Some teach that Matthew 24 was to be fulfilled twice. This view recognizes a first-century fulfillment, but suggests a second one with worldwide implications is unfulfilled. Even though Jesus said nothing to indicate the Olivet Prophecy would be fulfilled twice, that is apparently what Dr. Oral Roberts believes. Immediately after the World Trade Center attack on September 11, 2001, he stood up before the students and faculty of Oral Roberts University and suggested the disaster was an indication that Matthew 24 was about to be fulfilled. However, Roberts must believe in a first-century fulfillment, at least to some degree, simply because it’s undeniable. History records that the destruction of the Jewish temple mentioned by Jesus in the first two verses took place in AD 70. So Roberts’ futuristic scenario requires a second fulfillment; a new temple and its subsequent destruction. This might sound plausible initially; however, on closer examination, a verse-by-verse double-fulfillment proposal is exposed as absurd. Keith A. Mathison of R. C. Sproul’s Ligonier Ministries says the double-fulfillment theory cannot be “ruled out” (When Shall These Things Be? (Phillipsburg, NY: P&R Publishing, 2004), 180). Actually, it can easily be ruled out. We might wonder whether those who promote the double-fulfillment theory ever took the time to test it by reading over the text even once.

Is the “great commission” to be fulfilled twice? Since “the end” was to come immediately after, it must have already occurred following the first fulfillment. Does the end come twice? If it does, the first one wasn’t the end, was it? Some might suggest this “end” may refer to the end of the Jewish age, and in a greater fulfillment, the end of the Church age. However, nothing in Matthew 24 supports that interpretation. The modern second fulfillment is usually presented as a worldwide catastrophe, but notice verse 20:

Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath.

For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now — and never to be equaled again. (Matt. 24:21)

Since this time of trouble was “never to be equaled again,” how could it occur twice? Some will protest that this kind of language is hyperbole, common in the Old Testament (OT); it wasn’t intended to be taken literally. This is true. But then, the same people should be able to accept that the rest of Matthew 24 is replete with the same OT-style hyperbole. They should not require a second fulfillment just because some events didn’t occur just the way Jesus described them.

This is referring to the “last trumpet” of 1 Cor. 15:51-52; the Resurrection of the Dead and the moment when the living Christians would be “changed.” Are the “elect” to be gathered twice? If all of Matthew 24 was to be fulfilled twice, then clearly, the Resurrection must have occurred during the first fulfillment within the lifetimes of Christ’s listeners. But if all the dead in Hades were resurrected in the first century, how could they be resurrected again at another time in the future? It’s doubtful anyone believes any of this. Yet Oral Roberts, Keith Mathison and countless others present double fulfillment as a viable option.

The double-fulfillment concept is an untenable fabrication created in desperation, probably deemed necessary because its adherents expect literal fulfillments of the highly figurative, cosmic predictions in Matthew 24 and other places which, of course, have never occurred (and never will). In some cases we find types and anti-types in Scripture. For instance, Israelite worship under the Old Covenant was a type or “a shadow of the things that were to come” under the New Covenant (Col. 2:16-17).

However, the New Covenant does not create more shadows for greater fulfillments later. Here is an example of biblical typology:

New Testament (NT) anti-type: Jerusalem

In Matthew 24, Jesus referred back to Isaiah to demonstrate that sinful Jerusalem had become the anti-type of OT Babylon. Jerusalem’s destruction would be the anti-type of Babylon’s destruction. (Most expositors completely miss this parallel and then fail to recognize that in Revelation, “Babylon the Great” is symbolic of Jerusalem.)

Evidently, many influential Bible teachers spend little time testing the double-fulfillment model before teaching it to trusting Christians. They continually predict events that were actually fulfilled long ago. Herod’s temple was destroyed in AD 70, so they must predict a “rebuilt” one. Many prophecies require a Roman Empire, but since it no longer exists, and hasn’t for over 1,500 years, they predict a “revived” one. However, if they would give up their literal-fulfillment requirements (stars falling from heaven, etc.) and fully accept the first and only fulfillments of NT prophecies, there would be no need for a flimsy double-fulfillment theory, and Christians could be spared a lot of useless speculation.

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. (Matt. 24:14, NIV throughout)

For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now — and never to be equaled again. (Matt. 24:21)

An oracle concerning Babylon that Isaiah son of Amoz saw (Isa. 13:1); …The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light. (v.10)