This is a non-WLC article. When using resources from outside authors, we only publish the content that is 100% in harmony with the Bible and WLC current biblical beliefs. So such articles can be treated as if coming directly from WLC. We have been greatly blessed by the ministry of many servants of Yahuwah. But we do not advise our members to explore other works by these authors. Such works, we have excluded from publications because they contain errors. Sadly, we have yet to find a ministry that is error-free. If you are shocked by some non-WLC published content [articles/episodes], keep in mind Proverbs 4:18. Our understanding of His truth is evolving, as more light is shed on our pathway. We cherish truth more than life, and seek it wherever it may be found. |
In a previous post, I shared J. Stuart Russell’s argument against dual fulfillment in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, and Luke 21). Russell argued (well, in my opinion) that neither in Yahushua’s own words nor in the words of any other New Testament author does any teaching appear that supports “a twofold reference in the predictions of Yahushua concerning the end.”
An article written in 2004 by Michael Fenemore goes into even more detail on why the idea of dual fulfillment does not work when it comes to Yahushua’s famous words in Matthew 24:
Some prophecy teachers, while acknowledging a fulfillment of Matthew 24 in the first century, predict a future second fulfillment, but this time, with worldwide implications… We might wonder whether those who promote the double-fulfillment theory ever tested it by reading over the text even once. How could this be fulfilled twice?
This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come (v. 14, NASB).
Will the “great commission” be fulfilled twice? Does “the end” come twice? If it does, then the first one wasn’t the end.
A modern second fulfillment is usually presented as a worldwide catastrophe, but notice verse 20: “…pray that your flight will not be in the winter, or on a Sabbath.” What relevance would this have today? . . . In ancient times, the gates of Jerusalem were shut on the Sabbath, preventing escape (Neh. 13:19, 22; Jer. 17:21, 24). However, this is not a problem for anyone today. Most Christians probably live out their entire lives without ever praying their “flight” will not take place on the Sabbath. Mark’s account adds this: “…be on your guard; for they will deliver you to the courts, and you will be flogged in the synagogues” (Mark 13:9). How could this be fulfilled worldwide in our time? Today’s Sanhedrin has no jurisdiction outside Israel. There are likely very few Christians in the world, if any, who worry about being “flogged in the synagogues.”
Will there be two “great” tribulations? “For there will be greater anguish than at any time since the world began. And it will never be so great again” (Matt. 24:21). Since this anguish would “never be so great again,” how could it occur twice? Some might protest that such language is hyperbolic; it was not intended to be taken literally. Perhaps that is true. But then, the same people should be able to understand that the rest of Matthew 24 is replete with the same Old Testament-style hyperbole. They should not require a second fulfillment because some events did not occur precisely as Yahushua described them.
Yahushua never said Matthew 24 would be fulfilled twice, and there’s no rule anywhere in the Bible saying prophecy should be interpreted this way. The double-fulfillment concept is simply an untenable fabrication created in desperation. It is probably deemed necessary because its adherents expect literal fulfillment of the highly figurative, cosmic predictions in Matthew 24 and other places, which have never occurred (and never will). In some cases, we find types and antitypes in scripture. For instance, Israelite worship under the Old Covenant was a type or “shadow” of things to come under the New Covenant (Col. 2:16-17). However, the New Covenant does not create more shadows for greater fulfillment later. Here is another example of biblical typology:
- Old Testament types: Sodom, Egypt, Babylon
- New Testament antitype: Jerusalem
Sodom, Egypt, and Babylon were probably the three most detestable place names from Israel’s past. To this day, Sodom symbolizes sexual perversion (sodomy). Egypt and Babylon represented sin and captivity. However, by the first century, the sins of Yahuwah’s people, the Jews, had become so appalling that in Revelation, he called Jerusalem by all three names: “…the great city which mystically is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified” (Rev. 11:8); “BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH” (Rev. 17:5). See also Isa. 1:21. It’s possible, if not probable, Yahushua intended to draw the Babylon parallel when he described Jerusalem’s destruction in Matthew 24:
…the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light (v. 29)
The same pronouncement was made against Old Testament Babylon:
The. sun will be dark when it rises. And the moon will not shed its light. (Isa. 13:10)
Jerusalem had become the antitype of Babylon. Jerusalem’s destruction would be the antitype of Babylon’s destruction.
It’s all fulfilled. There is no third fulfillment. The destruction in Matthew 24 is not a type of something in the future; it’s the antitype of something from the past. The New Testament does not create new types requiring future antitypes. Some might consider types and antitypes to be double fulfillment. Still, if a double-fulfillment rule should be applied to all biblical predictions without exception, we should expect two Messiahs, two crucifixions, two judgments, two kingdoms, etc. It gets ridiculous.
Answer: Those who promote the law of double reference cannot show where this “law” is mentioned in the Bible. It is a law only because they say it is, not because of any biblical directive.
|
Many influential Bible teachers spend little time testing the double-fulfillment idea before teaching it to Christians. They routinely predict events that occurred long ago. For instance, some prophecies require a Roman Empire, but since it no longer exists — and hasn’t for over 1,500 years — they predict a “revived” one. However, if they would give up their literal-fulfillment requirements (stars falling from heaven, etc.) and fully accept the first and only fulfillments of New Testament prophecies, there would be no need for any such flimsy double-fulfillment theories, and credulous Christians could be spared a lot of useless speculation.
Objection
Objection: Pastor John Hagee says the double-fulfillment model should interpret prophecy because of “the law of double reference” (John Hagee, From Daniel To Doomsday [Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Inc, 1999], 181).
Answer: Those who promote the law of double reference cannot show where this “law” is mentioned in the Bible. It is a law only because they say it is, not because of any biblical directive.
This is a non-WLC article by Adam Maarschalk.
We have taken out from the original article all pagan names and titles of the Father and Son, and have replaced them with the original given names. Furthermore, we have restored in the Scriptures quoted the names of the Father and Son, as they were originally written by the inspired authors of the Bible. -WLC Team