This paper on the destruction of Jerusalem and the vindication of Jesus was originally delivered to the Reformation Society of Western New York on February 8, 2024. For readablity, it has been converted into a series of articles. A PDF version is available.
Introduction
Part 1 | Judgment on God’s House: A Central Theme of the Prophets
Part 2 | The Final Verdict: Judgment for Israel and Vindication for the Son of Man
Part 3 | AD 70 as a Sign of “The End”
Concluding Implications
In this final section I will argue that the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 serves as a sign of “the end” in two ways. First, it signals the end of the old covenant order. Second, it is an instance of “the day of the Lord” and a type of the final eschatological judgment at the end of history.
AD 70 as a Sign of the End of the Old Covenant Order
The NT is clear that the advent of Jesus is the climax to Israel’s story. All that Israel was waiting for―the restored kingdom, the new covenant, the end of exile, a new exodus―Jesus had inaugurated in his death and resurrection. A new era was beginning; the time was fulfilled, the kingdom of God was at hand (Mark 1:14; cf. Luke 11:20; 17:21).1Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 467-471. Thus, Jesus had a significant impact on Jerusalem and its temple, which played a key role in the life of Israel and redemptive history up until that point (Luke 2:38). Peter Walker writes, “If Jerusalem at the dawn of the NT period was associated with the presence of the divine Name, the throne of the true King, the place of true sacrifice, the centre of Israel’s life and the focus of its eschatological hope, then it was inevitable that the mission of Israel’s Messiah would be integrally connected with this unique city.”2P. W. L. Walker, “Jerusalem,” in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 590. My argument is that the fall of Jerusalem and its temple in AD 70 was not only the culmination of Israel’s judgment but also a sign of the end of the old covenant order.
The coming of Jesus led to a new understanding of Jerusalem and its significance in redemptive history. Jesus not only pronounced divine judgment on the city (Luke 13:33–35; 19:41–44; 21:20–24; 23:28–31), but also indicated that the promises of its restoration would be fulfilled in him. The city and its temple at the heart of the old covenant order would no longer serve the same role in God’s plan of salvation. Matthew tells us something greater than the templehad arrived in Jesus (Matt. 12:6). John confirms this when he tells us the tabernacling presence of God had returned to Zion in him (John 1:14) and that “the hour had come” when worship would no longer be restricted to Jerusalem (John 4:21-24). Jesus was the new and greater temple, the fulfillment of the sacrificial system, the place where cleansing, forgiveness, and salvation would now be found. According to Walker, “Jesus was offering in reality what Jerusalem had previously offered only in shadow, and which she was now failing to offer.”3Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 288.
Furthermore, Jesus was not just the fulfillment of the temple but also the messianic builder of the eschatological temple (John 2:19). He is the Son of David, the anointed “Shepherd,” and the “Branch” who were each connected with building God’s house (2 Sam. 7:12-13; Isa. 44-45; Zech. 6:12-13).”4Perrin, Jesus the Temple, 102. The church, as the body of Christ, would be the living stones raised up for Abraham in this new building, with Jesus as the Cornerstone (Matt. 3:9-10; Mark 12:10; Eph 2:19-22;1 Cor. 3:16-17; 1 Pet. 2:4-7). Those who are in Christ, citizens of his kingdom under the New Covenant, have come to the new “Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem” (Heb 12:22; cf. Gal. 4:26). In other words, the shadow gave way to the substance; the old was passing away and the new had come. The desolation of Jerusalem was a sign that the kingdom had been inaugurated and that God’s presence, along with his plans and purposes of salvation for the world, were now located in Christ and his church.
AD 70 as a Sign of the Final Eschatological Judgment
The phrase “the day of the Lord” is used throughout the Bible to refer both to instances of divine judgment in history on various nations (e.g., Babylon [Isa. 13:6-9]; Egypt [Jer. 46:10]; Edom [Obad. 15]; Israel/Judah [Amos 5:18-20]), and also to the final judgment at the end of time. The New Bible Dictionary defines this day as “the occasion when Yahweh actively intervenes to punish sin that has come to a climax.”5 J. S. Wright, “Day of the Lord,” ed. D. R. W. Wood et al., New Bible Dictionary (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 261. Jason DeRouchie’s definition is helpful as well: it refers “both to the ultimate time when Yahweh will punish and restore the whole world through Christ’s first and second comings and to the periodic pen-ultimate days that clarify and anticipate it.”6 Jason S. DeRouchie, “The Day of the Lord,” The Gospel Coalition, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/essay/the-day-of-the-lord/, emphasis mine. He adds that the biblical authors apply the apocalyptic language of “the day of the Lord” to instances where “Yahweh typologically intrudes into space and time to reconstitute right order through punishing wickedness.” If this understanding is accepted, then the climactic judgment on Jerusalem and its temple in AD 70 certainly is a candidate for the day of the Lord.
The prevailing understanding of divine judgment in Scripture is that the NT is concerned primarily, even exclusively, with the final eschatological judgment. Motyer asserts that, “The OT emphasizes judgment within history, while the NT emphasizes eschatological judgment, filling out the concept of the Day of the Lord (Amos 5:18) with the larger perspectives of the Day of Christ (2 Thess. 1:5–10; 2 Pet. 3:7–13).”7J. A. Motyer, “Judgment,” in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 612. However, such a sharp distinction between the OT and NT is unnecessary. The NT undoubtedly emphasizes the final Day, but it also predicts the fall of Jerusalem and describes it as an act of divine judgment within history, using apocalyptic language from the OT prophets (Matt. 24:29-31; Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-28; cf. Acts 2:14-21). If Jesus was the last and greatest of the prophets, then at least part of his focus would include judgment within history, especially if he believed he was actually inaugurating the kingdom of God before the end of history.
In summary, the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 is a “penultimate” day of the Lord that clarifies and anticipates the final day when Christ returns to eradicate all evil and fully consummate his kingdom. It serves as a sign or type of the final eschatological judgment.8Beale acknowledges the possibility that “the AD 70 coming of Christ in judgement as portrayed by the Synoptics is a typological foreshadowing of his final coming in judgment…Surely, there is an abundant testimony to Christ’s final coming to conclude history elsewhere in Acts, Paul’s writings, and the rest of the NT.” Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 396 n. 27. Walker maintains that “the fall of Jerusalem functions theologically as an advance paradigm of the final judgment of the world. It is a revelation in microcosm of what ultimately awaits us all.”9Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 317, emphasis original. Jerusalem is the city which represents all who reject Jesus, refuse his gracious offer of salvation, and persecute his people (cf. John 1:9-12). This means that Jesus’ rejection of the temple and his woes against the religious leaders of his day can also be read in a broader sense to apply beyond the first century. Patrick Schreiner concludes:
In the historical context the Jewish leaders are the referent, but in the eschatological context it is also all earthly systems opposed to Jesus as king. These two interpretations don’t have to be at odds, but can fit together. If Israel is a microcosm for the rest of humanity, then Jesus’ woes upon the Pharisees and Sadducees are not only woes to the Pharisees and Sadducees living in the first century. The woes are to all those who “tie up heavy burdens upon people,” and “do their deeds to be seen by others.” The judgment is coming upon the Jewish leaders, but also those who construct space in a similar way.10Patrick Schreiner, “People and Place: A Spatial Analysis of the Kingdom in Matthew” (PhD diss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2014), 151.
The NT is clear that the resurrection of Jesus is the firstfruits of the resurrection at the end of the age, and that anyone who is in Christ is a new creation (Acts 26:23; 1 Cor. 15:20-25; 2 Cor. 5:17; Col. 1:18; Rev. 1:5). The gift of the Holy Spirit is the guarantee or down payment of our inheritance (Eph. 1:14; 2 Cor. 1:22; 5:5). Paul proclaims that Christ has already disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame by triumphing over them, even as we wait their final destruction on the last day (Col 2:15; 1 Cor. 15:26). In the same way, the destruction of Jerusalem is best understood as the firstfruits or down payment of the judgment that is coming upon the world for its rejection of and rebellion against Christ and its persecution of his Bride.
Mitch Bedzyk serves as a pastor Emmanuel Community Church, overseeing music and Sunday Classes. He received his Master of Theological Studies from Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and works in IT for the NY Office of Mental Health. He and his wife, Sarah, have five children: Kya, Khalli, Oliver, Amelia, and Micah. In his spare time he enjoys reading, coffee, guitar, being an MLS fanatic and playing fantasy soccer.
