Author of “The Little Book of Revelation.” Get your copy now!!https://www.xlibris.com/en/bookstore/bookdetails/597424-the-little-book-of-revelation
447 posts
The First Coming Of Christ At The End Of Days: The Revelation Of Prophecy In 1 Peter And The Present-Day
The First Coming of Christ at the End of Days: The Revelation of Prophecy in 1 Peter and the Present-Day Anachronism of Revelation 12
By Author Eli of Kittim 🎓
In Revelation chapter 12 verses 1 to 10 there is a sequence of events that we, as interpreters, cannot disentangle without creating a bizarre anachronism as well as a great deal of confusion. The prevailing view presents this extraordinary sequence of events by going back and forth through time. This is called anachronism. In other words, a woman is about to give birth to the Messiah (“She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth” Rev. 12:2), “and behold, a great red dragon having seven heads and ten horns” (Rev. 12:3) stands “before the woman that is about to be delivered, that when she is delivered he may devour [kill] her child.” (Rev. 12:4). Even though scholars rightly interpret this seven-headed dragon as the last future empire on earth (cf. Rev. 17.7-18), and although these events are described sequentially and appear to be contemporaneous—nevertheless—they inexplicably juxtapose two ages that couldn’t be further apart from each other in order to explain what is being depicted here. That is, the current view holds that Revelation 12:1-5 refers to the Messiah’s birth, 2000 years ago, even though the seven-headed dragon represents a future empire. In short, scholars are erroneously juxtaposing the future with antiquity: the woman gives birth and the seven-headed dragon appears—then we jump back 2000 years, when he tries to kill Jesus—and then we jump forward in time when “the Devil … was cast down to the earth” (Rev. 12:9) to gather the nations for battle (cf. Rev. 20:8): “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels going forth to war with the dragon” (Rev. 12:7). This type of anachronistic interpretation—going back and forth through time—is outrageous and represents a most precarious solution to Revelation chapter 12.
The sequence is clearly linear, and the events being depicted are consistent and contemporaneous. This is how we know that the entire sequence is linear—culminating in the future—because it reads:
“Then I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, “Now the salvation, and the power, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down.” (Rev. 12:10).
This means that the entire sequence is set in the future because that is when God’s Kingdom “and the authority of His Christ have come”! You can’t have all the events occurring in the future and then conveniently cherry-pick one event (the Messiah’s birth/death) and set it in the past. It’s either all or nothing. Either they’re all future or they are not. The current anachronistic interpretation is inane! It not only unravels the sequence and disentangles it from its future perspective, it also juxtaposes two different ages of history that have absolutely nothing to do with each other, let alone their total inconsistency with regard to this particular sequence of events.
The first coming of Jesus at the end of Days (cf. Hebrews 1:1-2, 9:26) is the only view that makes any sense with regard to the prophecy of Christ’s birth in Revelation 12:5. And that is my view! It is consistent with Zechariah 12:9-10 which says that “In that day … they will look on Me whom they pierced.” Otherwise, we are once again engaging in anachronism if we understand Zechariah’s passage to mean that those who pierced Jesus 2000 years ago will look at him “in that [future] day.” It is utter nonsense!
1 Peter 1:3-13 is one of those passages that need to be studied thoroughly. For it is quite clear that the first coming of Jesus is a future event:
“Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade. This inheritance is kept in heaven for you, who through faith are shielded by God’s power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. In all this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. These have come so that the proven genuineness of your faith—of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire—may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed. Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, for you are receiving the end result of your faith, the salvation of your souls. Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow. It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things. Be Holy Therefore, with minds that are alert and fully sober, set your hope on the grace to be brought to you when Jesus Christ is revealed at his coming.” (1 Peter 1:3-13).
Notice that Jesus Christ is revealed at his coming—not at his second or third coming, but at his coming—which occurs “hapax” or once and for all (Hebrews 9:26). No one who has studied the above passage from 1 Peter can come away thinking that it refers to the past. You can study it for yourselves. Notice that 1 Peter 1:7 exhorts us to have faith so that we are ready “at the revelation of Jesus Christ,” which "apokalifthinai en kairo eshato” or is “revealed in the last days” (1 Peter 1:5). Moreover, observe that “the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow” are PROPHECIES or PREDICTIONS (1 Peter 1:10-11)! Notice also that the evangelists “preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven” (1 Peter 1:12)—not by historical reports! This passage tells you unequivocally that the revelation of Jesus—including his sufferings and glory—are for an appointed time in the future:
"For it is the Spirit of prophecy who bears testimony to Jesus.” (Rev. 19:10)
Conclusion
The real question is whether the birth of Jesus in Rev. 12.5 is referring to antiquity or to the end of days. The interpretation is actually very simple. The birth of the male child is obviously contemporaneous with the 7-headed dragon with 10 horns because it is said that “the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bear a child, so that he might devour her child [kill him] as soon as it was born” (Rev. 12.4 NRSV)! If the 7-headed dragon with 10 horns & the male child were NOT contemporaries, then this verse wouldn’t make any sense whatsoever because how could something that doesn’t exist kill the child? So, it’s quite obvious that the child & the 7-headed dragon with 10 horns are contemporaries. That is to say, they exist at the same time.
So, there’s only one question left: what is this 7-headed dragon with 10 horns? The answer is given by Scripture itself. It is the seventh and final empire (or superpower) on earth with 10 kings that will wage war on Jesus Christ at the end of days (see Revelation 17.7-14): https://www.biblestudytools.com/nrs/revelation/17.html
If the male child is in fact contemporaneous with the end-times-7-headed dragon with 10 horns, and it is (according to Rev. 12.2-6), then the male child could not have possibly been born in antiquity but rather at the end of days! That’s the clue that the birth of Jesus occurs in “the fullness [or completion] of time” (Gal. 4.4; Eph. 1.9-10), or in the “last days” (Heb. 1.2), otherwise known as “the end of the world” (Heb. 9.26b KJV) or “the final point of time” (1 Pet. 1.20 NJB)! Therefore, the evidence is both robust & compelling! It is indisputable!
More Posts from Eli-kittim
Biblical and Extra-Biblical Prophecies About the Year of the Coming Messiah
By Author Eli of Kittim
“If you shall see kingdoms rising against each other in turn, then give heed and note the footsteps of the Messiah.” —Bereshit Rabbah XLII: 4
“Each of the world’s major religions contain Messianic prophecies. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, the Zoroastrian religion and even the Native American religions all foretell the coming of a Promised One.” (Joel Smith).
Astoundingly, both the biblical and extra-biblical prophecies concerning the coming Messiah seem to converge in the 2010 decade: the Mayan (their twenty-six-thousand-year cycle ended in 2012), the Sikh (in which, according to Sakhee 15th, the avatar or god man is said to appear around the year 2015), Rabbi Yitzchak Kaduri’s prophecy (according to which the messiah will appear within a year of Ariel Sharon’s death—or 2015); Malachy’s prophecy of the 112 Popes (Pope Francis being the last, according to experts, who was inducted in 2013); Daniel’s Seventy-Weeks prophecy (in which Messiah is said to appear seventy years after the restoration of Israel: 1948+70=2018); Vilna Gaon’s prophecy (which predicts the Russian invasion of Crimea (2014) as a sign of the coming Messiah); Judah Ben Samuel’s prediction of the Messiah appearing by 2017); and the Four Blood Moons that fall on Jewish holy days (apocalyptic omens that culminate in 2015)!
Here are the links to explore some of these prophecies in more detail:
1) Vilna Gaon: The Russian invasion of Crimea (2014) is a sign of the coming Messiah https://seeker401.wordpress.com/2014/03/29/vilna-gaon-the-russian-invasion-of-crimea-is-a-sign-of-impending-redemption/
2) Judah Ben Samuel (Messiah will come by 2017). http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/12th-century-rabbi-predicted-israels-future/
3) Malachy’s prophecy (Ends in 2013) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxw4S7xGXMg
4) RABBI YITZHAK KADURI: THE MESSIAH WILL APPEAR SHORTLY AFTER ARIEL SHARON'S DEATH (in other words, sometime around 2015) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwN1QXDujp0
5) Four Blood Moons (End in 2015) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrObwDtYBrg
To sum up, both the biblical and extra-biblical prophecies indicate that the latter half of the 2010 decade is of extreme importance to all the inhabitants of the earth because it is during this time that the Messiah will appear to elevate our consciousness and transform the world. There is overwhelming evidence that the 2010 decade is the Messianic decade, as we are told in one prophecy after another! Apparently, we are the messianic generation that the prophets of old longed to see. The signs are everywhere:
"But as for you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal up the book until the end of time; many will go back and forth, and knowledge will increase." Daniel 12:4
#The_Jesus_Prophecy
By Author Eli of Kittim
There are some who clearly misinterpret and misrepresent my view. I never said, as some have claimed, that “the Gospels are just figments of the writers’ imagination,” or that they “are just made up stories.” On the contrary, they have their rightful place in the Bible, provided we understand what that role and function is. Actually, the gospels present an overview of Jesus’ life, not through biographical data, but rather through stories that are filtered down from the Old Testament. And they are inspired by God! They tell of the Messianic story in advance, so that it can be passed down from generation to generation until the time of its fulfillment. In my view, the gospels are true, not historically, but theologically, or, as I would argue, prophetically! What we have is, the Messiah’s history written in advance in story form.
What is the difference between my view and the classical Christian perspective? I am convinced that there are not multiple comings and multiple returns of Christ, but only one decisive coming at the end of the world, which includes the resurrection, the rapture, and his appearance in the sky! If there truly was an incarnation, a cross, a death, a burial, a resurrection, and ascension of Jesus two thousand years ago—then we’d have to tear many pages out of the Bible that directly contradict the Jesus of Antiquity. For example, we’d have to throw out Luke 17:30; 1 Pet. 1:5, 20; 1 Cor. 15:22-26, 54-55; Heb. 1:1-2; Heb. 9:26; 2 Tim. 2:18; Rev. 6:2; Rev. 12:1-5; Rev. 19:10-13; Rev. 22:7, 10, 18, 19, not to mention many Old Testament (OT) passages, such as Zeph. 1:7, 15-18; Isa. 2:2, 19; Isa. 9:6; Isa. 34:8; Isa. 63:4; Zech. 12:9-10; Dan. 12:1-4, and so on. Even the gospels themselves imply that the New Testament (NT) account of Jesus is prophetic. In Jesus’ own words, his presence on earth (which includes his passion and death) signifies the end of the world, and the commencement of the Day of Judgment:
“Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out.” —John 12:31.
In Acts 1:6, a book often referred to as the fifth gospel, there is a terse passage in which Jesus’ coming is associated with the restoration of Israel (1948). Compare that to Daniel chapter 9 and verses 24-27 (the so-called 70-week prophecy) where Daniel also prophesies the death of the Messiah after the restoration of Israel. Israel’s restoration is in fact prophesied in many places of the Old Testament, most notably in Ezekiel 38:8!
In Luke 17:20-27 Jesus offers a discourse on the end of days in which he implies that his own passion and death are set for an appointed time in the future:
“Now having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, ‘The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst. And He said to the disciples, ‘The days will come when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. They will say to you, ‘Look there! Look here!’ Do not go away, and do not run after them. For just like the lightning, when it flashes out of one part of the sky, shines to the other part of the sky, so will the Son of Man be in His day. BUT FIRST HE MUST SUFFER MANY THINGS AND BE REJECTED BY THIS [implied, future] GENERATION. And just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: they were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.” (Emphasis added).
Notice that during his discourse on the end of days, the Jesus character of the gospels promulgates a prophecy which most scholars attribute to his second coming: “For just as the lightning, when it flashes out of one part of the sky, shines to the other part of the sky, so will the Son of Man be in His day” (Luke 17:24). What is surprising, however, is that this omen is then expanded by a most intriguing appendage to the previous verse: “But first He must suffer many things” (17:25). In other words, while “the literary Jesus” is predicting his supposed second coming, according to the common view, this terse statement shockingly reveals that his incarnation must necessarily precede his coming from the sky! And since the entire prophecy is set in the future, the sentence pertaining to Christ’s suffering and rejection “by this [chronologically implied] generation” cannot possibly be understood in any other context except as a reference to a future event. Otherwise we would be dislocating this sentence from the end times setting of the prophecy, thus creating a bizarre anachronism. After all, Jesus prophesies that a long time will pass before we behold “the Son of Man” (Luke 17:22), an idiomatic phrase that is deeply tied to his incarnation (cf. Ps. 8:4; Ezek. 2:1; 12:27; Matt. 9:6; 17:9; 24:44; Gal. 4:4). As a matter of fact, Luke continues by saying that “the Son of Man is revealed” for the first time in the last days (Luke 17:26-30). Thus, the latter portion of the oracle paints Christ’s coming in a very different light and calls for a reexamination of scripture. It sets the prophetic timeline in its proper chronological perspective as it supplies fresh new insights into the future incarnation of Christ: what ought to be called, “the first coming of Jesus!”
The under mentioned verses cannot be understood apart from this future context:
“Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all things be accomplished.” — Luke 21:32.
But which generation is Jesus referring to? Answer: the last one! These verses only make sense within a future context, the implication being that Jesus’ contemporaries are part of the last generation on earth:
“Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.” —Mark 9:1.
If the gospels were historical, then we would have expected Paul to reference at least some of the purported events. Yet there is complete silence from Paul with regard to the gospel narratives. Paul never once mentions Jesus’ birth, the virgin birth, or Bethlehem as his birthplace, the flight into Egypt, the slaughter of the innocents, the Magi, the star of Bethlehem, etc. Paul does not mention this gospel material at all! Why? Paul had many revelations from God and knew about the true mystery of Christ. He knew that we are saved by faith in Jesus’ death and resurrection, which would take place “Once in the end of the world” (Heb. 9:26-27).
Read 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 again. Paul implores us not to be deceived by any rumors claiming that Jesus has already appeared, as though the day of Christ had come! Contrary to popular belief, Paul’s disclaimer insists that these conventions are divisive because they profess to be biblically-based, as if from us, even though this is not the official message of scripture. That is why there is a prophecy of Jesus’ incarnation in Revelation 12:1-5!
Similarly, 1 Peter 1:10-11 tells us unequivocally that the NT writers (prophets) “PREDICTED [or prophesied] the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow” (Emphasis added). Otherwise, Philippians 3:20-21 would not say, “We eagerly wait for a savior, the Lord Jesus,” if he had already come! Hence why we find an explicit verse that introduces us to “The Revelation of Jesus Christ” in Revelation 1:1. And that is why we await the white horse of Rev. 6:2 (who is Christ) with such eager anticipation (cf. Rev. 19:11). The previous verse (Rev. 19:10) tells us that the Jesus account is not historical, but prophetic! Revelation 22:7, 10, 18, and 19 further reiterate that this book is all about prophecy, lest we disregard it as nothing more than a historical composition of its time. In fact, the entire New Testament can be summed up in three words: The Jesus Prophecy!
If we read Isaiah 53:1-9, we would swear that this passage refers to past history, and that Isaiah is recounting an event which occurred before his time. For his verses are saturated with past tenses: “He was despised and rejected by mankind”; “Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering”; “But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities,” and so on. But, surprise, surprise! Despite all of the past tenses, it’s a prophecy that Isaiah is writing about! This passage teaches us that a) past tenses in the Bible do not necessarily reflect past history, and that b) prophecies themselves could equally be set in the past. That is why biblical events are assumed to have taken place – since the authors often use past tense to describe them – even though these events contain prophetic import concerning the future.
If you think that a surface reading of the gospels will give you understanding, you are deeply mistaken:
“The disciples came to him [Jesus] and asked, ‘Why do you speak to the people in parables?’ He replied, ‘Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.’” —Matthew 13:10-11.
Some refer to Galatians 4:4 about Jesus being incarnated during the so-called “fulness of the times,” but they fail to mention that this same idiomatic phrase is defined in Ephesians 1:10 as the end of the world, “that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things upon the earth.” So, if you think you have it all figured out, think again. In the deepest sense, the Bible is not meant to be interpreted, but rather revealed! Whether you know it or not, the Bible is still a mystery:
“But you, Daniel, keep these words secret and seal the book until the time of the end.” —Daniel 12:4.
A Retelling of the Jesus Story http://www.amazon.com/Little-Book-Revelation-First-Coming/dp/1479747068/ref=la_B00FWAVSMC_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1414502907&sr=1-1
What the Gospels Are, and What they are Not
By Author Eli of Kittim
Some of my readers have not fully understood my position regarding the gospels because they have not read my book, and therefore do not know the extent of these teachings. As a result, they have voiced their disagreement with my position. But in order to conclusively reject my view on the grounds that it fails to be supported by scripture, certain criteria must be met. However, based on some of my debates, their initial grounds for dismissal are often based on erroneous premises, such as tradition or dogma, conjecture and hearsay. At any rate, whatever it is that they think of my view is patently wrong because they haven’t yet grasped the gist of it. For example, I never said or implied that the gospels are made up stories, or that they were invented or manufactured by the writers themselves. Never was I so bold as to say that the gospels are superstitious myths, or the work of pure fiction with no basis in reality. If this is what some of my readers think, they couldn’t be further from the truth.
So, in my defense, let me explain what the gospels are, and what they are not.
1) I believe that the Gospels were verbally inspired by God (known as “Verbal Plenary Inspiration”). This means that every word of the gospels is God-given (“Plenary” means that the gospels are therefore fully authoritative). A side note: This means that it's not just the gospels, but scripture as a whole is authoritative over tradition or dogma. It means that all church tradition must be subordinated to the authority of Scripture. One of those dogmas that we inherited from the church was that the story of Christ happened in history (presumably from their literal interpretation of the gospels). But unless we check it against scripture, we will never know the validity of this dogma.
2) I also believe that in order to form valid conclusions, we must cross-reference between the gospels and the epistles to make sure that the account of Jesus is the same in all these texts and does not vary or present any major problems, especially with regard to chronology (i.e. the timing of his coming). A side note: When we engage in this type of study, certain things become immediately evident:
a) the authors of the Epistles do not mention a lot of the gospel material. For instance, they never once mention the birth narrative of Jesus, the virgin birth, the Flight into Egypt, the Star of Bethlehem, the magi, or even the city of Bethlehem as Jesus’ birth place. Now, that should raise some red flags.
b) In some cases, the authors of the Epistles seemingly contradict the gospels (I say “seemingly” because they don’t really contradict them, it only appears as such from our particular viewpoint) because they allude to Christ’s revelation as occurring “once at the consummation of the ages” (Heb.9:26), or in the “last days” (Heb. 1:1-2), so that the correct timing of Christ’s coming suddenly becomes an open question!
3) Even within the gospel texts themselves, we find language that seems more consistent with the epistles than with the church’s dogma (remember that in all of this, our dispute is not with the gospels per se, but rather with the “interpretation” of the gospels as put forth by church tradition). In the gospel of Luke, there is some indication that the suffering and rejection of Christ is ascribed not to the present, but to a future generation:
“Now having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He [Jesus] answered them and said, ‘The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; … The days shall come [centuries will pass] when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man and you will not see it. … For just as the lightning, when it flashes out of one part of the sky, shines to the other part of the sky, so will the Son of Man be in His day. BUT FIRST HE MUST SUFFER MANY THINGS AND BE REJECTED BY THIS [implied, future] GENERATION. And just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it shall be also in the days of the Son of Man: they were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, … until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all’” (17:20-27, emphasis added).
During his discourse on the end of days, Jesus promulgates a prophecy which most scholars attribute to his second coming: “For just as the lightning, when it flashes out of one part of the sky, shines to the other part of the sky, so will the Son of Man be in His day” (Luke 17:24). What is surprising, however, is that this prophecy is then expanded by a most intriguing appendage to the previous verse: “But first He must suffer many things” (17:25). In other words, while “the literary Jesus” is predicting his supposed second coming, according to the common view, this terse statement shockingly reveals that his incarnation must necessarily precede his coming from the sky! And since the entire prophecy is set in the future, the sentence pertaining to Christ’s suffering and rejection “by this [chronologically implied] generation” cannot possibly be understood in any other context except as a reference to a future event. Otherwise we would be dislocating this sentence from the end times setting of the prophecy, thus creating a bizarre anachronism. After all, Jesus prophesies that a long time will pass before we behold “the Son of Man” (Luke 17:22), an idiomatic phrase that is deeply tied to his incarnation (Ps. 8:4; Matt. 9:6; 17:9; 24:44; Gal. 4:4). In fact, Luke goes on to say that Jesus will be initially revealed ("ἀποκαλύπτεται" in Greek) in the last days:
“Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all. ... It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed" (Luke 17:26-30).
Now, let’s compare that passage with one from the epistles. Notice that 1 Peter 1:7 exhorts us to have faith so that we are ready “at the revelation of Jesus Christ,” which is “revealed in the last days” (1 Peter 1:5), and then Peter declares categorically and unequivocally that “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories” that would follow are really prophecies or “predictions”:
“Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he PREDICTED the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories.” (1 Peter 1:10-11, emphasis added, ESV).
4) To shed some light to this apparent controversy, we must also consult the Old Testament. But wherever we look there, we find one prophecy after another that seems to support the epistolary view of Jesus rather than the historical view of the gospels. Zephaniah 1:7, Daniel 12:1-2, Zechariah 12:9-10, and Isaiah 2:19 all place the death and resurrection of the Messiah at “the end of time” (Dan. 12:4). It is not a coincidence that Rabbinical scholars, steeped in Hebrew Scripture, also conclude that, according to their writings, the Messiah will appear once in the last days!
5) There are also literary and historical considerations. We now know that the gospels were written approximately 40-70 years after the purported events, which would indicate that they do not contain eyewitness reports, something the early church was not privy to during the formation of their dogma. Therefore, most of the evidence seems to confirm the epistolary view of Jesus, and the only thing standing in its way from being unanimous is the church’s dogma, which is a thorn in its side because it also creates all of the apparent biblical confusion that is expressed through various diametrically opposed views, such as Preterism versus Futurism, and the like.
Conclusion
Therefore, based on these findings, we must rightly conclude that although the gospels are the word of God, nevertheless, their purpose and function within the New Testament cannot be to give us a literal interpretation of history. After all, the Bible is not a book on science or history, but a book of faith! And if the gospels are the word of God—giving us an outline of the life of Christ within the context of the entire history of mankind, not just past history—then they must be theological documents that give us a glimpse of Jesus’ future history through theological language that imparts instruction into the meanings of salvation, the Messiah, and the nature of God. In other words, the gospels are a mixed bag of theology, history (history written in advance; cf. Isa. 46:10), and prophecy!
