The Last Days in Hebrews

We have completed the inmillennial prophetic model. Future posts will add other details, but the basic structure is now available to help us interpret Scripture. We will begin doing so with a series of posts dealing with the letter to the Hebrews.

The identity of the author of Hebrews is not critical to our study. To avoid confusion about some of our comments, however, we will state at the beginning our belief it came from the pen of the apostle Paul.¹

Hebrews provides many opportunities to apply inmillennialism. We need almost all its individual elements to better understand Paul’s message in this letter. This results, in part, from Hebrews’ date of writing. Most commentators believe it appeared just before the Romans destroyed the Temple. Leon Morris, for example, believes

A date before A.D. 70 is indicated, but how much before that we cannot say. Some passages in the epistle gain in force if we think of a time not long before, when there was a compelling call to loyal Jews to cast in their lot with those fighting against Rome. So perhaps we should think of a date near or even during the war of A.D. 66–70.²

The Hebrew Christians who first read this epistle lived near the end of the “generation” Jesus mentioned in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24:34). The time limit he set for the destruction of the Temple had almost reached its end. Most of the preliminary “signs” Jesus listed had occurred, and the climactic “great tribulation” was beginning, or was about to begin.

This unique historical setting generated many prophetic time statements throughout Hebrews.³ The Mosaic Age was almost over. The transition to the Messianic Age was well underway. Because we developed our prophetic model with this setting in mind, we expect it to give helpful insights as we study this letter.

The interpretive value of our prophetic model in Hebrews derives, also, from the letter’s overall theme. Its core message involves the transition from the old covenant instituted through Moses to the new covenant administered by Christ. John Brown, in his excellent commentary on Hebrews, says “the superiority of Christianity to Judaism is the great doctrine which the Epistle teaches and constancy in the faith and profession of that religion is the great duty which it enjoins.”⁴ Paul tells the Hebrew Christians that Christ far surpasses every element of Judaism, including Moses, Aaron, the Levitical priesthood, angels, the Temple’s daily sacrifices, etc. They were types, but he is the antitype to which they pointed. They should follow him instead of clinging to the disappearing shadows.⁵

The apostles referred to the duration of the old covenant as this age (e.g., 1 Corinthians 2:6, 8; Ephesians 1:21; NKJV). For them, the new covenant would govern the age to come. Paul, in Hebrews, mentions a change of ages several times in relation to the move from the Old to the New Covenant (e.g., Hebrews 2:5; 6:5; 8:13; et al.). This age change is at the heart of our prophetic model.

The “Last Days” in Hebrews

We will use Brown’s outline in this and future posts to show the value of inmillennialism in interpreting Hebrews. His first section is Hebrews 1:1–3, which he calls the “Introductory Statement: The Two Revelations Contrasted.”⁶ The first revelation was the one God gave through Moses; the second came through Christ.

We see the relevance of our model in this introductory paragraph. Paul says the new and superior revelation through Christ had arrived “in these last days” (Hebrews 1:2). These words refer to the “last days” of a particular age. Christ is the agent through whom God “did make the ages” (Hebrews 1:2b, YLT; emphasis added). Paul and his readers were living in the final period of one such age.

Our model suggests the age under consideration is the Mosaic Age. We will show below how the prophets, from Moses onward, described how God would set up the Messianic kingdom, judge his people, and expand the benefits of salvation to the nations during the latter days of Israel’s existence. Inmillennialism makes this clear: Jesus and the apostles lived in the last generation of the Mosaic Age, and God established the Messianic Age in the “last days” of that age.

Other prophetic models do not take this approach.

Inadequate Explanations of “These Last Days”

Without this prophetic framework, commentators have taken a variety of approaches explaining what Paul meant by his “last days” time statement. Some writers ignore these words altogether.⁷ In light of the many time statements scattered throughout Hebrews, this failure to deal with a clear chronological reference in the Apostle’s introduction disappoints those seeking to understand the overall message.

Other writers assert, with little or no scriptural proof, that “In these last days means the era in which we⁸ are living, and the time period in which Jesus Christ is God’s final word to us.”⁹ This is an unlikely meaning. The disciples associated the destruction of the Temple with the end of an age (Matthew 24:3). Jesus reinforced this connection in his discussion of the signs that would precede that event (Matthew 24:6, 13, 14). Afterward, the apostles preached and wrote with an eye toward the coming destruction of the Jews.¹⁰ The assertion that Paul’s phrase—“these last days”—includes the entire new age when Jesus and his apostles knew they were living during the last days of the Temple age is incredible.

Some commentators believe “the expression, ‘in these last days’ is . . . a term frequently employed in connection with the coming of Messiah; but the prophets were not able always to distinguish between Christ’s first and second advents.”¹¹ This explanation—which some writers call “prophetic perspective”¹²—comes close to charging Scripture with an error. It asserts the prophets spoke without precision about the “last days,” associating events that were to occur at the end of the Mosaic Age with those at the end of the Messianic Age. Further, Jesus didn’t clarify this confusion, and neither did the apostles. When Paul and the other apostles wrote about “these last days,” they failed to distinguish what would happen in their generation from what would happen at the end of the Messianic Age. According to this view, the prophets’ confusion remains.

Inmillennialism’s Explanation of “These Last Days”

Our simple framework suggests there is no need to define “these last days” in any of these non-intuitive ways. The Old Testament refers many times to the “last days.” In almost every case, this term designates the “last days” of Israel’s existence as a theocracy. When Jesus and the apostles used such expressions, they were following this precedent. They used “last days” and its equivalents to refer to the end of the age in which they lived—the Mosaic Age.

Examples from the three major divisions of the Old Testament—Law, Psalms, and Prophets (Luke 24:44)—will confirm our claim “the last days” refers in most cases to the final period of Israel’s existence as a nation.

This is what Jacob meant when he “called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days” (Genesis 49:1; emphasis added). He meant Shiloh (i.e., Christ) would come in this period “and unto him shall the gathering of the people be” (Genesis 49:10). This happened “in these last days” of which Hebrews speaks—the generation alive when Jesus came in the flesh (Matthew 24:34). During that period, “the sceptre . . . depart(ed) from Judah” (Genesis 49:10)—God took the kingdom from Israel and gave it to another nation (Matthew 21:43; cp. 1 Peter 2:9). Jacob’s prophecy came true in the “last days” of the Temple and the age it represented.

Moses spoke of the same period. God gave him a song about the evil destined to fall on Israel “in the latter days” (Deuteronomy 31:29; emphasis added). Speaking of that time, God said: “I will move them (i.e., Israel) to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation” (Deuteronomy 32:21). Paul reports this came to pass in his generation (Romans 10:19). These were the days when God would bring calamity as he judged his people and unsheathed his “glittering sword” against them (Deuteronomy 32:41).

We noted in an earlier post that “‘my glittering sword’ is, in Hebrew, ‘the lightning of my sword.’”¹³ This matches the lightning imagery Jesus used in the Olivet Discourse to describe God’s judgment of Israel in his generation (Matthew 24: 27, 34). The “latter days” of Moses’ prophecy, the “this generation” of the Olivet Discourse, and “these last days” of Hebrews all refer to the same period. They describe the last days of the Mosaic Age when God fulfilled the song-prophecies he had given to Moses.

Job said, “I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth” (Job 19:25). John Gill said Job knew the Redeemer would

appear in the world in human nature; be the seed of the woman, and born of one, be made flesh, and dwell among men, and converse with them, as Jesus did; who stood upon the land of Judea, and walked through Galilee, and went about doing good to the bodies and souls of men; and this was in the last days, and at the end of the world, Heb. 1:1 and 9:26.¹⁴

Job’s “latter day” identified the time of Christ’s arrival in Bethlehem. This occurred during the “this generation” (Matthew 24:34) of the Olivet Discourse. In the “last days” of the Mosaic Age, God spoke “unto us by his Son” (Hebrews 1:2). This fulfilled part of Job’s hope and ensured God would resurrect his body as well (Job 19:25–27; cp. 1 Corinthians 15:23).

Isaiah said, “And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it” (Isaiah 2:2; emphasis added). This mountain-top glory is consistent with our thesis. The letter of Hebrews declares that Mount Zion has now replaced Mount Sinai (Hebrews 12:18–24). God has now established the mountain of the Lord’s house. The “last days” of Isaiah’s prophecy are the “last days” (Hebrews 1:2) of which Hebrews speaks.

God, through Daniel, told “king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days” (Daniel 2:28; emphasis added). He then refers to four kingdoms: after Babylon, Medio-Persia, Greece, and Rome would arise in succession. Speaking of the fourth, Daniel said: “in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever” (Daniel 2:44).

Jesus’ birth was in the days of the second Roman “king,” Augustus Caesar (Luke 2:1). He established the kingdom of which Daniel spoke. The letter of Hebrews acknowledges this: “Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear” (Hebrews 12:28). God established the kingdom during Israel’s “latter days,” which coincided with the days of the Roman kings. Paul’s “last days” is the same period as Daniel’s “latter days.”

The “latter days” period of which the Old Testament speaks has passed and will never occur again. It was a unique, unrepeatable period. Israel’s “last days” included the transfer of authority from Judah (Genesis 49:10), the coming of the Redeemer to earth (Job 19:25), the establishment of the Lord’s house on Mount Zion (Isaiah 2:2), and the founding of the kingdom of God during the days of the Roman kings (Daniel 2:44). This situation and these events are unrepeatable. Their confluence occurred in the “last days” of the Mosaic Age, the period just before the fall of the Temple. The “last days” of Hebrews matches the “latter days” of the Old Testament.

Conclusion

Inmillennialism helps us understand the opening paragraph of Hebrews. “These last days” links too closely to the core message of Hebrews to ignore. This term does not refer to a period of indeterminate duration. To make it do so is to dilute its meaning and rob it of its power and significance. Neither does the term refer to a period yet to come, far removed from the events taking place in Paul’s day.

The prophets said God would judge his people—Israel after the flesh—for their apostasy. This would occur in their “latter days” (e.g., Deuteronomy 31:29; 32:1–43). In doing so, he would also exalt the Israel of God composed of the promised seed (Romans 4:16; 9:8; Galatians 3:19, 29; 6:16). This was happening when Paul wrote Hebrews.

The superiority of the revelation given during the “last days” of the Mosaic Age arises from the fact it announces the long-expected kingdom of God. Previous revelations had pointed forward to the kingdom in Israel’s distant future, but this revelation declares the kingdom has at last arrived. In his introduction, Paul hints at what he will later discuss at length: during the “last days” of the Mosaic Age, the King “sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high” (Hebrews 1:3) to begin his kingdom reign.

The inmillennial model stresses that “these last days” is the final part of the Mosaic Age. This does not negate the fact that major events are still to come, as our Lord’s prophetic word declares. God will raise the dead, execute the final judgment, and inaugurate the eternal estate. We should not, however, because of prior prophetic assumptions, demand that these events occur in the “last days” of Hebrews 1:2. Inmillennialism shows how to account for these yet-future events and leave “these last days” in their proper context at the end of the Mosaic Age.

Future posts will (D. V.) show how it also sheds light on other parts of the letter to the Hebrews.

1. For a discussion of Hebrews’ authorship see John Brown, Hebrews (London: Banner of Truth Trust, 1961), 5–8.
2. Leon Morris, “Hebrews,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Hebrews Through Revelation, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), 8.
3. See, for example, Hebrews 3:13; 9:26; 10:37. Most translations obscure several other important time statements. We hope to discuss these in future posts.
4. Brown, Hebrews, 10. Brown held a prophetic perspective similar in many respects to inmillennialism.
5. The picture in this post is a combination of two paintings. Information about the foreground painting is here and about the background painting is here.
6. Brown, Hebrews, 15.
7. For example, W. H. Griffith Thomas, Hebrews: A Devotional Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961).
8. I.e., the commentator and his contemporaries, living almost two thousand years after Paul wrote these words.
9. Walter A. Henrichsen, After the Sacrifice: A Practical Study of Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979), 25.
10. As exemplified, for example, by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 2:16.
11. E. Schuyler English, Studies in the Epistles to the Hebrews (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1976), 41.
12. See, for example, Robert L. Saucy, “The Eschatology of the Bible,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Introductory Articles, Vol 1, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979), 104.
13. Earl S. Kalland, “Deuteronomy,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol 3, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 215. The ESV marginal note has the lightning of my sword.
14. John Gill, An Exposition of the Old and New Testaments (Paris, AR: The Baptist Standard Bearer, 1989), 3:352.