Timing of the Rapture

[StefanM]

We are interpreting Revelation differently. There is only one place where a millennium is mentioned.
(Revelation 20:1-3)
Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven with the key to the bottomless pit and a heavy chain in his hand. He seized the dragon—that old serpent, who is the devil, Satan—and bound him in chains for a thousand years. The angel threw him into the bottomless pit, which he then shut and locked so Satan could not deceive the nations anymore until the thousand years were finished. Afterward he must be released for a little while.

The 1000 years is not a unique reign of Christ on earth where Jesus then goes back to heaven and Satan is released.
The 1000 years is a limited timeframe where Satan is not allowed to deceive the nations to be fully antichrist. We,the church, are presently in this 1000 year binding of Satan as God protects us in the wilderness.
(Revelation 12:6)
And the woman fled into the wilderness, where God had prepared a place to care for her for 1,260 days.

In Revelation, John is using apocalyptic language. He is not speaking with exact literal language. Like Matthew, in the 1st chapter of his gospel and Daniel in his 12th chapter, John is choosing numbers that have general meaning, not literal meaning. (To be honest, this was the hardest thing to wrap my mind around when moving away from dispensationalist futurism. Numbers have different meaning in Revelation that express general lengths of time or various perfections. John is employing a numeric technique that is very common to apocalyptic language.

Ultimately the idea that our King would come in full glory, reign for only 1000 years, and then let Satan reek havoc on the earth again seems bizarre and terribly random based on three verses. It doesn't make any sense. But, when we understand that God is protecting his church so it can grow from a mustard seed to a tree by keeping Satan bound for a period of time, then these verses make sense. The early church would have rejoiced in knowing that their endurance was not in vain and that Satan was being bound. We, today, can also rejoice that Satan is presently bound and that we are marked by God.

I'm not a premillennialist primarily because of Revelation 20. I am a premillennialist mostly because I believe in the earthly fulfillment of unconditional promises made to Israel, which I know is an area of disagreement between us.

As far as the thousand years go, I don't think it has to be exactly one thousand years (although it could be).

 

[canadyjd]

Pretribulation Rapture is a certainty. It's quite vain to think otherwise….

Not sure why vanity has anything to do with it.

Jesus said very specifically in Matthew 24 when answering the questions of his disciples concerning His 2nd coming and the end of the age.

Jesus said, “After the tribulation”… He comes in the clouds (2nd coming), He sends His angels to collect the saints (rapture) and then in Matthew 25 (as He continues His answer to the questions) He explains the great throne judgment.

Scripture does not support the dispensation views of 1000 earthly reign of Jesus, nor the restoration of the Temple in Jerusalem, nor the establishment of national Israel separate from the church.

Jesus said “after” the tribulation He comes, collects the saints, great throne judgment.

peace to you

 

[taisto]

I'm not a premillennialist primarily because of Revelation 20. I am a premillennialist mostly because I believe in the earthly fulfillment of unconditional promises made to Israel, which I know is an area of disagreement between us.

As far as the thousand years go, I don't think it has to be exactly one thousand years (although it could be).

There is an unconditional promise to the Israel of God, the Church which has existed from Adam onward. Paul tells us that the Church is Israel (not a replacement, but always the actual Israel, the chosen people of faith).

Until you are able to see Israel as those who are saved by faith, this will be a place of stumbling. I know that it was for me. I kept hearing "replacement theology" in the negative so it was hard for me to understand what Paul was saying in Romans 2, Romans 9, and Romans 11. In studying Romans and Paul's 11 chapter argument on justification by faith alone I had to accept Paul's argument for the Church always being Israel.

 

[canadyjd]

There is an unconditional promise to the Israel of God, the Church which has existed from Adam onward. Paul tells us that the Church is Israel (not a replacement, but always the actual Israel, the chosen people of faith).

Until you are able to see Israel as those who are saved by faith, this will be a place of stumbling. I know that it was for me. I kept hearing "replacement theology" in the negative so it was hard for me to understand what Paul was saying in Romans 2, Romans 9, and Romans 11. In studying Romans and Paul's 11 chapter argument on justification by faith alone I had to accept Paul's argument for the Church always being Israel.

Exactly!! Those that are “Abraham’s seed” are children of the promise, both Jew and Gentile… The Israel of God.

Add to that Paul’s explanation in Ephesians that Jew and Gentile have become “one new man” by the cross of Jesus, reconciled to God by Holy Spirit.

There can be no separate future for “National Israel”, since that would require the work of the cross to be undone so as to separate the “one new man” into the two old entities.

peace to you

 

[tyndale1946]

The distinction between the rapture and the second coming makes sense to me from a practical perspective. If there is no difference between the two, looking forward to Christ's return seems . . . difficult. If I have the option of living my life and dying normally vs. going through the calamities of the end times, I'll take the "normal" life and death 10 out of 10 times. If, however, I can look forward to the rapture as a deliverance from this fallen world and its troubles, I'm borderline impatient in expectation!

Sorry brethren but the rapture to me it is a waste of time and a waste of books and a waste of my good hard money... Why would Christ come down here and reign for 1,000 years?... What's he doing now in Heaven on his throne on the right hand of his Father, gathering dust?... He's reigning now!... You brethren with your confusion and your end time delusion... While us other brethren are resurrected and in glory, I guess we can wait for you other brethren to appear after your millennial games are complete in 1,000 years?... I know other brethren on here, who believe the way I do... Your rapture is a rupture in doctrine... We were in tribulation since we drew our first breath... Life is tribulation... I'm waiting for the Resurrection, I've had plenty of tribulation and its not over yet and some of it has been great!

John 16: 33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

Since I first joined, you brethren have been trying to drag this dead horse, to the finish line... Brother Glen

 

[asterisktom]

It already happened in the first century, probably AD 66. Several passages in the NT limit the fulfilling of that particular promise to that generation. But Christians nowadays ignore audience relevance and time markers and insist on doing their newspaper eisegesis.

 

[asterisktom]

Sorry brethren but the rapture to me it is a waste of time and a waste of books and a waste of my good hard money... Why would Christ come down here and reign for 1,000 years?... What's he doing now in Heaven on his throne on the right hand of his Father, gathering dust?... He's reigning now!... You brethren with your confusion and your end time delusion... While us other brethren are resurrected and in glory, I guess we can wait for you other brethren to appear after your millennial games are complete in 1,000 years?... I know other brethren on here, who believe the way I do... Your rapture is a rupture in doctrine... We were in tribulation since we drew our first breath... Life is tribulation... I'm waiting for the Resurrection, I've had plenty of tribulation and its not over yet and some of it has been great!

John 16: 33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

Since I first joined, you brethren have been trying to drag this dead horse, to the finish line... Brother Glen

Oh, that poor horse! I am definitely going to use that metaphor sometime.

Agreed on this. The worse result of this whole rapture- ready nonsense is that it distracts and weakens Christians from being salt and light now. They await a fictitious future kingdom and largely overlook Christ's present kingdom.

 

[percho]

It already happened in the first century, probably AD 66. Several passages in the NT limit the fulfilling of that particular promise to that generation. But Christians nowadays ignore audience relevance and time markers and insist on doing their newspaper eisegesis.

knowing that Christ, having been raised up out of the dead, doth no more die, death over him hath no more lordship; Rom 6:9

Has anyone other than Christ had that experience?

for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive, and each in his proper order, a first-fruit Christ, afterwards those who are the Christ's, in his presence,

Has anyone other than the Christ been made alive, to die no more?

who shall transform the body of our humiliation to its becoming conformed to the body of his glory, according to the working of his power, even to subject to himself the all things.
For our citizenship is in the heavens, whence also a Saviour we await -- the Lord Jesus Christ -- Phil 3:20,21

Has anyone other than Christ been so transformed?

John 7:39 and this he said of the Spirit, which those believing in him were about to receive; for not yet was the Holy Spirit, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

When was Jesus glorified so that the Holy Spirit would be available? Is the glorified spoken of in John 7:39 the same glorified spoken of in Hebrews 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.

When did he who said, "Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee," glorify him to be an high priest?

This one who, Phil 2:8 in fashion having been found as a man, he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death -- death even of a cross, And Heb 5:7,8 who in the days of his flesh both prayers and supplications unto Him who was able to save him from death -- with strong crying and tears -- having offered up, and having been heard in respect to that which he feared, through being a Son, did learn by the things which he suffered -- the obedience,

When was that one who was dead three days and three nights, glorified by God the Father? John 17:5 A priest forever after the order of Melchisedek

Heb 5:9,10 and having been made perfect, he did become to all those obeying him a cause of salvation age-during, having been addressed by God a chief priest, according to the order of Melchisedek,

What order of priesthood will we be and why so?

1 Thes 4:14 for if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, so also God those asleep through Jesus he will bring with him,

Has anyone other than Christ experienced that, "so also," above? Died and rose again in a glorified body unto an endless life?
Is that the rapture?

Will those who have died in Christ be regenerated? Will those who are alive and are Christ's, at his appearing, be regenerated as one who cannot die?

And Jesus said to them, 'Verily I say to you, that ye who did follow me in the regeneration, when the Son of Man may sit upon a throne of his glory, shall sit -- ye also -- upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel; Matt 19:28

Is the above verse speaking the same as the following? --

for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive, and each in his proper order, a first-fruit Christ, afterwards those who are the Christ's, in his presence,

Ye who follow me me in being made alive when I come to sit on the throne of my glory. Glorified likewise to reign with him unto the last enemy being done away by the rest of the dead being made alive and the kingdom being delivered up to the Father?

1 Cor 15:24-26 then -- the end, when he may deliver up the reign to God, even the Father, when he may have made useless all rule, and all authority and power -- for it behoveth him to reign till he may have put all the enemies under his feet -- the last enemy is done away -- death;

he day of the Lord begins 1 Thes 4 :14 - 5:2 then ends when the last enemy to be destroyed = 2 Peter 3:8


When did what happen?


IMHO

 

[asterisktom]

knowing that Christ, having been raised up out of the dead, doth no more die, death over him hath no more lordship; Rom 6:9

Has anyone other than Christ had that experience?

for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive, and each in his proper order, a first-fruit Christ, afterwards those who are the Christ's, in his presence,

Has anyone other than the Christ been made alive, to die no more?

who shall transform the body of our humiliation to its becoming conformed to the body of his glory, according to the working of his power, even to subject to himself the all things.
For our citizenship is in the heavens, whence also a Saviour we await -- the Lord Jesus Christ -- Phil 3:20,21

Has anyone other than Christ been so transformed?

John 7:39 and this he said of the Spirit, which those believing in him were about to receive; for not yet was the Holy Spirit, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

When was Jesus glorified so that the Holy Spirit would be available? Is the glorified spoken of in John 7:39 the same glorified spoken of in Hebrews 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.

When did he who said, "Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee," glorify him to be an high priest?

This one who, Phil 2:8 in fashion having been found as a man, he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death -- death even of a cross, And Heb 5:7,8 who in the days of his flesh both prayers and supplications unto Him who was able to save him from death -- with strong crying and tears -- having offered up, and having been heard in respect to that which he feared, through being a Son, did learn by the things which he suffered -- the obedience,

When was that one who was dead three days and three nights, glorified by God the Father? John 17:5 A priest forever after the order of Melchisedek

Heb 5:9,10 and having been made perfect, he did become to all those obeying him a cause of salvation age-during, having been addressed by God a chief priest, according to the order of Melchisedek,

What order of priesthood will we be and why so?

1 Thes 4:14 for if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, so also God those asleep through Jesus he will bring with him,

Has anyone other than Christ experienced that, "so also," above? Died and rose again in a glorified body unto an endless life?
Is that the rapture?

Will those who have died in Christ be regenerated? Will those who are alive and are Christ's, at his appearing, be regenerated as one who cannot die?

And Jesus said to them, 'Verily I say to you, that ye who did follow me in the regeneration, when the Son of Man may sit upon a throne of his glory, shall sit -- ye also -- upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel; Matt 19:28

Is the above verse speaking the same as the following? --

for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive, and each in his proper order, a first-fruit Christ, afterwards those who are the Christ's, in his presence,

Ye who follow me me in being made alive when I come to sit on the throne of my glory. Glorified likewise to reign with him unto the last enemy being done away by the rest of the dead being made alive and the kingdom being delivered up to the Father?

1 Cor 15:24-26 then -- the end, when he may deliver up the reign to God, even the Father, when he may have made useless all rule, and all authority and power -- for it behoveth him to reign till he may have put all the enemies under his feet -- the last enemy is done away -- death;

he day of the Lord begins 1 Thes 4 :14 - 5:2 then ends when the last enemy to be destroyed = 2 Peter 3:8


When did what happen?


IMHO

I get the feeling, then, that you don't really want an answer back. This is more of a sermon than a response with any kind of connection to what I wrote.

 

[John of Japan]

Sorry brethren but the rapture to me it is a waste of time and a waste of books and a waste of my good hard money... Why would Christ come down here and reign for 1,000 years?... What's he doing now in Heaven on his throne on the right hand of his Father, gathering dust?... He's reigning now!...

The reason for the rapture is doxological: to take the Bride out. The reason for the tribulation is doxological: judgment upon the world for its evil, and the calling out of multitudes to know Christ through the three great evangelistic efforts of the tribulation. The reason for the millennial reign of Christ is doxological. The theological purpose for it is to prove that only Christ can successfully rule the entire world with justice, perfect control, and love for all.

You brethren with your confusion and your end time delusion...

This is insulting. I'm not confused and deluded. I simply interpret Scripture literally. Why must those who do not agree with the millennial reign of Christ be so dismissive of those of us who do???

It is widely accepted among scholars, even those who are not chiliasts, that for the first three centuries of Christianity, chiliasm was not only prominent, almost no one believed otherwise until Origen and then Augustine. Why? It is the normal interpretation of prophecy, not allegorical nor "spiritual."

 

[Van]

1) We do not know when the "rapture" (when Christ returns in the clouds and we meet His in the air) will occur.
2) We expect those both born anew and physically living at the time will not experience the end stage of the Great Tribulation, thus many are pre-wrath, whether pre-trip or mid-trip.
3) No need to ride a hobby horse on the subject, we are to live as though we expect the rapture to occur imminently.

 

[taisto]

The reason for the rapture is doxological: to take the Bride out.

Indeed. The Bride is presently in heaven and on earth. When the last of the Bride comes to saving faith, then our Groom will come. Will the brides have their lamps ready for the Grooms return?
Those who are alive will meet Him in the air with the Army of Heaven and all the Saints coming as the King destroys His adversaries.

The reason for the tribulation is doxological: judgment upon the world for its evil, and the calling out of multitudes to know Christ through the three great evangelistic efforts of the tribulation.

We are in the tribulation. God's people are marked with a seal. Satan has marked those who are in rebellion. God's wrath is upon all who are not marked by God's angels with the seal of the Holy Spirit. The plagues, the trumpets and the bowls are all being unveiled even now.

The reason for the millennial reign of Christ is doxological. The theological purpose for it is to prove that only Christ can successfully rule the entire world with justice, perfect control, and love for all.

Here, you are creating a narrative from thin air. None of this is expressed in Revelation 20. In Revelation 20 we see Satan bound for 1000 years (a set and short period of time) and then, after this time, Satan is released to attack the church universal. The church is present through this time. We are presently in the 1000 year binding of Satan.
John, the text does not support your assertion here.

This is insulting. I'm not confused and deluded. I simply interpret Scripture literally. Why must those who do not agree with the millennial reign of Christ be so dismissive of those of us who do???

But John, you are not interpreting the Scripture literally. You are creating a narrative from a passage that does not state what you are stating.

It is widely accepted among scholars, even those who are not chiliasts, that for the first three centuries of Christianity, chiliasm was not only prominent, almost no one believed otherwise until Origen and then Augustine. Why? It is the normal interpretation of prophecy, not allegorical nor "spiritual."

I disagree. There are not many documents in total on this subject so for you to claim it as prominent and normal is an overstep.
Again, the text itself does not support a 1000 year physical reign. It does support this period as being the time when the church grows from a small mustard seed to a full tree.
The interpretation of the reign of Christ in the growth of the Church throughout the world is much more real and observable than the futurist interpretation you are holding.
John, just look around at what God has been doing since John wrote to this present hour. Look at the growth of the Kingdom around the world. It is no wonder that John was amazed at the size of the church who has endured the present tribulation (Revelation 7:14). God has presently kept his church (the woman) protected in the wilderness. The kingdom has grown and Christ Jesus is presently reigning. Every Sunday we all attend the meeting within our local Embassy to hear the words of our King. (Hebrews 12:22-29).

John, the Apostle, constantly points us to a myriad of Old Testament prophesy's and reveals to us what they mean. Revelation is the great connector of the dots in history that brings it all together. It is not some futuristic letter that doesn't address the church between chapters 4-20. It is a revelation to the church for what is presently happening and why we can be encouraged as we endure this tribulation.

We rejoice in the present. We don't push it all off to the future. John the Apostle and Jesus never meant for this letter to be interpreted in the fashion that futurists interpret the letter.

We will disagree on this matter. In studying the four prominent views on Revelation, only the Amillennial view makes sense.

Search | Monergism

 

[John of Japan]

A word about the poll in the OP: Almost no one nowadays believes in a mid-trib rapture, which is why no one has clicked on that yet. Instead, a guy named Marvin Rosenthal has spread a doctrine called the pre-wrath rapture, different in reasoning and timing than a mid-trib rapture.

I do not consider Rosenthal to be a good Christian, and I want to get my doctrine from theologians who walk with Christ. He arrogantly wrote, "It is my opinion that if man of absolute neutrality, average intelligence, and belief in the authority of the Word of God were given an ideal presentation of the commonly held Rapture views and the one presented in this book, they would choose the latter because of its simplicity, clarity, logic….” (Marvin Rosenthal, The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1990, 30-31).

 

[John of Japan]

Folks, our eschatology ought to make us better Christians. "And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure" (1 John 3:3).

If you get all caustic and insulting when discussing prophecy and the Second Coming of Christ, you are not understanding it. If your eschatology makes you a nasty Christian, that is an argument against your eschatology, according to 1 John 3:3. It should make you more gracious, gentle, and understanding.

So Gerstner's nasty book against Dispensationalism, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism, is one thing that convinces me I'm on the right track. One Amazon reviewer called it vindictive and inaccurate. Another reviewer says, "And at times distorts or misrepresents the position held."

 

[tyndale1946]

The reason for the rapture is doxological: to take the Bride out. The reason for the tribulation is doxological: judgment upon the world for its evil, and the calling out of multitudes to know Christ through the three great evangelistic efforts of the tribulation. The reason for the millennial reign of Christ is doxological. The theological purpose for it is to prove that only Christ can successfully rule the entire world with justice, perfect control, and love for all.


This is insulting. I'm not confused and deluded. I simply interpret Scripture literally. Why must those who do not agree with the millennial reign of Christ be so dismissive of those of us who do???

It is widely accepted among scholars, even those who are not chiliasts, that for the first three centuries of Christianity, chiliasm was not only prominent, almost no one believed otherwise until Origen and then Augustine. Why? It is the normal interpretation of prophecy, not allegorical nor "spiritual."

2 Timothy 4: 7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:

8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

He's coming to get his Bride at the Resurrection, I'm done here... Brother Glen

 

[John of Japan]

2 Timothy 4: 7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:

8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

He's coming to get his Bride at the Resurrection, I'm done here... Brother Glen

Don't forget the context from 2 Timothy 4:1--" I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom."

So in the context, vv. 7-8 are about the Second Coming, at which point the Lord will receive His kingdom; thus, the throne of David, at which time Christ will reign.

 

[taisto]

Folks, our eschatology ought to make us better Christians. "And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure" (1 John 3:3).

John, your proof text does not fit with your assertion.
Just because I disagree with your futurism interpretation, it does not make me a "lesser" Christian.
Indeed, my acceptance of amillenialism actually makes me care much deeper for all humanity than futurism ever did.
However, your chosen scripture has nothing to do with your statement and isn't rational in its placement here.

If you get all caustic and insulting when discussing prophecy and the Second Coming of Christ, you are not understanding it.

This is not a correlation. A person may very well understand it, yet still not express it in a manner that is received in love.

If your eschatology makes you a nasty Christian, that is an argument against your eschatology, according to 1 John 3:3. It should make you more gracious, gentle, and understanding.

You are using this verse out of context. Note what John is saying:
(1 John 3:1-3)
See how very much our Father loves us, for he calls us his children, and that is what we are! But the people who belong to this world don’t recognize that we are God’s children because they don’t know him. Dear friends, we are already God’s children, but he has not yet shown us what we will be like when Christ appears. But we do know that we will be like him, for we will see him as he really is. And all who have this eager expectation will keep themselves pure, just as he is pure.

The passage has nothing to do with eschatology.

So Gerstner's nasty book against Dispensationalism, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism, is one thing that convinces me I'm on the right track. One Amazon reviewer called it vindictive and inaccurate. Another reviewer says, "And at times distorts or misrepresents the position held."

One Amazon reviewer, very likely a dyed in the wool dispensationalist, didn't like Gerstner's critique of dispensationalism and that is your reasoning for thinking you are right on track in holding to dispensationalism?
John, can you acknowledge how your comments here seem irrational and unreasonable?

John, can you admit that cults like the Jehovah's Witnesses have emerged precisely because of the futurist interpretation of Revelation? Other cults as well have emerged and declared the exact dates of a pre-trib rapture. These false claims, when shown to be false, are merely brushed off as an "oops" but the main tenants keep being held. For nearly 200 years now we have witnessed obsession with futurism and tolerance of bad interpretation as it predicts the return of Christ.

When dispensationalist futurism is critiqued, the followers of that position very often question the critics salvation (hopefully that's not what you are doing with John Gerstner). Godward Christians have been removed from fellowship and kicked out of churches for not holding a dispensational futurist interpretation of Revelation. The vileness that gets directed at the amillennialist, historicist, or preterist, is as awful as can be. Will you acknowledge this reality in Fundamentalism and Evangelical circles that embrace futurism as their eschatological preference?
John, if I used your logic, I could make the exact statement against futurism and dispensationalism. The lack of love and tolerance in the camp is palpable. Will you acknowledge this reality?

I have not read Gerstner's book. I have read Mounce on Revelation and I have read parts of Riddelbargers commentary on Revelation. If you doubt the claims of mistreatment by futurists to non-futurists, I would ask you to listen to Voddie Baucham's sermon on Revelation 20:1-3. The whole sermon is excellent, but for this point you can start at the 8:45 mark and listen to the 16 minute mark. Especially focus on the 11:20 mark to 16 minute mark.

John, you may think Gerstner was mean in his critique. I cannot speak for his book. I have not read it. But, your thinking in your response is not rational or well thought out. I caution you to let the actual text of scripture guide you. Take your preconceptions and bias and place them in the corner. Acknowledge that Revelation uses apocalyptic language and numbering. View Revelation as a picture book and tapestry, meant to be viewed as a whole rather than as a strict timeline. Then write down what you see.
I recommend Mounce's book to you as a comparison to the futurist books you have studied.

Finally, know that your eschatology and it's difference from mine does not promote any desire in me to be angry. We disagree and I am at peace with that.

Blessings to you as you walk with God.

 

[John of Japan]

Indeed. The Bride is presently in heaven and on earth. When the last of the Bride comes to saving faith, then our Groom will come. Will the brides have their lamps ready for the Grooms return?
Those who are alive will meet Him in the air with the Army of Heaven and all the Saints coming as the King destroys His adversaries.

Amen!

We are in the tribulation. God's people are marked with a seal. Satan has marked those who are in rebellion. God's wrath is upon all who are not marked by God's angels with the seal of the Holy Spirit. The plagues, the trumpets and the bowls are all being unveiled even now.

I see nothing in the present world which resemble the trumpets, seals, and bowls. I assume then that to you they are all symbolic and not literal.

Here, you are creating a narrative from thin air. None of this is expressed in Revelation 20. In Revelation 20 we see Satan bound for 1000 years (a set and short period of time) and then, after this time, Satan is released to attack the church universal. The church is present through this time. We are presently in the 1000 year binding of Satan.
John, the text does not support your assertion here.

The word "church" does not occur in the book of Revelation anywhere past the letters to the seven literal first century churches in chapters 2-3. Therefore I question your interpretation.

But John, you are not interpreting the Scripture literally. You are creating a narrative from a passage that does not state what you are stating.

When I say that there will be a millennium with Christ reigning, I am literally interpreting Rev. 20. The 1000 years there are not symbolic, but literal. There is much symbolism in the apocalyptic book of Revelation, but the 1000 years is presented as actual years.

I disagree. There are not many documents in total on this subject so for you to claim it as prominent and normal is an overstep.

“Premillennialism was probably the dominant millennial view during the early period of the church. Christians of the first three centuries had a strong expectation of an early return of Christ, inaugurating the millennium. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and several other significant early theologians held to this view.” (Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013, 1110.

Note the following quotes from premillennialists in the early church:

“Of a truth, soon and suddenly shall His will be accomplished as the Scriptures also bear witness, saying, ‘Speedily will he come and will not tarry:’ and ‘The Lord shall suddenly come to His temple, even the Holy One, for whom ye look.’”—Clement of Rome, c. 30-100. (Quoted in Pentecost, Things to Come, 375.)

2. “But I and whoever are on all points right-minded Christians know that there will be a resurrection of the dead and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged as the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and the others declare.”—Justin Martyr, c. 100-165 (Ibid., 375-376).

3. “But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world…the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing in for the righteous the times of the kingdom.”—Irenaeus, c. 130-c. 202 (Ibid., 376).

“But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after their resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem.”—Tertullian, c. 160-c. 220 (Ibid.)

Again, the text itself does not support a 1000 year physical reign. It does support this period as being the time when the church grows from a small mustard seed to a full tree.
The interpretation of the reign of Christ in the growth of the Church throughout the world is much more real and observable than the futurist interpretation you are holding.

As somewhat of a missiologist (teaching two classes on it), I keep up with this. My memory says that there are still 3000 people groups with no Scriptures. So I disagree.

John, just look around at what God has been doing since John wrote to this present hour. Look at the growth of the Kingdom around the world. It is no wonder that John was amazed at the size of the church who has endured the present tribulation (Revelation 7:14). God has presently kept his church (the woman) protected in the wilderness. The kingdom has grown and Christ Jesus is presently reigning. Every Sunday we all attend the meeting within our local Embassy to hear the words of our King. (Hebrews 12:22-29).

I'm not sure what you think is the Kingdom currently, so it's hard to answer this. Are you ecumenical? Do you include the Catholics? The liberals? The baptismal regenerationists (Ch. of Christ, etc.)?

John, the Apostle, constantly points us to a myriad of Old Testament prophesy's and reveals to us what they mean. Revelation is the great connector of the dots in history that brings it all together. It is not some futuristic letter that doesn't address the church between chapters 4-20. It is a revelation to the church for what is presently happening and why we can be encouraged as we endure this tribulation.

All prophecies of the 1st coming of Christ were fulfilled literally. Therefore, all prophecies of the 2nd coming must be interpreted literally. For example, if you do not recognize that Christ will literally reign on the Davidic throne, you are not interpreting literally.

We rejoice in the present. We don't push it all off to the future. John the Apostle and Jesus never meant for this letter to be interpreted in the fashion that futurists interpret the letter.

I can rejoice in the present and the future at the same time. It's not hard! Joy is a fruit of the Spirit.

We will disagree on this matter. In studying the four prominent views on Revelation, only the Amillennial view makes sense.

We certainly do disagree on this.

 

[John of Japan]

John, your proof text does not fit with your assertion.
Just because I disagree with your futurism interpretation, it does not make me a "lesser" Christian.
Indeed, my acceptance of amillenialism actually makes me care much deeper for all humanity than futurism ever did.
However, your chosen scripture has nothing to do with your statement and isn't rational in its placement here.


This is not a correlation. A person may very well understand it, yet still not express it in a manner that is received in love.


You are using this verse out of context. Note what John is saying:
(1 John 3:1-3)
See how very much our Father loves us, for he calls us his children, and that is what we are! But the people who belong to this world don’t recognize that we are God’s children because they don’t know him. Dear friends, we are already God’s children, but he has not yet shown us what we will be like when Christ appears. But we do know that we will be like him, for we will see him as he really is. And all who have this eager expectation will keep themselves pure, just as he is pure.

The passage has nothing to do with eschatology.


One Amazon reviewer, very likely a dyed in the wool dispensationalist, didn't like Gerstner's critique of dispensationalism and that is your reasoning for thinking you are right on track in holding to dispensationalism?
John, can you acknowledge how your comments here seem irrational and unreasonable?

John, can you admit that cults like the Jehovah's Witnesses have emerged precisely because of the futurist interpretation of Revelation? Other cults as well have emerged and declared the exact dates of a pre-trib rapture. These false claims, when shown to be false, are merely brushed off as an "oops" but the main tenants keep being held. For nearly 200 years now we have witnessed obsession with futurism and tolerance of bad interpretation as it predicts the return of Christ.

When dispensationalist futurism is critiqued, the followers of that position very often question the critics salvation (hopefully that's not what you are doing with John Gerstner). Godward Christians have been removed from fellowship and kicked out of churches for not holding a dispensational futurist interpretation of Revelation. The vileness that gets directed at the amillennialist, historicist, or preterist, is as awful as can be. Will you acknowledge this reality in Fundamentalism and Evangelical circles that embrace futurism as their eschatological preference?
John, if I used your logic, I could make the exact statement against futurism and dispensationalism. The lack of love and tolerance in the camp is palpable. Will you acknowledge this reality?

I have not read Gerstner's book. I have read Mounce on Revelation and I have read parts of Riddelbargers commentary on Revelation. If you doubt the claims of mistreatment by futurists to non-futurists, I would ask you to listen to Voddie Baucham's sermon on Revelation 20:1-3. The whole sermon is excellent, but for this point you can start at the 8:45 mark and listen to the 16 minute mark. Especially focus on the 11:20 mark to 16 minute mark.

John, you may think Gerstner was mean in his critique. I cannot speak for his book. I have not read it. But, your thinking in your response is not rational or well thought out. I caution you to let the actual text of scripture guide you. Take your preconceptions and bias and place them in the corner. Acknowledge that Revelation uses apocalyptic language and numbering. View Revelation as a picture book and tapestry, meant to be viewed as a whole rather than as a strict timeline. Then write down what you see.
I recommend Mounce's book to you as a comparison to the futurist books you have studied.

Finally, know that your eschatology and it's difference from mine does not promote any desire in me to be angry. We disagree and I am at peace with that.

Blessings to you as you walk with God.

Sorry, I really don't have time to answer any more such long posts. I just answered one, but don't have time for this one. I'm just wondering why you disagree that your doctrine should make you gentle and kind rather than nasty and insulting. But maybe that's just me.

P. S. Don't know why the BB is saying there is an attachment. I haven't made one.

 

[taisto]

Sorry, I really don't have time to answer any more such long posts. I just answered one, but don't have time for this one. I'm just wondering why you disagree that your doctrine should make you gentle and kind rather than nasty and insulting. But maybe that's just me.

P. S. Don't know why the BB is saying there is an attachment. I haven't made one.

Very simple.
Since Jesus return isn't until all the elect have come to faith, I am commissioned by God to preach reconciliation with Christ to everyone. I know that this life is full of tribulation the beast is prowling to find ways to try destroy the church, but I am called to follow my King to the cross and bless those who would persecute me.
When we realize that we are in the midst of the end times and tribulation and that Jesus has called us to endure to the end, can we simply swipe that truth away and hope we don't become a martyr because Jesus would rapture us away before that time? No. We recognize that at any moment we may be like our brothers in North Korea, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, etc, who are being slaughtered for holding firm to the end. The book of Hebrews ever warns us to remain diligent and press on to the end. Simply waiting for Jesus to return and hope for a rapture rather than share the good news until every chosen one comes to faith is how I observe many futurists as they live. They turn their eyes and hopes upon a pre-trib rapture rather than look to Jesus, the author and finisher of their faith, to cause them to endure through all tribulation that comes our way in this foreign land.

Hopefully this helps you. I have spent much of my life in dispensational circles and observed the fear that is prevalent in the common non-educated believer who has been taught futurism as an absolute truth. It makes me sad that they are so consumed with futurism that they forego being ambassadors just because they think that Jesus is going to take them away from tribulation at any minute.

But, I would rather you address my other post #37 as it addresses what I perceive as you using poor discernment of scripture as a proof text for dispensationalism.