to still believe in and promote Futurism.

Shortly, Soon, Near, Now, Nigh, At Hand!

Every verse used by a Preterist to show these events were soon to happen and not 2,000 years later, must be changed, altered or corrected by the Futurist so I ask: Who is changing, adding, altering or taking away from Scripture? The Preterist or the Futurist?