Pre Tribulation Rapture Questions

[Yeshua1]

A few questions, my Brother. I apologize up front, as I do not want to appear confrontational. Just looking for a deep discussion, and you strike me as a true Biblical scholar.
1. Where do you find 3 1/2 years of worldwide peace in Scripture?
2. Where do you find a 3rd Temple built in Scripture.
3. Where do you find animal sacrifices resumed?
4. Why would animal sacrifices resume? Jesus was the Ultimate Sacrifice.
5. Where is "the AntiChrist" in Revelation? (I am guessing you are referring to the Beast that comes out of the sea in Rev. 13.)
6. Where do you find the Jews fleeing to Petra?
7. Where do you find 7 years of tribulation in the Bible?

Man of Sin of paul, Antichrist by John!

 

[Yeshua1]

So a Jew who is not washed in the Blood of the Lamb has no more hope of salvation than a Gentile who is not covered by the Blood. BTW - We are carrying on two conversations. Could we combine them into one for simplicity?

A Jew today has no relationship with God apart from trusting in Jesus as the Messiah!

 

[Lodic]

Man of Sin of paul, Antichrist by John!

Since John told his original audience that they would be able to calculate the number of the Beast, it must have been someone they knew. In 2 Thess. 2, when Paul speaks of the "man of Lawlessness", he states that the mystery of Lawlessness was already at work. That is, it was already at work in his day, not 2,000 years in his future. I believe Nero was the Beast / Man of Lawlessness.

 

[John I Morris]

1. Where is the direct reference that states that Christ is coming before the tribulation?
2. Is the Rapture the main subject in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 or was Paul answering a question concerning the saints that had died in the Lord?
3. Where is the timing of the saints being raised from the dead and the living caught up to meet the Lord in the air given in the context of versus 13-18 in cp 4 of 1Thessalonians?
4. Was Matthew 24:29-31 that speaks of Christ coming after the Tribulation spoken to the church or just to the Jews?

Brothers, I am not trying to be argumentative just want to have some input on these questions.

God Bless

Brother Steve

1. Revelation 4:1, the church is called out, not to be heard of again until the end of the Revelation. The great tribulation cannot start until the Holy Spirit is taken out, since the Holy Spirit lives in believers, they need to be gone prior to the start of the great tribulation. Hence, pre-trib.
2. Paul was talking, in context, about the calling out of the saints. Which covers the ones who have died, being reconnected with their soul and spirit. Since we are a tripartite being: body, soul, spirit. Our body goes to the grave and the soul and spirit go to our eternal home (heaven) for the Christian. We will be rejoined at this time, those who are alive just get glorified at that point.
3. The timing, I just explained that in my other answers. I think...
4. Matthew 24 in talking about Christs' second coming, not the great tribulation. At the calling out, we meet Jesus in the air, He does not come to earth.

 

[HankD]

So John could have made a reference to the 1,000 years in a different way and still have it be grammatically correct? Could you provide an example? (I don't want to put you on the spot, but if you happen to know, I'd appreciate it.)

I am not exactly sure what you are looking for. BUT, in the Revelation 20 in reference to the millennium John refers to the 1000 years BOTH ways - with and without the definite article.

Revelation 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

Look in verse 3 and you will see a non specific use of "a little season" as an example of usage without the definite article.
The fact that John uses the definite article at all with the thousand years proves it is a specific/literal "thousand years".
Verse 6 shows how the definite article is used in koine with "the second death".

 

[Lodic]

I am not exactly sure what you are looking for. BUT, in the Revelation 20 in reference to the millennium John refers to the 1000 years BOTH ways - with and without the definite article.

Revelation 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

Look in verse 3 and you will see a non specific use of "a little season" as an example of usage without the definite article.
The fact that John uses the definite article at all with the thousand years proves it is a specific/literal "thousand years".
Verse 6 shows how the definite article is used in koine with "the second death".

Thanks. You figured out what I was looking for, even though I wasn't very clear in the way I asked. While it's interesting, I still hold to a symbolic interpretation of a very long time.

 

[HankD]

Thanks. You figured out what I was looking for, even though I wasn't very clear in the way I asked. While it's interesting, I still hold to a symbolic interpretation of a very long time.

OK

 

[Revmitchell]

While there is certainly allegory in scripture, that is not to be confused with the allegorical method of interpreting scripture. The allegorical method of interpreting scripture is antithetical to the literal method of interpreting scripture. Along with one or two others both of these methods arrived on the scene in the third century. At least as an organized school of training. (1) Jews have a much longer history of interpreting scripture literally.

With the allegorical method you get theologies such as preterism (in all its forms) and amillennialism.

The allegorical method is a result of combining greek philosophy and revelation. It was first created and used by Origin and then later by Clement of Alexandria. (2)

"In the days of Justin the martyr and of Origen Christians had been driven to allegory by an imperious necessity. It was the only means known to them by which to meet the shock which wrenched the gospel free from the fetters of Judaism. They used it to defeat the crude literalism of fanatical heresies or to reconcile the teachings of philosophy with the truths of the Gospel."(3)

1. CF. F. W. Farrar, History of Interpretation, pp. 177
2. Ibid., p.182-83
3. Ibid., p. 238

 

[Yeshua1]

Since John told his original audience that they would be able to calculate the number of the Beast, it must have been someone they knew. In 2 Thess. 2, when Paul speaks of the "man of Lawlessness", he states that the mystery of Lawlessness was already at work. That is, it was already at work in his day, not 2,000 years in his future. I believe Nero was the Beast / Man of Lawlessness.

Except that Jesus did not return to slay Him!

 

[Lodic]

While there is certainly allegory in scripture, that is not to be confused with the allegorical method of interpreting scripture. The allegorical method of interpreting scripture is antithetical to the literal method of interpreting scripture. Along with one or two others both of these methods arrived on the scene in the third century. At least as an organized school of training. (1) Jews have a much longer history of interpreting scripture literally.

With the allegorical method you get theologies such as preterism (in all its forms) and amillennialism.

The allegorical method is a result of combining greek philosophy and revelation. It was first created and used by Origin and then later by Clement of Alexandria. (2)

"In the days of Justin the martyr and of Origen Christians had been driven to allegory by an imperious necessity. It was the only means known to them by which to meet the shock which wrenched the gospel free from the fetters of Judaism. They used it to defeat the crude literalism of fanatical heresies or to reconcile the teachings of philosophy with the truths of the Gospel."(3)

1. CF. F. W. Farrar, History of Interpretation, pp. 177
2. Ibid., p.182-83
3. Ibid., p. 238

Scripture should be interpreted according to "sensus literalis" - the literal meaning of the passage. This is not to say that everything is to be interpreted in a "wooden" literal fashion, but to interpret it by the type of literature it is. We have historical narrative, poetry, didactic, and prophetic symbolism. We see a lot of prophetic symbolism used in the OT prophets like Isaiah. This is the same type of literature John used in writing much of the Revelation. This was written to 7 literal churches around Asia Minor. A great deal of this prophecy uses symbolism. For instance, we don't literally look for a beast to rise up out of the sea, or 1/3 of the stars go out. The point is that we should not interpret everything in prophecy as being "literal".

 

[Lodic]

Except that Jesus did not return to slay Him!

Jesus "returned" in judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70. This is not the same as the Second Advent that we look forward to.

 

[Revmitchell]

For instance, we don't literally look for a beast to rise up out of the sea, or 1/3 of the stars go out. The point is that we should not interpret everything in prophecy as being "literal".

Actually we should in the sense that those symbols represent something literal not just some mystical philosophy. Your response does not really address my post you quoted.

 

[Revmitchell]

Jesus "returned" in judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70. This is not the same as the Second Advent that we look forward to.

Heresy

 

[SovereignGrace]

Jesus "returned" in judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70. This is not the same as the Second Advent that we look forward to.

Where is this found in the Bible?

 

[Yeshua1]

Scripture should be interpreted according to "sensus literalis" - the literal meaning of the passage. This is not to say that everything is to be interpreted in a "wooden" literal fashion, but to interpret it by the type of literature it is. We have historical narrative, poetry, didactic, and prophetic symbolism. We see a lot of prophetic symbolism used in the OT prophets like Isaiah. This is the same type of literature John used in writing much of the Revelation. This was written to 7 literal churches around Asia Minor. A great deal of this prophecy uses symbolism. For instance, we don't literally look for a beast to rise up out of the sea, or 1/3 of the stars go out. The point is that we should not interpret everything in prophecy as being "literal".

Yes, but we need to make sure that we do see the Great tribulation as meaning AD 70 only, or that the physical resurrection of the saints in Christ did not literally mean that!

 

[Yeshua1]

Where is this found in the Bible?

Its nowhere to be found, as the second coming will be something that changes history forever as we now know it!

 

[Yeshua1]

Jesus "returned" in judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70. This is not the same as the Second Advent that we look forward to.

There is but one Second Coming, as there was NO mention of AD 70 as being the time when all prophecy was then fulfilled!

 

[Lodic]

Actually we should in the sense that those symbols represent something literal not just some mystical philosophy. Your response does not really address my post you quoted.

While there is certainly allegory in scripture, that is not to be confused with the allegorical method of interpreting scripture. The allegorical method of interpreting scripture is antithetical to the literal method of interpreting scripture. Along with one or two others both of these methods arrived on the scene in the third century. At least as an organized school of training. (1) Jews have a much longer history of interpreting scripture literally.

With the allegorical method you get theologies such as preterism (in all its forms) and amillennialism.

The allegorical method is a result of combining greek philosophy and revelation. It was first created and used by Origin and then later by Clement of Alexandria. (2)

"In the days of Justin the martyr and of Origen Christians had been driven to allegory by an imperious necessity. It was the only means known to them by which to meet the shock which wrenched the gospel free from the fetters of Judaism. They used it to defeat the crude literalism of fanatical heresies or to reconcile the teachings of philosophy with the truths of the Gospel."(3)

1. CF. F. W. Farrar, History of Interpretation, pp. 177
2. Ibid., p.182-83
3. Ibid., p. 238

My apologies, Brother. Let me see if I can elaborate. We certainly don't want to interpret Scripture allegorical where it shouldn't be. That could leave interpreting the Bible to be like reading Aesop's fables. Most of the Bible should be taken in the literal sense. As you say, we need to see the meaning behind the symbolic passages. I believe we are both applying that principle when it comes to Revelation. It's just that our interpretations are very different.
Did that address your point better?

 

[Lodic]

There is but one Second Coming, as there was NO mention of AD 70 as being the time when all prophecy was then fulfilled!

There wouldn't be any mention of AD 70 if Revelation was written during the late 60s, and not in the 90s as many believe. As a matter of fact, the fact that the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple is missing from Scripture (except in the Olivet Discourse) is one of the main reasons that I believe all the NT was written by the late 60s.
I completely agree that there will be only one Second Coming. You will note that God "came" in judgment many times in the OT. That doesn't mean that He literally came down from Heaven to Earth. It's all in the language.

 

[Lodic]

Yes, but we need to make sure that we do see the Great tribulation as meaning AD 70 only, or that the physical resurrection of the saints in Christ did not literally mean that!

Agreed. It certainly can be a challenge when dealing with such a complex book. Isn't it ironic that a book titled "Revelation" is the most cryptic?