Rapture: The End-Times Error That Leaves the Bible Behind (18 page)

Yet although various authors chose varying dates as the “
terminus ad quem
” (end) for Daniel’s seventy weeks, virtually all the early Fathers agreed that it must be in some way associated with the fall of the Temple. Although the references can be obscure, some writers seem to have proposed 64 A.D., the year Rome burned. Also mentioned is 54 A.D., the year Nero came to the throne. This is justified, because Nero set into motion the destruction of the Temple. But by far the two most common dates are 70 A.D., the year of its burning, and 67 A.D., the year Rome declared war on Jerusalem.

For our purposes, either of these two dates would be satisfactory, which means that we stand with the majority of the early Church. Since 70 A.D. is the date emblazoned in the minds of most people as the year of the Temple’s destruction, I will refer to that date. Understand, however, that I use the date with intentional flexibility to mean the events of 67 to 70 A.D.

This date, 70 A.D., seems almost forgotten in modern theology. In spite of their differences, the early Fathers understood the importance of 70 A.D. The early-Church Fathers are so clear; it seems hard to believe that rapturists have even read them. Instead, rapturists insert that presumptuous parenthesis for the express purpose of putting the last week into our future.

Appendix One contains a brief survey of those Fathers I am referencing. I think you will agree, after reading the Fathers, that rapturists have no right to jettison the last week of Daniel into the future, especially when it creates some of the other problems in the vision we have already examined.

We are about to explain this vision, one verse at a time, with what I believe is the most consistent Catholic understanding. But first we have to examine the most controversial of the weeks. This is commonly called Daniel’s last or seventieth week. This is the week rapturists propel into the future with the presumptuous parenthesis.

We have already seen that the entire Church unanimously believed that the six benefits of these weeks were bestowed by Christ at His first advent. We have also illustrated that the vast majority of the early Church saw all seventy weeks as completed by 67 to 70 A.D. What we have not mentioned concerns the duration of each of the seasons within this final week. How long is a
shabua
?

Rapturists take each of the seasons as one year. That is how they end up with a seven-year Great Tribulation that they call Daniel’s last week. But the majority of the early Church understood the last week of Daniel (seven seasons) as encompassing seven
decades
, not seven years. Remember, the word
shabua
is like the word
dozens;
it does not designate the duration of the sevens.

Clement of Alexandria is the earliest Church Father to give a clear answer on this issue. St. Jerome informs us that Clement of Alexandria included in his seventy weeks “the reign of Vespasian and the destruction of the Temple.” Because Clement also included Christ, this last week must include more than seven years
(CID)
.

Origen was a student of Clement and is the key to Clement’s thinking on the seventieth week. Origen makes it explicitly clear that he believes the last week of Daniel does not refer to years, but to decades. He also went to great lengths to demonstrate that the beginning of the Temple’s destruction was half a week (thirty-five years) after Pentecost. This was because Origen understood Pentecost as the moment in the last week when the “strong covenant” of Daniel was confirmed (verse 27). He understood Pentecost to be about thirty-seven years before the Temple’s destruction. This would mean that the seventieth week of Daniel approximately spans the period from Christ’s birth to the assault on the Temple in 67 A.D. Halfway through are the events surrounding the Passion, the Resurrection, and the birth of the Church.

If Origen followed his teacher, which seems likely, we can now understand how Clement would include Christ, Nero, and Vespasian in these seven decades. The fact that Clement never explains this may indicate that this understanding was widely accepted in his day. This also harmonizes with what we have already learned: virtually the entire early Church understood the end of the seventieth week as no later than 70 A.D.

The Epistle of Barnabas already exhibits this view of the last week of Daniel (see Appendix
One
). “When
the week
is completed, the Temple of God shall be built in glory in the name of the Lord.… This is the spiritual Temple built for the Lord” (
EOB
, 16:6). This passage refers to the building of the Church. “The week” is Daniel’s final week, which contained the time of covenantal transition between the Old and New Covenants. The Incarnation, the Passion, the Resurrection, the Ascension, Pentecost, and even the judgment of 70 A.D. were all essential to building the Church. These events took seven decades, not seven years to unfold.

Eusebius wrote the first comprehensive Church history. Rapturists fail to notice his assertion that most of the early Church accepted the final week of Daniel as seven decades rather than seven years. “
Most authorities
extend the one [last] week of years to the sum of
seventy years
, reckoning each year as a ten-year period. They also claim that thirty-five years intervened between the Passion of the Lord and the reign of Nero, and that it was at this latter date when the weapons of Rome were first lifted up against the Jews” (cited in
CID
).

The authorities Eusebius refers to were obviously from before his time. They probably included Barnabas, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen, along with undoubtedly many others whose writings are no longer extant. Eusebius minces no words. “Most authorities” in the early Church held a position that was straightforward and easy to understand: the last week of Daniel encompassed seven decades, not seven years.

Yet this seems to be forgotten today. Even many well-educated Catholics assume that the final tribulation of the Church must last seven years. This is simply never taught in Scripture nor by the Church.

We are now ready to examine the vision verse by verse. This insight into the final week will enable us to understand the other sets of weeks of Daniel as well. As we will see, Daniel’s first set of sevens (seven weeks) is also best understood as forty-nine decades, not forty-nine years. The middle set of sevens (sixty-two weeks) is best understood as 434 years.

The vision starts with a summary of how many seasons will be under consideration: seventy weeks, or seventy times seven. The first mention of the seventy weeks does not point to years or decades. They are only a signal of how many “seasons” must transpire to bestow the six blessings. They carry the symbolic importance of the numbers
seven
and
ten
(GR2).

As we have noted, these blessings were all gained for God’s people at Christ’s first advent. The sixth blessing speaks of anointing a most holy. The Hebrew does not make it clear whether this is a person, place, or thing. The most straightforward understanding is to take every mention of “anointed” in this vision as a reference to the Messiah. That is what the word
Messiah
means, “anointed one.” The coming of the Messiah during the seventy weeks is one of the blessings.

The second half of verse 24 gives the reader a specific length of time before the “anointed one, a prince” arrives on the public scene. That length of time is “seven weeks” (forty-nine seasons). Again, the simplest method of understanding this vision is to take both the last set and this first set of seven weeks as decades. This would mean that the duration before the Messiah’s arrival would be seven times seven (forty-nine) decades. This would, of course, span 490 years. But when does the clock start ticking?

The vision declares that the time line starts with a decree “to restore and build Jerusalem.” In 538 B.C., Cyrus decreed the rebuilding of the Temple (Isa. 44:26–28, 45:1–4; Ezra 1:2–4). Darius issued a second decree in 520 B.C. (Ezra 6:3–12), and in that year the people started to rebuild the Temple in earnest under Zerubbabel.

But both decrees have the same problem. They do not mention the rebuilding of
Jerusalem
, but only the reconstruction of the Temple. A decree allowing the building of the Temple (for spiritual worship) is one thing. Allowing the building of a city with walls (for political protection) is another issue entirely. The building of the Temple might be included in the building of the city, but not vice versa.

Finally, King Artaxerxes of Persia issued a decree to rebuild the city of Jerusalem in about 457 B.C. (Ezra 7:11–26). This is the decree for which we have been waiting. The beginning point for Daniel’s seventy weeks of seasons is therefore 457 B.C., since it is the initial “word to restore and build Jerusalem.”

If we take the beginning of this seven weeks to be years, they end in the middle of nothing, around 408 B.C. But if we understand these sevens to be decades, as a complement to the Church’s clear understanding of Daniel’s last week, then this first segment makes perfect sense. The first set of seven weeks denote the forty-nine decades from 457 B.C. to 32 A.D. This spans the time from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem to the public arrival of the Messiah, the Anointed One. The prophecy certainly matches history well! Scholars now estimate that the public ministry of Jesus occurred sometime between 25 and 33 A.D.

We now encounter the second set of weeks, sixty-two times seven seasons. Rapturists insist that these weeks must follow chronologically after the first set of seven weeks. But this is not necessary (GR8). In fact, the text itself argues against that understanding. The vision states that the actual building of Jerusalem will span this second set of weeks. This means that the beginning point of the second set of weeks is not the end of the first set, but whenever the building project actually began.

Did the building start immediately in 457 B.C.? No, history is clear that it did not. While the decree to rebuild Jerusalem was first issued in 457 B.C., Nehemiah received word from Jerusalem several years later. “The wall of Jerusalem is broken down, and its gates are destroyed by fire” (Neh. 1:3). Nehemiah asked Artaxerxes to write another decree between 446 and 444 B.C. (Neh. 2:3–13). The actual rebuilding of Jerusalem began around 444 B.C., which makes this the beginning of the sixty-two weeks.

If we count this middle segment as years, we find that this segment ends in 10 B.C. That certainly meets one of the criteria for this second segment mentioned in the next verse (26): it must end before the Messiah is cut off.

This understanding also fits history exceedingly well. The 434 years from 444 to 10 B.C. saw plenty of “troubled times” for Jerusalem. During Nehemiah’s rebuilding project, the threat was so imminent that the construction workers labored with weapons at their sides. By 400 B.C., the controlling political force in Jerusalem was the priests, but they found themselves beholden to a series of conquerors. First the Persians, then Alexander the Great, then the Ptolemies of Egypt, and then the Seleucids of Syria conquered Jerusalem. Around 168 B.C., the priestly dominance was challenged by the Syrian king, Antiochus Epiphanes. In his effort to minimize Roman influence, he profaned the Temple with the sacrifice of swine to the Greek god Zeus Olympios (1 Macc. 1:44–59). The Jews rose in rebellion. By 165 B.C., the priestly family of the Hasmonians had prevailed in the war, and the Temple was reconsecrated by Judas Maccabee. The Jewish nation won complete independence by 142 B.C.

But any sense of tranquility was short-lived. The two competing Jewish groups we read about in the Gospels, the Pharisees and Sadducees, fought over religion and power. Their infighting enabled Pompey to conquer Jerusalem with a Roman army in 63 B.C. In 54 B.C, he sacked the Temple. At this point, the Temple had not been destroyed, but it was certainly not in functional shape. In fact, there was hardly a moment in these four centuries when Daniel’s description “troubled times” did not fit Jerusalem’s situation.

But this ruin of a Temple that Zerubbabel had built was not the one Jesus entered during His first advent. In 37 B.C., the Romans installed Herod the Great as king of the Jews. He initiated a massive reconstruction project on the Temple in 20 B.C. Everyone agreed this was still the second Temple, the Temple of Zerubbabel, being finally completed for glory (
AJ
, XV, 11).

Herod really outdid himself. This construction project enlarged the Temple greatly. While annexes and adjoining buildings were still under construction until about 63 A.D., Herod’s Temple, the culmination of Zerubbabel’s efforts, the Temple of Jesus’ day, was in fact finally completed in a peaceful, protected, and rebuilt Jerusalem by about 10 B.C. (The Jews who spoke of a forty-six-year project in John 2:20 were including the annexes and adjoining buildings.) You couldn’t ask for a more accurate, historical fulfillment of Daniel’s middle sixty-two weeks of seasons. They began in 444 B.C. and ended in 10 B.C., 434 years (sixty-two weeks) later.

Now it becomes clear why the Jews of Jesus day were so overwrought with Messianic anticipation. They knew that Daniel’s time line pointed to their generation. The Temple had been completed in 10 B.C. The forty-nine decades of the first set of weeks ended around 32 A.D. So where was the Messiah?