What are the "Last Days?"

[RandyPNW]

I heard the term "last days," and see a basic confusion with many who are trying to understand this term. What are the "last days," if they were designated as such in the apostles' time, and are also used for the end of the age?

Really, I think we need to understand that the term often reflects the fall of a civilization, such as when Israel declines as a nation of God, and is close to national judgment. It involves a state of apostasy from the true faith, and is accompanied by an imminent judgment of God against that nation. That is why it is termed "the last days," because a nation is close to coming to an end.

The entire NT era is, as I often point out, a period of "great tribulation" for the Jewish People. In Jesus time, Israel was coming to an end. It was the "last days" for Israel in the present era. They were engaged in the worst kind of apostasy--the rejection of their own Messiah, and the rejection of his eternal atonement for their sins. They were insistent in living in their own sin nature, independent of God, and covering it up with a facade of allegiance to the Law of Moses.

Their judgment would come about 40 years after Jesus was crucified by the Romans, in 70 AD. Clearly, those were the "last days" for Israel, even though there remains a future Hope for Israel, when Messiah returns.

So Israel came into a time of punishment called "the Great Tribulation." They were destroyed as a nation by the Romans, and sent into an age-long exile called the "Jewish Diaspora." Some like to identify the "Great Tribulation" as only 3.5 years at the end of the age, when Antichrist rules, persecutes the Church, and brings all kinds of calamities upon the earth from God.

But the truth is, the "Great Tribulation" began with Israel's "last days," when Israel fell into great apostasy and lawlessness, and came under an age-long period of judgment. During this same period, the Gospel message has been extended to non-Jewish nations, to enable them to learn the same lessons that Israel has learned, with the same results. Nations rise, become Christian, and then they backslide, sin, and come under judgment. Their "last days" ensue.

I hope this helps you understand why, biblically, the "last days" started back in the time of Israel's Roman judgment and continues until today? It isn't just the Rule of Antichrist, or an end-time period in which plagues are sent out into the earth. No, this is an age-long process in which nations hear the Gospel, respond, and then ultimately fall away, with few remaining to be faithful to the Lord.

[Not Worthy]

Here's a biblical definition of the last days:

"God, who at many times and in many ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds." (Hebrews 1:1-2)

So the last days does indeed, as you say, span the entire period in-between the ascension of Christ and His appearance in the clouds when He comes to gather His elect.

As far as Tribulation vs the seven last plagues is concerned, no one conflates the tribulation of God's people under the hand of Pharaoh with the plagues that were coming upon Egypt. Everyone knows that the judgment of Pharaoh and his armies was also the deliverance of God's people.

Of all the New Testament references to tribulation, affliction (whatever it's called where it appears), only two of those references are not talking about the tribulation experienced by saints: 2 Thessalonians 1:6 and Romans 2:9.

Even two of the only three verses that link the word megas (great) as an adjective to the word thlipsis (tribulation) are without doubt referring to the tribulation of Christians (Revelation 2:22 and Revelation 7:14). The only other reference to megas thlipsis (great tribulation) is the one found in Matthew 24:21 - and verse 9 of that passage starts talking about the tribulation to be experienced by the saints.

So I think the first step is to realize that it's just as much faulty terminology to call the wrath of God/seven last plagues "the great tribulation". as it is to call the plagues coming upon Egypt "the great tribulation of the Egyptians"

The second step is to understand that Daniel 12:7, Revelation 13:5 and Revelation 11:2 all speak of a period of 3.5 years immediately prior to the Lord's return, when He defeats the beast. I doubt that Daniel 12:7 is not talking about the same beast as Revelation 13:5-7. I also doubt that the 42 months described in-between the sixth and seventh trumpets in Revelation 11:2 is not also talking about the same period.

So I think that the saints are Christians, and Christians will face tribulation at the hand of the beast, just as Israel faced tribulation at the hands of Pharaoh.

I believe that the warning given by the Lord to His saints regarding armies gathering against Jerusalem was given for their benefit, not for the benefit of these, because these would not hear, anyway, since they did not believe:

Luke 21
  22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
  23 But woe to those who are with child, and to those suckling in those days! For there shall be great distress in the land and wrath on this people.
  24 And they shall fall by the sword's edge. And shall be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the nations until the times of the nations is fulfilled.

It all depends on whether or not you regard those who are not in Christ as Israel. Personally, I don't believe God regards the Gentiles who are not genetically descended from Israel and are not in Christ through faith in Christ, as Israel any more than He regards those who are genetic descendants but are not in Christ through faith in Christ as Israel.

I've picked up that most of the few people in this forum disagree with me, if not all, so I'm aware of the fact that my views have already landed me in trouble with some, and possibly will land me in trouble again now.

[agnostic]

I heard the term "last days," and see a basic confusion with many who are trying to understand this term. What are the "last days," if they were designated as such in the apostles' time, and are also used for the end of the age?

The apostles believed their time was the end of the age/world. The NT says it bluntly multiple times.

[Fenris]

Why do Christians feel that they can only justify their own faith by talking about how sinful the Jews are?

[Not Worthy]

Why do some expect that we should regard the sins of the Jews as more special than the sins of any other nation?

[RabbiKnife]

Why do Christians feel that they can only justify their own faith by talking about how sinful the Jews are?

The only sins anyone needs to be concerned with are one’s own.

[Not Worthy]

Why do Christians feel that they can only justify their own faith by talking about how sinful the Jews are?

The only sins anyone needs to be concerned with are one’s own.

That's right. My sins placed Jesus on the cross, but my home was not destroyed and I was not exiled because of it. So I got off much lighter than those among the Jews who lived 2,000 years ago who had rejected Christ (and we know that it wasn't every Jewish man and woman).

I guess the difference is between who believes and who rejects. Those who believe are given the free gift of eternal Life.

[RandyPNW]

Here's a biblical definition of the last days:

"God, who at many times and in many ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds." (Hebrews 1:1-2)

So the last days does indeed, as you say, span the entire period in-between the ascension of Christ and His appearance in the clouds when He comes to gather His elect.

As far as Tribulation vs the seven last plagues is concerned, no one conflates the tribulation of God's people under the hand of Pharaoh with the plagues that were coming upon Egypt. Everyone knows that the judgment of Pharaoh and his armies was also the deliverance of God's people.

Of all the New Testament references to tribulation, affliction (whatever it's called where it appears), only two of those references are not talking about the tribulation experienced by saints: 2 Thessalonians 1:6 and Romans 2:9.

Even two of the only three verses that link the word megas (great) as an adjective to the word thlipsis (tribulation) are without doubt referring to the tribulation of Christians (Revelation 2:22 and Revelation 7:14). The only other reference to megas thlipsis (great tribulation) is the one found in Matthew 24:21 - and verse 9 of that passage starts talking about the tribulation to be experienced by the saints.

So I think the first step is to realize that it's just as much faulty terminology to call the wrath of God/seven last plagues "the great tribulation". as it is to call the plagues coming upon Egypt "the great tribulation of the Egyptians"

The second step is to understand that Daniel 12:7, Revelation 13:5 and Revelation 11:2 all speak of a period of 3.5 years immediately prior to the Lord's return, when He defeats the beast. I doubt that Daniel 12:7 is not talking about the same beast as Revelation 13:5-7. I also doubt that the 42 months described in-between the sixth and seventh trumpets in Revelation 11:2 is not also talking about the same period.

So I think that the saints are Christians, and Christians will face tribulation at the hand of the beast, just as Israel faced tribulation at the hands of Pharaoh.

I believe that the warning given by the Lord to His saints regarding armies gathering against Jerusalem was given for their benefit, not for the benefit of these, because these would not hear, anyway, since they did not believe:

Luke 21
  22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
  23 But woe to those who are with child, and to those suckling in those days! For there shall be great distress in the land and wrath on this people.
  24 And they shall fall by the sword's edge. And shall be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the nations until the times of the nations is fulfilled.

It all depends on whether or not you regard those who are not in Christ as Israel. Personally, I don't believe God regards the Gentiles who are not genetically descended from Israel and are not in Christ through faith in Christ, as Israel any more than He regards those who are genetic descendants but are not in Christ through faith in Christ as Israel.

I've picked up that most of the few people in this forum disagree with me, if not all, so I'm aware of the fact that my views have already landed me in trouble with some, and possibly will land me in trouble again now.

I don't have  a problem with anybody stating their honest view, as long as they do is respectfully. WE all have a hard time doing that, though. There are a number of different issues you raise, but for now, I'd just like to focus on what the "Great Tribulation" is. Here is what I wrote to my brother:

Good points. These are two of the major sticking points I get when I share my view on the forums. The "Tribulation," if depicted as a "punishment," doesn't seem to fit the Church. And the "Tribulation" seems to fit a particularly terrible event, as opposed to a long exile.

I had the same issues, I'm sure. What prompted me to take the position I do now is simply Jesus' exact wording, that this is a severe tribulation and it is a Jewish punishment. So regardless of whether it is a punishment to the Church, it is in fact a punishment to the Jews. And even though the Tribulation is severe, the severity can be looked at not just as an isolated event, but also as the severity associated with the longest punishment in Israel's history, a severity associated with the danger of eternal abandonment by God.

What made this so difficult for me is that nobody seemed to share my view, and that's a red flag. Normally, I find a major stream in Christian history that carries a belief that I will embrace, because it is nonsensical to think God will establish a doctrine and nobody understand it or embrace it!

It's either that or what is believed can be viewed as of minor importance, and can be explained as being eclipsed by other more important agendas at different historical moments. In this case, I couldn't deny what Jesus said, and that is all important. So I figured that importance of the doctrine was likely eclipsed by other more important emphases in history until later. (I can explain this later. It has to do with the historical dominance of Amillennialism and with Premillennial Dispensationalism.)

Fact #1: Jesus called this a Jewish punishment.

Luke 21.22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people.

It may be that we have falsely applied this Tribulation to the Church in the same way that it is applied to the Jewish People. It may be that the Tribulation has one kind of application to the unbelieving Jews, and a different kind of application to believing Jews? (This period, after all, is still focused only on the Jewish People.)

Jesus said the unbelieving Jews would be punished with the destruction of their city, the destruction of their temple, and with exile. The believing Jews would suffer in the same way that Jeremiah suffered when Babylon defeated Jerusalem. He was not the object of God's wrath, but rather, a victim of the sin of his society--a "martyr," as you will.

So, the "Tribulation" has a different effect on the believing Jews, as opposed to the unbelieving Jews. And yet they are all one people, suffering the destruction of their nation due to what the majority of the nation has done in rejecting Messiah. This would explain the difference between how unbelieving Jews and the Church should view this. One is a warning to repent to avoid judgment, and the other is warning to expect opposition to righteous living.

It is all Tribulation designed to afflict a society, whose majority has turned against God. As such, it may apply equally to Christian nations that backslide as to Israel, as it backslid in the time of Jesus. Although Jesus said this at a time when Israel still was the only chosen nation, Matthew, Mark, and Luke wrote the account for the Church, to learn from Jesus' message to Israel, which at the time had included both believing and unbelieving Jews.

As to the matter of the severity of the Tribulation, whether it was a limited episode or severe because of its long duration we have to look at more scattered facts, as well as fact #2.

Fact #2: Jesus said this Jewish Tribulation included the destruction of Jerusalem, the temple, a dispersion, and an age-long exile.

Since this Tribulation seems to encompass the entire NT age, the severity seems to have to due with the duration of Israel's exile, and the danger of extinction associated with it. Earlier exiles had been specifically counted for length of time, eg the 40 years in the Wilderness and the 70 years of Babylonian Captivity. Here, we have Jesus expressing this exile as *age-long.*

(Since this is Israel's final punishment in history, I call this exile the "Last Days." And it would mean that the "Last Days" incorporates both the time of Israel's fall and the entire age-long exile of Israel. Since these terms, "Last Days" and "Tribulation" were used by Jesus in the OT era, they had a particular emphasis on Israel's history. They apply to the Church by way of *example,* and not directly, in my view.)

Luke 21.24 They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Although Jerusalem seemed to stop being trampled in 1967, as indicated by Hal Lindsey, in reality Jerusalem is still divided and therefore "trampled." I think Jesus was referring to the end of the age as the date when Jerusalem's "trampling" will be ended.

So these are my reasons, and they are based strictly on what Jesus said. I realize that everybody bases their beliefs on what Jesus said! But nevertheless, without trying to coerce agreement from anybody, I'm just trying to satisfy my own conscience, regardless of whether anybody agrees, until God corrects me.

[RandyPNW]

I heard the term "last days," and see a basic confusion with many who are trying to understand this term. What are the "last days," if they were designated as such in the apostles' time, and are also used for the end of the age?

The apostles believed their time was the end of the age/world. The NT says it bluntly multiple times.

I do think that some sort of folded time up like an accordian and saw the "Last Days" as happening pretty quickly, perhaps even during the ancient Roman Empire. Some, however, interpreted the 4th Kingdom of Dan 2 and 7 as indicative of an empire that is broken up into 10 kingdoms, headed by the Antichrist. They obviously would not have expected the end to happen imminently, since Antichrist's coalition had to take place 1st -- see 2 Thes 2.

Some in the Early Church apparently believed in the Millennial Day theory, and also could not have expected an imminent appearance of Christ's Kingdom. Jesus himself seemed to speak against an imminent appearance of his Kingdom--certainly not in his own time!

Luke 19.11 While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once.

Though it's popular, in some parts, to believe that Jesus' apostles thought the Kingdom was to appear imminently, I don't believe that's true. They want it to appear as if the apostles were foolish, with false expectations, or that Jesus' teaching was flawed. But as you can see, the criticism itself is flawed.

[RandyPNW]

Why do Christians feel that they can only justify their own faith by talking about how sinful the Jews are?

Remember, friend, that Christians include in their own Bible the Jewish Bible! As such, Israel is viewed as prototypical for all Christian nations. What the Jews have had to learn, the Christian nations have had to learn, as well.

I do not join antiSemites in their hostility towards the Jews. I pray for the prosperity of the Jewish People, believing in their call from God to be restored. Jews who are unworthy of their religion I do not wish to see prospered. But there are many exemplary Jews, and many Jews who are mixed good and bad--I pray for God's love and mercy to draw out the good in these.

In other words, the Jews are like any other cultural group on earth. They deserve God's love and good will. I wish their ethnic group well.

In reality, we are all God's children. It's just that God Himself chose to separate the godly from the ungodly. Can I do any less?

All Jews are not alike. They are not all bad because they follow Judaism. They are bad if they act bad--same as any other group.

[RandyPNW]

Why do Christians feel that they can only justify their own faith by talking about how sinful the Jews are?

The only sins anyone needs to be concerned with are one’s own.

That's right. My sins placed Jesus on the cross, but my home was not destroyed and I was not exiled because of it. So I got off much lighter than those among the Jews who lived 2,000 years ago who had rejected Christ (and we know that it wasn't every Jewish man and woman).

I guess the difference is between who believes and who rejects. Those who believe are given the free gift of eternal Life.

Actually, the difference is in the magnitude of the sin. Israel sinned as a nation, and therefore were exiled as a nation. And when they sinned, it was great sin, and not little sins.

If we, in Christian nations or in post-Christian nations, turn to wickedness, we also will be punished with destruction and with exile.

If you, as an individual, sin smaller sins, you can, of course, be forgiven. We are disciplined by the Lord daily, as Christians.

But it is a different thing to be part of a nation that is turning away from God. When that nation falls, we, as individuals, will fall with it. But the judgment is not directed against us, any more than God directed the Babylonian Judgment against Jeremiah.

Jesus simply warned believing Jews that they would go through tribulation together with the ungodly nation of Israel, simply because they are members of that nation. But the judgment was not being directed at them.

It is the same thing with those of us in Christian nations who suffer from the calamities falling upon our own ungodly peoples. We simply suffer what may be called "collateral damage."

Actually, it is God's will that we suffer in giving our testimony to show God's love and patience for those who do not deserve His mercy. It shows He's always willing to dispense mercy to the repentant.

[RabbiKnife]

Exactly what is a "smaller sin"?

[Fenris]

Why do some expect that we should regard the sins of the Jews as more special than the sins of any other nation?

Why do Christians obsess over the sins of the Jews? I've never heard a Christian say "Man, those Nazis really needed Jesus. Started a war that killed 50 million people, murdered millions of Jews in gas chambers." No, it's always the sins of the Jews that Christians are concerned about. And I think I know why. Because many Christians believe that there's only one sin: the rejection of Jesus. Mass murder? Genocide? Irrelevant. The Jews rejecting Jesus? How sinful!

[Fenris]

Exactly what is a "smaller sin"?

In his context, I'm guessing it's anything aside from the rejection of Jesus, which is the only "great sin".

[Fenris]

Remember, friend, that Christians include in their own Bible the Jewish Bible!

Really? That's amazing! Does it contain the promises that God made to Israel? Ezekiel 37, perhaps? Or Isaiah 60?