Why I believe there’s going to be a future “abomination of desolation” in a rebuilt Jewish temple

The future temple and “abomination of desolation” prophesied by Christ

According to the belief of many Christians (e.g., those who belong to the Roman Catholic Church and many mainline Protestant denominations), God’s covenant people, Israel, have no further prophesied role to play in God’s redemptive plan, and have no distinct expectation or eonian destiny apart from that which belongs to “the ecclesia which is [Christ's] body” (Eph. 1:22). I think this view is mistaken, and have written several articles in refutation of it (see, for example, my four-part study, “God’s Covenant People,” as well as the related, follow-up articles I posted on my blog during the months of October and November in 2018). God’s numerous promises to Israel throughout Scripture – as well as Paul’s words in Romans 11 – completely refute the “replacement theology” (or “supersessionism”) that has, unfortunately, been affirmed by many Christians throughout “church history.”

In connection with the view defended in the articles referred to above, the position for which I’m going to be arguing in this study is that, at some point in the future (quite possibly the near future, but definitely before this present eon ends), a third Jewish temple is going to be built in Jerusalem. And in conjunction with the rebuilding of the Jewish temple, I believe that Israel’s sacrificial system is going to be reinstated. However, at some point after the construction of this future temple has been completed (perhaps very soon after), the regular sacrifices that will have been taking place are going to be caused to stop, and an object that Christ referred to as the “abomination of desolation” (Matthew 24:15) is going to be set up “in the holy place.”

I want to make it clear that my main reasons for holding to this admittedly controversial position are not based on current political/religious events and developments taking place in Israel or the rest of the world (and depending on who you ask, things may or may not be seen as moving in a direction that makes the construction of a third temple in the near future likely). Instead, my belief that a third (as well as a fourth) Jewish temple is going to be built at some future time is based primarily on my understanding of scriptural prophecy. Thus, it is to scripture – rather than to current world events – that I will be appealing in defense of my position. I should also add that I am in no way a “Zionist,” or sympathetic toward the Zionist political/religious movement. Christians who think that God approves of (and will bless) those nations or individuals that support and “stand with” the modern state of Israel today are, I believe, about as misguided as a first-century Christian would’ve been for supporting Saul of Tarsus before his conversion on the road to Damascus. The fact that I believe that the existence of the present-day state of Israel is in accord with God’s sovereign plan (as is everything else that exists or takes place in the universe) doesn’t mean that I approve of everything the state of Israel does, or consider it ethically superior to (or more “deserving” of national existence than) other nation states and people groups in the world today. In any case – and regardless of what one’s stance is toward the state of Israel and Zionism – this article is not a defense of the present-day Israeli state/government, or its national/international policies. 

With the above preliminary remarks out of the way, let's now consider Matthew 24:15-16. In these verses we read that Christ declared the following to his disciples while they were gathered together on the Mount of Olives: “Whenever, then, you may be perceiving the abomination of desolation, which is declared through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let him who is reading apprehend!); then let those in Judea flee into the mountains.”

The “holy place” in which we're told the “abomination of desolation” will be “standing” refers to the first division of the Jewish tabernacle and temple (the second division being the “most holy place”). In support of this understanding, consider 1 Kings 8:6-8 and Hebrews 9:1-3 (cf. Acts 6:12-13; 21:28):

1 Kings 8:6-8

Then the priests brought the ark of the covenant of the Lord to its place in the inner sanctuary of the house, in the Most Holy Place, underneath the wings of the cherubim. For the cherubim spread out their wings over the place of the ark, so that the cherubim overshadowed the ark and its poles. And the poles were so long that the ends of the poles were seen from the Holy Place before the inner sanctuary; but they could not be seen from outside. And they are there to this day.

Hebrews 9:1-3

Now even the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly place of holiness. For a tent was prepared, the first section, in which were the lampstand and the table and the bread of the Presence. It is called the Holy Place. Behind the second curtain was a second section called the Most Holy Place.

As noted in the last passage, it was in the holy place that the golden lampstand and the table for the bread of presence (as well as the altar of incense) were present. But what, exactly, is the “abomination of desolation” that Christ said would be “standing” in the holy place at some future time?

Notice that Christ said this “abomination” will be something that was ”declared through Daniel the prophet.” There are several verses from Daniel in which the phrase “abomination of desolation” – or some similar, related expression – is found. For example, in Daniel 11:31 we read, ”Forces from him shall appear and profane the temple and fortress, and shall take away the regular burnt offering. And they shall set up the abomination that makes desolate.”

Most scholars understand this prophecy to have been fulfilled in 168 BC when the Syrian ruler, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, put an end to the daily sacrifice in the temple and set up an altar to a Greek god (probably Zeus) in the most holy place, thereby polluting the sanctuary (see 1 Maccabees 1:48, 54). This is the view to which I hold as well. However, according to Christ’s prophecy in Matt. 24:15, there is another “abomination of desolation” that is “declared through Daniel the prophet,” and which will be “standing in the holy place” at a yet-future time. And it is this prophesied event that I believe is in view in the remaining verses from Daniel that refer to the “abomination of desolation”:

Daniel 8:13

Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to the one who spoke, “For how long is the vision concerning the regular burnt offering, the transgression that makes desolate, and the giving over of the sanctuary and host to be trampled underfoot?” 

Daniel 9:27

He will make a firm covenant with many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and offering. And the abomination of desolation will be on a wing of the temple until the decreed destruction is poured out on the desolator.

Daniel 12:11

And from the time that the regular burnt offering is taken away and the abomination that makes desolate is set up, there shall be 1,290 days.

Notice that, in all four of the above verses, the abomination of desolation (or “transgression that makes desolate,” in the case of Dan. 8:13) is inseparably connected with the cessation of sacrifice and offering. In fact, the clear implication of each of these verses is that the setting up of the abomination of desolation is something that either coincides with (or shortly follows) the cessation of sacrifice/offering, and that both of these related events will be occurring on the same day (this is especially evident from Daniel 12:11, where it's revealed that the taking away of the regular burnt offering and the setting up of the abomination of desolation will occur 1,290 days before another related event takes place). 

This point should be kept in mind by the reader when coming to the words of Christ in Matt. 24:15, and should inform our interpretation of this important prophecy. For in light of this background information, we can conclude the following: in order for something to qualify as the prophesied “abomination of desolation” that Christ had in view in Matt. 24:15, it must be part of an event that involves (1) the cessation of sacrifice and offering and (2) the setting up of an abominable thing “in the holy place” (i.e., the first division of the temple) on the same day. Moreover, in light of the historical event involving Antiochus Epiphanes in 168 BC, it's reasonable to conclude that the future “abomination of desolation” will also be associated with idolatry, or the worship of some false god (which, when occurring in the temple, would be considered a terrible abomination by any devout Jew). But is there any other passage of scripture that refers to the abomination of desolation that Christ had in view in Matt. 24:15? I think so. 

In Revelation 13:14-15, we read the following concerning a certain individual who is elsewhere referred to by John as the “false prophet” (and who will be acting on behalf of another individual – i.e., the “wild beast” – and the political/religious system that this figure represents and heads up):

And it [the false prophet] is deceiving those dwelling on the earth because of the signs which were given it to do in the sight of the wild beast, saying to those dwelling on the earth to make an image to the wild beast which has the blow of the sword and lives. And it was given to it to give spirit to the image of the wild beast, that the image of the wild beast should be speaking also, and should be causing that whosoever should not be worshiping the image of the wild beast may be killed.

Now, I realize that there are many who will scoff at the idea that any detail found in the above passage should be taken literally, or that what’s being described will be fulfilled at some future time through actual, historical events that will involve the creation and worship of an “image” of some world ruler (or an image connected with the political/religious system headed up by this person). However, if there is anything referred to in the New Testament that could be understood as referring to the “abomination of desolation” that Christ said would be “standing in the holy place,” then the “image of the wild beast” is surely it.

Now, notice that, at some point after the “image of the wild beast” has been made, those who refuse to worship it will begin to be put to death. This fact is alluded to in Revelation 20:4 as well, where we read of “the souls of those executed because of the testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who do not worship the wild beast or its image…” The fact that the making of the “image of the wild beast” will lead to the execution of those who refuse to worship it ties right in with the immediate context in which we find the abomination of desolation being referred to by Christ. In Matt. 24:16-22, we read that the setting up of the abomination of desolation in the holy place will be a sign indicating that a time of “great affliction” is about to begin:

Whenever, then, you may be perceiving the abomination of desolation, which is declared through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let him who is reading apprehend!); then let those in Judea flee into the mountains...for then shall be great affliction, such as has not occurred from the beginning of the world till now; neither under any circumstances may be occurring. And, except those days were discounted, no flesh at all would be saved. Yet, because of the chosen, those days shall be discounted.

According to Christ’s exhortation in this passage, as soon as those dwelling in Jerusalem and the surrounding area become aware of the “abomination of desolation…standing in the holy place,” they must flee the region. No matter what they happen to be doing at the time, their safety will depend on evacuating the area as quickly as possible and “fleeing into the mountains.” For the setting up of the abomination of desolation in the holy place will mean that a time of “great affliction” is about to begin. So terrible will this time of affliction be that “no flesh at all would be saved” if it were to continue beyond the limit set by God. Moreover, when we let Rev. 13:14-15 inform our understanding of Matt. 24:15-22 (and thus interpret scripture with scripture), it’s reasonable to conclude the following: those who are being admonished to flee into the mountains will consist of believing Jews who, in defiance of the command that will go forth after the abomination of desolation has been set up, will refuse to worship “the image of the beast.”

Another passage from Revelation that I believe sheds light on the event of which Christ was prophesying in Matthew 24:15-22 is Revelation 12:6, 13-16. In these verses we read the following:

And the woman fled into the wilderness, there where she has a place made ready by God, that there they may be nourishing her a thousand two hundred sixty days…And when the dragon perceived that it was cast into the earth, it persecutes the woman who brought forth the male. And given to the woman were the two wings of a large vulture, that she may be flying into the wilderness into her place, there where she is nourished a season, and seasons, and half a season, from the face of the serpent. And the serpent casts water as a river out of its mouth after the woman, that she should be carried away by its current. And the earth helps the woman, and the earth opens its mouth and swallowed the river which the dragon casts out of its mouth.

In part two of my 2017 study on Revelation 12 (”Identifying the sun-clothed woman”), I argued that the “sun-clothed woman” being referred to in this passage represents the believing Jewish remnant that will be dwelling in the land of Israel at the time when the midpoint of Daniel’s 70^th week is reached, and will include the 144,000 referred to in Rev. 7:2-8 (in contrast with this company of believing Israelites, I believe that those referred to in Rev. 12:17 as “the rest of her seed” will be comprised of believing Israelites who will be dwelling outside the land of Israel at this time, and who are described by John as “a vast throng which no one was able to number” in Rev. 7:9). As soon as those comprising this believing Jewish remnant perceive the abomination of desolation “standing in the holy place,” they will heed Christ’s exhortation to flee into the mountains. And in this way, the future event which John saw being symbolically represented by the sun-clothed woman fleeing into the wilderness will be fulfilled.

Here, then, is the chronological sequence of events being prophesied by Christ in Matthew 24:15-22:

1. The “abomination of desolation, declared through Daniel the prophet” will be “standing in the holy place.”

2. Those who heed Christ’s exhortation to quickly escape the city and surrounding region when this event takes place will “flee into the mountains” (where they will be protected for 1,260 days, or 3 ½ years).

3. During this time there shall be “great affliction, such as has not occurred from the beginning of the world till now.”

So what are the implications of this? Well, in light of the above considerations, we can conclude that the events of which Christ prophesied in these verses (and which are symbolically depicted in Revelation 12) have not yet occurred. For since the time that Christ uttered the words recorded in Matthew 24, there has never been an event involving the termination of sacrifice/offering and the setting up of an abominable thing in the holy place that has preceded a time of “great affliction.” There is simply no historical record of this having ever taken place, and no scripture-based reason to believe that it has taken place.

In fact, not only is there no evidence for this event having already occurred, but – in light of what was argued in part two of this study – we can know for a fact that this event is yet to be fulfilled. How so? Well, we know that those Jewish believers who will be “perceiving the abomination of desolation…standing in the holy place” will also go through the time of “great affliction” referred to in v. 21. We also know that this time of great affliction has not yet occurred (since Christ’s “coming on the clouds of heaven with power and much glory” will take place “immediately after” this time of great affliction, and will involve the “deliverance” of the believers who will be living through it; see Luke 21:27-28). From this it logically follows that the prophecy concerning the abomination of desolation in Matt. 24:15 is just as unfulfilled as the coming of Christ itself. Thus, both the “abomination of desolation” and the “holy place” in which it will be standing belong to a yet-future time.

It’s commonly believed by preterists that the surrounding of Jerusalem by “encampments” (or “armies”) that we find referred to in Luke 21:20 should be equated with the “abomination of desolation” referred to by Christ in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 (this view also presupposes that the “encampments” or “armies” Christ had in view belonged to the Romans, and that this event occurred sometime before the siege of Jerusalem). For the sake of argument, let’s assume that the interpretation of Luke 21:20 which sees this event as having been fulfilled in the first century (i.e., sometime before the siege of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.) is correct, and that the “encampments” or “armies” Christ had in view in Luke 21:20 belonged to the Romans. Given this assumption, is it at least possible that these “encampments” or “armies” could’ve been the fulfillment of the “abomination of desolation” referred to by Christ in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14? No.

As argued earlier, in order for something to qualify as the prophesied “abomination of desolation” that Christ had in view in Matt. 24:15 and Mark 13:14, it must be part of an event that involves (1) the cessation of sacrifice and offering and (2) the setting up of an abominable thing “in the holy place” (i.e., the first division of the temple) on the same day. However, there is no evidence from history that this occurred in the first century. Even if we were to grant, for the sake of argument, that “the holy place” referred to by Christ in Matt. 24:15 could refer to something other than the first division of the Jewish temple, what we read in Mark's account is inconsistent with the abomination of desolation being a reference to the “encampments” or “armies” referred to by Christ in Luke 21:20. For in Mark 13:14, Christ clearly spoke of the abomination of desolation as a singular thing or object that would be standing in the holy place (hence the words, “...the abomination of desolation, declared by Daniel the prophet, standing where it must not...”). The term translated “encampments” (or “armies”) is, of course, plural. Thus, the “encampments” or “armies” Christ had in view cannot be the singular thing that will be “standing where it must not.”

But if (as I believe to be the case) Luke 21:20-24 is a prophecy that refers to the same future time as Matt. 24:15-22, why would Christ refer to the “abomination of desolation” in Matt. 24:15 (and Mark 13:14), and refer to “encampments” (or “armies”) surrounding Jerusalem in Luke 21:20? Answer: I believe Christ was simply providing his followers with another sign to look for that is distinct from, but related to, the setting up of the abomination of desolation in the holy place. Apparently, around the time that the abomination of desolation will come to be standing in the holy place, there will be military forces surrounding Jerusalem (perhaps in anticipation of what's about to occur in the temple, and the negative response it will inevitably provoke from the Jewish people). 

Seated in the Temple of God

In my refutation of preterism in part two, I quoted Revelation 11:1-2 to demonstrate how long the “eras” (or “seasons”) will be during which the nations will be treading Jerusalem after the abomination of desolation comes to be “standing in the holy place.” In addition to revealing this bit of information, these verses also provide us with further confirmation that the Jewish temple is going to be rebuilt before this eon concludes. Here, again, is the passage:

“And a reed like a rod was given me, and one said, “Rouse, measure the temple of God and the altar and those worshiping in it. And the court outside of the temple cast outside, and you should not be measuring it, for it was given to the nations, and the holy city will they be treading forty-two months.”

One would, I think, have to perform some pretty impressive interpretive gymnastics of an allegorical nature to view the “temple of God,” the “court outside the temple,” the “altar” and the “holy city” spoken of in these verses as referring to anything other than literal structures and places (which is what a straight-forward, natural reading of the text communicates to the reader). Given the fact that the “temple of God” referred to here should be understood as a reference to a literal building located in the city of Jerusalem (in conjunction with the fact that the period of “forty-two months” during which we’re told the nations will be treading the holy city is still future), these verses provide further evidence for a rebuilt Jewish temple.

With the words of Revelation 11:1-2 kept in mind, the last passage that I want to consider in support of the view that a third Jewish temple is going to be constructed before Christ’s return is 2 Thess. 2:3-4. In these verses we find the following prophecy from Paul:

“No one should be deluding you by any method, for, should not the apostasy be coming first and the man of lawlessness be unveiled, the son of destruction, who is opposing and lifting himself up over everyone termed a god or an object of veneration, so that he is seated in the temple of God, demonstrating that he himself is God?”

As with what we read in Revelation 11:1-2, I submit that the most plain and straightforward meaning of the words “temple of God” in v. 4 is that of a building that’s intended for the worship of the one true God by his covenant people, Israel. Moreover, when we compare Paul’s words here with certain prophetic passages found in Daniel concerning a future wicked world ruler who will exalt himself, blaspheme God and oppress God’s people (e.g., Daniel 7:23-25, 8:9-12 and 11:36-39), Paul’s words harmonize with, and fit right into, this broader prophetic context. Consider, especially, Daniel 11:36-39:

“And the king shall do as he wills. He shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak astonishing things against the God of gods. He shall prosper till the indignation is accomplished; for what is decreed shall be done. He shall pay no attention to the gods of his fathers, or to the one beloved by women. He shall not pay attention to any other god, for he shall magnify himself above all.”

That Paul had this prophecy from Daniel in view when he wrote what he did concerning the “man of lawlessness” in 2 Thess. 2:4 seems clear. When we read Paul’s prophecy in light of Daniel’s prophecy, the most reasonable conclusion at which to arrive is that the “man of lawlessness” of 2 Thess. 2:3-4 and the “willful king” of Daniel 11:36-39 are one and the same. What’s more, in Daniel’s prophecies concerning this future lawless ruler, the focus is clearly on events that will be transpiring shortly before the kingdom of God is established on the earth (which is to occur at the time of Christ’s eon-terminating return). Both Daniel and Paul also refer to the demise of the lawless ruler (Dan. 7:11, 26; 11:45; 2 Thess. 2:8). There is even compelling evidence from Daniel (especially when read in conjunction with Christ’s words in Matthew 24:15-16) that the wicked world ruler who will be persecuting the saints just prior to Christ’s return will put an end to the daily sacrifice and desecrate the temple in some way reminiscent of what Antiochus IV Epiphanes did shortly before the Maccabean revolt (Dan. 8:9-13; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; cf. Matt. 24:15-16) – something which would, of course, be consistent with what we know about the character of the man of lawlessness (as well as where we’re told he’ll be sitting in 2 Thess. 2:4).

These considerations notwithstanding, one fellow believer with whom I’ve discussed this particular passage on a public forum (and to whom I’ll be referring by his initials, R.L.) expressed his disagreement with this interpretation of this passage, and suggested that our understanding of the “temple of God” referred to here should be informed by what Paul wrote in 1 Cor. 3:16-17 and 6:19 (where Paul figuratively referred to those in the body of Christ as the “temple of God”). Here is what R.L. wrote:

“From my understanding of what God calls a temple of God, my thoughts are this lawless one is indeed standing in the temple (his own body) of God. The lawless one(s) may not know they are a temple of God (some think they are God), but, according to what a temple of God is (humans) described by Paul, they are standing in a temple of God. And the lawless one(s) will continue to stand in a temple of God, calling him/herself God, until God brings him/her into a realization that he/she is in fact the temple of God.”

In contrast with what is said by R.L. in the quotation above, Paul didn’t say that the man of lawlessness will be “standing in the temple of God” (although, assuming he’ll have use of his legs at the time, he’ll probably be “standing” in the temple before he eventually takes his seat in it!). It also seems clear that, in contrast with R.L.’s use of the plural “lawless one(s)” (and the plural pronoun “they”), Paul had a single individual in view in this prophecy. This is evident from the fact that he referred to him as the “man of lawlessness,” the “son of destruction” and the “lawless one,” and used singular personal pronouns (“he” and “himself”).

A bigger problem with R.L.’s view is that, unlike in 2 Thess. 2:4, it’s clear from the context that Paul was using figurative language when he referred to those in the body of Christ as “the temple of God” in 1 Cor. 3:16-17 (cf. Eph. 2:20-22, where similar figurative language is used). Paul wasn’t, of course, redefining the expression “the temple of God” here (no more so than he was redefining the word “body” when he figuratively referred to the believers to whom he wrote as “the body of Christ”). Rather, Paul was simply using metaphorical language to express the idea that believers are like the temple of God (in that we, like the temple of God, are holy, and are indwelled by God’s spirit). Similarly, in 1 Cor. 6:19, Paul makes it clear that he’s referring to each believer’s literal body (i.e., the “organic substance” that constitutes us as human beings) as a “temple of the holy spirit.” As with Ephesians 2:20-22, there is no question that Paul was using metaphorical language in these verses to refer to something other than the literal building in Jerusalem that was, at that time, being used by the Jews to worship God.

Moreover, although R.L. seems to believe that humans, in general, can figuratively be considered a “temple of God,” this view cannot be derived from what Paul wrote in these passages. What makes the figurative “temple of God” imagery of 1 Corinthians 3 and 6 appropriate and true is that Paul had believers/saints in view, and not humans in general. Not all human beings are “holy” or have God’s holy spirit in them in the sense of which Paul wrote in these passages; rather, the “holy spirit” that Paul had in view in these verses is something that is, at present, “making its home” in believers only (cf. 1 Cor. 2:12; 2 Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Gal. 3:2, 14; etc.). And assuming that Paul did have in view a person’s spirit-indwelled body when he referred to the “temple of God” in 2 Thess. 2:4, then what does it even mean to say that the man of lawlessness will be “seated in” his own holy spirit-indwelled body? I’m sitting down right now as I type this, but I would never think of (or refer to) myself as “sitting in my own body.” Not only would that be a highly unusual and bizarre way of speaking, it really doesn’t make any sense. Or even assuming that the “temple of God” in 2 Thess. 2:4 is a figurative (and enigmatic) reference to believers, collectively, what does it even mean to say that a certain lawless man will, at some future time, be “seated in” believers, collectively, and demonstrating that he himself is God? Again, such an interpretation not only requires that one disregard the larger prophetic context in which Paul wrote what he did in these verses, but it doesn’t even make sense.

I would be more sympathetic to R.L.’s interpretation of Paul’s words in 2 Thess. 2:3-4 here if it actually served to clarify, and make better sense of, what Paul wrote here. However, this it does not do. Rather than bringing clarity to the meaning of what Paul wrote, R.L.’s interpretation only results in head-scratching confusion. The ordinary, straightforward meaning of what Paul wrote makes perfectly good sense (and to quote David Cooper, “When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense”). In contrast with what Paul wrote in 1 Cor. 3:16-17 or 6:19, no such qualification or explanation is to be found in 2 Thess. 2:4 concerning the nature of the “temple of God” that Paul had in view. There are no contextual indicators provided by Paul in 2 Thessalonians (either in the immediate or broader context of this letter) that would lead one to believe that Paul was referring to either believers collectively or to their bodies when he referred to the “temple of God” in which the “man of lawlessness” will be “seated.” And without such contextual indicators, I submit that it’s far more reasonable to understand Paul to have had in view the same sort of temple of which we read in (for example) Matthew 21:12, 23:21, Acts 2:46, 3:1, 5:42 and Revelation 11:1-2. Moreover, as already noted, the immediate context in which 2 Thessalonians 2:4 occurs clearly has far more in common with the prophetic, “eschatological” context in which the “temple of God” is referred to in Revelation 11:1-2 than it does with what Paul wrote in 1 Cor. 3:16-17 or 6:19.

In conjunction with the above considerations, the last point I want to make is this: if the position for which I argued in part one of my study on the timing of the snatching away in relation to the 70^th week of Daniel is sound, then the spirit-indwelled believers who constitute the body of Christ will not even be present on the earth when the “man of lawlessness” is unveiled. As I argued in this study, the “era” that will commence with the lawless one’s unveiling is the “day of the Lord,” and the saints in the body of Christ are going to be snatched away to meet the Lord in the air before this era of divine indignation arrives. Thus, those that Paul figuratively referred to as the “temple of God” in 1 Cor. 3:16-17 will not even be present on the earth when the man of lawlessness is unveiled, and later takes his seat “in the temple of God, demonstrating that he himself is God.”

Did John reveal the truth of the salvation of all mankind in his writings? (Part Two)

“The Savior of the world”

In John 4:39-42, we read that a group of Samaritans referred to Jesus as “the Savior of the world, the Christ.” But were they affirming the truth that every person who has ever lived (or ever will live) will be saved by Christ? As argued in the previous installment of this study, when the word kosmos or “world” is used to denote people in the realm of human society (and not the realm of human society itself), it need not be understood as denoting every person in the world without exception. Later, Christ referred to himself as “the Light of the world”: “Again, then, Jesus speaks to them, saying, ‘I am the Light of the world. He who is following Me should under no circumstances be walking in darkness, but will be having the light of life.’” Jesus went on to say, “Whenever I may be in the world, I am the Light of the world.” And in John 12:46, Jesus declared, “I have come into the world a Light, that everyone who is believing in Me should not be remaining in darkness.”

Notice that Jesus’ being the “Light of the world” did not mean that, while he was in the world, everyone in the world had “the light of life,” and that no one in the world was (or would be) “walking in darkness.” Many people – both in Israel and throughout the rest of the world – lived and died in darkness, despite Jesus’ status as the Light of the world. What Jesus’ being the “light of the world” meant was that anyone in the world who was following him/believing in him would “be having the light of life” (with the “life” in view being “life eonian”). In the same way, Jesus’ being the Savior of the world (in the sense referred to in John 4:42) should be understood as meaning that anyone in the world who was following Jesus/believing in him would be saved (i.e., they would receive life eonian). Again, the “salvation” that the Samaritans most likely had in view in John 4:39-42 was eonian life and not the salvation that all will enjoy at the consummation (which, again, is a truth we only find revealed in Paul’s letters).

Moreover, it must be taken into account what kind of salvation the Samaritans described in John 4 would’ve most likely had in mind when they referred to Jesus as “the Savior of the world” (for clearly they must have had some sort of salvation in view here). We know that Jesus had been staying with and teaching these Samaritans for two days (John 4:40-41). And it’s reasonable to conclude that what he’d been teaching them during the two days he was with them was not radically different from what he’d been teaching others before (and after) this time. And what had Christ been teaching prior to this time?

Earlier in this chapter, we read that the first Samaritan to whom Christ spoke and taught was a Samaritan woman at a well. And in John 4:13-14, we read the following: “Everyone who is drinking of this water will be thirsting again, yet whoever may be drinking of the water which I shall be giving him, shall under no circumstances be thirsting for the eon, but the water which I shall be giving him will become in him a spring of water, welling up into life eonian.” The salvation of which Christ spoke in his conversation with the woman at the well was clearly the same salvation that is the focus of John’s Account – i.e., “life eonian.” And it’s unlikely that the Samaritans who were taught by Jesus for two days had in mind a salvation that was completely different than the salvation of which Christ spoke when speaking to the Samaritan woman at the well.

Further evidence that the expression “Savior of the world” was understood by the Samaritans as meaning, “Savior of everyone in the world who is believing in Christ” can be found in John 3:17-18: “For God does not dispatch His Son into the world that He should be judging the world, but that the world may be saved through Him. He who is believing in Him is not being judged; yet he who is not believing has been judged already, for he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God.”

Notice that we’re told that Christ was sent into the world “that the world may be saved through him.” What do the words “saved through Him” mean? In the immediate context, the salvation being referred to here involves the salvation of those who believe “in the name of the only-begotten Son of God” (and not the salvation of unbelievers). This is further evident from the fact that, in the context, the “salvation” in view involves receiving life eonian. Thus, based on the context, the words “that the world may be saved through him” should be understood to mean, “that everyone in the world who is believing in him should be saved” (with “saved” meaning, should “not be perishing, but may be having life eonian”). And when we let this passage inform our understanding of John 4:42, we can conclude that the sense in which Jesus was considered the “Savior of the world” by the Samaritans is that Jesus was (and is) the Savior of everyone in the world who is believing in him, and that the salvation received through him is eonian life.[1]

“I will draw all to myself”

The next verse I’ll be considering is John 12:32, where Christ declared, “And I, if I should be exalted out of the earth, shall be drawing all to Myself.” Because of Christ’s use of the word “all” here, some believe that he was revealing the truth of the salvation of all humanity. Although I would agree that Christ did have his death in view here (which is clear from the inspired commentary provided by John in verse 33), I don’t believe Christ was, at this time, revealing that all humanity would be saved by virtue of it. Instead, the larger context indicates that Christ had in view all whom God had given to him, and whom he will be raising up on “the last day” to enjoy life eonian in the kingdom that is to be restored to Israel.

Among those who see Christ’s words in John 12:32 as an affirmation of the salvation of all humanity, some have pointed out (correctly) that Christ didn’t say “all kinds of people.” I agree whole-heartedly that we shouldn’t read “all kinds of people” into the text, and that the word “all” undoubtedly refers to every single individual of the category of people who are in view here. But the question we then need to ask is this: “Which category of people did Christ have in mind when he used the word ‘all’?” Should we just assume that, because Christ himself knew that all humanity would be saved by virtue of his sacrificial death, that he necessarily had the salvation of all humanity in view when he spoke these words? I don’t think so. Although it’s perfectly valid to point out that Christ didn’t say “all kinds of people” here, it’s equally true that Christ didn’t say “all mankind” or “all people” here, either. There’s no more indication that Christ was referring to “all mankind” here than there is that he was referring to “all animals,” “all Israelites” or “all celestial beings.” Those who think Christ had all humanity in view here are simply reading “mankind” or “people” into the text.

Now, it’s of course true that we have to read some category of people into the text here. Whatever the term “all” refers to here, it must refer to all of something rather than to all of nothing! So to determine what the term “all” refers to in this verse, we have to look to the surrounding context. And when we do so, we find that the last time Christ referred to a category of people as “all,” he was referring to those who will be receiving life eonian. In John 6:37, 39 we read: “ALL that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out….And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of ALL that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.” Compare these verses with John 17:2, where Christ declared that “all” which the Father had given to him would be given life eonian (although some versions translate the word pan in this verse as “everything,” it’s the same word translated “all” in John 12:32). It is this “all” – i.e., everyone whom God had given to Christ to raise up “on the last day” – which Christ had in view in John 12:32.

Christ went on to refer to this category of people – i.e., all those given to him by the Father – as the “sheep” for whom he was going to lay down his life (or “soul”). In John 10:4, 9, 11, 15, 16, we read: “When [the shepherd of the sheep] has brought out ALL his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice…I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture…I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep…And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd.” Christ went on to attribute the unbelief of those around him to the fact that they were not “of [his] sheep” (John 10:26-27). They were not, in other words, among the “all” that the Father had given to Christ, to raise up on the last day.

In light of the above verses, it’s clear that Christ laid down his life or “soul” for all who would come to constitute the “one flock” to which he was referring. Even though it’s revealed elsewhere that Christ’s death procured the salvation of all humanity (as well as the reconciliation of all intelligent beings to God, whether terrestrial or celestial), the focus of these verses (and indeed of Christ’s earthly ministry as a whole) was most assuredly not “all humanity.” Rather, the focus was on that special category of Israelites who had become (or would become) “children of God” by their faith in him, and who would thus enter into the kingdom that is to be restored to Israel to enjoy “life eonian” in this kingdom. It is every member of this category of people who is to be drawn to Christ, in accord with Christ’s words in John 12:32.

But what is the nature of the “drawing” referred to by Christ in John 12:32? And when will it take place? To answer these questions, let’s consider another prophetic reference to Christ’s death in John’s Account. In John 11:49-53 (which, it should be noted, is a passage that appears in the chapter that immediately precedes the one to which the verse under consideration belongs), we read the following:

The chief priests and the Pharisees, then, gathered a Sanhedrin and said, “What are we doing, seeing that this man is doing many signs? If we should be leaving him thus, all will be believing in him, and the Romans will come and take away our place as well as our nation.” Now a certain one of them, Caiaphas, being the chief priest of that year, said to them, “You are not aware of anything, neither are you reckoning that it is expedient for us that one man should be dying for the sake of the people and not the whole nation should perish.” Now this he said, not from himself, but, being the chief priest of that year, he prophesies that Jesus was about to be dying for the sake of the nation, and not for the nation only, but that He may be gathering the scattered children of God also into one.

According to John’s inspired commentary on Caiaphas’ prophecy, Jesus was going to die not only “for the sake of the nation” but also so that “he may be gathering the scattered children of God also into one.” But what will this “gathering” involve? Well, we know from prophecy that, after Christ returns to earth and begins restoring the kingdom to Israel, all believing Israelites are going to be gathered into the land (see, for example, Deut. 30:1-5; Isaiah 11:11-12, 27:13; Jeremiah 29:14; Ezekiel 11:17; 20:34, 41-42; 28:25; 36:24-27; 37:1-14; etc.). In accord with these prophecies, we read the following in Matthew 24:30-31: “And then shall appear the sign of the Son of Mankind in heaven, and then all the tribes of the land shall grieve, and they shall see the Son of Mankind coming on the clouds of heaven with power and much glory. And He shall be dispatching His messengers with a loud sounding trumpet, and they shall be assembling His chosen from the four winds, from the extremities of the heavens to their extremities.”

Where will these “chosen” ones be assembled? Answer: they’re going to be assembled to the location to which Christ will be returning at this future time (i.e., the land of Israel). It’s reasonable, then, to understand the “gathering” of “the scattered children of God also into one” referred to in John 11:53 (as well as the implied gathering of the children of God within the nation of Israel) as involving their being assembled to Christ after he has returned to earth. And if that’s what this “gathering” by Christ will involve, then it’s also reasonable to conclude that, when Christ begins gathering the scattered children of God “into one,” he will be drawing them to himself at this time. Moreover, not only will the living “children of God” be drawn to him at this future time, but those who will have died before his return to earth will be drawn to him as well (by virtue of their being restored to life in his presence on “the last day”).

Thus, when we let the broader context of John’s Account inform our understanding of John 12:32, I think it’s reasonable to conclude that the “all” whom Christ said he would be drawing to himself will be all of the “sheep” on whose behalf he – as the Good Shepherd – laid down his soul. That is, Christ was referring to “all” that the Father had given him, and who will be enjoying life eonian in the kingdom that is to be restored to Israel.

“The whole world also”

The final verse from John’s writings that I’ll be considering is 1 John 2:2. Here’s the verse in its immediate context: ”My little children, these things am I writing to you that you may not be sinning. And if anyone should be sinning, we have an Entreater with the Father, Jesus Christ, the Just. And He is the propitiatory shelter concerned with our sins, yet not concerned with ours only, but concerned with the whole world also.”

This isn’t the only time John used the word translated “propitiatory shelter” in his first letter. The word appears again in 1 John 4:9-10: “In this was manifested the love of God among us, that God has dispatched His only-begotten Son into the world that we should be living through Him. In this is love, not that we love God, but that He loves us, and dispatches His Son, a propitiatory shelter concerned with our sins.” John’s “we,” “us” and “our” in these verses refer, I believe, to those constituting the “Israel of God” (not those in the body of Christ, who I don’t think are even “in the picture” here). And – as argued in my 2018 article on John’s expectation and doctrinal position concerning salvation, the way in which this company of saints benefits from Christ’s propitiatory work on their behalf involves a faith that requires righteous conduct in order for them to be saved (as James so clearly affirmed in his letter to the twelve tribes).

In light of the larger context of John’s letter as well as what we read in the letter to the Hebrews, the sense in which Christ should be considered a “propitiatory shelter” concerned with the sins of John and those to whom he wrote is, I believe, as follows: Christ, through his sacrificial death, became Israel’s Chief Priest, according to the order of Melchizedek (see Hebrews 6-10). Through “his own blood,“ Christ “entered once for all time into the holy places, finding eonian redemption” (Heb. 9:11-12). And because Christ “has an inviolate priesthood,” he is “able to save to the uttermost those coming to God through Him, always being alive to be pleading for their sake” (Heb. 7:23-25). In these verses, the “eonian redemption” and salvation that is in view is not something that all people without exception will receive and enjoy. In contrast with the salvation that all people will enjoy after Christ has delivered up the kingdom to the Father and God has become “All in all” (1 Cor. 15:24-28), the salvation referred to in Hebrews 9:11-12 refers to an allotment in what Peter referred to as “the eonian kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 1:11).

Moreover, we can also infer that, in Heb. 7:23-25 (where Christ is said to be pleading for the sake of those coming to God through him), the author was referring to the same mediating and priestly role that John had in view when he referred to Christ as “an Entreater with the Father” (1 John 2:1), and which is clearly connected with Christ’s work as the “propitiatory shelter” concerned with sins. As Israel’s Chief Priest, Christ is the one through whom Israel’s sins can be pardoned (1 John 1:7, 9), and through whom those “coming to God through Him” can thus be saved and receive “eonian redemption.” Thus, when we read that Christ is “the propitiatory shelter concerned with our sins, yet not concerned with ours only, but concerned with the whole world also,” we can conclude that John understood the benefits of Christ’s propitiatory work as a blessing that is conditionally received by believers, as opposed to something that will be automatically and unconditionally applied to all people without exception at the end of Christ’s reign.[2] But in what sense did John believe Christ to be the propitiatory shelter concerned with the sins of “the whole world also?” And who, exactly, did John have in mind by the words, “concerned with our sins, yet not concerned with ours only”?

In order to determine which categories of people John had in view here, let’s again consider John’s commentary on Caiaphas’ prophetic words in John 11:49-53 (for in this passage I believe we find a parallel to what John wrote in 1 John 2:2): “Now this he said, not from himself, but, being the chief priest of that year, he prophesies that Jesus was about to be dying for the sake of the nation, and not for the nation only, but that He may be gathering the scattered children of God also into one.” It should be emphasized that we can’t understand “the nation” to be a reference to every individual who constituted the nation of Israel in that day. This is evident from the fact that the individuals referred to as those “scattered abroad” are “the children of God” (i.e., believers); thus, by “the nation” John must’ve had in mind the children of God (i.e., believers) who were living in the geopolitical territory of the nation of Israel.

Let’s now compare the last verse of the above passage with 1 John 2:2:

“And He is the propitiatory shelter concerned with our sins, yet not concerned with ours ONLY, but concerned with the whole world ALSO.”

“He prophesies that Jesus was about to be dying for the sake of the nation, and not for the nation ONLY, but that He may be gathering the scattered children of God ALSO into one.”

The striking similarities in the grammatical structure and terminology of these two statements cannot be a coincidence. When we compare these two verses, it becomes evident that John’s “our” in 1 John 2:2 corresponds with “the nation” of John 11:53, while “the whole word” of 1 John 2:2 corresponds with “the scattered children of God” of John 11:53. And just as “the nation” should be understood as a reference to the believers (or “children of God”) living within the geographical territory of the nation of Israel, so the expression “the whole world” can be understood as a reference to believers who were (or will be, in the future) living outside of the geographical territory of Israel. This interpretation is consistent with what we’ve seen to be the case with the use of the term “world” in John’s Gospel (which need not be understood as a reference to every person in the world without exception, but to a certain category of people in the world).

John’s addition of the word “whole” simply emphasizes the fact that the people in view whose sins have been (or will be) pardoned – and who will thus come to be among the “children of God” – are not merely from one region or country of the inhabited earth only, but from every tribe, people, language and nation. John referred to these “scattered children of God” in chapter seven of Revelation:

After these things I perceived, and lo! a vast throng which no one was able to number, out of every nation and out of the tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lambkin, clothed in white robes and with palm fronds in their hands. And they are crying with a loud voice, saying, "Salvation be our God's, Who is sitting on the throne, And the Lambkin's!" And all the messengers stood around the throne and the elders and the four animals. And they fall on their faces before the throne and worship God, saying, "Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanks and honor and power and strength be our God's for the eons of the eons. Amen!"

And one of the elders answered, saying to me, "These clothed in white robes, who are they, and whence came they?" And I have declared to him: "My lord, you are aware." And he said to me, "These are those coming out of the great affliction. And they rinse their robes, and they whiten them in the blood of the Lambkin. Therefore they are before the throne of God and are offering divine service to Him day and night in His temple. And He Who is sitting on the throne will be tabernacling over them. They shall not be hungering longer, nor yet shall they be thirsting any longer; no, neither should the sun be falling on them, nor any heat, seeing that the throne-centered Lambkin shall be shepherding them, and shall be guiding them to living springs of water, and every tear shall God be brushing away from their eyes."

The vast throng is said to consist of people who are “out of every nation and out of the tribes and peoples and languages.” Rather than identifying these people as Gentiles, I believe this language identifies them as the descendents of those Israelites who were scattered and dispersed among all the nations, and who today exist throughout the world instead of in the land of Israel (for more examples of references to the dispersion of Israelites among all the nations, see Deut. 30:1-3; Isaiah 11:12; Ezekiel 6:8-10; 11:16-17; 20:23-24; 22:15; 36:17-20; Dan. 9:7; Acts 2:5, 8-11; James 1:1). 

In chapter 22 of his book The Unveiling of Jesus Christ, A.E. Knoch has, I believe, persuasively argued in defense of this position. Knoch begins this chapter with the following remarks:

“THE hundred and forty-four thousand are the firstfruit of the millennial harvest (14:4; Lev.23:10). The vast throng are symbolized by the festival of ingathering (Lev.23:39-42). They appear with palm branches in their hands (7:9). They dwell in the tabernacle or booth of the Enthroned One (7:15). These, as well as the hundred and forty-four thousand who are sealed, are able to stand in the great day of His indignation.”

Knoch goes on to say, “All the symbolism employed places them among the saved of the sacred nation. Israel itself did not keep the feast of ingathering (Neh.8:16,17) until after the return from Babylon. Then they celebrated it with great rejoicing (Ezra 3:11,12). How can it possibly figure a company of aliens, to whom these festivals do not apply? It was never kept in the wilderness, because it was reserved for the land, when they dwelt in houses. It was to remind them of the wilderness, when they dwelt in booths.

“All this typical teaching is for naught if we transfer this scene to the nations. We have a firstfruit, but no harvest, in Israel. We have a limited number saved, all males, scarcely more than one per cent of the nation. We have the favored people doubly decimated, and bring unnumbered aliens into their fold. The vast throng, as well as the hundred and forty-four thousand are Israelites, to whom the promises pertain.”

For Knoch, the most compelling evidence supporting the view that the vast throng will consist of Israelites is that they are said to be “those coming out of the great affliction” (Rev. 7:14). As Knoch points out, the expression “great affliction” is “a special phrase denoting the sufferings of the faithful in Israel at the hands of the other nations.” See Christ’s words in Matthew 24:19-21, where the same expression is found (for a more in-depth look at what this “great affliction” will involve, how long it will last and where else it is referred to in Scripture, see part four of my study on the timing of the snatching away).

Whether this vast throng is to be understood as comprised of Gentiles or Israelites (or a mixture of both), I think it’s reasonable to view the people who are in view as constituting the “scattered children of God” who are to be “gathered into one” by Christ. It is these who, although dwelling throughout “the whole world,” will receive the same pardon of sins as John and the original recipients of his letter received by virtue of Christ’s propitiatory work on their behalf.

---

[1] It should be noted that the faith that was required for the salvation of those to whom Christ ministered during his time on earth could not be separated from their righteous, obedient conduct. For example, in Matt. 7:21-23 Christ declared: “Not everyone saying to Me ‘Lord! Lord!’ will be entering into the kingdom of the heavens, but he who is doing the will of My Father Who is in the heavens. Many will be declaring to Me in that day, 'Lord! Lord! Was it not in Your name that we prophesy, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name do many powerful deeds?' And then shall I be avowing to them that 'I never knew you! Depart from Me, workers of lawlessness!'”

Notice how Christ contrasted “doing the will” of God with being a worker of “lawlessness.” Those to whom Christ spoke would’ve understood “doing the will of the Father” as involving righteous conduct (e.g., keeping the commandments which were summed up in what Christ referred to as the “greatest commandments” in Matt. 22:36-40). In contrast, “workers of lawlessness” would’ve been understood as those who didn’t do the will of God by keeping his commandments. Thus, although John would’ve considered faith in Christ as being absolutely essential to the salvation of those to whom he wrote (John 20:31), he also would’ve believed that the faith by which one could have “life eonian in his name” had to be combined with, and expressed through, obedient conduct. Apart from such conduct, the faith of those called through the gospel that we find revealed in John’s Account would be “dead,” and thus unable to save them (cf. James 2:14-26). For more on this subject, see my 2018 article on John’s expectation and doctrinal position concerning salvation.

[2] Even Paul understood the redemptive benefit of Christ’s propitiatory work as something that was conditionally applied only to believers (as opposed to Christ’s work as “a ransom for all,” which will ultimately benefit all humanity). According to Paul, it is by “faith in His blood” that one benefits from Christ’s propitiatory work (Rom. 3:25-28). When those called through Paul’s evangel of the Uncircumcision believe the evangel (and thus believe that Christ died for their sins), the believer is “justified gratuitously in His grace,” and receives the “righteousness of God” that is “through Jesus Christ’s faith” (Rom. 3:21-24).