A critical analysis of premillennial dispensationalism's interpretation ...

no doubt that Africanus saw no evidence of a gap between the 69 th and 70 th
weeks (Archer: 99).
An early commentator by the name of Appollinarius stated the following: “It is
impossible that periods so linked together be wrenched apart, but rather the
time-segments must all be joined together in conformity with Daniel’s
prophecy” (Archer: 105).
In the light of the evidence examined thus far, it is possible to conclude that
the early Church looked for a single unified Second Coming that would follow
the tribulation spoken of by Jesus in Matthew 24 (MacPherson: 40).
In Premillennial Dispensational thought, the reconstructing of the Temple in
Jerusalem during the end times is of central significance. The Epistle of
Barnabus (circa AD 130) refers to the temple’s destruction in AD 70, “ I will
show you how mistaken those miserable folk were in pinning their hopes to
the building itself…” He goes on to say that such hope was the “purest folly”
(Staniforth: 215).
It would appear that the early Church understanding of eschatology did not
include the rebuilding of a structure that had captured the minds and hearts of
so many of those made miserable by its destruction. It is here that one can
see that such a rebuilding would require a physical land in which to build.
Having said that, it is worth mentioning that Cerinthus claimed that he came to
his knowledge of eschatology through the ministry of angels who he said had
showed him truths concerning the last things. Included with his angelic
revelations was that subsequent to the Second Advent, Jesus would establish
His Kingdom on earth in Jerusalem. Eusabius describes Cerinthus as an
enemy of God’s Scriptures as he wished to deceive the Church by stating that
the one thousand-year rule would be spent in wedding festivities (Stevenson:
96).
40
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com