#2 THE RAPTURE

Now, where does it literally say, in every NT usage of the Day of the Lord, that there is any indication at all that ”the Day of the Lord” lasts for 1000 years?


Act 2:20 The sun shall be turned into darkness and the moon into blood, before that great and glorious Day of the Lord.

1Co 5:5 to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

2Co 1:14 even as you have recognized us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as you also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus.

1Th 5:2 For you yourselves know accurately that the day of the Lord comes like a thief in the night.

2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat. And the earth and the works in it will be burned up.

2Th 1:5-10 For this is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God for which you also suffer, since it is a righteous thing with God to repay tribulation to those who trouble you, and to give rest with us to you who are troubled, at the revealing of the Lord Jesus from Heaven with the angels of His power, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God and who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, when He shall come to be glorified in His saints and to be admired in all those who believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that Day.

2Th 2:1-3 Now we beseech you, my brothers, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you should not be soon shaken in mind or troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word or letter, as through us, as if the Day of Christ is at hand. Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For that Day shall not come unless there first comes a falling away, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition,


The only reference to a “1,000 years” in connection with the Second Coming is clearly not literal but symbolical to simply indicate that God’s timing is not our timing. And immediately after that, it clearly says that the Lord will “come quickly” and that when he does come, the day of judgment occurs, the world is burned with fire, the elements will melt, the new heavens and new earth appear and eternity begins – and of which we are warned not to listen to anyone who tries to tell us anything contrary to these things.

2Pe 3:7-18 But the present heavens and the earth being kept in store by the same Word, are being kept for fire until the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. But, beloved, let not this one thing be hidden from you, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow concerning His promise, as some count slowness, but is long-suffering toward us, not purposing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat. And the earth and the works in it will be burned up. Then, all these things being about to be dissolved, what sort ought you to be in holy behavior and godliness, looking for and rushing the coming of the Day of God, on account of which the heavens, being on fire, will melt away, and the elements will melt, burning with heat? But according to His promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. Therefore, beloved, looking for these things,…Paul also has written to you according to the wisdom given to him as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable pervert, as also they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction). Therefore, beloved, knowing beforehand, beware lest being led away with the error of the lawless, you fall from your own steadfastness. But grow in grace and in knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and [TO] the day of eternity. Amen.

I am not in the least bit afraid to post these words of Christ as a serious warning to those who would come with a different message than what these verses clearly and literally say. They are intended for Christians to believe as doctrine and doctrine to hold fast to in respects to watch for concerning anyone coming and saying anything different.

 

How so?

Just the opposite. The posttrib view makes no sense in 2 Thess 2. This is one of the clear ones to me. Think about it. The people in teh church were troubled by the Tribulation because someone told them the DOL had already come. Why were they troubled by being in teh tribulation? Because Paul had told them they would not be in it. A posttrib view does not comport with the text.

I am not aware of any passage that demands such a conclusion.

The Scripture makes a distinction between Isreal and the church. In fact, the very passage you cite (Rom 11) is fundamentally incoherent without that distinction. Gal 6:16 is another wonderfully clear passage that shows a distinction. Plus there are tons of theological arguments that draw on the whole teaching of Scripture that show the distinction, including the NC passages.

Actually, it is dispensationalists that argue the NC is made with true Israel, rather than with the church. When you read the Jer 31 passage, there is no way to "literally" find the church in there. The people with whom the NC made is people whose fathers came out of Egypt, whose father were under the Mosaic covenant, and whose fathers were evicted from the land. That is only true of Israel. IT is not true of the church. The church participates in hte blessings of hte NC, as Hebrews makes clear. They do not become Israel. As Romans 9 reminds us, Israel is hte people of God, but not all physical Israel is spiritual Israel. There are some in physical Israel that are not in spiritual Israel. But Israel is defined by genetics as Gen 15 makes clear.

Absolutely not. What God brought together was Jews and Gentiles in teh church. That says nothing about his promises to Israel as a nation. You can't just skip over that.

I already answered this above. Ask yourself this: If the people there expected to be in the Tribulation, why were they troubled by someone saying they were? If you are right, they should have expected it. Only if I am right is there any reason for them to be troubled.

Because it isn't there. Give us a passage where this is taught. I have never seen it from Scripture. I have seen it from men like Allis, Gerstner, etc. But I have never seen it from God. Jer 31 appears, at face value, to teach the opposite. Who do you think is described in vv. 31-34? How can that be anyone other than ethnic Israel?

But as I have maintained in the past, our discussions always fall apart here because of the matter of exegesis and how we handle the Scripture. YOu seem willing to take what jer 31:31-40 says, and make it mean something in addition to that. I can't seem to find any legitimate way to do that. And that will likely remain our differences.

Bottom line, you are accusing us of a faulty definition of the church, but I must wonder what you think we think the church is. The church is the sum total of all believers (including Jews) from Pentecost to the Rapture. They are incorporated into the body through Spirit baptism, and nationalities and gender no longer matter.

But as Paul says in Gal 3, the promise has not been annulled. And that precisely is why dispensationalists hold out for a future for national Israel ... God promised them one, and he did not annul it. Therefore, it must happen. Romans 11:26ff prove this very point. After the fulness of the Gentiles comes in (the church), then all Israel will be saved. That is a reference to time sequence (after ... then) and it is a reference to Isreal in distinction from the church.

I wish you could see it. I don't understand how you can't ... But, my friend, that is fine. We see it differently ... None of these passages demand what you seem to think they do. They all have legitimate explanations that comport with the context of the passage, as well as the context of Scripture as a whole. I find your explanation (what little there were) lacking in this regard. But I will continue to study, and I trust you will as well.

I appreciate the exchange.

[ March 29, 2005, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

Revelation 20 uses the exact words "thousand years" with reference to the DOL and Christ's reign on this earth. Given the fact that the Trib last for seven years, we should be precise and say that the DOL is a 1007 years. That is the result of precise exegesis of the words of Scripture.

What indicates any symbolism in REv 20?

Having just taught through 2 Peter, I am fairly sure that "come quickly" and "immeidately" are not there, but I am going from memory so I could be wrong. Nor do I know of any such place where they are. The Bible prophesies a time of the Lord's coming when he will rule on the earth in peace and righteousness, with a rod of iron. That certainly is not happening now, and it must happen unless God didn't tell the truth, and I don't think you want to say that.

The warning is with respect to those who deny his coming (2 Peter 3:4), not those who parse the details of hte text in a little different way. However, the warning could be, and probably should be, applied to those who teach amillennialism, because they unintentionaly deny the teaching surrounding the coming of the Lord by lumping separate things into one category. They fail to note biblical distinctions, and when something doesn't fit their system, they just spiritualize and say it really doesn't mean that.

For my conscience, I can't accept thast as a legitimate way to handle Scripture. If your conscience is fine with that, then I guess you can live with it ... I can't.

Yes, and in this we have a warning against all forms of false doctrine. What is remarkably absent is any reference to what we are talking about. Listen, I believe amillennialism to be a false teaching and a denial of Scripture. I see no way to reconcile it. And because of that I warn people about it. I don't think it fits this passage because this is about false teachers who are unprincipled men teaching to exploit people out of their own greed. Neither dispensationalists nor amillennialists really fit that category. That is why we need to be precise about what Peter is talking about. He was not talking about me, nor was he talking abou tyou (unless you are unprincipled and twisting Scripture to exploit others).

I absolutely agree, and teach what I teach because I take these verse very seriously and very literally. But again, they simply don't address this issue. Sorry ...


[/qb][/QUOTE]

 

Larry,

The text doesn't say that Paul taught them that they wouldn't go through the tribulation. You said that reading it into the text. 2 Thess. 1:6 clearly teaches that they would go through persecution, trials, tribulation and not find relief until Christ appears in blazing fire, a post-trib second coming of Christ event. Read the text!

The text doesn't say that the Day of the Lord is the tribulation period. You said that reading it into the text. They thought the Day of the Lord had already come and Paul teaches them that the Day of the Lord won't come until after the tribulation period. Therefore, he is teaching them that the Day of the Lord hasn't yet come. Equating the Day of the Lord with the tribulation is eisegesis.

Stop reading your pre-trib system into the text. It's not there!

At the second coming, after the church is raptured, 1/3 of Israel will convert when they see the one whom they pierced and 2/3 of Israel will be destroyed. The nation of Israel will be the head of the nations during the 1000 years.

The promises given to ethnic Israel will be fulfilled when 1/3 of the nation converts when they see their Messiah returning to earth.

Covenant,

The reason why I am not amill is because after Christ returns the nations go up to Jerusalem. See Zechariah 14. It is not true to say that Rev. 20:1-6 is the only place in the Bible that speaks of a millenium. See Zech. 14:16.

With this understanding, I am required to interpret "day" to mean a thousand years. The Day of the Lord is the day in which he reigns for a thousand years, glorified in his people, judging the nations. First resurrection = glorified in his people. He then rules with an iron scepter. Second resurrection = final judgment of the wicked. Then eternity.

The first resurrection is a resurrection to eternal life.

The second resurrection is a resurrection to eternal condemnation.

This is not inconsistent with the Sheep/Goats passage or 2 Thess. 1:6-10, etc.

[ March 29, 2005, 03:24 PM: Message edited by: Paul33 ]

 

Start with Zecharaiah 12. Note verse three. Zechariah 12:3-9 describes Armageddon, the return of Christ! In my understanding, the post-trib rapture has already taken place. Then we come to verse 10. "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him . . . " From 12:10-13:9 we see a description of the Jews and their response to the return of Christ and what Christ will do on that day. Zechariah 13:7-9 speaks of 2/3 being struck down and 1/3 being refined. Zechariah 14 reiterates what the 1/3 will do on that day when Christ comes to fight against the nations. (verse 3) and reign as king (verse 9). Verse 12 seems to describe the effects of Armageddon on the nations. Verse 16 describes the nations coming up to Jerusalem year after year. That certainly sounds like a millennium to me. Christ rules with an iron scepter because nonbelievers enter the millennium and continue to disobey (Zech 14:16-21).

It is simply not true to say that Rev. 20:1-6 is the only place in Scripture where a thousand year reign of Christ is talked about. Zechariah doesn't give the length of the reign of Christ on earth, but it certainly describes one where non-believers reject his authority!

If my interpretation is correct, 1/3 of the Jews (Israel) will convert to Christ and enter the millennium in unglorified bodies as the head of the nations. Non-believers from the nations who surrive Armageddon will enter the millennium in unglorifed bodies. The post-trib rapture of the church (consisting of all of the Saints throughout the ages) will rule and reign with Christ. At the end of the millennium, the final rebellion takes place and the second resurrection takes place. The wicked are raised to eternal condemnation.

 

It is inferred from 14:2, 4, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 21 that Jerusalem (and Israel), the seat of Israel, is the head of the nations that come up to it year after year!

 

If all of the living believers are raptured at the end of the tribulation, and if 1/3 of Israel convert after the rapture and enter the millennium as believers, then the only other people able to enter the millennium are non-believers from the nations who continue to disobey Christ's rule.

 

Belleview Psychiatric Hospital (see page 7 of this thread) proved to be a wonderful place to spend Eater Sunday. I played a game table tennis with the resurrected Christ, played a game of chess with the Apostle Paul, and got into a very good debate with Moses about keeping the Sabbath . Today, however, after three days of extensive testing and finding absolutely nothing wrong with me , the doctors told me that I was more sane than they are and discharged me before I got a chance to ask Jesus any questions about the Rapture.

So here I am back in this thread of woes, bowls, and trumpets , and I would like to ask a question. It is an established fact that there is no known explicit mention of a pre-trib rapture in any literature from earlier than 1830, and am not aware of even one exegetical commentary on the Greek or Hebrew text of any book in the Bible in which the author favors the pre-trib view. Indeed, I am aware of only one exegetical commentary on the Greek or Hebrew text of a book in the Bible in which the author even mentions the pre-trib view of the rapture. My question is, in the light of these facts, how can a hermeneutic that results in the belief in the pre-trib rapture possibly be a sound hermeneutic? After all, if it is a sound hermeneutic, would we not find it being applied to the Scriptures by at least one the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers or by at least one exegete of the Old or New Testament?

 

Paul,

Zechariah 14:16 says; "Then every one that survives of all the nations that have come against Jerusalem shall go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the feast of Tabernacles."

So, you believe that the Feast of Tabernacles will once again be celebrated by "all the nations" on a yearly basis? Think about it, there are 6,510,053,064 people on planet earth now. Take out the remnant of believers, send them off with the rapture to heaven, and you still have a lot of people from all nations going to Jerusalem on a yearly basis, and on one certain day of the year too, don't you? How are they going to get there too - and all on the same day?

Zechariah 14:21 says; "...and every pot in Jerusalem and Judah shall be sacred to the Lord of hosts, so that all who sacrifice may come and take of them and boil the flesh of the sacrifice in them...."

Now, according to this verse, sacrifices once again will have to be re-instated. So, out of all those that didn't get "raptured to heaven" (and lets just say 1/3 of the earths total population are born-again Christians)will have to fulfill their sacrificial obligations once a year.

Don't you think this has to be speaking of something else? The New Jerusalem perhaps?

 

Craig,

Welcome back! I hope Dr. Luke cured you of the "thorn in your side!"

 

Paul,


You chastise Larry for reading into the text a “rapture theory” that is not there;…

…and then proceed to read into Zechariah a “1,000 year millennium” that is not there either!

It doesn’t matter if you qualify it by saying that the “length of the reign of Christ on earth” is not given, and then proceed to act upon the false belief that it is the same thousand years of Revelations.

While the term "Day of the Lord" is in verse 1 of Zechariah 14, it does not indicate that it is a 1,000 year period of time, nor does Revelation 20 use the term "Day of the Lord," otherwise I would have included it with those verses in the NT that did use that exact phrase which was the purpose of the list - to say it was not in Revelation 20 as Larry had said it was.

Also, vers 7 of chapter 14 says "And there shall be continuous day (it is known to the Lord), not day and not night, for at evening time there shall be light." How do you explain this that you left out?

What are the "Living waters" of verse 8? Christ is the "living waters" of John 7.

[ April 01, 2005, 09:03 AM: Message edited by: covenant ]

 

Paul,

Please correct me if I am wrong, but, if my interpretation of your interpretation is correct, based on gleanings from your last few posts, you are essentially saying this:

…all of the living believers [consisting of all of the Saints throughout the ages] are raptured at the end of the tribulation, [and will rule and reign with Christ.]

…1/3 of Israel [convert to Christ] after the rapture and enter the millennium as believers, [in unglorified bodies as the head of the nations.]

Now, if that is a correct putting together of what you believe, then why is it that those Jews that come to believe in Christ and receive Him as their Lord and Savior during the tribulation, have to remain on earth while their counterpart Christians of all ages are enjoying a heavenly reign with Christ. Sounds like a set-up for jealousy, favoritism, elitism and further tribulation to me.

When do the 1/3 converted Jews get to be raptured? Don't you then have two raptures and 3 resurrections - one additonal one for those Jewish converts that die during the millenium?


-- -- ------------ -- --

[ April 01, 2005, 10:02 AM: Message edited by: covenant ]

 

Covenant,

Good to hear from you.

Jews and Gentiles that believe are raptured together at the end of the tribulation.

The rest of the Jews that remain are either converted and enter the millennium or are destroyed.

I hope that clarifies my position on that issue.

On your other questions. They are admittedly difficult. I would take the position (and I'm probably wrong) that whatever sacrifices or feasts are instituted would be memorial in nature. But I really don't know.

I think that Zechariah 14 is a problem passage for me and for you. After Christ's return in glory, the survivors of the nations must go up to Jerusalem year after year or be disciplined. This doesn't sound like the New Jerusalem or eternity, but rather Christ ruling on earth over the nations with an iron scepter.

I must admit, again, that the more important issue is how we view the people of God, which I think amills and post-trib premills are in agreement on.

I just can't reconcile Zechariah 12-14 and Rev. 20 with an amill position. I can stretch my understanding of the general resurrection passages, but I can't seem to condense my understanding of the Zechariah/Revelation passages.

Thanks for the dialogue.

 

Paul,

First I would like to restate your position to make sure we are talking about the same thing;

Ok, I was most curious about this question that didn't seem to get addressed;

In your last post you essentially said what you had said before; "

Question #1) So, when do the 1/3 Jews that convert "after" the rapture at the "end" of the tribulation and rule and reign with Christ for 1,000 years get raptured? Don't you now have to have 2 raptures, just like the dispys do?

Question #2) If 1/3 of Israel convert to Christ "after" the rapture and "enter" the millenium as believers, then is there a "gap" between the rapture and the resurrection when this salvation of 1/3 of the Jews takes place?

Question #3) If 1/3 of Israel convert to Christ "after" the rapture and the already raptured saints are in heaven with Christ, who is witnessing to those unsaved Jews and Gentiles that are in the millenium phase?

Question #4) Does this not go against the wheat and the tares growing together until the end? They aren't growing together if some are in heaven as saints and the unsaved are on earth during the millenium are they?

Question #5) I thought that the Post-mil position was that it would be an earthly kingdom for 1,000 years with Christ in the temple in Jerusalem. If so, then he won't be in heaven but his saints will?? Why send them to heaven when he could use them on earth to witness?

Question #6) What about the other questions I asked before? Like, how are the trillions of people out of all the nations going to go to tiny little Jerusalem on a yearly basis and on the same day? And where does it say in Zechariah that the sacrifices are "symbolical?"

Question #7) What about verse 7 in chapter 14 where it says that "there shall be continuous day, not day and not night, for at evening time there shall be light."

Question #8) Do you still want to insert a 1,000 year earthly kingdom into Zechariah?

Will be looking forward to your answers.

 

http://castlecops.com/modules/Forums/images/smiles/icon_eck.gif

 

Question #1) So, when do the 1/3 Jews that convert "after" the rapture at the "end" of the tribulation and rule and reign with Christ for 1,000 years get raptured? Don't you now have to have 2 raptures, just like the dispys do?

This is a good question. The Bible doesn't say. The 1/3 of Israel that converts after the rapture and enters the millennium along with the survivors of the nations that have offspring during the millennium and convert will some day recieve glorified bodies. At least I think they do. But the Bible doesn't say how. Admittedly, this is a weakness for my position, because all I can say is "I don't know." If a general resurrection happens at the end of the tribulation, this problem goes away. But I do see from Scripture that converted Jews will enter the millennium along with uncoverted gentiles. What they do during the thousand year reign of Christ as far as offspring, etc. the Bible is silent. I can't answer it.

Question #2) If 1/3 of Israel convert to Christ "after" the rapture and "enter" the millenium as believers, then is there a "gap" between the rapture and the resurrection when this salvation of 1/3 of the Jews takes place?

I don't understand this question. At the second coming of Christ, the saints are raptured and continue to earth with Christ. Then Israel will look upon the one they have pierced. 1/3 convert. 2/3 perish. Armies of the nations perish. Survivors of the nations enter the millennium. So the raptured saints rule and reign with Christ in glorified bodies. The 1/3 converted Jews constitute the nation of Israel that enters the millennium. The gentile survivors enter the millennium.

Question #3) If 1/3 of Israel convert to Christ "after" the rapture and the already raptured saints are in heaven with Christ, who is witnessing to those unsaved Jews and Gentiles that are in the millenium phase?

The Jews aren't unsaved. They converted to Christ and entered the millenium. They witness to unbelieving Gentiles. The resurrected saints witness to the power of Christ. They are not in heaven. They are with Christ on earth. Christ himself is ruling and reigning from Jerusalem over the nations of the world.

Question #4) Does this not go against the wheat and the tares growing together until the end? They aren't growing together if some are in heaven as saints and the unsaved are on earth during the millenium are they?

That text refers to this age when believers and nonbelievers exist side by side until the return of Christ. At the start of the millenium, there will also be believing Jews living among the nonbelieving Gentiles.

Question #5) I thought that the Post-mil position was that it would be an earthly kingdom for 1,000 years with Christ in the temple in Jerusalem. If so, then he won't be in heaven but his saints will?? Why send them to heaven when he could use them on earth to witness?

I'm premill, not postmill. Christ will be on earth. His raptured saints will be on earth. They won't be in heaven. They will be wherever Christ is.

Question #6) What about the other questions I asked before? Like, how are the trillions of people out of all the nations going to go to tiny little Jerusalem on a yearly basis and on the same day? And where does it say in Zechariah that the sacrifices are "symbolical?"

I don't know. I can't answer that. Don't know if they are symbolical or memorial in nature. Perhaps only representatives of the survivors will go. "If any of the peoples" leaves room for representatives to go and not everyone. But I can't answer all of these questions because God didn't spell it out in the text.

Question #7) What about verse 7 in chapter 14 where it says that "there shall be continuous day, not day and not night, for at evening time there shall be light."

I have no idea what this means. Does this mean the earth will stop rotating? How can there be no light, cold or frost, but then at night there will be light. I don't know what it means and neither do you! But verse 9 is a problem for you. The LORD will be king over the whole earth. Why say this if the general resurrection is the end. There will simply be eternity to follow. But here it says that on that day (age? 1000 years?) thre will be one LORD, and his name the only name. Verse 10 then describes the condition of the land and the raising up of Jerusalem. Jerusalem will be secure. Descriptions then follow describing that day when Christ returns, the plague, and the actions of the survivors of the nations (v. 16). It sure doesn't seem to be the end. It seems to be the beginning of the reign of Christ on earth.

Question #8) Do you still want to insert a 1,000 year earthly kingdom into Zechariah?

Yes. Some of your questions were incorrect in what they were driving at. Others make the millenium seem hokey, silly, or complicated. I admit all of that. It would be simpler to say, Christ returns, the righteous enter eternal life, the wicked are judged and eternally condemned, and eternal life with God commences. But the text seems to indicate a physical reign of Christ on earth with his holy ones (raptured saints) over converted Israelites and unconverted gentiles (survivors of the nations).

What am I supposed to do? There is enough evidence in Scripture to believe in a 1000 year reign of Christ, so I do. Without having all of the answers.

Do you still want to deny a reign of Christ on earth from Zechariah?

 

Paul,

Thank you for your response. I was trying to draw a "graph" from what you had posted of your views, which was the reason for the details. I misunderstood that you were post-mill. Pre-mill is more confusing than post-mill, dispensationalism or Amillenialism, and therefore, I suppose I should learn what the differences are. I’ll consider it a learning process. Understanding your position makes it easier to debate if I have a better perception of the doctrine.

With question # 1 though, in regards to offspring, scripture does say in Mat 22:30 "For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in Heaven. " Now, as an Amill, I would apply this to the period after the New Heavens and the New Earth where the white robed saints of Rev 22:14 are residing in the New Jerusalem for eternity.

Concerning question #2; …1/3 of Israel [convert to Christ] after the rapture and enter the millennium as believers, [in unglorified bodies as the head of the nations.] I guess my confusion concerns 1/3 of Jews that constitutes the nation of Israel. Are you saying that if Christ should come back today it would be the Jews living in Jerusalem now, or would the 1/3 mean out of all Jews worldwide that would have the opportunity to convert? Would all the Jews that died for the past 2,000 years be resurrected at that time so that they could have the opportunity to convert also?

What I don't understand also about question #3 is how those 1/3 of the converted Jews got converted. Who witnessed to them? Scripture says that before conversion takes place, a person has to hear the word message of salvation and be convicted by the Holy Spirit. In Rom 10:14 is say this; "How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without preaching?

I must admit that the biggest problem that I have so far concerns what you say about this in your answer to #5; "Christ will be on earth. His raptured saints will be on earth. They won't be in heaven. They will be wherever Christ is."" However, I would like to put that on hold for now because it is a slight detour from the questions at hand.

I think with question #6, concerning the sacrifices being either symbolical or literal, it is best not to write into scripture what is not there. If the context of the whole chapter is interpreted literally, and it does seem as though you are treating it that way, then the details must be treated in the same manner. A literal interpretation of the chapter also still poses a problem for the trillions of people that would be absolutely required to go to Jerusalem during the Feast of Tabernacles each year.

Now, about verse 7 in chapter 14, where it says that "there shall be continuous day, not day and not night, for at evening time there shall be light" goes? I do have an answer for that actually. It's in Rev 21:23-24. "And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine upon it, for the glory of God is its light, and its lamp is the Lamb. By its light shall the nations walk;...there shall be no night there;" This is in the New Jerusalem on the renewed heavens and the renewed earth.

But, when you say that 14:9 poses a problem for me, I don't know what you mean, because the Jews have already acknowledged Christ as having been crowned King by the Jews. Mat 21:5 - "Tell the daughter of Zion, Behold, your King comes to you, meek, and sitting on an ass, even a colt the foal of an ass."... Mat 27:37 - "And they put up over His head His accusation, written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS." ....Mar 15:31-32 - “And also the chief priests mocking, with the scribes, said to one another, He saved others but he cannot save himself. Let Christ the King of Israel now come down from the cross, so that we may see and believe…."

With this, I would say that it's an irony that you actually have the right words when you say;

I don't see where a complicated theory has benefited the church or that a complicated theory has been proven be scripturally supported. When people pick up the Bible and read it without outside interference, they just don't come up with anything else other than what scripture says in 1 Cor 15:20-28.

Lastly, to answer your question; " Do you still want to deny a reign of Christ on earth from Zechariah?" To this I would say "No." However, it is in a different way. It will be the New Jerusalem on a renewed earth, with things restored to the way they were before Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden of Eden.

But, to me, the 1,000 years time frame is almost irrelevant as to whether or not it is a literal time or symbolical time concerning the period between the cross and when eternity begins - it's how scripture is manipulated to put Christ back on a sin-cursed earth again when He would not appear to any unbelievers whatsoever, Jew or Gentile, after the cross and before the ascension! There was only one point in the history of mankind that he mingled with unbelievers and that was for the purpose of shedding his blood for the sin of the world. The job has been accomplished – there is no need to return to earth.

[ April 02, 2005, 03:03 PM: Message edited by: covenant ]

 

I haven't been as precise as I should have been.

Sorry.

I don't think that this is all that complicated. However, there are details that I can't answer because they aren't given in Scripture. By that I mean, what happens to the people that enter the milleniun. When are they resurrected, etc.

Let me simplify this for you.

All believers in Christ throughout all of the ages will be raptured when Christ returns to earth to rule and reign on earth.

That leaves the wicked dead still in the grave. It also leaves the non-believing survivors of the nations alive and entering into the millenium.

It also leaves the 1/3 of Israel that converts immediately after the tribulation alive and entering into the millenium. World-wide Jews or local Israelites? I don't know.

The armies of the nations will perish as will 2/3 of Israel.

The second resurrection is a resurrection at the end of the thousand years. I believe that at this time all unsaved individuals who perish at the end of the thousand years as well as all dead unsaved inidivudals prior to the millenium will be raised, judged, and condemned. In other words, at the end of the thousand years, all dead unsaved individuals from all of the ages will be resurrected to be condemned at the great white throne judgment.

What happens to the saved individuals who are living in the millennium? When do they receive their glorified bodies? Apparently at the end of the thousdand years, but the Bible doesn't specifiy.

It's not all that complicated, but not every detatil is specified in Scripture.

I believe in the thousand year reign of Christ because of Zechariah 12-14 and Revelation 20.

I believe that he will reign on earth as promised and then the new heavens and new earth of Revelation 21 will commence.

As for those living in the millenium in unglorified bodies. They no doubt will live just like we do today. They will marry, have children, etc. Some will believe, others won't.
At the end of the millenium, the nonbeleivers will rebel and be consumed by fire.

 

Paul,

I appreciate your effort to explain your beliefs, but, what you have presented as pre-mill doctrine in your posts just doesn’t line up with scripture at all. However, I’m only going to focus on one error because there simply are too many to do all at once.

First of all, you seem to have “resurrection” and “rapture” confused. They are two different events, although with the Amill view, they both occur on the Last Day at the end of the world.

Also, scripture specifically states that the only event following death will be judgment and that He will appear only one more time to accomplish all this.

Now as far as the believers in Christ throughout all the ages returning to earth after being “resurrected” instead of going to heaven goes, it simply does not agree with scripture. I will give you the best example in scripture that very few people talk about because it is only two little sentences in Matthew.

First, and very interesting indeed, are the only 3 references in the New Testament that uses the words “the holy city” in alluding to the “New Jerusalem.” The word “Jerusalem” is uses many, many times in scripture but not in the same manner as in these 3 unique verses. When you look at Matthew describing what happened immediately upon the death of Christ on the cross, you read where “many saints" were resurrected and went into the “holy city” and appeared to many. Next, we learn that the “holy city” is the New Jerusalem of Revelation 21.

Now, “how many” saints of old were resurrected we are not told, but it does pose a problem for your theory that “believers throughout all the ages will be “resurrected” to live on earth for 1,000 years. Matthew disputes that theory unequivocally. “Many” have already been resurrected and they went immediately into “the holy city.” Since it leaves open the door for it to have been John the Baptist, David, Noah, Adam and Eve, etc. –well, my guess is that they most likely may very well be there already!

But, with your view of returning men like Noah, David and Adam and Eve to a modern, space age world for 1,000 years is……well, downright ludicrous!

(I do wish to qualify this by stating that I am not attempting to be dogmatic by asserting that the resurrection has already taken place - scripture simply says "many".)



[ April 04, 2005, 12:46 AM: Message edited by: covenant ]