Israel, The Temple, and End Times (The Chosen Season 5 Controversies)
Updated: 6 days ago
Season 5 of The Chosen is still months away, but we already have more advanced knowledge about the upcoming season than we have had about any past season. Based on the basic details that we have - and the way controversy hounds every new season of The Chosen - we can be pretty confident not only that there will be controversies related to Season 5 but what some of those controversies will be. In this post, I’ll look at the minefield that The Chosen Season 5 will wade through if it depicts Jesus’ prophecy about the destruction of the Temple and the coming of the Son of Man. [Looking for analysis of the recent Last Supper teaser? Check out another recent post!]
What’s happening in The Chosen Season 5 and why is it controversial?
Season 4 of The Chosen leaves off just before Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday. Dallas Jenkins has said on multiple occasions that Season 5 of The Chosen will pick up where Season 4 left off and focus on Holy Week, leading up to but not including the crucifixion of Jesus. This is the section of Jesus’ life that receives the most detailed treatment in the Gospels, and so we can actually be fairly confident about the events that we’ll see in The Chosen Season 5. One of these events is Jesus’ prophecy about the abomination of desolation, the destruction of the Temple, and the coming of the Son of Man - a prophecy that has generated endless debate among Christians.
Sometime during his final week in Jerusalem, after visiting the Temple with his disciples and hearing them praise the fine architecture, Jesus responds in a surprising way:
Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” And Jesus answered them, “See that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray. And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for this must take place, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are but the beginning of the birth pains.
“Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
“So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let the one who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house, and let the one who is in the field not turn back to take his cloak. And alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath. For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand. So, if they say to you, ‘Look, he is in the wilderness,’ do not go out. If they say, ‘Look, he is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather.
“Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
“From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.
“But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only. For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one left. Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into. Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.” (Matthew 24:1-44, ESV; see also: Mark 13, Luke 21).
This prophecy has generated many conflicting interpretations. Some interpreters believe Jesus’ words refer exclusively to events that have already taken place. Others believe that they anticipate recent and future events that are part of the last days. Sill others believe that Jesus refers to events in the first century and the future. If The Chosen depicts Jesus’ prophecy, it could try to stay neutral in these debates by presenting the biblical text without commentary or interpretation. But when the show depicts Jesus’ difficult teachings, it generally doesn’t give us just the straight text. Instead, The Chosen adds additional explanation or commentary that is meant to clarify what Jesus does and doesn’t mean. If The Chosen provides additional commentary on Jesus’ prophecy about the Temple and the coming of the Son of Man, it may favor one interpretative camp over another - and potentially anger those who hold a different view.
What’s at stake? (Eschatology and Israel)
Some Christians aren’t very interested in eschatology (the study of the last things) and may not be particularly concerned about how Jesus’ prophecy is interpreted. But other Christians place a very high emphasis on the end times. If The Chosen depicts Jesus’ prophecy in a manner that violates a particular end times schema, it will almost certainly draw criticism. And The Chosen may face even greater scrutiny in this respect because of its connection to the Jenkins family.
Apart from the Bible itself, the Left Behind series is one the most popular depictions of the end times that’s ever been made. The books sold millions of copies worldwide and were adapted into multiple films, graphic novels, and video games. As anyone who grew up during the 90’s and early 00’s can attest, there was a time when the distinctive striped cover of the Left Behind books seemed to be everywhere.
The original Left Behind books were the result of a collaboration between Tim LaHaye, an Protestant Evangelical minister, who was primarily responsible for the biblical and theological underpinnings of the series, and Jerry B. Jenkins, who handled more of the actual writing. Jerry B. Jenkins is, of course, the father of Dallas Jenkins, creator of The Chosen.
Although the Left Behind books were incredibly popular in their own time, they aren’t nearly as popular today, even among Protestant Evangelicals. Part of that may be due to the criticism that the books have received since publication. But part of it may also be due to a general decline in the popularity of traditional dispensationalism, the eschatological approach that undergirds Left Behind. While traditional dispensationalism is still an influential strain of American Evangelicalism, it is not nearly as dominant and pervasive as it once was, having been overshadowed by other growing theological perspectives, like Reformed post- and a-millennialism and progressive dispensationalism.
If The Chosen depicts Jesus’ prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem, many viewers will scrutinize the scene in light of Dallas’ genealogical connection to the Left Behind books. Ardent fans of Left Behind may expect the younger Jenkins to craft the scene in a manner that’s consonant with his father’s work. They may be disappointed if the show takes another approach - or tries to skirt the issue. Meanwhile, critics of the Left Behind books may also expect to see a dispensational influence on The Chosen - and may be too quick to judge what the show does.
[Sidenote: I continue to believe that the meaning of a show like The Chosen should be judged solely on the basis of what it actually says/depicts. The beliefs and work of Dallas' father may or may not matter to him, but I don't see why they should matter to viewers like me. What matters is what makes it on screen. Of course, what makes it on screen may be influenced by Dallas' connections, but such things may also be completely irrelevant - or there may be a dozen other influences that are far more relevant. Someday, there might be a biographer/historian with insider access that might be able to judge the influences on The Chosen fairly, but we're not in the position to do so. That said, I've brought up Dallas' connection to Left Behind because the kinds of people who criticise the show often do believe that such things matter (see, for example, The Law of Moses controversy.)]
There’s another reason why the depiction of Jesus’ prophecy in The Chosen may generate some very heated debate in our specific cultural moment. The current situation in Israel is one of the most polarizing divides in global politics today. While a large percentage of American Christians (especially Evangelicals) support Israel in its current conflict, there is a significant group of Christians who either support the Palestinian cause or are skeptical of Israel's war. This division is largely generational, with the most ardent supporters of Israel skewing older and the most ardent opponents of Israel skewing much younger.
Among certain groups of Christians, support for Israel (or lack thereof) is tied to the interpretation of Jesus’ prophecy. As we'll see below, certain interpretive approaches to the passage (especially dispensationalism and futurism) emphasize the importance of modern Israel and the rebuilding of the temple. Although Jesus' prophecy is not the only text that underlies this perspective, it is an important building block. On the other hand, some Christians believe Jesus' prophecy indicates that God's purpose for the nation of Israel and for the Temple came to a definitive end in 70 AD and that the church has now superseded Israel as the people of God and the true Temple.
Because the interpretation of Jesus’ prophecy has had an influence on the political outlook of so many Christians, whatever The Chosen does with this moment will be construed as a political statement. On the one hand, if the show undermines the futurist interpretation, theological proponents of Israel will see it as an attack on the nation’s right to exist. On the other hand, if the show supports the futurist interpretation, it may anger Christians who are pro-Palestinian or critics of the state of Israel. Either way, there will probably be critics who accuse The Chosen of being political.
How has Jesus’ prophecy been interpreted?
Jesus’ prophecy has been interpreted in many different ways. I won’t try to cover all of them - or give a super-detailed explanation of any particular approach. But for those of you who aren’t acquainted with eschatology, here’s a general overview of three general approaches to this passage:
Futurism
In the futurist interpretation of Matthew 24 (and the parallel passages):
Jesus’ prophecy primarily refers to events that are either still in the future (from a modern vantage point) or fairly recent (i.e. sometime after the founding of the modern state of Israel).
The “holy place” is a yet-to-be rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem.
The “abomination of desolation” is either a future global Antichrist, his false prophet, or an image of the Antichrist that will be set up in the Temple.
The “great tribulation” refers to a period of severe persecution and global catastrophe.
The “coming of the Son of Man” refers to the pre/mid tribulation rapture of the elect and/or the post-tribulation second coming.
When Jesus predicts that “this generation” will not pass away before these events take place, he’s either referring to the people of Israel as a whole (generation = lineage) or the generation of people who witness the beginning of the tribulation.
Jesus’ prophecy cannot be fulfilled until a Temple is rebuilt in Jerusalem, and thus provides justification for supporting the modern state of Israel.
Preterism
In the preterist interpretation of Matthew 24 (and the parallel passages):
Jesus’ prophecy refers to the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD - a few decades after Jesus’ earthly ministry but long before modern times.
The “holy place” is the Temple of Herod, which was destroyed by Rome during the siege of Jerusalem.
The “abomination of desolation” is either the Roman army, which bore abominable idols and desolated Jerusalem, or the Zealots, who filled the Temple with violence and ultimately brought about the desolation of Jerusalem.
The “great tribulation” refers to Roman oppression and dramatic disasters that took place in the days leading up to and following the Jewish rebellion.
The “coming of the Son of Man” is either a reference to Jesus coming up to (i.e. ascending to) the Ancient of Days and receiving power and authority (like in Daniel 7) or a vision of the spiritual reality underlying the earthly judgment of Jerusalem, similar to Old Testament depictions of God coming on the clouds in judgment often refer to spiritual realities underlying historical earthly events (e.g. 1 Samuel 22).
When Jesus predicts that “this generation” will not pass away before these events take place, he’s referring to the generation of people that he’s speaking to (generation=age cohort, like Gen Z or Gen X).
The Temple has already served its purpose and does not need to be rebuilt. Many (but not all) preterists believe that God's purpose for the nation of Israel has come to a close and that the modern state of Israel is a secular state like any other and does not play a unique role in God’s purposes today.
Some preterists still believe in a future second coming of Christ based on other New Testament passages, while others believe that all references to Jesus’ coming have already been fulfilled.
Hybrid Approaches
A few approaches to Matthew 24 (and its parallels) seek to incorporate both the events of 70 AD and a future tribulation/second coming. The first of these is the double fulfillment model:
Jesus’ prophecy is establishing a pattern, which was partially fulfilled by the events in 70 AD, and will be more fully fulfilled by future events.
The “holy place” refers to both the Temple of Herod and a rebuilt Temple. Alternatively, some believe that in the second-fulfillment, church institutions may replaces the Temple as God’s “holy place.”
The “abomination of desolation” refers to both the Roman armies and the forces of a future Antichrist.
The “great tribulation” refers to disasters and persecution both around 70 AD and at some future time.
The “coming of the Son of Man” is often considered to be the only aspect of the prophecy that was not fulfilled in 70 AD.
The other hybrid approach (developed by Professor John Murray) argues that Jesus is predicting two separate events, which his disciples assumed would be simultaneous but have turned out to be separated in time:
Initially, Jesus only predicts the destruction of the Temple (Matthew 24:2). In response, his disciples ask two questions: “when will these things be?” and “what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” (Matthew 24:3). Jesus’ response begins with an overview of the church age (Matthew 24:4-14). Then he addresses the disciples’ first question (Matthew 24:15-28), before turning to the second question (Matthew 24:29-44).
The “holy place” is the Temple of Herod, which was destroyed in 70 AD.
The “abomination of desolation” refers to the Roman armies that besieged and desolated Jerusalem.
The “great tribulation” refers to the events surrounding 70 AD, but the “tribulation of those days” refers to a broader, ongoing season, the “times of the Gentiles” (Luke 21:24), during which Jerusalem is still controlled by Gentiles and the Jewish people are in diaspora.
The “coming of the Son of Man” is the future Second Coming.
This is not a prophecy blog, so I’m not interested in trying to argue for one approach over another. To be honest, I’m not even settled in my own convictions on this matter. That’s why I’ve done my best to fairly represent each approach. Too often, Christians are quick to judge each other for coming to a different conclusion about matters that simply aren’t very clear. But whatever your own convictions may be - and whatever approach The Chosen takes - I encourage you to engage with those who see things differently with a spirit of humility, grace, and love.
How should The Chosen Season 5 adapt Jesus’ prophecy?
In light of the controversy that could surround the depiction of Jesus’ prophecy, there are a few approaches that The Chosen could take to adaptation:
Clarifying Jesus’ Words and Taking an Interpretive Position
As I noted above, The Chosen rarely gives us a straightforward rendering of Jesus’ difficult teachings. Speeches that are long and complex in the original source material [like the commissioning of the disciples (Matthew 10; cf. Season 3 Episode 2) or the the Born Again teaching (John 3; c.f. Season 1 Episode 7)] are depicted as more digestible dialogues, in which the disciples ask for or offer clarification when Jesus says something confusing. Short, pithy sayings in the source material [like Jesus’ response to Martha (Luke 10:41-42, cf. Season 4 Episode 5)] are often expanded out into longer, more nuanced speeches that are meant to counter misunderstandings and misapplications.
In many ways, Jesus’ prophecy is ripe for this clarifying approach. Some of the things that Jesus says in this passage will be opaque to the typical viewer. Moreover, such a long, complex speech will be difficult for viewers to follow. Given how the prophecy begins with the disciples asking Jesus questions, it would make a lot of sense for the show to interrupt the speech with questions from the disciples that clarify what Jesus means.
But if The Chosen takes this approach, it will almost inevitably end up favoring a particular position. Clarification is interpretation. It almost always means pushing people toward one potential sense - and away from other competing senses. Of course, there are minor clarifications that can be made that will not affect the big picture debates over interpretation. But the most obscure and difficult parts of the speech are precisely the points that are most debated. As I’ve argued above, wading into such debates could lead to significant controversy and division.
Avoiding the Passage
The Chosen does not adapt every passage included in the Gospels. Some stories and teachings are omitted merely because they resemble other stories or teachings that are in the show. Depicting everything would make the show feel a bit repetitive. There are also times when The Chosen appears to omit stories and teachings because of the difficulty involved in depicting them. The Transfiguration was famously (and controversially) omitted. After the feeding of the five thousand, Jesus’ teaching about eating his flesh and drinking his blood was also omitted - perhaps in part because of how sharply Catholics and Protestants are divided over the meaning of his teaching and what it says about the nature of Communion.
By simply omitting Jesus’ prophecy, The Chosen would avoid weighing in on the interpretive debate. Given how many controversies The Chosen has already faced, I could see why the show might want to steer clear of another. This is actually what most popular Gospel adaptations seem to do. The only depictions of the passage that I’ve personally come across are in comprehensive, word-for-word adaptations like the Lumo Project.
Still, I have a hard time believing that the show will totally avoid Jesus’ prophecy. Most Gospel adaptations are films with a limited run time and so it’s easy to justify omitting a long, complicated speech. The Chosen, by contrast, is dedicating an entire eight-episode season to Holy Week. While there is a lot of material in this section of the Gospels, a significant portion of that material is actually related to Jesus’ prophecy. In addition to the speech itself, the cleansing of the Temple (Matthew 21:12-13), the cursing of the fig tree (Matthew 21:18-22), and many of Jesus’ parables and other speeches (e.g. Matthew 21:28-45, 22:1-14, 23, 24:45-52, 25) are often interpreted in connection to Jesus’ prophecy (whatever way you want to understand it). The Chosen can’t avoid the prophecy and the topics that it addresses without gutting or obscuring core elements of the story of Holy Week.
Straightforward Depiction
Although The Chosen often provides us with an interpretive rendering of Jesus’ teachings, there are times when the show gives us a fairly straightforward depiction that sticks fairly close to the original source material. In this instance, the advantage of doing so is that no one could accuse the show of favoring or supporting a particular interpretive/theological perspective. Each viewer in the theological diverse audience of The Chosen would be free to interpret and understand Jesus’ prophecy according to his/her own perspective. While the scene might still generate some debates between fans of differing perspectives, no one would blame the show for putting a thumb on the scale.
Out of all the approaches, this is my second favorite approach. While I generally don’t mind when the show interprets and attempts to clarify Jesus’ words, I believe there is wisdom in being more restrained when dealing with passages that are more obscure or debated. Still, providing no clarification for obscure or difficult passages can also be frustrating for viewers. As I've pointed out, this long, complicated speech would be hard for many viewers to follow and understand. That’s why I favor another approach:
Presenting Multiple Competing Interpretations
The advantage of a show in which there are several diverse characters is that you can present the audience with a variety of perspectives without definitively favoring one perspective over another. Although Jesus’ perspective in The Chosen is authoritative, the show also contains a variety of non-authoritative perspectives (the disciples). There have been times in which The Chosen has allowed the disciples to debate a thorny theological question from their own limited perspectives, without providing a definitive and authoritative answer through Jesus. Most recently, the show deployed this approach to moment when Jesus renames Simon and declares that "on this rock I will build my church." While the disciples speculate and debate the meaning of Jesus' words, Jesus himself never provides an exhaustive explanation.
When Jesus utters his prophecy, we know that there are multiple disciples conversing with him. It wouldn’t be hard to have the disciples voice different understandings of Jesus’ words - and for Jesus to either not hear or refuse to clarify. For example, when Jesus says “this generation will not pass away,” the disciples could jump in and begin arguing (“Wait, do you mean the people alive right now or the people alive when all of this starts?” “No, he means the Jewish people.”) and Jesus could play coy (e.g. “I’ll let you figure that out.”). I could also see the show making a meta-textual point by having the disciples begin to fight over what Jesus meant - and then having Jesus basically say, “These matters are difficult. Don’t lose sight of what’s most important - showing love for one another.”
This approach would allow the show to break up the long speech and provide potential clarifications - without definitively favoring one perspective over the others. While I’m sure there would still be quibbling (the show couldn’t possibly represent every interpretive perspective and some people will be offended at the mere mention of certain interpretations), this seems like the best way to balance the various challenges involved in depicting Jesus’ prophecy.
Do you think this scene will generate controversy in Season 5? Which adaptive approach do you think would make the most sense? Please leave your thoughts in the comments below. I'll try to update this post after we see what the show actually does. Note: If you think I need to correct my description of an interpretive approach to Matthew 24, I’m glad to receive feedback (I’m not an expert in eschatology). But I’m not interested in debating the merits of the various interpretations - at least not in this space. That doesn’t mean that such things aren’t worth studying and discussing - it’s just not the purpose of this specific blog.
Supporting The Bible Artist
Have my resources helped you explore the Bible and biblical adaptations, either on your own or with your ministry, church, or family? I offer most* of my work for free and rely on the generous support of readers like you. Your contributions mean so much. Thank you!
*Members who contribute $5/monthly or $50/annually receive access to exclusive content, including monthly blogs and pdf versions of my Bible study/discussion guides, as well as free gifts and other perks.
