IT IS CONTENDED that the greatest tribulation that ever befell the Jews was in the siege and destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. Against this we interpose two objections:
--Not Fulfilled in the Destruction of Jerusalem
First, it is by no means clear that the overthrow of Jerusalem by the Romans was the greatest tribulation the Jews ever suffered. All the scenes of horror described by historians, as occurring at that time, are by the inspired records ascribed also to the conquest of the Babylonians. See the Lamentations of Jeremiah, especially: Lamentations 4:10 The hands of the pitiful women have sodden their own children; they were their meat in the destruction of the daughter of my people. Also, Daniel 9:11-13 The curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against Him. And He has confirmed His words, which He spoke against us, and against our judges that judged us; by bringing upon us a great evil; for under the whole heaven has not been done as has been done upon Jerusalem. As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us.
The Gathering of the Saints Second, at the coming of Christ, as noted in Matthew 24, the elect of God, the saints of Christ, will be gathered…Matthew 24:31 ...from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
--This cannot be referred to the destruction of Jerusalem.
Nothing occurred at that time to which it will possibly apply.
Paul, speaking of the coming of Christ, mentions the same fact, as follows: 2 Thessalonians 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto Him.
Q: How did the Lord come to Jerusalem at the time of its overthrow?.jpg)
A: We are answered, “It was a figurative coming.”
.jpg)
Q: If it was not literal and actual, what was the nature of the figure used?
A: It is said that He visited the Jews in judgment; that Titus, or the Roman army, really executed the judgment upon the doomed city.
--Then the coming of Titus, or of the Roman army, is represented as the coming of Christ? Was it a fact, then, that the saints of God, the followers of Christ, from the four winds, were gathered together unto Titus, in that day? This must have been so if the coming of Titus represented the coming of Christ, or if Christ came figuratively in the person of Titus.
It is as sure as the Scriptures are true that the saints will be gathered unto Christ in the day of His coming; which did not occur, even in a figure, at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem; for the saints, instead of being gathered unto Christ, or to any person or thing which came to Jerusalem as His representative; were scattered from the city, fleeing from the presence of that which represented Christ! So absurd is that theory.
The fact of Christ’s coming, and the gathering of the saints at that time, being stated alike in Matthew 24 and 2 Thessalonians 2, proves that these chapters refer to the same time and event.
Paul cautions his brethren not to look for the coming of Christ until the man of sin is revealed.
Paul cautions his brethren not to look for the coming of Christ until the man of sin is revealed.
Q: Who, or what, is that man of sin?
--Paul wrote this about eighteen years before Jerusalem was overthrown.
Q: What arose within these eighteen years which filled the outline of this prophecy?
A: Nothing at all. The, old and well-accepted view of the Protestant reformers,— that this man of sin is the “supreme pontiff” of Rome,—is every way reasonable, and to produce a harmony of the prophetic scriptures, is unavoidable.
Notice these points:
1. Paul wrote only eighteen years before the overthrow of Jerusalem, but he looked forward to the future for the revealing of the man of sin. The elements were then already operating, but hindering causes had to be removed. Consequently, as he said, the coming of the Lord was not “impending” in his day.
2. It was not merely a sinful man to be revealed, there were many such then; “that man of sin”—who legalizes and enforces sin, not merely one who breaks law, but one who overrides and breaks down law—such has been the character of the Roman pontiff
3. Exalting himself above God. This he has done, not, merely by assuming the prerogatives of God, but by legislating on the law of God, which can be done only by a superior, in fact or assumed.
4. Claiming to be God. See the titles which have been given to, and assumed by, the pope; and most recently, the assumption of infallibility. These, and other specifications of prophecy, have been fulfilled by the popes of Rome, and by no other."
4. Claiming to be God. See the titles which have been given to, and assumed by, the pope; and most recently, the assumption of infallibility. These, and other specifications of prophecy, have been fulfilled by the popes of Rome, and by no other."
A.T. Jones