The origin of today’s teaching on rapture is a perverted reading in the Biblical book of Daniel at 9:24-27. It is, in short, a refusal to accept a literal consecutive seventy time periods, all the while insisting upon literal interpretations elsewhere in Scripture. Let us observe, so that we are not deceived.
Specifically, the reasoning is that thousands of years span between the 69th and 70th weeks in these verses. This is one of the key assumptions required for dispensationalism to “work” as a complete system of belief on the end times. This interpretation goes hand-in-hand with several other important underpinnings within dispensationalism:
1. An assumption that the Biblical book of Revelation depicts unfulfilled prophecy of a future tribulation awaiting the church leading up to the rapture. For highly intellectual counter reading, I recommend Vic Reasoner’s books and sermons on Revelation as he handily uses Scripture, historical accounts, and facts to demonstrate that most of the prophecy in Revelation has already been fulfilled. Daniel, for example, does not look beyond the destruction of the temple and fall of Jerusalem, which Vic Reasoner handily asserts is foretold in detail in Revelation. Note also that Christ in Matthew 24:34 says, “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” Obviously, Christ has not yet returned, yet an untold number of generations have passed away since Matthew 24:34. “These things” seem to then be expounded upon in Revelation. Contrary to popular opinion, there does not appear to be any discussion in Matthew on the second coming of Christ until 26:64.
2. A multi-phased return of Jesus Christ, beginning with the rapture of the church and ending with Israel being brought into the kingdom of heaven, with great tribulation in the middle. This view seriously detracts from the glory of Christ, as if His glory is insufficient or so minimal that His appearance will not then immediately end time as we know it. 2 Peter 3:1-11, Revelation 20:7-10 Again, do we deny that Scripture is God-breathed and without error? If we do, such a view on the rapture is simply incompatible with Scripture.
3. A disconnection of the Old Testament from the New Testament such that Israel and the church continue to remain two separate and distinct entities. We have already discussed the reasons why this assumption is problematic.
In today’s post, we will review the first assumption underpinning dispensationalism. Our goal in this series of posts will be two-fold. First, the aim is to help you, the reader, identify teachings which do not conform to a comprehensive understanding of Scripture. Within this framework, the aim is to also help you, the reader, lean more on the Holy Spirit for a more full and rich understanding of the Word of God as we have it in the Bible.
Second, the aim will be to help explain part of the bigger picture behind current events involving the United States and Israel.
2 Timothy 4:3-4 “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.”
The dispensationalist’s view of the world begins in Daniel 9:24-27. There, if we hold certain unquestioned assumptions and ignore Scriptural contradictions, we would come away with the understanding that many thousands of years will elapse before the conclusion of the 70 weeks.
I submit to you that this is not that much different than the separate claims that Daniel is fictional and should not be part of the Biblical canon. All such claims have since been disproved through archeological digs which helped to answer questions intended to cast doubt on the authenticity of Daniel both as a historical figure and as a Biblical book.
Both Darby and Scofield, as well as those who have followed them, believed in a “literal” interpretation of Biblical prophecy. I issue just one caution in response, which is that we will lose our way very quickly if we alternate between literal and figurative readings of Scripture, especially of prophecy. The entire book of Revelation is a very good example.
However, as Vern Poythress points out (https://faculty.wts.edu/lectures/understanding-dispensationalism/), literal has a very limited meaning within dispensationalism. Thus, they would not take “week” in Daniel to be a literal 7-day week, for this would undermine their entire argument. Oh boy, we’re already off track. You see, when we take some things literally and others figuratively, we quickly lose our way. This is strike one against the dispensational teachings as a whole.
A more correct reading of Daniel chapter 9 is that a week represents 7 years and the prophecy encompasses the entire span of time leading up to a climax, consisting first of the Messiah and secondarily the institution of the new covenant. Using this approach, we can see how the fall of Jerusalem fits very well in the prophecy. There is no viable support for any other interpretation of the 70 weeks in Daniel chapter 9. This understanding of Daniel was also accepted in mainstream theology until the time of John Nelson Darby in the 1830s.
The thrust in Daniel chapter 9 is the coming Messiah and the installment of the new covenant. This is yet another strike against dispensationalism because in dispensationalism there is very little reverence for the significance of the new covenant, at the center of which is Christ. Many of the tangential teachings within dispensationalism wind up disputing the authority of Jesus Christ, which is a no-go for any serious Christian.
Like this post? Subscribe to stay up to date on new posts.