Introduction
The Bible has two terms found in the New Testament of which most people probably take little or no notice, but which are both extremely important markers in the Biblical historic and prophetic timelines. Those terms are known as "the fullness of the Gentiles" (Romans 11:25) and "the times of the Gentiles" (Luke 21:24). If people take notice at all, many would probably conclude without a second thought that these two terms, sounding similar to the casual reader, refer to the same thing. They do not. So then, what's the difference between the fullness of the Gentiles and the times of the Gentiles? It's time to explore a little bit of history and a little bit of prophecy to find out!
Romans
11:25, New King James Version:
For I do not desire,
brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise
in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the
fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
Luke 21:24, New King James Version:
And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
Well, let's start by discussing their similarities. First, they are both prophetic markers, or events, in the Bible that have yet to be fulfilled, but will be at certain points in our current future. Second, they both represent periods of time which have already begun and the origins of which we can delineate in history. Third, they both have to do with Gentiles, which is an important point, as we will see.
What's a Gentile? As you know, etymology is a passion of mine. I think it is important to understand the meaning, and sometimes origin, of words, and use them properly. So let's discuss the word "Gentile." The word is defined by Merriam-Webster online as: "a person of a non-Jewish nation or of non-Jewish faith." A Gentile is commonly understood in Biblical language and Judeo-Christian terminology as any person other than a descendant of Abraham. Its first use in the English King James and New King James translations is in Genesis 10:5. As an aside, and it's almost not worth mentioning but I love to mention things that almost aren't worth it, the LDS organization has, at times, misappropriated the term Gentile to refer to non-Mormons. But this is not the historical usage of the term, nor is it the most broadly understood use as recognized by Christian and Jewish communities or traditions.
What is the history of the Gentile people groups and where did they come from? Well, oddly enough, before Abraham was called out of the nations by God (Genesis 12:1), all people were Gentiles; or more technically, the distinction of Gentile from other did not exist. When God promised to make a nation from Abraham and his descendants (Genesis 12:2), we see the origins of the practice of Biblically dividing humanity between Gentile and non-Gentile; the non-Gentile people being later referred to as Hebrews, Israelites, or Jews, having been descended from Abraham, his son Isaac, and his son Jacob (renamed Israel by God in Genesis 32:28). So it wasn't until Abraham was called out of the nations by God that the Hebrew people group was made distinct from all others, and since all others are Biblically known as Gentiles, it is really in Genesis 12:1-2 that we see the beginning of the Gentiles as a distinct people group. This distinction, of course, is only in relation to the other, the Jews. So Gentiles have always been around since the beginning of humanity, which is why Genesis 10 refers to Gentiles before Abraham as the text was written from a Jewish perspective after Abraham.
Once the Israelites became a distinct people group from the nations, or Gentiles, the Bible begins to record history from the perspective of the Jews. From the time of Abraham's calling in Genesis 12:1, which was about 2000 BC/BCE (give or take a few decades or more) until the time of the Babylonian Exile or Captivity, around 586 BC, human history was recorded in the Bible through the Nation of Israel. This time spans chronologically from Genesis 12 through 2 Chronicles 36:19; understand that the order of books in the English Old Testament is not always entirely chronological. The time before Genesis 12:1 had no distinction between Jew and Gentile. One might think of this period of time (approximately 2000-586 BC) as “the times of the Jews," although the Bible never uses such a term. Certainly, the Bible continues the story of the Jews beyond 586 BC, and without a doubt, God is not done with the Nation of Israel. They have a prophetic destiny to fulfill yet future even to our current time. But for events occurring after 586 BC, up to and including the present day, the Bible describes as the "times of the Gentiles." We are living in the times of the Gentiles now. But I get ahead of myself, so let's return to where we left off and look now at determining the difference between the two terms we started with. To do that, we need to return to 586 BC.
The Times of the Gentiles
Luke 21:24, New King James Version:
And they
will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all
nations.And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
Let's now move to the topic of determining what the phrase "the times of
the Gentiles" means. We’ll start by looking at history. In 586 BC/BCE,
King Nebuchadnezzar (actually, Nebuchadnezzar II), led the Babylonian Empire in
a successful siege of Jerusalem. This was actually the second (possibly third)
siege he led against the city. He had successfully conquered the Kingdom of
Judah and besieged Jerusalem previously and had departed with Judah agreeing to
pay tribute, but they later rebelled against him which led to the siege of 586
BC. The Babylonians were descended from the Chaldeans and occupied territory
that is currently within the modern state of Iraq. Oddly enough, the deceased
former Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, claimed to be a direct descendent of
Nebuchadnezzar and fancied himself an inheritor of the Babylonian Empire. He
even began rebuilding the city of Babylon, which itself might play an important
role in the fulfillment of future prophecy. This final siege of Jerusalem by
Babylon resulted in what is commonly referred to as the Babylonian Captivity or
Exile. It is documented in the Biblical texts of 2 Kings 25:1-22, 2 Chronicles
36:13-21, Jeremiah 39:1-9, and elsewhere. Daniel and his three friends,
Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah (also known as Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego)
had been carried away to Babylon as captives from the first Babylonian
deportation around possibly 605 BC. After the siege of 586 BC, the Kingdom of
Judah (which had already outlived its northern neighbor, the Kingdom of
Israel), ceased to exist as a political, civil, or military nation. Prior to
this time, from the time King David conquered Jerusalem in approximately 1000
BC (2 Samuel 5:6-9) until the Babylonian siege in 586, Jerusalem had been
occupied and controlled by the Jews. After this time (586 BC) it fell under the
jurisdiction of the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks (Ptolemaic and Seleucid),
Romans, and others. There was a brief stint after the Maccabean Revolt (which
also has important Biblical historic significance regarding fulfilled
prophecy), from about 164-63 BC, when the Jews controlled Judea, including
Jerusalem, under the Hasmonean dynasty. But this was a short-lived dynasty, and
the Hasmoneans only controlled part of the former kingdom. However, both before
and after the Hasmonean dynasty, Jerusalem was "trampled" underfoot
by the Gentiles. From 586-164 BC the Jews did not control Jerusalem with
autonomy. From 164-63 BC they somewhat did, but did not control the territory
of the former kingdom. From 63 BC until 70 AD/CE they still occupied Jerusalem
but did not have control. From the destruction of Jerusalem under the Romans in
70 AD and the great Diaspora that followed (prophesied by Daniel in Daniel
9:26, and Jesus in Matthew 24:2, Luke 19:43-44, and Luke 21:24), all the way
until 1967 AD, Jerusalem was under the control of the Gentiles. From 1967 until
even now, parts of Jerusalem remain outside of complete and uncontested Jewish
control (the Temple Mount, etc.). The United Nations and other modern foreign
powers are constantly interfering with Israel and attempting to dictate which
parts of the city and which former territory of the Davidic Kingdom actually
belong to the Nation. The Gentiles continue to trample upon Jerusalem.
These are the times of
the Gentiles (Luke 21:24). This period started at least as far back as 70 AD,
when the Romans destroyed the “city and the sanctuary” (Second Jewish Temple)
and caused a “flood” (Diaspora) of people (Daniel 9:26). The Romans surrounded
the city and laid siege to it (Luke 19:43-44) and then physically took the
Temple apart stone by stone to get all the gold out of it (Matthew 24:2). These
events precipitated the rebellion of the Zealots against Rome and the later
siege at the Fortress of Masada in 73 AD. But we actually trace the beginning
of the times of the Gentiles further back to 586 BC when the Babylonians laid
siege to Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple of Solomon (First Jewish Temple).
Jerusalem was trampled by the Gentiles going back as far as that.
But why is this period
specifically called the times of the Gentiles by Christ though? And how can we
be sure when it started for sure, since there were Gentiles that entered into
Jerusalem before 586 BC? It is true that the Babylonians actually laid siege to
Jerusalem and the Kingdom of Judah capitulated as early as 598 BC. Judah had
actually become a vassal of Babylon and paid tribute to them as early as 605
BC. But it was in 586 that the city walls were broken down, the remaining
treasures were sacked, the First Temple was destroyed, and the final great
exile or captivity to Babylon occurred. It was also at this time that the Jewish
monarchy ceased to have political control and the state was absorbed into the
Babylonian Empire. The Jewish Kingdom was temporarily lost (and has yet to be
restored to this day, but will be in the future, according to Biblical
prophecy). This really marks the beginning of the time of the Gentiles.
In addition to
everything discussed so far regarding the identification of the times of the
Gentiles, I want to focus our attention upon the Bible’s view of history.
Before the Bible differentiated between Jew and Gentile (starting with Abraham
in Genesis 12, around 2000 BC), the Biblical narrative of history was one of
general humanity in terms of major events, like origins (creation), the flood,
the division and dispersion of the Table of Nations (post-Tower of Babel), etc.
Once Abraham entered the narrative, the focus of Biblical history narrowed
through the lens of the Nation of Israel (Abraham, his son Isaac, his grandson
Jacob, and Jacob’s descendants). This Biblical narrative of human history, as
told through the lens of Israel, continued until the time of the Prophet
Daniel. Daniel was a young Hebrew man, or boy, who was carried away captive to
Babylon during the first exile, which occurred possibly as early as 605 BC.
Daniel lived the rest of his life, as far as we know from the Biblical account,
in Babylon. Daniel was a prophet of God, and God gave him many visions and
prophecies which are recorded for us in the Book of Daniel, which was
translated from Hebrew and Aramaic into Greek in the Septuagint (LXX) during
the third century BC. He was also quoted by Jesus (Matthew 24:15, Mark 13:14),
giving credibility to his status as a Prophet of God. Not only did Daniel have
visions and prophecies, but he also was given the gift of dream interpretation
by God at times to interpret dreams of others (as Joseph also had been given by
God back in Egypt; Genesis 40, 41). After Daniel was taken to Babylon he had a
series of visions and dream interpretations that outlined human history
starting from the time of the Babylonian Empire and lasting all the way until
the beginning of the Messianic Kingdom age.
Oddly enough, and it is
odd if you are a student of the Old Testament from before Daniel’s time, these
prophecies lay out human history in advance, or give a narrative of human
history starting from Daniel’s time, from the perspective of Gentile nations.
In other words, from Abraham until Daniel, the Bible views human history through
a Jewish lens. From Daniel until the establishment of the Kingdom of Messiah,
the Bible views, or outlines, history through a Gentile lens. Of course, the
Jews are a part of this period of history, but they are not the sole
perspective through which it is told. You can read these prophecies in Daniel
chapters 2 and 7-12. These prophecies, in short, describe human history in the
following stages of Gentile empires, starting with Daniel’s time forward until
“the end of the days” (Daniel 12:13): Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Greek (broken
into 4 kingdoms, corresponding with the division of Alexander’s empire among Ptolemy,
Seleucus, Lysimachus, and Cassander), and Roman. Each successive empire in the
narrative conquers the preceding. There is no empire in the narrative following
Rome, however, the Roman Empire is described in terms of having more than one
phase. Interestingly enough, from a perspective of human history, each of these
empires did conquer much or all of the territory of the preceding, until the
time of the ancient Roman Empire. The Roman Empire was never conquered by any
singular rival power. It divided into eastern and western halves during the
fourth century AD. After that, it gradually disintegrated and lost territory to
various rivals until it ceased to exist as a unified power. However, many of
the nations (mostly European) that eventually emerged from its remnants went on
to have substantial empires of their own. Some speculate that a revived Roman
Empire of sorts will emerge during the final years before the Messianic Kingdom
age as a final attempt to rule the world apart from Messiah as the kingdom of
the Beast or Antichrist. But this is a topic for another time.
So, largely as a result
of the aforementioned reasons, “the times of the Gentiles” can be identified as
consisting of the period of time in which Jerusalem is controlled or occupied
by Gentiles (following its initial conquest by King David) with the Jews having
little or no autonomous control, and as the period of time through which the
Biblical narrative of human history is outlined through the lens of the
Gentiles rather than the Jews. This period appears to have started in
approximately 586 BC after the final Jewish Kingdom of Judah lost its autonomy
to Babylon and Jerusalem was completely conquered. This period of time
continues through to the present day, with the modern state of Israel still
lacking complete, autonomous, and uncontested control over the city of
Jerusalem. When will this period end? According to Daniel, at “the end of the
days.”
So what is the
significance of Jesus’ use of the term, and what is the greater purpose of the
times of the Gentiles within God’s plan? I want to take a moment and examine
that in more detail. When Jesus discusses the times of the Gentiles in Luke
21:24, He is discussing it in terms of its ending at the end of a period of
great turmoil described throughout that chapter, and the corresponding chapter
of Matthew 24, as well as in 2 Thessalonians 2, and in Revelation, Daniel,
Zechariah, and many other places. As we have already discovered, the period
began in 586 BC. This final captivity or exile to Babylon occurred as a result
of hundreds of years of corporate rebellion by the Nation of Israel against
God, who had delivered them generations before from slavery in Egypt and given
them the land of Canaan and grew them into a bountiful and prosperous nation in
partial fulfillment of His promise to, or covenant with, Abraham. I say partial
fulfillment because the promise, which was extended and expanded with Moses and
again with David, has never been completely fulfilled. But God isn’t done with
Israel yet, and He will fulfill His promises in their entirety at some point
yet future from our current perspective. So the times of the Gentiles began as
a consequence for Israel for their rebellion and disobedience after repeated
warnings by God and opportunities given for repentance, which were never fully
realized by the Jews. But Jesus tells His audience in Luke 21:24 that this time
of the Gentiles will eventually end at the end of the period of time He is
describing in that chapter, and Daniel described in his book ending in Daniel
12:13 as “the end of the days.” Daniel isn’t describing the end of time, or
human history, and neither is Jesus. Just the end of the portion of human
history during which Jerusalem is “trampled” by the Gentiles. This period will
end when the Messiah, Jesus, returns to establish His earthly kingdom. This
will happen after a period of great tribulation and persecution that will occur
at some point yet future to us. But we don’t know yet when this will be. There
are things that will happen that will indicate to those living during those
days that they are in that time period of tribulation, but that is another
subject. Suffice it to say, the times of the Gentiles started in approximately
586 BC, were (in part) a response to Israel’s rebellion against God, are still
continuing today, and will end when the Messiah returns to establish His
kingdom.
The Fullness of the
Gentiles
Romans
11:25, New King James Version:
For I do not desire,
brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise
in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the
fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
Let’s now shift to the
topic of determining what the phrase “the fullness of the Gentiles” means.
We’ll start by looking at ancient Judaism. The practices of ancient Judaism
centered around worship of YHWH through keeping the Law (moral requirements of
the Torah), observing the prescribed holidays and festivals (ceremonial
requirements of the Torah), abstaining from certain foods (dietary requirements
of the Torah), and offering animal sacrifices for the covering of sin
(sacrificial requirements of the Torah). In addition to these practical
requirements, there was also the physical practice of male circumcision, which
was supposed to be indicative of a spiritual truth of circumcising the heart to
God. Also in addition to these practices, there was supposed to be a worship of
God in the heart and a commitment to obedience in the mind as well as action.
Following the Exodus from Egypt, worship of YHWH was geographically centered in
the Tabernacle, which was a portable structure that could be moved as Israel
travelled through the wilderness. After the conquest of Canaan, during the time
of King Solomon and beyond, worship of YHWH was geographically centered in the
First (and later Second) Temple in Jerusalem. There’s much more to it than
this, but in short, according to Judaism, if you wanted to worship the one,
true and living God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, these were the things you had
to do. If you were a descendant of one of the 12 sons of Jacob (who were the
Patriarchs of the 12 Tribes of Israel), you were born into Judaism (when it was
being practiced) and it was expected that you would continue these traditions
throughout your life. In other words, if you were a Jew by birth, you were
automatically a Jew by religion. If you were not a Jew by birth, you were a
Gentile. If you wanted to follow the God of the Jews, you had to convert and
keep the practices, including circumcision for males. But you were still
considered a Gentile, a “God-fearing” Gentile, but a Gentile nonetheless, and
you could not progress into the Temple courts beyond the Court of the Gentiles.
Only Jews by birth were allowed full privileges. If you were not a Jew by
birth, you were always somewhat of a second-class person in Jewish culture and
tradition. This is simply the way it was. There was always a distinction
between Jew and Gentile, and the Gentiles were always looked at somewhat
unfavorably. The non-God-fearing Gentiles were often downright despised by some
elements of ancient Jewish society.
I provide this
background to help illuminate understanding of the context behind the
expression “the fullness of the Gentiles” used by the Apostle Paul in Romans
11:25. Let’s look at this passage and this expression in more detail. By the
time Paul wrote the Book of Romans in the first century AD/CE, he was already a
convert to Christianity. But prior to his conversion, he was Jewish by birth,
and a Jewish Pharisee (religious leader) by training. His background was
steeped in Jewish culture and tradition. The company he kept with other
Pharisees was the type of company that generally held Gentiles in very low
regard. To them, the Jews were the inheritors of the promises of God. It was to
them that the Messianic Kingdom was promised. It was their land that was being
occupied by the Gentiles (at that time, by the Romans). But we know through the
words, actions, and deeds of Christ (also Jewish by birth and religious
upbringing) as recorded in the Gospels, as well as the words, actions, and deeds
of the apostles in the Book of Acts, as well as the other writings in the New Testament
(both Paul’s and others’) that the Church, or Christianity, is a faith that can
be entered into by people of all birth, nations, tribes, and tongues. In
Christ, there is neither Jew nor Gentile (Galatians 3:28). This is important,
because before the time of the New Covenant, as established by Christ, there
was a distinction, and if a Gentile wanted to become part of God’s prescribed
method for fellowship, he or she had to become a Jew in practice, and was still
not treated as an equal by many of those who were Jews by birth. Now, as part
of the Church, there was no distinction. Being a Jewish Christian might mean
that one had a greater knowledge of Scripture from one’s upbringing, but one
had no practical advantage over the Gentile Christian in terms of access or
worship or anything else. This was a new concept for Jewish converts.
When Paul speaks of the
fullness of the Gentiles in Romans 11:25, he is speaking in terms of the
Church. To worship God in Judaism, you had to be a Jew. If you weren’t born as
a Jew, you could become a proselyte and convert to the practice of Judaism as a
God-fearer, and if you were a man you had to be circumcised, but you still only
had limited access to the corporate worship of God as prescribed in the Torah.
But not so in the Church. In Christianity, it didn’t matter what people group
you were born into; all had equal access to God through Christ Jesus. When Paul
speaks of blindness happening to Israel (Jewish distinction) until the fullness
of the Gentiles has come in (non-Jewishness being irrelevant), he is speaking
of the Gentiles coming into the Church. In other words, corporate Israel (Jews
by birth who haven’t become Christians and joined the Church where there is no
distinction) will be blind until the fullness of Gentiles (non-Jewishness only
relevant from a Jewish perspective, not a Christian one) has come into the
Church. Does that mean that once the fullness of the Gentiles has come into the
Church that Israel won’t be blind anymore? I think it does!
So, what does it mean
for the fullness to come in? Well, we know that not everyone will be saved by
God’s grace through faith in Christ, so not everyone will become part of the
Church. We also know that not all Gentiles will be saved either. So the
fullness of the Gentiles doesn’t mean all Gentiles. But the phrase clearly
indicates there is a point at which the fullness will come in, and then
Israel’s blindness will be lifted. We’ve already seen that there is no
distinction between Jew and Gentile in the Church, but clearly Paul is speaking
in terms of the Gentiles coming in. Well, earlier in this passage (Romans 11),
Paul gives an excellent explanation of how the Gentiles became inheritors
through Christ of God’s promise to Abraham to bring salvation to the world
through Abraham’s descendants (the Nation of Israel). So Gentiles have become inheritors
of God’s promise to Abraham as fulfilled through Jesus and the New Covenant.
Gentiles now have access to the promise without becoming Jews. Gentiles have
come into the promise. When the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, that
means that the last Gentile who will become part of the Church has become part
of the Church.
But there’s more. Not
only does it mean that the last Gentile who will become part of the Church has
become part of the Church, but I believe that it also means the last person who
will become part of the Church has become part. I believe it means the Church
will be complete. The Church does not distinguish between Jew and Gentile. But
after the last Gentile comes in to the Church, then blindness will be lifted
from Israel. What does this mean? We’ll look at that in a moment, but for now,
I want to elaborate on my proposal that when blindness lifts from Israel, the
Church, as the mystery spoken of in Colossians 1:26 will be complete. The
Church had a beginning, and, I believe, will have an end. And I believe Romans
11:25 testifies to this. People were saved before the Church came onto the
scene, and I believe people will be saved after the Church leaves the scene;
but just as before, those who are saved after are not part of the Church. The
Church is a mystery, hinted at in the Old Testament, and revealed in the New.
It is called the Body of Christ. It is called the Bride of Christ. Other saved
people (saints) from other ages (before the Church) are not referred to in this
way. The redeemed of the Church are called kings and priests (Revelation 1:6). Israel
had two separate lines for kings (from Judah) and priests (from Levi), and the
two functions were not to be mixed. The Church has been promised the indwelling
of the Third Person of the Trinity, or Triune Godhead, the Holy Spirit, as a
seal unto salvation (2 Corinthians 1:22). Other people of God from other ages
did not have this promise. For more information, see my blog entries regarding
Dispensationalism. I think that when the fullness of the Gentiles has come in
(to the Church) that means the fullness of the Church has come in to salvation
and the Church will be complete. I also believe that this means that the Church
will then be removed and God’s focus will turn fully upon completing His
promises to, and timeline for, Israel. But this takes us into another topic
again. For more information, see my blog entries titled “Caught Up!”
Let’s look more at what
it means for blindness to be lifted from Israel. I don’t see any reason Paul
would say that blindness has happened to Israel “until” the fullness comes in
unless that blindness will be lifted after the fullness comes in. Regardless of
whether you accept my proposal regarding the Church being completed when the
fullness of the Gentiles has come in, I think a strong case has been built for
the fullness of the Gentiles coming in as referencing in to the Church, and we
can still arrive at an understanding of the blindness that is covering
corporate Israel (Jews who haven’t accepted their Messiah). Take a look at the
following verses:
Daniel 9:24-27, New King James Version:
Seventy weeks are
determined for your people and for your holy city, to finish the transgression,
to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in
everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the
Most Holy. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the
command to restore and build Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince, there shall be
seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; the street shall be built again, and the wall,
even in troublesome times. And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut
off, but not for himself; and the people of the prince who is to come shall
destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, and
till the end of the war desolations are determined. Then he shall confirm a
covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring
an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one
who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured
out on the desolate.
Luke 13:34-35, New King James Version:
O Jerusalem,
Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her!
How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her brood
under her wings, but you were not willing! See! Your house is left to you
desolate; and assuredly, I say to you, you shall not see me until the time
comes when you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD!’ (See
Luke 19:37-38)
Matthew 23:37-39, New King James Version:
O Jerusalem,
Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her!
How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her
chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! See! Your house is left to
you desolate; for I say to you, you shall see me no more till you say, ‘Blessed
is He who comes in the name of the LORD!’ (See Matthew 21:9)
Luke 19:41-44, New King James Version:
Now as He drew near,
He saw the city and wept over it, saying, “If you had known, even you,
especially in this your day, the things that make for your peace! But now they
are hidden from your eyes. For days will come upon you when your enemies will
build an embankment around you, surround you and close you in on every side,
and level you, and your children within you, to the ground; and they will not
leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not know the time of your
visitation.”
Matthew 24:1-2, New King James Version:
Then Jesus went out
and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the
buildings of the temple. And Jesus said to them, “Do you not see all these
things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another,
that shall not be thrown down.”
Let’s unpack these
verses and discuss their relevance to our discussion. The first passage, Daniel
9:24-27, is known as Daniel’s 70 Weeks. I could say much about it, but I won’t
here as I am going to dedicate an entire post to this passage at some future point,
hopefully soon. For now, I want to call your attention to a few items. “Know
therefore and understand…” The listener and/or reader is being told to pay
attention, and figure this out. The Jewish religious leaders who studied this
passage had a responsibility to understand what God was revealing here to
Daniel, and to them. And remember, this would have been written by Daniel
sometime during the sixth century BC/BCE. There would be a total of 69 sevens,
or weeks, between the command to restore and build Jerusalem, including the
street and wall, and the presentation of Messiah. What are the 69 sevens, or
weeks? They are periods of time. Each week represents 7 passages of time. Each
passage of time is a year. Each week is seven years. There are 69 times 7
years, or 483 (Jewish—“your people” and “your holy city” refers to Daniel’s
people, the Jews, and his holy city, Jerusalem) years (360 days by the
traditional Jewish calendar). History tells us that this command was issued by
King Artaxerxes I, or Artaxerxes Longimanus, of Persia around 445 BC. This
command is recorded in the Bible in Nehemiah chapter 2. History also tells us
that Jesus was most likely crucified in 32 AD, with His triumphal entry being
earlier that same week. The time between the two works out to be 483 years of
360 days each. 483 years of 360 days = 173,880 days. 173,880 divided by 365.25
= 476 years. 445 BC to 32 AD = 476 years, accounting for the fact that there is
no year zero (from 1 BC to 1 AD). Finally, after the Messiah is “cut off,” the
city and sanctuary will be destroyed (no specific timeframe given between the
two events). Jesus was crucified, resurrected, and ascended in 32 AD, after
having been rejected by the leadership (priests and Pharisees) of His people,
the Jews, and the corporate nation of Israel (“Give us Barabbas!”; John 18:40,
NIV). Then, in 70 AD, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Second Temple, as
we discussed already in the last section.
So the Jewish religious
leaders should have expected the coming of Messiah in 32 AD, based upon
Daniel’s prophecy. The Magi certainly expected the Messiah’s birth around the
time Jesus was born and were watching for the star that led them to Bethlehem.
But what about the Jews? There was an expectation at the time, or at least a
hope, that Messiah would come and free the Jews from the Romans. But when Jesus
came, He was rejected by the Jewish leadership. We see in the next two
passages, Luke 13:34-35 and Matthew 23:37-39, Jesus proclaiming over Jerusalem
that they would see Him no more until they received Him with the Messianic
greeting. Now, both Luke and Matthew also record that some of the people did
greet Jesus this way during the Triumphal Entry. But it didn’t catch on, and it
didn’t last, because, less than a week later, Jesus was crucified. I believe
Jesus was referencing the reception He will receive by the remnant of Israel
after the period of great tribulation that I mentioned earlier. This will be
after their blindness has been removed and they petition His return to save
them. But again, we get into another topic here. Either way, He was not fully
received as Messiah during His first coming, so, as He proclaimed, the Nation
of Israel, represented by Jerusalem, will not see Him again (blindness) until
His return. It’s possible this is reinforced by the order of events in Mathew
which have Jesus’ statement after the Triumphal Entry, as opposed to the order
in Luke where the statement is made before. He may have made the statement both
before and after, indicating the Triumphal Entry was not a fulfillment.
However, this last point is just conjecture on my part.
The final two passages
from Luke 19:41-44 and Matthew 24:1-2 give us additional clarification on
Israel’s blindness. In both passages, Jesus prophesies of events that will
occur about 38 years after the time of His speaking, when the Romans destroy
the city and sanctuary in 70 AD. But I want to focus on the Luke passage where
Jesus says, “If you had known… But now they are hidden from your eyes… because
you did not know the time of your visitation.” If we think this through we can
get some answers to the question of understanding Israel’s blindness and how it
relates to the fullness of the Gentiles. If we really think this through, we
can start to uncover some unsettling possibilities. First, some answers.
In Luke 19:41-44, Jesus
declares national blindness on corporate Israel. The blindness had to do with
recognizing Him as Messiah. The reason had to do with their failure to receive
Him at the appointed time. Jewish leadership, and those they led, were being
held accountable to “know therefore and understand” the prophecy regarding the
Messiah’s coming from Daniel. They failed. And national blindness was the consequence.
So then we have the birth of the Church after Jesus’ resurrection and
ascension; and in the spiritual entity of the Church there was no distinction
between Jew and Gentile, at least not from God’s viewpoint. And then Paul
states in Romans 11:25 that the blindness which covers Israel in part will
remain “until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.” This fullness will
come in once the last Gentile who is to become part of the Church becomes part
of the Church. For all intents and purposes, I say when the Church is complete.
But at least once the last Gentile has come in. Then we can reasonably expect
that the blindness will be lifted from national Israel, and they (those that
remain) will receive their Messiah when He returns. “Blessed is He who comes in
the name of the LORD!”
Now some, potentially,
unsettling possibilities; in the sense that it might upset some people’s
theology, although it really shouldn’t. And of course I have to do this, or my
post wouldn’t be complete; you are entitled to receive the full experience of
obscure tangents and unconventional thinking that you have come to expect from
my writings. What might it possibly mean that “the things that make for your
[Israel’s] peace” are now “hidden from your [their] eyes” and their enemies
would destroy their city “because you [they] did not know the time of your
[their] visitation?” What might have happened had they known the time of their
visitation? What might have happened had the Jewish leadership accepted Jesus
as Messiah? This is pure speculation on my part, but I think it is a
possibility worth considering, based upon what we know was said and happened to
the contrary, that had Israel accepted Jesus as Messiah in 32 AD, the Romans
would have still crucified Him (God’s plan for the redemption of humanity), but
as a political threat rather than to appease the riotous mob, but upon His
resurrection, He might have established His earthly Kingdom and restored the
throne of David right then and there. Now, before people get worked up about
this, let me clarify some points. First, of course that didn’t happen, and God
knew that wouldn’t happen. But the people were held accountable. Which means,
in my mind, there had to at least have been the possibility for them to choose
otherwise. I’m not saying that God’s plans are based solely upon His
foreknowledge. I completely assert that He is sovereign and exercises His
election and orchestrates His will regardless of the actions of man. However, I
believe He gives us the ability to exercise agency, or choice. Without getting
too far off the topic, I recognize that we only understand His truths when He
chooses to give us understanding, and we only exercise faith as He gives it to
us, but I still believe the Bible clearly indicates that people can choose to
reject Him; and He allows this in His sovereignty. Second, of course it was
God’s plan from the beginning to initiate the New Covenant and save both Jew
and Gentile alike. Nothing would have stopped that from happening if Jesus had
established His Kingdom during the First Advent. In fact, Gentiles were saved
before the Church ever began. The Old Testament is full of accounts of Gentiles
being worked into God’s program for salvation. It just looked different due to
the operative mechanism of the dispensation they were living in and the
covenants in place at the time. And God promised in the Abrahamic Covenant to
bless the world (a prophecy of Messiah) through Abraham and his descendants,
not just to bless his descendants only. Third, of course God planned for the
Church from the beginning; it wasn’t an afterthought, or a reactionary response
(although, it might not have been necessary if events had played out
differently). I’ve already discussed God’s sovereignty, but I’ve also discussed
my position that I still maintain that at least the possibility existed for the
people to make a different choice. Fourth, I do not choose between God’s
sovereignty and man’s agency because I believe both are taught in Scripture. I
cannot explain how they both exist and interact, but they do, and I accept
that. Fifth, and finally, I already stated this was last part was just
speculation, so don’t take it as my assertion of evident Biblical truth.
I’ve already summarized
the meaning of the fullness of the Gentiles, as well as the significance of
Paul’s use of the term, as well as its greater purpose in God’s plan. But I
still have a couple of points to make to finalize this section. First, when
will the fullness of the Gentiles occur? We don’t know. The Church is still here,
and we are still living in the Age of Grace, or Church Age, so it hasn’t
happened yet. Collective Israel still hasn’t recognized Jesus as their Messiah,
so the blindness in part still exists. The fullness will occur at some point
yet future, and the church will end. We haven’t seen the final week, or 70th
week, of Daniel’s 70 weeks yet. I believe the Church occupies a space between
weeks 69 and 70. How long that space will last is unknown to all but God. But,
I believe, once the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, the Church will be
complete. I believe at that point the Bride of Christ will be taken away to the
wedding feast (or Marriage Supper of the Lamb), and the 70th week,
or final seven years, will begin and God’s timetable for Israel from the
prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27 will resume, after which we will see the final
establishment, or consummation, of the Messianic, or Millennial, Kingdom. But
again, other topics.
Conclusion
We’ve covered a lot of
ground to understand the meaning of what appeared to be two simple phrases.
Maybe they weren’t so simple after all. We started this study by looking at the
similarities between the phrases “the times of the Gentiles” and “the fullness
of the Gentiles.” Then we dug deeper into the phrases and studied some
Scripture, looked at some history, discussed some prophecy, and hopefully I
demonstrated the differences between the two. They certainly don’t refer to the
same thing at all.
In summation, “the
times of the Gentiles” is a phrase that references a period of time where the
Biblical narrative of history is outlined through the lens of the Gentiles, and
also a period of time during which Jerusalem is not under autonomous control of
Israel, but is trampled by Gentile occupation forces. This period started in
approximately 586 BC and is still continuing today, and will come to an end at
some future point when Jesus returns to establish His earthly, Messianic
Kingdom from Jerusalem.
Also in summation, “the
fullness of the Gentiles” is a phrase that references not a period of time per
se (although one could say that this filling started with the birth of the
Church on the Day of Pentecost in the first century AD), but rather a specific
happening, at some future point, when the last Gentile has become a part of
God’s mysterious, beloved Church. I also believe that this event marks the
completion of the Church and triggers the Church’s removal from earth,
whereupon God’s prophetic timetable for Israel found in Daniel 9:24-27 resumes.
But even if that isn’t the case, this event will trigger the removal of
corporate Israel’s blindness which was imposed when the Messiah was rejected by
the Jews during His first coming, thereby allowing for yet unfulfilled prophecy
regarding Israel’s restoration and salvation to be fulfilled.
I hope you’ve enjoyed
reading this as much as I’ve enjoyed writing it. Thanks for taking the time. As
always, grace and peace.
