The Rapture or the Second Coming

[Eleanor]

My bible says....
I speak with him face to face, ......clearly and not in riddles; So, I'm not really following you.

Okay. . .God is defending Moses to Miriam, where God tells her that he speaks to Moses face to face, clearly, and not in riddles as he does with the other prophets.
We learn there that God gives prophecy in riddles and not clearly. . .which riddles, by definition, are subject to more than one interpretation.

Whats that have to do with the 1000 year reign of Jesus?

The "1,000 year reign of Christ" is prophecy (Rev 1:3), which is given in riddles, which are not spoken clearly (Nu 12:6-8) and are subject to more than one interpretation.
The "millennium" is a riddle, figurative of the church age, where the "first" resurrrection (Rev 20:5-6) is from eternal death into eternal life in the new birth (Jn 3:3-5).

 

[Josheb]

I'm at a loss on this site! Therefore I have sent for some books to read when I am feeling better.

If I may,

If it is eschatology in which you've an interest then I recommend the following,

"A Case for Historic Premillennialism" by Craig Blomberg and Sung Wook Chung (they have videos on YouTube where they discuss their pov)

"A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times" by Kim Riddebarger

"Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope" by Keith Mathison (this is recommended because Mathison is a non-Dominionist, non-Reconstructionist postmillennialist)

"Dispensationalism" by Lewis Sperry Chafer (founder of Dallas Theological Seminary)

"The Returning King" by Vern Poythress (Idealist pov)

That covers the five main viewpoints in chronological order of their formalization. I also recommend comparative works, such as "The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views," "Four Views on the Book of Revelation," and "Revelation: Four Views."

 

[Josheb]

The BIBLE informs us Jesus raptures the church pre-tribulation.

No, it does not. That is an invention of the 19th century, not something the Bible "informs us."

I this is the Dispensational Premillennial/modern futurist view.....they got it right.

The 100% fail rate of 200 years of false prognostications and the inability of Dispensationalist defenders to address the facts of Matthew 24's Noah reference prove otherwise.

 

[Eleanor]

Sorry...I'm still lost in trying to figure out your point.

Wasn't John an apostle when he wrote down Revelation?

Yes, but Revealtion is prophecy, which God says is spoken in riddles and not clearly (Nu 12:6-8).

Revelation is not literal, it is figurative.
The "millennium" of Revelation is not literal. It is figurative of the church age, in which we are now living.

As in the "first" resurrection (Rev 20:5-6), which is not literal, it is figurative of the new birth, from eternal death to eternal life (Jn 3:3-5).

 

[Josheb]

Whe we read no one knows the hour...is the bible referring to the rapture or the second coming? Which of the 2?

Irrelevant to this line of inquiry. We are discussing the teaching of Dispensational Premillennialism/modern futurism of a separated rapture relevant to Jesus' assertion no one will know when he's coming. What DPism teaches is the rapture is a separate event from Christ's second coming. While it is true there are pre-tribbers, mid-tribbers, and post-tribbers, the prevailing, mainstream Dispensationalist point of view is that of the rapture and second coming being separated by seven years, the seven years of the tribulation.

That teaching contradicts the premise of both imminence and no one knowing when.

 

[Arial]

Is that rule in the bible?

Yes, there will be a 1000 year reign. As WE all know Revelation talks about it.

How someone can claim it's not in agreement ..or...agreement with 1 Thes 4:16....is beyond me as they are different different topics.

1 Thess 4 depicts his second coming with the resurrected and changed saints. Now, if that is what happens at his second coming and in judgement and cosmic restoration (Zech 14) where does a 1000 years fit into that picture?

 

[CrowCross]

Okay. . .God is defending Moses to Miriam, where God tells her that he speaks to Moses face to face, clearly, and not in riddles as he does with the other prophets.
We learn there that God gives prophecy in riddles and not clearly. . .which riddles, by definition, are subject to more than one interpretation.

Always?

The "1,000 year reign of Christ" is prophecy (Rev 1:3), which is given in riddles, which are not spoken clearly (Nu 12:6-8) and are subject to more than one interpretation.
The "millennium" is a riddle, figurative of the church age, where the "first" resurrrection (Rev 20:5-6) is from eternal death into eternal life in the new birth (Jn 3:3-5).

I don't think so...the 1,000 year reign is presented as quite literal.

You're going to need much more than a riddle theory to convince me.

 

[CrowCross]

No, it does not. That is an invention of the 19th century, not something the Bible "informs us."

The rapture theology has been around a lot longer than that.

This link disagree's with you.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE RAPTURE

Tom’s Perspectives

by Thomas Ice

One of the most often cited objections to pretribulationism is that it is a new

teaching in church history having only come on the scene in the 1830s. It is often

argued that if the pre-trib rapture were biblical then it would have been taught earlier

and throughout church history. In the last decade, individuals have found a number of

pre-1830 references to a pre-trib rapture. Here is a summary of that evidence......continue reading

The 100% fail rate of 200 years of false prognostications and the inability of Dispensationalist defenders to address the facts of Matthew 24's Noah reference prove otherwise.

...soooooooooooooooo, this proves there is no pre-trib rapture where the bible says christians will not face the wrath?

OK.....if you say so.

 

[CrowCross]

1 Thess 4 depicts his second coming with the resurrected and changed saints. Now, if that is what happens at his second coming and in judgement and cosmic restoration (Zech 14) where does a 1000 years fit into that picture?

The 1,000 year reign is after the biblical 7 year tribulation and before Rev 21.

 

[Josheb]

The rapture theology has been around a lot longer than that.

This link disagree's with you.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE RAPTURE

Tom’s Perspectives

by Thomas Ice

One of the most often cited objections to pretribulationism is that it is a new

teaching in church history having only come on the scene in the 1830s. It is often

argued that if the pre-trib rapture were biblical then it would have been taught earlier

and throughout church history. In the last decade, individuals have found a number of

pre-1830 references to a pre-trib rapture. Here is a summary of that evidence......continue reading

...soooooooooooooooo, this proves there is no pre-trib rapture where the bible says christians will not face the wrath?

OK.....if you say so.

First of all, you're changing the topic, again. If you wanted or intended to stay on topic then what you shoudl be doing is quoting Ice's view on "in the days of Noah."

Second, Thomas Ice is a biased source (and a sloppy exegete and irrational apologist). He is not honest, either. He commonly baits and switches historical views of dispensation with Dispensational Premillennialism, treating the two as if they are identical or synonymous when they are not. Pre-1830 references to a pre-tribulational viewpoint does not mean they were Dispensational Premillennial viewpoints. Acting as if they might be synonymous is dishonest. Furthermore, anytime any past theologian or theological viewpoint contradicts scripture that theologian/viewpoint is wrong. This is particularly applicable to Ice because he often cites extra-biblical source, some of which are known to be heretical (like the Shepherd of Hermas). When a godly man cites an extra-canonical source (like the Epistle of Barnabas), his argument has no merit if his use of the extra-canonical source contradicts scripture (as does the Epistle of Barnabas' view of the tribulation). When a godly man cites a heretic, he's being heretical. When a heretic cites another heretic that's twice heretical. You should read that Ice article critically, with the same sense of criticism you have for my posts. If and when that happens, you'll find Ice is not reliable and has led you astray. Don't trust Ice any more than you trust me. Measure us both by scripture correctly rendered. What you've done is make an appeal to authority and for every Dispensationalist you cite I can cite two non-Dispensationalists. Shall we play who can cite the most theologians? No! That will get us nowhere. Nothing Thomas Ice or ANYONE else (whether they be Dispensation ally Premillennial or not) says in contradiction to those facts can be true. Let God be true and all men liars! Sound doctrine never contradicts God's word. Ice's view contradicts God's word.

The FACTs of scripture are...

• Jesus explicitly stated the disciples would be handed over to tribulation.
• Jesus explicitly stated after the great tribulation the disciples would see the sign of his coming.
• Jesus explicitly states those clothed in white robes were Christians who had gone through the great tribulation.
• John stated he was a partaker in the tribulation!

.....and scripture is authoritative. It overrules anyone and everyone you might ever think to reference. Christians cannot be removed from the planet to escape the tribulation if they are delivered to the tribulation, go through it with robes washed in Christ's blood, and see the sign of Christ's coming afterwards.

That is irrational.

 

[Arial]

The 1,000 year reign is after the biblical 7 year tribulation and before Rev 21.

You have done nothing to support a biblical seven year tribulation, or a rapture, or the thousand years, beyond just declaring it and giving a couple of scriptures that you also simply declare that that is what they mean.

 

[John Bauer]

How is the 1,000-year reign not in accordance with scripture when the Bible mentions it six or seven times?

Your question is framed in a way that misrepresents @Hazelelponi's view. Since that is inappropriate and against the forum rules, I can only hope it was unintentional.

What is contrary to scripture is treating that 1,000 years as literally and exactly 365,243 days.

When do you believe the rapture/resurrection will happen? I know you're not pre-trib. Would you be mid-trib? Post-trib? Pre-wrath? Or would you say it already happened?

1. The resurrection and rapture will happen at the second coming of Christ.

2. An amillennialist doesn't hold to pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib, or pre-wrath because all those positions assume a futurist, premillennial framework. An amillennialist believes the "tribulation" isn't some future seven-year turmoil but the present reality of the church age; as Jesus said, "In this world you will have tribulation" (John 16:33). The millennium of Revelation 20 is symbolic of Christ's kingdom reign from heaven, during which Satan is bound from deceiving the nations and the gospel goes forth. When Christ returns, it's not to begin a new phase of redemptive history but to end this phase. The resurrection, rapture, final judgment, and renewal of all things all happen together.

 

[CrowCross]

First of all, you're changing the topic, again. If you wanted or intended to stay on topic then what you shoudl be doing is quoting Ice's view on "in the days of Noah."

Second, Thomas Ice is a biased source (and a sloppy exegete and irrational apologist). He is not honest, either. He commonly baits and switches historical views of dispensation with Dispensational Premillennialism, treating the two as if they are identical or synonymous when they are not. Pre-1830 references to a pre-tribulational viewpoint does not mean they were Dispensational Premillennial viewpoints. Acting as if they might be synonymous is dishonest. Furthermore, anytime any past theologian or theological viewpoint contradicts scripture that theologian/viewpoint is wrong. This is particularly applicable to Ice because he often cites extra-biblical source, some of which are known to be heretical (like the Shepherd of Hermas). When a godly man cites an extra-canonical source (like the Epistle of Barnabas), his argument has no merit if his use of the extra-canonical source contradicts scripture (as does the Epistle of Barnabas' view of the tribulation). When a godly man cites a heretic, he's being heretical. When a heretic cites another heretic that's twice heretical. You should read that Ice article critically, with the same sense of criticism you have for my posts. If and when that happens, you'll find Ice is not reliable and has led you astray. Don't trust Ice any more than you trust me. Measure us both by scripture correctly rendered. What you've done is make an appeal to authority and for every Dispensationalist you cite I can cite two non-Dispensationalists. Shall we play who can cite the most theologians? No! That will get us nowhere. Nothing Thomas Ice or ANYONE else (whether they be Dispensation ally Premillennial or not) says in contradiction to those facts can be true. Let God be true and all men liars! Sound doctrine never contradicts God's word. Ice's view contradicts God's word.

The FACTs of scripture are...

• Jesus explicitly stated the disciples would be handed over to tribulation.
• Jesus explicitly stated after the great tribulation the disciples would see the sign of his coming.
• Jesus explicitly states those clothed in white robes were Christians who had gone through the great tribulation.
• John stated he was a partaker in the tribulation!

.....and scripture is authoritative. It overrules anyone and everyone you might ever think to reference. Christians cannot be removed from the planet to escape the tribulation if they are delivered to the tribulation, go through it with robes washed in Christ's blood, and see the sign of Christ's coming afterwards.

That is irrational.

sorry try again.

 

[CrowCross]

1. The resurrection and rapture will happen at the second coming of Christ.

No....The resurrection and rapture will be pre-trib.

 

[CrowCross]

You have done nothing to support a biblical seven year tribulation, or a rapture, or the thousand years, beyond just declaring it and giving a couple of scriptures that you also simply declare that that is what they mean.

LOL......you simply declared it to be symbolic.

 

[John Bauer]

No....The resurrection and rapture will be pre-trib.

In your view, yes—which you were not asking about.

 

[Josheb]

sorry try again.

Are you suggesting scripture is not authoritative?

 

[CrowCross]

In your view, yes—which you were not asking about.

I was simply trying to determine when she thought the rapture would occur.....if she even believed it would occur....nothing more, nothing less.

Stand down John. I see a lot of hate on this forum. Venom. I have shown where the rapture/resurrection will be pre-trib. How christians escape the wrath....and a few people absolutly hate that escatology....when they should be comforting each other with the truth of the pre-trib rapture.

 

[Josheb]

No....The resurrection and rapture will be pre-trib.

This chart was taken from the "Rose Guide to End-Times Prophecy." Its author is a Dispensational Premillennialist.



Note Dispensational Premillennialism is the only eschatological point of view that separates the rapture from the second coming. Everyone else holds the two co-occur. Every other view is also post-tribulational. Dispensational Premillennialism is the normative and statistical outlier. It is the newest theology and its views conflict and are irreconcilable with what historical, orthodox Christianity has been teaching for two millennia.

No....The resurrection and rapture will be pre-trib.

Scripture and two thousand years of orthodox Christian thought, doctrine, and practice prove otherwise.


I have told you before: I've been where you are now at. Many of us here are former dispies. We've been through the stage of apologetic defense. We've been presented the evidence disproving DPism. We too went through the alarm of realizing there are some very real and substantive inconsistencies and conflicts between DPism and well-read scripture. We too held those bringing us the truth of scripture in contempt only t later realize the blessing they provided (and the extraordinary victory that ensues when DPism is discarded. You quote Ice. I've just shown you another leading DPer presenting a comparative examination of the rapture, tribulation, and second coming and he is telling you (and all his readers regardless of the eschatological orientation) DPism is the normative and statistical outlier.
.

 

[John Bauer]

I was simply trying to determine when she thought the rapture would occur—if she even believed it would occur. Nothing more, nothing less.

And the answer was, "The resurrection and rapture will happen at the second coming of Christ." She holds an amillennial view that's fairly aligned with that of Riddlebarger, so that would be her answer.

Instead of accepting the amillennialist answer, you corrected it—showing your true colors.

Stand down, John.

I don't know what that is supposed to mean or imply.

I see a lot of hate on this forum. Venom.

Then hit that Report button. If there are cases of venomous hate, the moderators will deal with it.

I have shown where the rapture/resurrection will be pre-trib, and how Christians escape the wrath.

In your view, yes—which amillennialists have rejected (and for good reason).

And a few people absolutely hate that escatology (when they should be comforting each other with the truth of the pre-trib rapture).

Since they believe it is contrary to scripture, they have every right to hate it. Their devotion is to God and his self-revelation in scripture, so they will chafe at anything that runs counter to it.

They do not comfort one another with unbiblical views of eschatology, but rather with a biblical view thereof rooted in Christ Jesus.