Just A Simple Guy: Amillennialsim?

Sunday, July 5, 2009

Amillennialsim?

In a previous post where I told "what I believe" I shared my current view of eschatology. I must add, that I have been struggling with end times prophecy for about 4 years in an attempt to learn what is true.

Well, I have been listening to some sermons by Sam E. Waldron online. I am not certain that I have changed my view, but I will say this deserves a look.

The sermons I listened to were apparently from a conference he preached in Fargo, North Dakota at Community Baptist Church. The title of his series is: End Times Made Simple. I did not attend this conference and have absolutely no knowledge of this church or it's people. However I have really enjoyed the messages.

Here is a link to the one sermon where he puts it all together in a summary, but I would encourage listening to all of the messages from this conference.

Each sermon is about 50 minutes long, and there are 8 sermons. So this will take some time. However, I would encourage taking the time. I find it takes listening to a person a few times to find how they use scripture and check what they say.

I did look into who Mr Waldron is, and this is what I was able to find. He is apparently affiliated with Reformed Baptist Seminary. Here is a link to that info.

After you look into this, I would appreciate your input.

146 comments:

Karina said...: Youre right....this will take some time to do :)

Sounds interesting though, we'll try it out.; July 5, 2009 6:31 PM
Craig and Heather said...: I've struggled with trying to swallow the concept of a pre-trib rapture and the complex nature of dispensationalism (mostly what I heard growing up).

History does seem to be fulfilling many aspects of Biblical prophecy, But I have hesitations about the postmillenial teaching that Christians are to be ushering in a literal 1,000 year reign of Christ by engaging in political and geographical domination. That breaks the symbolic nature of the rest of Revelation's prophecy. Why would Jesus switch from delivering the visions via symbolism in order to give a tidbit which is meant to be taken literally?

My problem has been that when I read scripture for myself, my understanding of certain sections just don't match with the explanations of some of the "last days" formulas. Some passages have been very problematic for me when I try to "fit" them into most eschatology frameworks. You know I really want to know what is true and am not simply being a pain about questioning.

Amillennialism offers a refreshing, straightforward simplicity and so far it has laid to rest many of the concerns I had about not only "end times" but what other "problematic" passages were talking about.

Not saying I completely agree with the perspective, yet, but I'm amazed at how my own understanding of the verses make so much more sense when I view them from the amillenial perspective. It doesn't detract from the wonder, depth and beauty of God's plan--but it does free my mind from the agony of wondering why I cannot see things that other people confidently insist are there.

Even though I tend to get buried in details, I prefer "simple" things :o)

H; July 8, 2009 9:43 AM
Craig and Heather said...: The Simple Guy says,
I'm glad you like simple things.

Craig; July 8, 2009 4:17 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Why do you think everybody (it seems) is converting to the Reformed philosophy? It is a really growing movement. My husband, an Assemblies of God minister, I think you know, pastored a Reformed church for 10 years (a small conservative congregation belonging to the liberal Reformed Church of America, the oldest denomination in America), and really, we were quite unimpressed with the Reformed philosophy. I don't understand what makes it so attractive to everyone, except making them feel like the special elite (the elect).

The people would tell us that they didn't have to be born again, because they were the elect (born saved). They were completely unconcerned about the lost and non-evangelistic.

Today's neo-reformed people seem to have a new-convert zeal about their philosophy and talk about it a lot and attempt to convert people, but I wonder how long that will last.

But then I would ask them how they knew that they were the elect, and they would say, "We don't know -- but we have that hope." (God's elect are known only to Himself, they say.)

This to me, was not assurance of salvation. But they would tell us that by repenting of our sins and accepting Christ as savior, that was a "work."

And, yes, they were amillenial and completely unconcerned about the second coming of Christ.

Not to be argumentative, but it really troubled me.

I think the reason we were in that church for so long, is that my husband and I, although we are two obscure people in the middle of nowhere, are always on the cutting-edge of things in the church, and by the time everybody else is doing it, we have come out the other side.

So, we know all about Reformed, although we never accepted it, and can't understand the attraction these days, unless it is an over-reaction to the silly health and wealth "gospels" that came out of the Charismatic Movement.

I think, too, that some of this end-time stuff can never be proven. We are just promised a blessing if we read Revelation, and we are supposed to be eagerly looking forward to His coming.

I hope I didn't offend. I'm just amazed at what is popular today among young people in the Church.; July 9, 2009 2:55 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: I guess there are extremes. The amillennialism seemed to put the second coming of Christ completely off the radar of these Christians. However, the other extreme, where Christians don't plan for the future or are completely paranoid about the Mark of the Beast and stuff like that is just as bad, I guess.

I was raised Catholic, and I think they are amillennial, and we were just taught that the world was going to end one day with a big bang and that would be the end of it.

Personally, I hold to the dispensational view myself. It seems to make the most sense to me.

Well, I think it is good to look into these things. Keeps us on our toes.; July 9, 2009 3:01 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Mary,

Craig will probably pop in after work.

No offense taken. We aren't officially "Reformed" or "Calvinist".

If you're not asking the questions we were, you might consider it to
be a waste of your time to listen to the sermons Craig linked. However, if you're curious about better understanding the amillenial belief, they are well worth the time, IMO. For instance, it is worth noting that the term a-millenial is actually a misnomer. The belief isn't that there is *no* millenial reign of Christ but that it is a symbol, rather than a literal end of time event.

The man giving the sermons definitely has a concern for Christ's second coming and I felt he was not at all condescending about his presentation.

The Reformed people you encountered are not an accurate representation of all those who hold to the doctrine of election. You are right in that the concept of election often translates to an elitist attitude in those who hold to it. I've seen it and find it incredibly distasteful.

Yet, I'm not sure it is appropriate to completely toss the teaching just because some of the adherents lack Christlike love and humility. One of the blogs we visit is authored by a pair of "Reformed" brothers and they are some of the kindest, most compassionate bloggers I have encountered.; July 9, 2009 3:35 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: I'll have to make time to listen to this sermon, Heather.

No, I'm just saying that a certain teaching will have a certain outcome.

I'm not saying that the people we knew were unkind or unsaved, just lethargic in their Christianity as far as evangelism went or looking toward the second coming.; July 9, 2009 4:07 PM
Craig and Heather said...: I do understand, I think.

My perspective is that all Christians can experience "dry" moments. However, if we are truly new creatures in Christ, we will not be content to stay that way. The Holy Spirit will eventually prod us forward to want to know Jesus better and have a desire to obey.

Sometimes the problem is not in the teaching but in the application made by the listener.

Maybe I can illustrate: "Love your neighbor as yourself" is, according to Jesus, the second great Commandment.
A Christian will recognize that this instruction is subordinate to "Love the Lord with all your heart, mind and strength." In fact, 1 John says that this love for others is evidence that we love the Lord. And it is impossible to truly love anyone unless the love of God abides in us.

When I hear "love your neighbor as yourself", I automatically think that it applies to me in the way I treat others. *I* need to love others and act toward them in a way that I would like to be treated.

When a non-Christian hears this, I have often seen the instruction turned around to be aimed at the way *other* people behave rather than be a check for his own heart. They often interpret the meaning to be "*YOU* need to treat *me* the way I want to be treated".

It's the same instruction but one listener either misunderstands or deliberately bends the meaning to fit a personal agenda. Does that make sense?

H; July 9, 2009 4:34 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: I understand. What I'm saying, though, is that what you believe determines how you live your life.

I'm not talking about dry periods, or people who listened to a teaching but did not live it out.

I'm talking about the overall outcome or end result of the belief in a philosophy or theology, and all of the people who truly believe it will exhibit a similar outcome.

Catholics are taught that Christ does not save exclusively, but that believers must also work their way to heaven, and rely on the merits of Mary and the saints.

Because this is the basic teaching, all of the true believers will believe this and do certain things and their lives and religious actions will exhibit certain behaviours.

I've never known a devout Catholic who does not pray to Mary and take sacraments in order to work their way to heaven. The doctrines inevitably end up in a certain behavior among the devout.

Same with Reformed beliefs. The people who truly believe them will inevitably end up doing certain actions and living out their Christian lives in a certain way based on those beliefs.

Ok. I'll continue. I listened to the sermon. I'll talk about that.; July 9, 2009 5:22 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Ok. I listened to the sermon. It was easy to understand and follow.

Oh, BTW -- I seem to have a genius for missing the main point of things -- not being able to see the forest for the trees.

I didn't understand that this blog was for questioners. I thought you guys had your minds made up. So, you are questioning. I finally get it.

Ok, here is my opinion of the sermon.

His main point is that there are 2 ages: the world we have now (this age) and the world or age to come (eternity).

His big point is that THERE IS NO AGE BETWEEN THIS AGE AND THE AGE TO COME. Nothing in between the world now, where we are all alive as fleshly human beings, and the world to come, where there exist resurrected beings who spend eternity in heaven or hell.

So, there is no rapture, literally millenium (thousand year reign of Christ).

We just go from the end of the world (the judgment of believers and unbelievers) right into eternity.

My answer to this is that the millenium is part of THIS AGE.

The millenium is part of this age.

It is not part of the age to come, because there will be living flesh and blood people living in the millenium. Not resurrected people who have previously died.

The rapture occurs at the end of the church dispensation, silently. It is not the second coming of Christ. Those saints that are raptured (living and dead) are taken to heaven, where they will wait until the end of the world/age.

The purpose for the rapture is so that the church is taken out of the way, allowing antichrist to come to power, and for God to deal again with the Jews. (Not so that Christians can escape persecution.)

The key now is THE JEW. Christ will come back to reign for 1,000 years with the Jews. I think raptured Christians, living and dead, will be in heaven, not in the millenium.

Reformed teaching refuses to deal with the Jew, and with the fact that the focus again turns to the Jews. This is why the church is on earth no longer. The age of the church is over and God again deals exclusively with Israel.

Good and bad people exist during the millenium. It is part of THIS AGE.

Matt.24, one taken and one left, is talking about saved people (mostly Jews who have turned to Christ) being separated from unsaved people by the angels and the unsaved taken to judgment. This is the Day of the Lord, or the End of the World, or the Second Coming, or The Resurrection.

After this judgment, the unrighteous will be cast with hell and satan into the lake of fire. The believers at that time will go into eternity with other believers (mostly gentiles) who have already died or been raptured.; July 9, 2009 5:36 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: So, to clarify and cap it up: he says there is no age inbetween this age and the age to come, like the rapture and the literal 1,000 year reign of Christ (the millenium).

I say that the rapture and millenium are part of this age. Not some "inbetween" age.; July 9, 2009 5:40 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Mary,
Thanks for your comment. No, you did not offend, and you are welcome on my site any time. In addition, I will not allow anyone to bully you here :)

I agree that doctrine affects the way we live. This is precisely why I have been studying this.

I grew up dispensational and Calvinist, so amillenialism is not necessarily a part of that theology. As a matter of fact, I never even considered amillenialism as I was taught that they allegorize everything and don't even believe what the Bible says. (no such thing as miracles, etc.)

My problem was that about 4 years ago, through my own personal study, my pretrib rapture/7year tribulation/Armeggedon/1000year reign eschatology fell apart. I have not been able to replace it. Everything I have looked at (as far as "canned" eschatology went) did not stand up to honest scrutiny when compared with Scripture.

I am not saying that I agree with amillennialism at this point. This is precisely why I put it on the blog, in an attempt to get counsel from many wise people, so I can examine it more thoroughly. (I was hoping you would stop by and comment, as I respect you and your husband's experience and perspective)

The reasons I have gotten excited by this are:
1) It lines up with several things I already kind of thought based upon my own study
2) It seems to be based on the details of what Jesus taught throughout his ministry, not just on selected prophetic texts interpreted through someone's "decoder ring" (a little tongue in cheek there, I hope you realize)
3) The application of this teaching is very simple, and fits the Gospel message. It encourages me to sow to the spirit, but still be involved in the physical world. Extreme is what it seems to NOT be.

Well, I have written a very long comment here. I am ready to listen now.

Thanks again for stopping by!

Craig; July 9, 2009 5:42 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Yes, I can see where amillenialism would be seen as "not extreme". The Pretrib Rapture/Millenium seems like something out of a movie, I know.

Thing is: everything in the Bible seems extreme and like something out of a movie. If fact, I don't know what Hollywood would do without the bible -- ha-ha!

I am amazed at just how many people who are armenian/evangelical are ditching their pre-trib/millenium beliefs and wonder why?

I have been saying to my husband for years: "Have you ever noticed that nobody is talking about the End Times any more?" He did notice.

Some of this, I think, is prophesied -- II Peter 3:3-4 "Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts. And saying, Where is the promise of his coming, for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."

Some of it also comes from people hearing over and over again the stories of the rapture, and the stories about the antichrist and the mark of the beast, and finally, after many years of this, saying:

"We've been hearing about this for years, and where is it? None of this stuff has ever happened. Maybe it is time to ditch the belief altogether."

I mean, people for many, many years have believed this, but during the Charismatic Movement, there was a plethora of books and tv shows on the End Times, and we thought it would happen TOMORROW, even though some of the stuff seemed far-fetched (the technology for such things as a mark of the beast and "every eye" beholding the 2 slain witnesses of Revelation, etc.).

Well, I find it funny that now, 30 years or so later after the Charismatic Movement, we DO have the technology to do all of these things, but the interest in End Times has faded.

I think people just got tired of waiting for these things to happen. I guess their children and grandchildren have no interest at all.; July 9, 2009 6:04 PM
Karina said...: Don’t know how relevant it is but Im reminded of a study I did on grave markers of Roman Catholic, Anglican and Presbyterian denominations within the Victorian era in Australia which evidence various attitudes towards death and the hereafter.

Catholic doctrines of purgatory; prayer to and for the deceased as a means of affecting one’s hereafter experiences; and the Catholic belief of achieving salvation through both faith and meritorious works; are quite evident on gravestones. Epitaphs such as “SWEET JESUS HAVE MERCY ON HER SOUL” ; “JESUS, MARY & JOSEPH HAVE MERCY ON HER” and ‘OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY PRAY FOR US’ are common and reflect the Roman Catholic practice of praying for saintly intercession of the deceased. The words ‘Of your charity, pray for the repose of the soul of…’ are frequently found on other Catholic grave markers in this time period. These words appeal to the ‘charitable’ nature of the reader, as a reminder that prayer for the deceased is counted as a virtuous, meritorious deed. Statuettes of ‘saints’ such as ‘the Virgin Mary’ or ‘Saint Peter’ are also common, as are statues of angels such as ‘Saint Michael’. Other mortuary symbolism commonly appearing on Catholic graves include dramatic crucifixes, labelled with ‘INRI’ (meaning ‘Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews’, as found in the Bible). This contrasts with the non-Catholic sections of the cemetery where, if crosses are displayed, they are empty and hence point towards the resurrection of Christ. Good works or attributes are also commonly listed on Catholic graves, denoting the belief in meritorious works for justification and ultimate salvation.

In the Anglican section we see more simple graves that point more towards the Second Coming of Christ. Eg:
‘ON THAT HAPPY EASTER MORNING/ALL THE GRAVES THEIR DEAD RESTORE,/FATHER, SISTER, CHILD & MOTHER/MEET ONCE MORE’ (Fig. 20).

(These words were written by Sabine Baring-Gould in 1864 and made into the hymn ‘Resurrection Morn’ in 1887 by Ira Sankey. The words are based on the bible passage 1 Thess 4:16-17 indicating belief in Bible prophecy regarding the ‘second coming’ of Christ). It is also worthy to note the difference in Anglican inscriptions such as ‘in loving memory of’ compared with the common Catholic grave marker inscriptions ‘pray for the repose of the soul of’. The Protestant grave marker being one of joy and finality; the Catholic grave marker beseeching those still living to intercede for them in the hereafter.

These beliefs are also evident, although to a lesser degree, within the Presbyterian (reformed) section. Commonly on these tombstones we see a (usually sandstone or marble) book inscribed with the biographical and epitaphic information of the family. While this could by symbolic of the Bible a closer examination of specific Presbyterian doctrine (eg predestination) may indicate that this book was intended to represent the ‘Book of Life’. Epitaphs such as; ‘BUT THY WILL, O GOD, BE DONE’ or ‘TIS SINFUL I KNOW TO WISH YOU WERE HERE’ reflect the view that God has willed and chosen the eternal destiny of these souls, whether to be part of his ‘elect’ or endure eternal punishment in Hell.

I don’t know how relevant it is to your discussion, and there is obviously a lot more than the words on the graves that reflect particular denominational doctrines; but I just found it interesting to see how the different denominations reflect attitudes towards Christ’s second coming in their grave markers.; July 9, 2009 7:23 PM
Karina said...: My comment was too long to fit any more (sorry, I know it wasnt THAT relevant).

Do I look forward to the Second Coming of Christ? Most definitely. Every single day. Do I know how or when or what happens next? Nope. Its not that I don’t care about the ‘End times’ or that Im done studying them or that Im advocating biblical ignorance. But I realised a while ago when I was entrenched well beyond my understanding that Im just to look forward to Christ’s return and spend my time focusing on what God would have me do this day. The joy (and trepidation) I feel when I think of His return is a constant reminder to prepare as best I can for what God would have me do tomorrow. How desperate God is for His children to know and love Him, how I can be a part of that. Of course there is a sense of foreboding…the state of the world and technology etc, certainly makes the End Times seem more ominous. But as you pointed out, people have been saying this for decades…and centuries. And whether I die and am resurrected, or raptured, or ???...Im sure I wont be counting down thinking ‘I KNEW this would happen exactly as I thought’:P. As with other issues I have struggled to grasp hold of (such as predestination) I don’t have all the answers. As I have continued to seek Him, the amount of understanding I do have has been revealed in His time.; July 9, 2009 7:24 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: That was really interesting, Karina. I never thought of looking at gravestones to see messages that pointed to peoples' views of the afterlife. That was really stunning. It is relevant to a certain extent, because it shows that when people are committed to a particular religious belief, it will be borne out in the way they live and how they view the end times and death and the life to come.

Although there is some trepidation that comes with thinking about the second coming of Christ, it is mentioned so much in the New Testament. I never see an attitude like you hear facetiously, "Oh, it'll all pan out in the end, so I don't worry about it."

The New Testament Christians looked forward to it -- Maranatha! Lord Come Quickly!

Also, I John 3:2,3 says, "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him: for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure."

Looking forward to the return of Christ, no matter what your end-time view, has a purifying effect on the church. "He that hath this hope purifieth himself." We have noticed that with the demise of interest in the End Times has come a lack of holiness in the church.

We were always taught, "What if He should come today?" And whether you thought that was the secret snatching away of the Church, or simply the Day of the Lord for judgment and the end of the world, it made you think: what would you want Jesus to find you doing? It had a purifying effect.

So, if you ask me why there is so much sin in the church today, my opinion is that it is because we have lost interest in the return of Christ. We don't think He is coming back any time soon, and we start to fall asleep spiritually.

You know, if we have nothing to look forward to except our ultimate physical death, that doesn't leave much to look forward to. But, if we think Christ could come today, well, that is something great to look forward to, and I am so sad to see this anticipation dying out in churches in America today, no matter what denomination.; July 9, 2009 7:57 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: As a younger person (than I am, anyway) Craig, do you think you got tired of hearing your parents talk about pre-trib stuff, and feeling that "it has never happened"?; July 9, 2009 7:58 PM
Craig and Heather said...: No, that wasn't really it at all. Frankly, It was a side by side comparison between Thessalonians, Matt 24, and the 6th seal in Revelation. I came to the realization that the order and termanology was so similar that I had better be prepared to live through the persecution of the tribulation. This totally took my by surprise. I was reading and just noticed that what I had always thought (and was even excited about) just didn't match what I was reading.

Craig; July 9, 2009 8:07 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Oh, yes, I think Matthew 24 and also Rev.7 I believe are talking about the Jews that God is now dealing with again, after the removal of the church. Tribes of Jews were sealed. Verse 9 of Chapter 7 I think is talking about "tribulations saints," which are gentiles of every nation, not yet resurrected, who had come to Christ during the tribulation and have paid for it with their lives (the way a lot of Christians in other parts of the world do today).

Anyway, it is good to look into these things and wonder. Not that we forget about life here and now and living for Christ and preaching the gospel. But something about wondering about these things is good in an of itself, as long as we don't get nasty and argumentative about it, as it keeps us on our toes, not being lethargic in our faith and evangelism.

This great tribulation seems like it is going to be worldwide, against Chritians, all at once, at the same time, not sporadically in places all over the globe like now.

At least that's what I think. The great tribulation is also spoken of as "Jacob's trouble" -- believing Jews. I have to look that one up.; July 9, 2009 8:27 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: I did like the preacher's clarification about the "world/age". That helped me to understand that the rapture/millenium are part of "this age". Like the disciples asked the Lord, "What will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age." Meaning, the end of the world, when Christ comes back for judgment, for the resurrection, etc. Very good.; July 9, 2009 9:24 PM
Craig and Heather said...: It is interesting that you mention clarification. That would be the one word I would use to describe my listening to these sermons. As I said before, there are several things that I have noticed or discovered in the past few years of studying this topic that have been troubling to me. Listening to his perspective clarified a lot of them, and he wasn't even talking about them. I simply applied what he was saying to the problem I was wrestling with, and the pieces fell into place. But that is while listening to all 8 sermons. He lays out a pretty good case, and does it by using good Bible study methods.

Still pondering

Craig; July 10, 2009 8:23 AM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: I'm going to sit down today and re-read Revelation. I don't get a lot of time to blog about this in a well thought out manner, because I keep getting interrupted when I'm on the computer -- other people wanting to use it, or having to stop and find something for somebody, and I lose my train of thought and have to close my comment quickly.

My husband had to read all sorts of books before the Reformed district superintendent would allow him to pastor that church, so he read Calvin's Institutes of Religion and other stuff, like the Heidelberg Catechism, etc. He has the concentration to be able to read that stuff, I don't.

Anyway, he says that Calvin never wrote a commentary on Revelation at all, just commentaries on the other books of the Bible. So, the Reformed people are rather weak on end-times theology, and also refuse to deal with the Jew.; July 10, 2009 9:18 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Maybe this guy isn't your typical amillenialist. He does deal with the Jews as you listen on. (talks about them in his series about the final judgment.)

Not too sure reformed or calvinism is the point in my mind. I mentioned before that I was raised in a calvinist background, but we had people of both persuasion who were close to us.

Your eschatology sounds exactly like mine used to be, and I am familiar with all of the arguments, they just don't make sense to me as I read my Bible. Not wanting to argue, just want to know how to behave day to day. As far as that goes, I am pretty sure we agree. I was talking to Heather today about James where he says that true religion is to visit widows and orphans in their distress and keep oneself unspotted from the world. (compassionate holiness) I believe we both agree on that.

Craig; July 10, 2009 7:39 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Yeah, ain't that the truth!; July 10, 2009 7:41 PM
The Squirrel said...: Craig & Heather:

Just wanted to pop in a point you towards what I consider to be the best eschatology resources on the internet from the Dispensational perspective.

First is Dr. S. Lewis Johnson's lectures on eschatology. It's a long series, 37 messages, each 45 minutes to an hour long, but it is well worth the time. Dr. Johnson died in 2004, but his teachings have been preserved for us. John MacArthur says that his iPod is full of S. Lewis Johnson's sermons.

The other series I would point you to is Dr. John MacArthur's series The Second Coming of Jesus (part 1, part 2). Again, a long series (23 messages) but worth it.

Both Dr. Johnson and Dr. MacArthur avoid the sensationalism and pure speculation of a Hal Lindsey or Tim LaHaye. As someone who holds to, and teaches, a Dispensational view, I've found both of these series very helpful.

~Squirrel; July 13, 2009 6:11 PM
The Squirrel said...: Craig:

I just read your "No Links" policy after I posted my comment above. I won't be offended if you trash it. Didn't mean to flaunt the rules.

~Squirrel; July 13, 2009 6:32 PM
Craig and Heather said...: No problem Gene,
I will allow the links in this instance, as I want people to come to their own opinions. I genuinely don't know what to think about eschatology. I must say I held the dispensational view for about 30 years and am not ignorant of what it teaches. John MacAuthur is one of my favorite teachers, and I grew up listening to him every weeknight on Moody Radio. However, I just can't accept the hermaneutical gymnastics at this point.

Not to argue, It just doesn't add up to me. I can't buy that "the restainer" is the Holy Spirit in believers. I the sequence in 2 Thess is problematic in my view as it compares with the dispensational eschatology.

That being said, I will probably look into the links and listen to some of what is there.

My link policy is for people who just pop in and leave self serving links without actually involving themselves in the discussion.

Craig; July 13, 2009 7:11 PM
The Squirrel said...: No Link Trolling, got it!

:o)

Each eschatological "scheme" has difficulties. The one thing above all others that keeps me Dispensational is the belief that God gave promises to national, ethnic Israel that have yet to be fulfilled.

Amillennialists must, by using what Dan Philips has called "decoder-ring hermeneutics," reinterpret "Israel" to mean "church," or "Jesus," or some other "not-Israel," and that seems to make many of the OT promises to Israel just a huge "bait & switch."

I do reject the weird Dispensational typology that tries to see prophetic significance in the measurements of the furnishings of the Tabernacle and stuff like that. That's "decoder-ring hermeneutics," too.

I'm getting ready to teach through Daniel, beginning in a few weeks. I'm planning on blogging on much of it, and will even try to podcast my sermons. So I've been thinking and reading a lot on these issues lately.

~Squirrel; July 14, 2009 5:46 AM
Craig and Heather said...: You know, Squirrel made a good point that I've been pondering a lot lately.

****************
Each eschatological "scheme" has difficulties. The one thing above all others that keeps me Dispensational is the belief that God gave promises to national, ethnic Israel that have yet to be fulfilled.
*************************

Every time we look at a new eschatological concept, I see some things that make a LOT of sense. But there is always something that prevents me from fully accepting that particular view.

I agree with Mary and Squirrel that the Bible does repeatedly indicate that God intends to turn back to the Jews after the time of the gentiles is complete. And, when I read Revelation for myself, it DOES appear to say that there will be a literal millenial Kingdom set up when Jesus returns.

If the beliefs in the Jewish place of favor, a seven year period of intense trouble and a literal millenial kingdom makes a person "dispensational", I probably would still be in this camp. But I would fall into the post-trib/prewrath rapture category.

The "secret rapture, two phase return" aspect of pretribism messes with me not because it seems too much like a movie but because I just don't see it in the text. I understand that when Christ returns to collect His bride and pour out His wrath, it will be a single event which all the world will see (which is also the point when the nation of Israel will repent) (Rev 1:7). At that time, there will be a "catching up" and instantaneous physical change of those who have believed in Him. (2 Thess 2; 1 Corinth 15:51-53)

My understanding of pretrib teaching is that it is based mainly on 2 Thessalonians 2--the idea being that the Holy Spirit is the "one who restrains". Historicists have a different perspective and point to the RC church and the office of the Pope as Antichrist and tend to believe that the Pagan Roman empire was the "restrainer" of a false Christianity and the "man of perdition". That explanation intrigues me as we watch the ecumenical movement picking up steam. It seems as though *everyone* listens to the Pope. I also wonder if the rapidly spreading religion of Islam is an end-times player because of the statement in Rev. 20:4 about those who had been beheaded for their testimony. Infidels who refuse to worship Islam's god have been known to lose their heads.

Anyway, as I read the 2 Thess. passage, the order of events is 1. a "falling away" followed by the revealing of the "man of sin". 2. Then the coming of Jesus and our gathering to Him.

When I took off my "pre-trib glasses", the text became pretty clear to me as to what would happen first. Actually, it appears Paul was even addressing the misconception of the second coming as some private, secret event that some might miss. Whoever/whatever the "one who restrains" is, it appears there is no need to remove the church before Antichrist rises to power.; July 14, 2009 10:13 AM
Craig and Heather said...: (Imagine that! I got long-winded and had to split my post)

Mary, you are absolutely correct in stating that what a person believes dictates his life's path. The thing that initially excited me about the amillenial presentation was the "two age" description. As I listened, so much of my confusion about "what I'm supposed to be about today" became clear. The NT teaching about Christ's return is to always be ready.
Craig described the clarification as "Is ******** of eternal significance or is it temporal?" It isn't that Jesus' instructions are hidden or complicated but the frameworks we build around His words can muddy the water, so to speak.

Historicist/Postmillenialists seem to believe this means we are to geographically conquer and prepare this planet for Jesus by Christianizing politics and society.
Premillenialists often focus on the "Great Tribulation", reading "signs of the times" and mapping out last-days time lines instead of simply being sure we are about God's business. If you are dispinsational but not "pretrib", there is a danger of getting worked up looking for the Antichrist to appear rather than anticipating Jesus' second coming! And, I've also seen that some premillenialists have stated that since God still as a future plan for the Jews, there is no need to try to tell them about Jesus *today*! Amillenialists may be in danger of "falling asleep". I suppose.

Guess the only obvious thing to do is continue to trust that God's got it all under control and be earnestly searching for direction concerning the day I am currently living...

Heather; July 14, 2009 10:14 AM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: The second coming and the rapture are two different things. The rapture is a secret snatching away. Not the second coming of Christ. The second coming of Christ is at the end of the world (end of the age) when every eye will see him. Then comes the millenium.

My husband and I have been studying this for the better part of the day. I have John MacArthur's commentary and he has been reading out of a Reformed commentary (Hendricksen's New Testament Commentary -- the standard of all Reformed people, he informs me).

We are still dispensationalist pre-trib rapture, literal millenium people.; July 14, 2009 4:27 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: And, no, premillenial-tribulation- believing Christians definitely do not look forward to Antichrist, because the rapture takes place before Antichrist, in fact, the rapture is one of the things that enables the Antichrist to come to power. So, I am not looking forward to Antichrist. I'm looking forward to the rapture, which can happen at any time, and nothing has to happen first for it to take place.; July 14, 2009 4:28 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Sorry for the multiple comments. Anyway, yes, the rapture and millenium sound very extreme.

So does the whole Bible.

The more intellectual Christians get, the more the whole Bible seems extreme and unbelievable.

This is why many in the mainline denominations, with their highly-educated theologians and pastors, don't believe in the OTHER extreme things like the six day creation; Noah's flood; the descruction of Sodom and Gomorrah; the virgin birth of Christ; His miracles; Christ's resurrection; the start of the Church with cloven tongues of fire; and of course, back to the rapture and millenium. Also, a literal hell that burns forever and ever.

All of those are dismissed today by so many in the mainline denominations as myths, because the are extreme and unbelievable to the carnal mind of man.; July 14, 2009 4:31 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Mary, multi-comments are acceptable :o) I seem to experience the effects of that particular "disorder" as well.

I can accept extreme ...and I honestly am not trying to be the bratty little kid who refuses to be taught. Trust me, I would LOVE to be able to have this settled in my own mind! But look at 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4, especially the wording of verses 1 and 3 ...

2:1 Now we beseech you, my brothers, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,
2:2 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.
2:3 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,
2:4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, setting himself forth, that he is God. (MKJV)

It appears to clearly state that the coming of Jesus AND our gathering to him comes only AFTER the rise of the "son of perdition".

What am I missing?; July 14, 2009 4:43 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: The Thessalonians were afraid that they had missed the second coming of Christ because of their severe persecution. Paul told them that they should not be moved by the persecution, because "we are appointed thereunto" (I Thes. 3:3). (Indeed, the some of the seven churches of Asia in Revelation were warned by Jesus that there would be severe persecution for them.)

Paul told the Thessalonians that the second coming of Christ (the end of the world/age when Christ shall come and every eye see him) would not occur until there come a great falling away first and the appearance of Antichrist. Paul did not tell the Thessalonians that they would be alive to see that. The church has to be taken out of the way first to allow Antichrist to come on the scene.

At least that is my understanding of I and II Thessalonians.; July 14, 2009 4:44 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: I think we are crossing comments, Heather!

The gathering together unto Him is talking of the secret gathering of the church in the rapture.

The Day of the Lord in verse 2 is talking about the end of the world, not the rapture.

Believers in Christ at the end of the world (Jews and gentiles) are not "gathered together to Christ" the way the church is at the rapture. Unbelievers at the end of the world are taken away to judgment. Believers at that time are left behind to go right into the millenium.; July 14, 2009 4:49 PM
Craig and Heather said...: It's possible we're crossing comments. I tend to get really wordy and take a long time to get something published.

So, is there something in the original Greek to indicate that the rapture is secret and separate from Christ's return? I don't see that in any English translation I have looked at. Is there another passage which supports a secret, separate snatching away?

The way I understand what I have read is that Jesus will return just before the end of the world, and upon His arrival, (in quick succession), rapture the church, convert the remnant Jews,and pour out His wrath on rebellious humanity. Then, it appears He will institute His thousand-year reign and afterward, administer His final judgment at the end of "this age".

Again, I'm really trying to learn and not just poking at you out of boredom or something.

H; July 14, 2009 5:37 PM
The Squirrel said...: Mary said - "The second coming and the rapture are two different things. The rapture is a secret snatching away. Not the second coming of Christ. The second coming of Christ is at the end of the world (end of the age) when every eye will see him. Then comes the millennium."

A slight shift in thinking helped me with this a few years back. How long was Jesus' first coming? About 30+ years. How many events made up the first coming? A lot, from Christmas to the Crucifixion. Jesus' second coming will not be a single event, either, but a series of events over a period of time, just as the first coming was.

I've heard people accuse pre-tribbers of believing in two 2nd comings (or, as a amillennial friend recently ribbed me with, "Jesus 1.5!") The second coming begins with the rapture and ends at the end of the Millennium. So, the second coming will last 1007(+/-) years.

Just as the first coming began with Jesus' conception, nine months before his birth (or even 6 months prior to that, with Elizabeth's conception with John the Baptist?) the second coming,in my understanding, begins with the rapture, 7 years before the "coming in the clouds with great glory."

My two acorns worth...

~Squirrel; July 14, 2009 6:02 PM
The Squirrel said...: The biggest problem I see with a post-tribulation rapture is the question of who will populate the millennial kingdom?

If all believers are translated and glorified at the rapture: Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. [1 Corinthians 15:51-53 NASB].

And If the glorified believers do not marry: For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. [Matthew 22:30 NASB].

Then who is going to populate the Millennium?

But if all those believers who are alive at the end of the Tribulation enter the Millennium in their natural bodies, then they will marry and have children and the Kingdom will be populated. There need to be a large number of unbelievers alive at the end of the Millennium for Satan to deceive and lead against God in the last battle.

~Squirrel; July 14, 2009 6:15 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Good point, Squirrel, and I understand what you are saying.

Where do we get the idea that only Christians enter the millenium?

Craig; July 14, 2009 6:22 PM
The Squirrel said...: If, as I believe it does, the sheep and goat judgment of Matthew 25:31-46 takes place at the end of the Tribulation, then all those who survive Armageddon will be judged, and only believers will enter the Millennium.

Of course, amillennialists would interpret the sheep and goat judgment of Matthew 25 to be the same judgment as the great white throne judgment of Revelation 20. But Matthew 25:31 says "when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him," while Revelation 20:7 says "When the thousand years are completed..." and Revelation 20:11 says "Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away..." So, the great white throne judgment is after the Millennium, while the sheep and goat judgment is after the Tribulation.

~Squirrel; July 14, 2009 6:57 PM
Craig and Heather said...: An "incremental" return is understandable. Scripture seems to support that concept but I still don't see evidence of a separate rapture that occurs before Christ's public appearance to the world. I see Him coming publicly, saving the church etc. and staying until the end of this age--then there will be one final rebellion and judgment.

Who is to populate the millenial kingdom? Good question. I'm not a scholar but am thinking that the rapture doesn't actually fall at *the* end of the tribulation period but rather just before the bowls of God's wrath are poured out.

The 144,000 sealed Jews would not be raptured with the church but because they refuse to worship the beast, they would be protected during the time of the outpouring of God's wrath. They would still have their earthly bodies when entering the millenium.

Honestly, I don't *know* how to populate the millenial Kingdom. Right now, there is very little about prophecy that I can confidently claim to understand.

I'm mostly hung up on the timing of the rapture due to the straightforward language of Paul's letter to the Thessalonians.

H; July 14, 2009 7:14 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Squirrel said, "So, the great white throne judgment is after the Millennium, while the sheep and goat judgment is after the Tribulation"

Unless I interpret Matt 25 the way you said earlier and say that Christ coming in His glory covers the entire 2nd advent.

Just thinking. . .

Craig; July 14, 2009 7:23 PM
The Squirrel said...: I can see how a mid-trib or "pre-wrath" rapture also solves the Millennium Population Problem(tm) in exactly the same way that the pre-trib rapture does.

The main reason I maintain a pre-tribulation rapture is the imminence issue. The Bible speaks clearly that the Rapture could be at any time. Not the only reason, surly, but a big one.

~Squirrel; July 14, 2009 7:27 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: I think I agree with Squirrel on everything.

"Changed in the twinkling of an eye" is the rapture.

At the end of the world, when Christ comes for every eye to see Him, there is a judgment of sheep and goats, like Squirrel says.

Unbelievers are carried away to judgment.

Believers living at that time (believing Jews from the 144,000 plus beliving gentiles -- all of whom became believers during the tribulation) will stay behind on earth and go right into the millenium. These are the people who will populate the millenium. Believing Jews and gentiles who are alive at that time.

The church is already in heaven, changed in the twinkling of an eye, earlier, in the rapture.

The first few books of Revelation show the church around the throne.

After about Revelation chapter 4, you don't hear of the church any more.

After that, the believers you see, Jews and gentiles, are tribulation saints. These go on into the millenium.

Hope that is clear.

The tribulation is for the judgment of Israel (Jacob's trouble) via Antichrist, and the pouring out of God's wrath on the unbelieving world. Israel will believe on Christ. Gentiles will get saved then, too. They will pay for it with their lives.

No, Heather, I know you are not poking at me. We all want to know about these things.; July 14, 2009 7:38 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Oh, and ALL Jews, now and then, must accept Jesus Christ as their savior, just like we have to. They don't get special privileges (like John Hagee says they do!!!).

I think at the end, all of Israel will look on him whom they have pierced and mourn as one mourns for an only son -- I don't remember the exact quote or where it is. They will finally recognize Him as Messiah. Then they are saved.

Like Squirrel says, there are not too many living humans around to go on into the millenium. They will be believing Jews and gentiles who got saved during the tribulation.

I don't think we, the church that gets raptured, get resurrected for that. I think we stay up in heaven, and then after the great white throne judgment and the annhiliation of the universe, and Satan and hell and all the unbelievers getting cast into the lake of fire, we get to go on the new heaven and new earth (recreated).

I think I'm remembering all this right.; July 14, 2009 7:43 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: I don't know why the Bible doesn't just come out and list this stuff. Guess it is not meant to be easy. You have to take everything literally whenever and wherever you can. That helps.; July 14, 2009 7:45 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Mary said, "I don't know why the Bible doesn't just come out and list this stuff."

My problem is the places where the Bible does come out and say stuff that doesn't line up with some of this stuff. (like the order of the events in 2 Thess)

Like I said before, I have been taught this view the whole time as I was growing up. I am not unfamiliar with the things you guys are saying. You have not said anything I hadn't already heard. (or even believed at one point)

Now to be fair, I would say that after sitting down and re reading Rev 19-21, I have to say that I agree that there is a literal physical 1000 year reign on earth in "this age" before the white throne judgment.

I still can't find 2 judgments, looks to me like one.

I agree that the second coming includes everything from when He first appears until He creates the new heaven and earth.

The framework that is making sense in my mind is the one of the parable of the wheat and the tares. Both grow together. Both increase and reach maturity. (the brightness of church and the evil of the world) The result is increasing conflict, and final persecution. Then there is the harvest. The harvest would be the second coming. (most of Revelation)

The reason for vigilance is that there is a struggle that is increasing, and the nature of your life displays what kind of seed you are from.

As the conflict intensifies, we will begin to see the signs that were foretold. The world will not know what is coming, but those of us who recognize the "fig tree" will know what time it is. Not that we will know exactly when, but we will be able to recognize the season. If the man knew his house was going to be robbed, he would be ready.

The action item for us is to be found doing our masters bidding when he comes, as is seen in several parables.

I believe that when He comes, we will meet Him in the air, as He is coming down. I believe that from the time we meet Him in the air we will forever be with Him where he is. Both in the coming millinium and eternity to come.

Again, just my thoughts, (which have been brewing and festering for about 4 years, and will continue to change I am sure) - not cutting off your comments, just continuing the discussion, as each of you have been very open with me. Seemed like I needed to fill you all in a little more on were I am.

Craig; July 14, 2009 8:15 PM
The Squirrel said...: Craig:

Most of my friends are amillennialists or historic premillennialists, so no worries here. I've been disagreed with much more disagreeably then I have here!

:o)

Mary: I would say that, during the Millennium, the glorified & resurrected saints (both Old and New Testament, I believe) will rule and reign with the Messiah. "If we endure, we will also reign with Him;" - 2 Timothy 2:12 NASB)

~Squirrel; July 14, 2009 8:34 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Well, please keep trying to persuade me. I am learning. This is exactly what I hoped to do when I posted this. Iron sharpens iron you know. (or do Squirrels say claw sharpens claw? - oh yeah, I saw the graphic on your Squirrel can cook feature, you sharpen with iron too) :)

Craig; July 14, 2009 8:40 PM
Craig and Heather said...: So, when speaking of the imminence of Christ's return, are we looking at "coming as a thief" passages such as:

1. "For you yourselves know accurately that the day of the Lord comes like a thief in the night.
For when they shall say, Peace and safety! Then sudden destruction comes on them, as travail upon a woman with child. And they shall not escape.
But you, brothers, are not in darkness, that the Day should overtake you like a thief." 1 Thessalonians 5:2-4

and

2. "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." 2 Peter 3:10

and

3. " Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is the one who watches and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame." Revelation 16:15

?

It seems to me those passages are referring to 1. non-believers who become enamored with Antichrist's promise of peace and prosperity 2. The specific day/hour of Christ's return (which none of us can know) and 3. Professing believers who are not concerned with obeying and overcoming while there it is still called "today".

To a certain degree, I think everyone will be surprised because Jesus told even His closest friends that He would be coming at an hour when He is not expected (Matt. 24:44)

I absolutely believe there is a need to stay ready because we specifically are told that no one will be able to accurately predict the moment of Jesus' return and because of the suddenness (imminence)of His appearance, there will be no chance to "hurry up and get ready".

You can be standing in the middle of a violent thunderstorm and know the lightning will strike somewhere, at some moment--but not know for sure precisely where or when. Perhaps I am misunderstanding what is meant by "imminence"?

I know...inquiring minds are a pain in the neck :o)

Heather; July 14, 2009 10:05 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Mary--
To me, the churches in Revelation do not appear to be around the throne because they are being reprimanded and told to "overcome". If the church has already been raptured at that point, why would Jesus have something against them?

I see the word "church" is not used again after Revelation 3, but does this necessarily mean that the church is totally out of the picture? I can't find "trinity" or "rapture" in even one passage, but the concepts are still there...

Okay, here's another passage that gums up my ability to accept pretrib rapture teaching as it shows the same sort of timing for the rapture as 2 Thessalonians 2.

24:29 And immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from the heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.
24:30 And then the sign of the Son of Man shall appear in the heavens. And then all the tribes of the earth shall mourn, and they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of the heaven with power and great glory.
24:31 And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other." Matthew 24:29-31

The imagery Jesus uses here is strikingly similar to that of the sixth seal in Revelation 6:12-17. And Rev 7 is the sealing of the 144,000 ( the Jews who refused antichrist but got surprised by Christ's sudden return so didn't get caught up with the church).

So, I need a little help working out how a pretrib rapture fits in here. Anyone???

H; July 14, 2009 10:29 PM
The Squirrel said...: Heather:

You've pegged onto the biggest problem that every eschatalogical scheme has, the exact chronology of the events.

We can pull together passages from Ezekiel, Daniel, Amos, Zacharia, Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, Luke 21, the Epistles of Paul, Peter, and John, and the book of the Revelation, and get a pretty good outline, but questions still remain.

Oh, and "rapture" is found in the text of 1 Thessalonians 4:17, where the Greek αρπαγησομεθα is translated "rapiemur" in the Latin Vulgate ("caught up" in most English translations.)

~Squirrel; July 15, 2009 6:06 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Squirrel,
Thanks for the clarification on "rapture". I appreciate that you and Mary are willing to discuss this subject.

Again, I'm not trying to argue that the concept isn't there at all... My thought was just that the church could still be represented in Revelation by, say, the designation "saints".

And really, I'm not trying to prove or disprove one timing scheme over another. I believe that the passages that I mentioned give a legitimate foundation for asking "timing" questions-- even if I don't convince anyone else to abandon his/her belief in a pretribulation catching up of saints. I'm going to try to boil down my thoughts and simplify:

1. It appears that Pretribbers tend to define the rise of Antichrist to the battle of Armageddon as the period of God's Wrath--the emphasis seems to be put on vigilance concerning Christ's return. The support for this tends to be that Christians are not destined for wrath.

2. Because of the widespread adherence to the above belief, a large percentage of the church expects to be completely out of the picture before Antichrist rises to power. Or, in the case of a- and post-millenialists, it seems that the reign of Antichrist is taken figuratively, so they don't expect to face Antichrist, either.

Fair enough summation so far? Now, my concern:

1. I don't see all of the seals, trumpets and bowls as being God's Wrath, so I don't understand why there needs to be a pre-tribulation catching up of saints. It appears that the devastation up through the 5th seal is directly caused by Antichrist and is Satan's wrath, which God allows as a means to purify and refine the church of the flaws described in the letters to the churches. (I expect you all have heard this perspective before, so I won't belabor this point).

2. I wouldn't mind being wrong in my understanding. Severe persecution under the personal reign of Satan doesn't really sound like a lot of fun.
But, what if the popular pre-trib perspective is the one that has mistaken the timing of the rapture? There does appear to be straightforward NT evidence of the order of events as being first antichrist and then rapture and I am confused as to how the pretrib perspective effectively deals with these without changing the plain reading.

If Antichrist actually comes to power while the majority of Christians are only looking for Jesus to return (a- and post-millenialists would be caught off-guard, too), it will be a terrifying "wake up call".

I'm just concerned that we be spiritually prepared for the worst, I suppose. :o(

Heather; July 15, 2009 8:39 AM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Ooops, I didn't mean the churches are around the throne. You're right -- they are told to repent. I meant that after Jesus talked to the churches, then you see ELDERS around the throne and you don't hear of the church any more. My bad.

Squirrel, yes I was wondering if the saints who had been raptured and all the saints who had died naturally before that and were in heaven would come down to reign in the millenium. I wasn't sure about that.

This is very complicated, I'll admit. Hard for me to keep the story line straight. I believe it is:

rapture of saints; rise of antichrist; first 3 1/2 years of the tribulation; Israel makes a pact with antichrist; antichrist betrays Israel; last 3 1/2 years of the tribulation; Christ comes again and every eye sees Him; sinners swept away to judgment; believers stay behind on the earth and go into millenium; satan bound for 1,000 years; satan loosed and a conflagration ensues; fire comes down from heaven; satan cast into the lake of fire; great white throne judgment; the universe is uncreated (20:11); death and hell cast into the lake of fire; commencement of new heaven and new earth and eternity.

Anyway, thanks for letting all of us discuss this, you guys.

Yes, the main thing is for all of us to be ready, because we don't know when any of these things come to pass exactly.

What I see right now are signs of judgment on America.; July 15, 2009 8:51 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Oh, Squirrel, don't throw up your paws in frustration, yet! We have been listening to some of the info you linked, so the grilling here isn't due to stubborn ignorance.

Thanks for clarifying about the churches, Mary.

Yes, your explanation of events pretty much matches standard pretrib teaching that I've heard.

I'm sure the men who have studied this out are sincere and I am not accusing anyone of lying. But I'm kind of a "hands on" sort of person and I've learned the hard way to not just take someone else's word that something is in the Bible.

Can you tell me where in the *Bible* I can find support for the idea of God's Wrath being the full seven years and that we won't be here for any of it?

If the interpretation of the events of Revelation do not involve "The Church", why do Jesus (Matthew 24; Revelation's first six seals) and Paul (2 Thessalonians 2) describe the order of events as

~A "falling away"/rise of false christ(s)/unprecedented tribulation
~Then, Christ returns to gather His elect

I might be able to accept that Jesus was talking about Jews, but Paul was addressing Christians. And he said that Christ's return and our gathering together to Him (which will apparently happen in The Day of Christ) would not occur until after a falling away and the rise of the man of sin (Antichrist).

I understand the "Day" of Christ to be the period that begins with Christ's return/rapture of the saints, proceeds through the outpouring of His wrath and continues through the Millenium. And Paul says that this "Day" will not begin until after Antichrist is revealed.

The rest of the "Revelation Roadmap is not a huge concern for me at this time. I just am wondering where to find support for a pre-trib rapture that is as clearly stated as the evidence I have seen for a pre-wrath rapture.

If there isn't such clear text, I am wondering why it is acceptable to overlook the obvious (that we can clearly read in the Gospels/epistles)in favor of a complicated prophecy interpretation that appears to contradict what Jesus and Paul actually said?

Straining my brain in an effort to understand,
Heather; July 15, 2009 10:36 AM
The Squirrel said...: "Oh, Squirrel, don't throw up your paws in frustration, yet!"

Oh, I haven't! Just busy with other stuff this morning. I've written bunches more on other's blogs then on my own this week.

:o)

I'll be back!

~Squirrel; July 15, 2009 10:59 AM
The Squirrel said...: "I understand the "Day" of Christ to be the period that begins with Christ's return/rapture of the saints, proceeds through the outpouring of His wrath and continues through the Millenium. And Paul says that this "Day" will not begin until after Antichrist is revealed."

The Day of the Lord is better understood as the Tribulation proper, beginning with the emergence of the Antichrist and ending with the aftermath of Armageddon.

In , Jesus quoted Isaiah 61:1-2, "The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, Because the LORD has anointed me To bring good news to the afflicted; He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to captives And freedom to prisoners; To proclaim the favorable year of the LORD" But he did not finish the sentence, which continues, "And the day of vengeance of our God;"

compair with:(not an exhaustive list)

Isa 13:6 "Wail, for the day of the LORD is near! It will come as destruction from the Almighty."

Joe 1:15 "Alas for the day! For the day of the LORD is near, And it will come as destruction from the Almighty."

Amo 5:18 "Alas, you who are longing for the day of the LORD, For what purpose will the day of the LORD be to you? It will be darkness and not light;"

The Tribulation is the 70th Week of Daniel 9:24-27, and it begins with the making of a covenant by "the prince who is to come" and Israel. A covenant that he breaks at the 3 1/2 year mark, when he becomes the Abomination of Desolations (Matthew 24:15). This corresponds with Paul's list of the actions of the Antichrist in 2 Thessalonians 2:4.

Dinner's ready :o) More later...

~Squirrel; July 15, 2009 4:59 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Squirrel,
Hope you enjoyed your dinner.

Okay, so The Day of the Lord, is understood to actually begin when Antichrist is revealed (this would begin a seven-year, end of the world as we know it countdown of events, yes?) Am I following you?

I suppose I can accept a change in my general definition--but that still doesn't help me with the order that Paul gives.

Also, we are told we are not destined for [God's] wrath. God's wrath hangs over the head of every non-believer and there is evidence of His exercising of various judgments throughout the Bible. I believe that Antichrist's rise and rule can be considered a form of "judgment" (and time of refining trial for those who go into the tribulation period) without actually being the direct administration of His fury upon the rebellious world.

Anyway, Paul said that the Day of the Lord *and* catching up of the saints cannot occur until AFTER the falling away and revealing of Antichrist.
Put another way, I read this to mean that we should not expect to be lifted out of this world until after Antichrist has taken power (and probably done a significant amount of damage)

Oh, something about the population of the millenial kingdom came to my attention yesterday.

Since "every eye" will see the rapture, isn't it possible that even if it occurs after the midpoint of Antichrist's reign (the setting up of his "image" for worship), not only the Jews will be able to recognize their Messiah, but many gentiles could also convert?

Of course, they would still have to stay here during that time and either be martyred or have to be supernaturally protected. But that could account for the pretrib belief in non-Jewish tribulation saints which end up going into the millenium in mortal bodies. And it doesn't conflict with my thought that the Church should expect to be here until sometime after Antichrist breaks his promise to the Jews.

Heather; July 16, 2009 7:41 AM
The Squirrel said...: Squirrel,
Hope you enjoyed your dinner.

Yes, Heather, I did very much. Grilled chicken, noodles, and salad. It was all very good.

Okay, so The Day of the Lord, is understood to actually begin when Antichrist is revealed (this would begin a seven-year, end of the world as we know it countdown of events, yes?) Am I following you?

That would be my interpretation, yes. The Tribulation, or the Day of the Lord, begins with the Antichrist’s covenant with Israel.

Also, we are told we are not destined for [God’s] wrath.

While everything related to the curse on the earth, from mosquitoes to hurricanes, is undoubtedly related to God’s anger at a fallen world, the Tribulation period is a special outpouring of God’s wrath. Romans 5:9 says, “Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.” And 1st Thessalonians 1: 10 says that Jesus rescues us from the wrath to come, while 1st Thessalonians 5: 9 has not destined us for wrath.

Jesus compared the days of the end times with the days of Noah and of a Lot. While undoubtedly he spoke of the moral conditions of the times, it is also telling that God put Noah safely in the Ark before the flood, and God delivered Lot from Sodom before raining down destruction.

Anyway, Paul said that the Day of the Lord *and* catching up of the saints cannot occur until AFTER the falling away and revealing of Antichrist.

Actually, Paul did not say anything about the rapture in 2nd Thessalonians 2. Paul’s rapture passage is in the 1st Thessalonians.

Since "every eye" will see the rapture…

Actually, the every eye passages refer to the Glorious Appearing at the end of the Tribulation period. Certainly the rapture will not go unnoticed, but that is not the same event.

But I do believe that many gentiles will also be saved during the Tribulation. Many will be martyred for their faith, but others will live to enter the millennial kingdom. (see Revelation 7:14)

~Squirrel; July 16, 2009 8:56 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Okay, Mr Squirrel, some more questions for you...

I'm thinking this is the rapture reference to which you pointed?

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 For the Lord Himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ shall rise first.
Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. And so we shall ever be with the Lord.

It seems to me that this passage involves His very public (and noisy) glorious appearing which includes the rapture of saints. I understand the 2 Thessalonians passage to be referring to the same topic as 1 Thess.

Even in 1 Thessalonians, Christ's public, physical return to earth and the catching up of the Church appear to be all one event. This is why I brought up the "every eye" verse from Revelation 1.

I'm not a Greek scholar, so I might be completely ignorant of some key word or phrase, but a straight reading in English doesn't tip me off to Paul's separation of rapture/Christ's physical return to the earth.

How can we know for sure that the 1 and 2 Thess. passages are talking about two different things?

H; July 16, 2009 10:30 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Oh, glad you enjoyed your meal. I had no idea that squirrels were carnivorous...but rather they seem to prefer bird seed and vending machine candy :o); July 16, 2009 10:32 AM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: I'm wrapping my brain around this, too, you guys. Yes, I would agree with the Squirrel that the Day of the Lord begins with the revelation of Antichrist, because the Day of the Lord is His day of vengeance, beginning after the church is raptured. Israel is also judged at this time.

The Tribulation is called "Jacob's" trouble. Jacob, meaning Israel.

I'll have to give that "shout" passage more study. The shout certainly does sound noisy, like you say.

Whatever, I believe the time is near, because all the technology is in place for Antichrist and the one world church and government and the mark of the beast and surveillance, etc.

I know that a lot of Christians believe in a mid-trib rapture.

I'll have to study some more.; July 16, 2009 12:31 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Oh, Matthew 24 takes place after the rapture. One taken and one left means one taken to judgment (an unbeliever) and one left (a believer) to go into the millenium, which is still part of this age. Also the great falling away. Many will profess Christ during this time but fall away due to the tribulation. That is why they are warned to hold on to the end, but many won't. True believers during the tribulation will pay for it with their lives.

Much more falls into place if you put Matthew 24 after the rapture. Jesus is talking to Jews (His Jewish disciples) about future Jews (believing Jews during the tribulation), which is why He tells those who are in Judea (literally) to flee.

Many Bible scholars place Matthew 24 after the rapture.

Like I said, I'll have to study Thess. more.; July 16, 2009 12:36 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Ok, Mrs. Multiple Comments is back. I'm looking at the passage in I Thes.4:15-18, and II Thes.2:1-2.

I don't have any commentary here (my lazy), I'm just reading this to see what it says to me.

The only thing I can make out of this is that the shout could possibly be only heard by the living Christians and the already-deceased Christians who will be raptured.

It says in I Thes.4:15 that at the rapture (the rapture is where I'm coming from), we which are alive and remain unto the COMING of the Lord, etc.

It says again in II Thes.2:1 "by the COMING of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by our GATHERING together unto him."

Then, same chapter, verse 2 says not to be troubled...that the DAY of the Christ is at hand.

Same chapter, verse 3 says again, "that DAY shall not come except there come a falling away first,a nd that an of sin be revealed, the son of perdition."

There seems to me to be a difference between the COMING of the Lord, when he GATHERS His saints living and dead in the rapture, and teh DAY of the Lord after the rapture, when people will fall way, the antichrist will arise, Israel will be judged, and God's wrath will be poured out on the world.

A difference between COMING and DAY.

So, maybe that shout is not heard by everybody. Of course, maybe it IS and the unbelievers will misinterpret it or assign some hair-brained meaning to that shout.

Once the rapture occurs, there certainly will be a great falling away, because all that will be left are nominal "Christians" who don't believe the Bible, making an easy way for the one world ecumenical church to arise.

We are seeing much preparation for this now, as many denominations and nominal believers are ditching the Bible and into ecumenicalism.

I believe we haven't seen anything yet, although pathways are being cleared for all sorts of stuff that Revelation talks about.

Anyway, we are gathered at the rapture "...so shall we ever be with the Lord," I Thes.4:17. Tribulations saints, (Jews and gentiles) go into the millenium. They are not gathered to be with the Lord the way we will be, whether we are still alive at the time of the rapture or have passed away.

Make sense?

In; July 16, 2009 2:17 PM
The Squirrel said...: “Okay, Mr Squirrel, some more questions for you...”

:o) Bring it on!

“I'm thinking this is the rapture reference to which you pointed? 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17”

Yes, that is the passage I was thinking of. Do note, however, the phrases “in the clouds” and “in the air.” 1st Thessalonians 4 does not mention Jesus coming to earth. I have never liked the phrase “secret rapture.” I do not believe that there will be anything “secret” about it. In fact, I believe that the Antichrist’s explanation for the disappearance of millions of people is the false thing referred to in 2nd Thessalonians 2:11.

Heather, what event in second Thessalonians do you see as the same event as seen in first Thessalonians four? Could you please cite a verse or passage?

“Oh, glad you enjoyed your meal. I had no idea that squirrels were carnivorous...but rather they seem to prefer bird seed and vending machine candy :o)”

The fact is I’ve just recently learn to myself that squirrels are omnivores. In addition to seeds and nuts, squirrels also eat bugs, eggs, and small birds. Personally, I tend to avoid the bugs!

:o)

~Squirrel; July 16, 2009 2:27 PM
Craig and Heather said...: My head hurts :oP

I'm glad you're still here, Mary.

I can get a little aggressive with my questions--and don't want you to feel like I'm yelling at you or just not listening.

It's probably pretty obvious by now that I'm more bothered than Craig about not knowing all the answers :oS

I'll get back to your comment in a minute...; July 16, 2009 2:32 PM
The Squirrel said...: Briefly, two things.

I believe that Mary is correct in saying that Matthew 24 and 25 take place during the Tribulation after the Rapture.
I also agree that 2nd Thessalonians 2: 1 most likely refers to the Rapture.
If you have the time to do a lot of reading, Dr. Thomas Ice has posted online his entire exegesis of Matthew 24 and 25. You can find it at http:///www.pre-trib.org/

(Look Craig, no link! :o)

Squirrel; July 16, 2009 2:37 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Okay, In both passages, I see that the Lord is returning. 1 Thess. uses the term "descend", and 2 Thess. says "coming". But both verses appear to be speaking of the return that the disciples were told about in Acts 1:11.

Also, the "catching up together" in 1 Thess 4:17 seems to be a reference to the same event as the "gathering together" in 2 Thess. 2:1.

I'm thinking that since Paul was writing two letters to the same audience, he would not have worded both descriptions exactly the same way and could still be talking about the same event.

Do note, however, the phrases “in the clouds” and “in the air.” 1st Thessalonians 4 does not mention Jesus coming to earth. I have never liked the phrase “secret rapture.” I do not believe that there will be anything “secret” about it. In fact, I believe that the Antichrist’s explanation for the disappearance of millions of people is the false thing referred to in 2nd Thessalonians 2:11.

Duly noted. However, I am wondering how the church being caught up to Him in the clouds prevents Jesus from continuing down to administer justice? I see 1 Thess. 4:17 says "And so we shall ever be with the Lord", but if return happens in split phases, wouldn't He have to come back at some point anyway?

I would have to agree with you that if such a thing were witnessed by the masses, there would have to be some sort of powerful deception involved.; July 16, 2009 3:06 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Yes, yes, you go, Squirrel! I think I agree -- Antichrist will probably have a weird explanation for the "shout" and the departure of the saints.

My husband thinks the great falling away must take place before the rapture, because you have to fall away from something. You have to be there (a Christian) before you can fall away. You can't fall away if you haven't ever "fallen forward".

I thought it must mean just nominal Christians falling away after the rapture, but my husband says no, because then that would mean that they were never saved. And if they were never saved (nominal), then they can't fall away, because they never fell forward in the first place.

He believes true Christians will lose their faith and fall away before the rapture. He believes we are seeing that now. Upon thinking about it, I have to agree.

Of course, true believers who get saved during the tribulation will also fall away, which is why they are warned to hold out till the end.

You can tell my husband and I are not "once saved always saved." Never have been.; July 16, 2009 3:10 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Okay, Mary, back to your thought,

Matthew 24 is pretty complex, IMO because the disciples asked two (possibly three) questions
1. When will the temple they were looking at be destroyed? and
2. What will be the sign of His coming and (maybe #3)the end of the world?

Jesus answered the questions but I have a hard time sorting through exactly the delineation between parts. For instance, the temple was destroyed by Titus in AD 70. The Jewish Christians of that time probably would have been observing Sabbath and the "abomination that causes desolation" could have simply meant when they saw the conquering pagan armies coming, to take note that it was the same type of situation as when Antiochus Epiphanes set up an altar to Zeus in 168 BC (Daniel 11:31)

So, while dealing with Jewish believers, that aspect of Jesus' answer may have nothing to do with the end of the world. Or it may be a preview of what will happen at the end.

This is where I admit we have also looked at historicism (Revelation unfolding consistently from Jesus' time until the end rather than being just a one thousand-seven year blip at the end of time).

While I can't support the historicist's "Church-as-Israel" replacement conclusion, I believe there is a fascinating case built for the concept of Revelation being an overview of what would happen over the years until the end.

My husband thinks the great falling away must take place before the rapture, because you have to fall away from something. You have to be there (a Christian) before you can fall away. You can't fall away if you haven't ever "fallen forward".

I would tend to agree with your husband, and his understanding matches the order I keep pointing to in 2 Thessalonians.

My perspective is not so much that a person can lose salvation, but rather that he can lose his illusion of having been saved.

Trials and persecution can cause those who have been along for the ride to decide to turn away from the hard path. They cannot endure til the end because the work of regeneration was never begun and they will not be able to press forward in their own strength.

I look at the parable of the sower and the seeds and notice that some professing Christians will continue to appear to grow even as the "weeds of worldliness" choke the life out of them. But in the parable, only the seed that fell into good soil grew into anything useful.; July 16, 2009 3:27 PM
The Squirrel said...: Craig &/or Heather,

:o)(Could you please sign your comments so that I know which one of you I’m addressing. C or H would do nicely.)

I believe that Jesus’ disciples did indeed asked three questions, exactly as you gave in your ultimate reading.

What might really help you in understanding the chronology of the Olivet Discourse is to read it in the light of Daniel chapter nine. Daniel 9:26 says that, sometime after the crucifixion, “the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary…” the people of the who is to come refers, of course, to the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem and 70 AD, and the prince who is to come would be the Antichrist.

Daniel 9:27 tells us that the abomination of desolation takes place at the midpoint of the final week of the prophesy. This will be long after 70 AD, therefore the destruction of Jerusalem foretold in verse 26 is clearly not the fulfillment of verse 27. Also the desecration of the temple under Antichrist’s the fourth, some 200 years before the crucifixion, fails to meet the criteria of the prophecies.

And in the Olivet Discourse, Jesus clearly warns His listeners to watch for the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel.

~Squirrel; July 16, 2009 6:02 PM
The Squirrel said...: Mary:

"My husband thinks the great falling away must take place before the rapture, because you have to fall away from something. You have to be there (a Christian) before you can fall away. You can't fall away if you haven't ever "fallen forward"."

I guess this is where our theologies part. I invite you to come on over to my blog, as I've just started a series on the Calvinist Doctrines of Grace.

~Squirrel; July 16, 2009 6:06 PM
The Squirrel said...: Two comments up: Antichrist the fourth should have been Antiochus 4th. I'm trying out new voice recognition software, and I didn't proofread as well as I should have.

~Squirrel; July 16, 2009 6:09 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Well, the eternal security question would take a whole 'nother blog and comment thread!

My husband and I know all about Calvinism, Squirrel, because we pastored a Reformed church for 10 years (although we are Assemblies of God).

Calvin sounded like a good man, but we don't agree with his teachings. We really don't think they are Biblical. We see them as somehow twisted. They are very popular today, though. Maybe as a reaction to the silly health and wealth, God-as-genii "gospels" which hijacked the Charismatic movement and traditional pentecostals along with them?

It is good to recognize the sovereignty of God, but I think Calvin went overboard. God did give us a free will (and he didn't ask our permission first, nor did we jin it up ourselves).

Heather, according to the parable, the seed that fell on rocky and thorny soil did spring up for a while. The plants were genuine. They didn't make it.

Well, to get back to the amillenialism, I can't think of anything more to say.

Seems there is a great falling away right around the time of the rapture due to Christians falling asleep and eventually losing their faith, and we are seeing it begin now; and the love of Tribulation saints growing cold due to the increase of wickedness (Matt.24) during the Great Tribulation -- in our opinion, both times, genuine believers who have lost their faith and their love of Christ.

That's the best I can figure out.; July 16, 2009 6:22 PM
Craig and Heather said...: (Could you please sign your comments so that I know which one of you I’m addressing. C or H would do nicely.)

Sorry,Squirrel. If the comment is unsigned it is Heather.

Okay, I'll go read all of Daniel 9 and compare the two passages.

Have either of you ever considered the possibility that Jesus might have been talking about both 70 AD and the end of everything?

I was recently thinking of Ecclesiastes 1:9 : That which has been is that which shall be; and that which has been done is that which shall be done; and there is nothing new under the sun. (history repeats itself)

...and wondering if the historicist perspective AND the dispensational framework could be correct in several aspects. Perhaps "antichrist IV" is not too far off, if each evil empire leader is actually a foreshadow of a single, consummate personality that is indwelt by Satan himself?

Since I consider myself to be something of a free agent as to which perspective I hold, I kind of wonder if maybe it isn't necessary to completely accept or reject either one (as long as the parts which are held don't contradict each other).

Heather, according to the parable, the seed that fell on rocky and thorny soil did spring up for a while. The plants were genuine. They didn't make it.

Hm. When I read the parable (Mark 4), I see that the seed is "the word" (v 14). and the various types of soil as the hearts of those into which it is sown. The soil is what it is and determines what happens when a person is exposed to the word of God. The seed is God's Truth and the plants are genuine, since they are from that seed. But some people's hearts are so hard they are never phased.
In other people, the word has an effect but because the soil (heart) is a poor growing medium, the "plants" never grow to maturity.
In the good soil, which God has properly prepared (call it predestination, foreknowledge, or whatever), the sprouted seed will be healthy and continue to grow until the harvest.

I've had this experience with transplants--The broccoli sprouts would have produced broccoli if I had planted them in rich, well-tended garden soil. And the radish plants would have been edible if the worms hadn't eaten them up...

"Those who endure to the end will be saved" was a concept that baffled me for years. And I believe God finally showed me that it isn't about my own ability to keep trudging stoically onward until I die.
The a-Ha moment for me was realizing that those who endure till the end were the only ones who actually had salvation in the first place because GOD was faithful to complete the work that HE started in hearts that have truly experienced brokenness for sin and a full turning to Christ for salvation as a result.

Mary, You are definitely right that Calvinism is an entirely different subject. I don't call myself "Calvinist" but guess I lean that direction. Perhaps we can hash that one out another day.

I still love you :o)

Heather; July 16, 2009 7:25 PM
The Squirrel said...: I remember being somewhat confused by the parable of the sower and the seed in Matthew 13. I had a hard time trying to grasp who in the parable had true faith and who did not. It was not until I listened to John MacArthur teaching through Matthew, and subsequently reading his commentaries on Matthew, that I understood that it is “fruit” not “foliage” that indicates true faith. Only the person represented by the soil that brought forth fruit was truly regenerate.

Jesus answered them, "Did I Myself not choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is a devil?" - (John 6:70) Jesus here is referring to Judas, who was never born again.

They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us. - (1 John 2:19) here John speaks of false teachers, who have the spirit of antichrist, who proved by their departure that they never truly were part of the church.

Okay, I’ll let this go now, and we can get back to questions regarding amillenniumism, premillenniumism, and the end times.

:o)

~Squirrel; July 16, 2009 7:54 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: The seed that fell on the hard path never sprouted at all. The birds came and ate it up. The other seeds fell on rocky or thorny soil and grew for a short time. To me, that means a genuine plant, even if fruit has not shown up yet.

A person, when they are saved, is a Christian. It may take a little while for any fruit to show up.

This is where me and John MacArthur part company.

I do agree, though, that many of these supposed fallen-away "Christians" were never really saved. I am not a believer in "once prayed, always saved" by which somebody makes a "profession of faith" because somebody twisted their arm to say some "sinner's prayer" that they didn't mean. Such a person was never saved. This is shoddy evangelism. But, unfortunately, such people are told they are saved and are presented to the church as saved. Sad. Leads to much confusion.

But, I do believe, with many, that a true Christian can lose his salvation (when he loses his faith -- not when he sins necessarily, although sin can erode faith, so we have to be careful of it).

Oh, the millenium. Yes, I believe Jesus was talking about the destructin of Jerusalem in 70 AD, as well as the future when it the temple will once again be destroyed like it says in Revelation, in the future.

I am a believer in double fulfillment of prophesy (and this would be one of them).

Frequently, prophets spoke to somebody (in this case, to the Jews in the end times) through somebody else (in this case, the Jews living in Jesus time who saw the destructin in 70 AD).; July 16, 2009 8:12 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Mrs. Multiple Comments again: I was thinking about "the restrainer" in Thessalonians and about what that meant. I still think it must be the body of Christ, because of Jesus parable of the 10 servants who were told to "occupy till I come" (Luke 19:13) - I assume when He COMES for His church (rapture)?

The true church is a restrainer. The restrainer could also be the Holy Spirit, like you said, Heather, working through the true church, as His presence manifested throught he church is lifted.

Interesting thought about the imperial government of Rome being a restrainer.

I like talking about this. I have been thinking about it all day.; July 16, 2009 9:06 PM
Craig and Heather said...: The "great falling away" is singular, not plural. I think it is talking about the church as a whole as an entity, rather than individuals losing their salvation or not being saved in the beginning. My understanding is that the visible church as a whole trends toward a falling away from the truth in the end. Had not considered whether this could be the restrainer though. Will have to look more closely at the grammar there. Something about that doesn't quite make sense yet.

But if it is the visible church as a whole rather than individuals, than Calvinism/Arminianism is a non issue here.

Craig; July 16, 2009 10:19 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Thanks Mr. Simple Guy. Yes, I suppose there is no need to complicate the discussion more than it needs to be. I'll just let the Calvinism/Arminianism aspect slide because I could really branch us off on a rabbit trail from which we may never return... :o)

Mrs Mary Multiple Comments,

You are welcome to have your say here, I promise! And I'm pleased that the conversation has been good for you. I love it when a conversation or Bible passage keeps me "chewing" on God's word all day!

This has been very exciting for me, too. To be honest, the way we go about discussing such topics is as important to me as my finding a satisfactory answer.

Although I still have questions, and am not yet convinced of the pre-trib stance, I love that we can respectfully discuss this and recognize that (if we really want to know what is true) God will not fail show each of us what we need to know, and not a moment before we need to know it.

Oh, I wanted to share something about the parable in Luke:

Your mention of "'occupy' til I come" grabbed my attention, so I had to look it up for myself (it is both wonderful and a little unnerving to be willing to visit with other believers who think differently! On the one hand, my understanding of Scripture gets tested and refined----on the other hand, my understanding of Scripture gets tested and tossed).

Anyway, the KJV uses the word "occupy" but others say "trade",and one uses the word "invest" so I was a bit confused about what that meant. So, I ran to check the trusty Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary and found that the word is translated from "pragmateuomai", which basically means "to busy one's self with", or "trade". This was interesting, because in the context, it appears Jesus is not saying "occupy(take up space in) the geographical realm of this world until His return. Rather, it reads that He is instructing His followers to "occupy themselves (keep busy) with the task of 'trading' until His return" In other words, I believe this parable is warning us to not simply 'sit on' whatever amount of spiritual/worldly resources He has given us to use while we are here.

I could be wrong, though. It's happened before. I'll go re-read the whole chapter because the parable is sandwiched in between the visit to Zaccheus and the Triumphal Entry and just before Jesus told the parable, is:

And as they heard these things, He added and spoke a parable, because He was near Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God was about to appear immediately. Luke 19:11

I'm thinking that little verse is significant to the meaning of the parable.

Heather; July 17, 2009 7:29 AM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Yes, it seems the Thessalonians thought the kingdom, or whatever, was to appear immediately, and Paul had to warn them that they should work, go about their business, and said, "he who does not work, let him not eat!"

Lots of Christians over the centuries have fallen into this and we should beware of that.

I'm enjoying this discussion. It's making me think and look stuff up.

I can't help but think we are in some kind of a great falling away, if not THE great falling away, as I see denomination after denomination abandoning the Word of God and doing things they ought not to do.

This study has helped me and my husband realize we must "do the things we did at first" and not get lazy in our Christian walk.; July 17, 2009 10:05 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Isn't that something Mary. We must all realize that we are students in the classroom and He is the teacher. I can't tell you how many times I have asked God questions and not gotten MY question answered, but have found out what HE wanted me to know. My questions must always be focused on, "What would you have me to do Lord?" not "Why did you do it this way"

Each of us in this discussion have diverse views of what scripture teaches on this topic. However, we do all agree on Who is teaching, and as our hearts are open to Him, He will continue to use our interactions to bring us closer to HIM. Our eschatologies may only finally become correct when He comes, but we will continue to get closer to Him forever. I look forward to the journey together with each of you.

I so much appreciate the details of this conversation, and it has given me a lot to think about. But more than that I appreciate the tenor and tone of the conversation, and the fellowship of pursuing Christ together. That is the stated purpose of this blog.

Thanks to each of you for your contributions. Glory goes to God.

Continue please!

Craig; July 17, 2009 2:21 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Yes, as we occupy, we continue on in our daily tasks. I'm always reminded, as a military wife, of how our country would occupy other countries like Germany or S. Korea (although we are now more like protecting forces rather than occupying forces like after a war).

We Americans would have our bases in those countries. All of the G.I.s and their families would go about their normal, everyday lives. Some of the G.I.s were, of course, combat forces ready and able to go to battle; the rest were in other career fields like medicine as doctors, nurses, dentists and technicians; some were administrators and assistants and computer programmers; some were cooks and services personnel; some were in supply; some were in civil engineering like drafters/surveyors, plumbers and electricians or carpenters. Whatever.

All of the occupying forces, and their families who lived in base housing -- the wives and children -- went about their daily activities and jobs, the same way they would in the States.

However, if these occupying forces that were going about their daily activities in their various career fields were taken out, the enemy (at the time we lived in W. Germany -- the USSR; or the North Koreans) would quickly overrun the occupied territory.

These countries know this and keep our U.S. presence there.

If the true church is taken out of this world, all "hell" will break loose.

Makes you wonder how many true Christians will be left to be raptured, seeing that we may be in the beginning of the great falling away.

My husband did a study on the great falling away. If you are interested, I can give you the link.

This is all so interesting.; July 17, 2009 3:15 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Yes Mary,
I would be interested in the link.
Craig; July 17, 2009 3:35 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Mary, you make an interesting case for the occupation of the Church to be for peace keeping purposes. I'm still not sure whether the main point of the parable was a focus on the presence or the activity that occurred during the presence

I got sidetracked and haven't read through the whole chapter yet, so I can't intelligently comment about that at the moment.

This morning, I accosted Craig with the "double prophecy" concept because I seriously wonder if the historicist (I think it tends to be a perspective of "postmillenialism" and possibly some amillenialists ) view has a point concerning Revelation prophecy being fulfilled in world history--from the time Christ's first advent until his return.

The historicist writings I have looked at examine the historical part of the RC church, paganism revived within the organization after the Roman Empire fell apart, the office of the pope, the persecution of Protestants by the RCC, the role of Islam and dates that appear to exactly match the day/year pattern of OT Biblical prophecy---far more details than I have room for here. And the conclusion of the historicists is that we are now in the millenium because the prophecy appears to all have been fulfilled in the past.

However, I was thinking that perhaps, as Ecclesiastes states, history will repeat in a condensed form just before Christ returns.

Maybe all of the previous fulfillments were only partial and meant to be preview pictures of end times players and what we should be looking for. I wonder if it might be wise for historicists and dispensationalists to carefully consider each other's perspectives.

I mean, we now have the ecumenical movement which is trying to merge protestants back into Catholicism.

There is also a certain prominent emergent evangelical who is attempting to woo Muslims, who's numbers rival that of the RCC. I had a head-ful of thoughts on that, too but will not throw those out right now.

Anyway, what if the "falling away" is not only corruption within the church but is also the erasing of the lines between mainstream Christianity and all other forms of religion? Couldn't that loss of purity be considered religious harlotry and be represented by the woman who rides the beast?

So, I took the scenic route in trying to say that I wonder if it is possible that history, up to this point, has given us some important details which we should note.

Heather; July 17, 2009 4:53 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Here's the link. I'm starting another blog.

When we belonged to the (non-instrumental) churches of Christ, a fundamentalist sect, they taught that we were in the millenium, because Satan is bound (!).

I don't see how they could say that Satan is bound! I mean, think things are pretty bad and getting worse.

Yes, I think part of the great falling away is this ecumenical stuff. It is paving the way for the one world church or religion.

We had to be in that ministerial alliance when we pastored the Reformed church (the Board required it). Everybody in it was so ate-up with Roman Catholicism.

I predict that once the Catholic church gets the right pope, one who will allow women and married clergy, these Protestant ministers from the mainline denominations will TRIP over each other to get back to the Catholic church.

All the Protestant denominations who have let go of the Bible will simply telescope back in. I have felt this for a long time.

The Baptist church that we pastor now does not require my husband to be in such an alliance, thank God. We learned enough about it before to not want to do it any more.

And, yes, I think history could possibly repeat itself.

I'll get you that link.; July 17, 2009 5:58 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Craig and Heather, here is the link (I'm starting a couple of new blogs):

http://theheartofmary.blogspot.com/

There's only this one article on there.; July 17, 2009 6:07 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Interesting prediction about the ecumenical movement.

One other thought I had concerning the recognition of end times "players":

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the Word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast nor his image, nor had received his mark on their foreheads, nor in their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Today, there is a certain major (and rapidly growing) religion that regularly practices beheading of those who refuse to convert.

Thanks for sharing the address, Mary.

I like the name you chose for your site, BTW :o)

Craig's already looked at it, so now I have to catch up!; July 17, 2009 7:11 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: The name kind of looks like I worship the Blessed Mother, now that I look at it.

Yes, there is a group that beheads people. Who knows exactly who these end-time players will be.

I guess the important thing in all of this is, "Are WE ready whichevery way it turns out?"; July 17, 2009 7:42 PM
The Squirrel said...: Everybody:

Sorry, I’ve been rather busy today and have not had much time for blogging.

Mary, thanks for the link, I will check out that site in the morning.

One quick thought about the effects of the rapture on society. Think about the effect that a very small percentage of mortgages not being paid has had on our economy. Now think what would happen if hundreds of thousands of people disappeared, and stopped paying their mortgages, their car payments, their credit card bills, or even just stopped buying groceries. Don’t you think that would precipitate a huge economic collapse that could be used by the antichrist as an excuse for seizing power?

Remember that Hitler manipulated the economic crisis of the 1930s into his rise to power in Germany. Just something to mull over in your mind’s.

~Squirrel; July 17, 2009 9:48 PM
Craig and Heather said...: I guess the important thing in all of this is, "Are WE ready whichever way it turns out?"

I believe you are right! Often, I've thought that regardless of how the events actually go, it won't matter to me to have things "figured out" if I don't personally know the Lord and am actively growing in Him. It seems that is the main point of several "keep watch" parables and the letters of correction to the Revelation churces.

Oh, and my RC and other "player" comments were not an attempt at mapping things out. I was just thinking aloud how history may very well give important clues to better understanding the events of future.

Craig said: But more than that I appreciate the tenor and tone of the conversation, and the fellowship of pursuing Christ together. That is the stated purpose of this blog. and I agree. The Lord draws each of us from different backgrounds, and sometimes we get sidetracked with different details as we get to know Him (which is a call to love, encourage and be patient toward other believers, not evidence that "all paths eventually lead to God"). He has promised to be faithful to finish the work that He started.

I still like the name of your other blog and not having had a Catholic background "Blessed Mother" doesn't come to mind. After all, Mary IS your name and you are sharing your heart.

I did read through it yesterday but have not gone over each section in detail. My initial reaction is that I don't see anything with which I would disagree. But, I've already tipped my hand by saying that I believe the Bible says the falling away and revealing of antichrist will happen before we can expect to be taken away from here. ;o)

Sorry, I’ve been rather busy today and have not had much time for blogging. No worries, Squirrel. We figured you might be busy preparing for Sunday or something.

You make an interesting point about the possibility of economic chaos being created by the removal of millions of people.

Yes, your scenario is possible.

I've believed for quite a while that because of slanted media propaganda, government control of food supplies, the move away from hard currency and into the realm of "electronic transfer" etc it would be relatively easy for an evil ruler to take control of a subtly directed, manufactured crisis.

But I'm not convinced that the Church needs to be out of the picture for that to be able to fall into place. In my mind, we could all still be here when that happens and, as in Hitler's regime, be blamed for the problems (because we are unwilling to cooperate with the main goal to "unify" all of humanity) and Christians could be severely persecuted on a worldwide scale as a result.

We already can see how Satan is allowed to work within individual, dictatorially supervised countries--thousands of Christians within those countries are strongly oppressed or killed. God hasn't abandoned His people even as Satan's wrath is poured out on them. And He allows the horrors to continue for now.

Couldn't that happen on a grand scale while the Church is still here--just before Jesus actually returns for His bride?

Heather; July 18, 2009 7:37 AM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Sure, I think that could happen. I just think it is so chilling that all of this technology that we found so far-fetched back in the 80's is here now.

This economic chaos we're moving into right now has got me scared.; July 18, 2009 8:59 AM
Craig and Heather said...: This economic chaos we're moving into right now has got me scared.

I know what you mean. For a while, I was searching for news articles that might give an idea of what is really happening, and had to give up because
1. I don't trust mainstream liberal media to tell the truth. and
2. When I would look for alternative sources of information, I would end up on sites written by apparently paranoid individuals with wild "conspiracy" theories about what is supposedly really going on behind the scenes.

And I nearly had a nervous breakdown over it due to the load of anxiety. Some of the conspiracy stuff doesn't seem too far fetched these days but a lot of it is written by non-Christians or people who say they are Christians but focus mainly on the chaos and bad news rather than encouraging readers to look to Jesus and trust that whatever God allows to happen is what needs to happen.

Hang on to Jesus, Mary and ask Him to give you the strength to live in today, like He instructed us. I'm praying for you and your family, BTW :o); July 18, 2009 9:54 AM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: Thanks for the prayers. The church is appointed to persecution, as Paul told the Thessalonians. It may eventually hit here in America. If there is a Rapture, you can be sure there will be much persecution beforehand, which will probably be one more thing to cause the great falling away.

Yeah, the economy. Well, I always say, "If God can't take care of me then, He can't take care of me now, and He's doing a good job of taking care of me now!"

My son is coming home from Bible camp and will go back 2 more times this summer. I'm very pleased.

This is such a good discussion.; July 18, 2009 12:16 PM
The Squirrel said...: Just a couple of quick words about conspiracy theories. Chuck Colson, jailed Watergate conspirator, said something interesting about conspiracy theories. He said that, unlike most people, he had been a part of a secret conspiracy. He said that, what ever you may think of their politics, the people that work in the White House are highly intelligent highly motivated individuals. Then he noted that they could not keep a conspiracy together for two weeks!

I don’t deny that there are conspiracies, I just don’t think there are many, if any, secret conspiracies. Most people, whom history regards as dastardly, Were quite open about their intentions. Adolph Hitler wrote Mein Kompf, outlining everything he intended to do if he ever got into power. And he is not alone. John Dewey, who created the American educational system, openly admitted that he desired a system that would train atheistic socialists! There is no doubt what the agenda of our university system truly is.

Of course there is a huge satanic deception behind all of these ungodly maneuverings, and I’m not complacent about any of it. However, I am not going to spend my time trying to weasel out the secret plans of the Illuminati, the Masons, or the Council on Foreign Relations. (If you have the time, and want to be sadly amused, read the Antichirst and A Cup of Tea, by fellow name Cohen. He lays out in microscopic detail his “evidence” that the Antichrist is in fact Charles Prince of Wales. He also “shows” that the Masonic lodge is run by the Illuminati, which is in turn run by the Order of the Garter, whose chief member is the Prince of Wales. Truthfully, it all would make a much more exciting book then the De Vinci Code.)

~Squirrel; July 18, 2009 10:18 PM
Craig and Heather said...: I may have to blog on this again, as there are lots of details swirling around in my mind and not enough space on a comment section to organize it.

I would say that I have pretty much made up my mind that I don't agree with Waldron about the millenium. I do believe it is literal and in this age. However, I did learn in his presentations that my eschatology must match the rest of my theology. What does that mean? It means - in shoe leather - that the instructions Jesus gave us remain until he comes.

Let me explain. I have known that dominionism is wrong, because it puts our treasure back in this world system. I have also known that the tendency of post trib rapture people to isolate themselves in an attempt to "duck and cover" so they can make it through (a defeated attitude) does not match Jesus' promise to build his church and the gates of hell not prevailing against it. (by the way, gates are defensive tools, not offensive tools - this points to a forward leaning active role in the world)

I have had trouble with the pre-trib rapture view resulting in an escapist mentality.

No, we are to remain occupied with our Master's work one person by one person, with our treasures in heaven, or heart set on a time to come, but our lives fully engaged in the lives of those around us. If we are found doing this when He comes, we are blessed. Jesus told us repeatedly not to be surprised that the world hates us, it hated him and the servant is not greater than the Master. I believe that the world will get darker, and the church will get brighter right up until the return. However, the return will be a harvest. Every crop of wheat undergoes a form of death (falling away) right before harvest. We must not get caught up in systems (the plant) we must stay focused on the fruit that Christ will harvest. Not sure I know what that even means, just an observation.

Finally, I have noticed that those who had their eschatology all in place missed the first coming. Those the Holy Spirit prompted recognized the fulfilled prophecy. (look at all the times Matthew says, "this was done that this prophecy might be fulfilled" then you go back and if you didn't have Matthew's words you wouldn't be able to recognize it.) Those who know what God's word says, and are walking daily by His side going about His business will recognize fulfilled prophecy when they need to and will be where they are supposed to be when they are supposed to be there.

Just my thoughts,

Craig; July 18, 2009 11:02 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Mary,
I believe it is wise to expect persecution regardless of one's understanding of rapture timing.

It sounds like your son is busy..That is always a good thing!

Squirrel,
Thanks for the perspective on conspiracy theorism. Interesting point about the aspect of things actually being in plain sight.

Oh my, I haven't actually read the Antichrist book you mentioned, but have read some stuff which referenced it. It's the kind of thing I was talking about and tends to take my focus off of God, nauseate me with fear and cause me to just sit and spin my wheels in a "stationary panic" sort of way. Thankfully, God brought to my attention that it is impossible to live that way and still be obedient to Him.

Craig,
I like the way you think! Yes, if listening to the amillenial perspective has done anything for me, it has brought a simple clarity to the instruction that Jesus gave concerning how we spend our time. The "two age" concept may not accurately place the millenial reign of Christ, but it does encourage me to weigh individual situations/behaviors/attitudes as to whether they are of temporal or eternal significance. I don't have to accept the entire eschatological teaching to be able to benefit from that.

H; July 19, 2009 12:01 AM
The Squirrel said...: Hey everyone:

Craig, I absolutely agree, we are to abide until He comes, being about His business. I do not believe that the sensationalism of many “prophecy teachers” more popular today is edifying to the church. There is a sense in which we need to focus more on the here and now, instead of daydreaming about things to come. But at the same time, so much of the Scriptures concerning end times that we must conclude that it is important for us to study it.

I have to disagree regarding those “who had their eschatology settled.” It is obvious to me that many in Israel had latched onto all of the promises of the coming Kingdom but had ignored all of the prophecies concerning the suffering of the Messiah. But there were few who “got it,” such as Simeon and Anna, to whom God had given understanding.

It is interesting that at that time there was a great general expectation that the Messiah would be coming soon, based upon the chronology in Daniel. While, indeed, Matthew does refer to a few prophecies that otherwise might not be connected to the Messiah’s coming, the vast majority of prophecies concerning Jesus’ first coming were easily understandable and literally fulfilled. And I don’t believe that that is all just 20/20 hindsight. It was all there is see for anyone who looked.

Heather, yes, the “Antichrist” book was interesting, and not entirely unprofitable to read. I believe that his scenario and conclusions are laughable, but it was enlightening to see just exactly what sort of scripture-twisting “interpretations” are out there. A main point that I take from Paul’s section on the antichrist in 2nd Thessalonians is that he will not be recognized until he is revealed, which makes trying to identify him a futile waste of time they could be better spent serving the Kingdom.

Satan, not being omniscient, must always have an antichrist waiting in the wings. It is clear that Satan is constantly maneuvering to take over, and that he always has his people ready to move into power, all he needs is for God to allow them to succeed. God, of course, knows exactly who the final antichrist will be, but I do not see that he will be easily identifiable to the world in the beginning.

~Squirrel; July 19, 2009 7:32 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Squirrel,
I am not seeing how Simeon or Anna could have recognized Jesus through old testament prophecy, as the prophecies that he had fulfilled at that point would have still most likely been private information. I can see that perhaps Nicodemus recognized him by fulfilled prophecy. I was intending to make a general statement, not an exclusive one.

To clarify what I meant, Revelation 1:3 says we are blessed if we read, hear, and keep (keep our eye on) the words of this prophecy. My understanding is that we are to know what scripture says specifically, and keep it in our minds. God will use this to guide us. I think it is good to listen to what godly scholars say and think, but it is dangerous to let what they say eclipse what scripture actually says.

I also think that Jesus meant what he said when he told the Apostles in Acts 1 that it is not for us to know the times or the seasons, but that they were to be his witnesses. (Acts 1:7-8) When I put that together with Rev 1, I think that we need to be careful about putting things in chronological order and having it mapped out (man's diagrams) We are instead to 1)be his witnesses, and 2)know what it says is to come, and 3) keep our eye on what is happening with 2 in mind.

I have read amillinial, post millinial, dispensational pre, post, mid, and partial etc. One problem is that each does a pretty good job of pointing out how the others are wrong. In the end my head spins. Each of them uses good hermaneutics, and accuses the others of not doing it. Each has flaws. (as is to be expected with man's systems) I do think it is profitable to study these things, and maybe someone can figure it out. However, the main things are the plain things, and the plain things are the main things.

What are those main things?

I think they are:
1)He is coming back literally and to judge
2)The faithful will survive the judgment and will live with him eternally / the unfaithful will live in eternal torment - so be ready
3)no second chances
4)the conflict between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of prince of the power of the air will increase until the end, and it gets ugly.
5)the instructions Jesus gave the Apostles for how to live are the instructions that will serve us well in the end. (you can't serve God and money / love God with all of your heart etc in a way that is lived out. / the world hated him, it will hate us. the list goes on)

I am sure the list goes on.

Craig; July 19, 2009 7:57 PM
Mary at Civilla's Cyber Cafe said...: That's about it, Craig. Hey, you guys made the 100 comment mark! Congratulations.; July 19, 2009 8:45 PM
Craig and Heather said...: That's about it, Craig. Hey, you guys made the 100 comment mark! Congratulations.

Thanks! And it wouldn't have happened without you, Mrs. Multiple Comments :oD

Seriously, though, it is awesome how we all have different perspectives and through the entire conversation, there has been no name calling or sneering that "everyone else" is just blind.

We are to have "the mind of Christ" which is evidenced not only in our doctrine, but also by the way we interact with others. Even the most godly of Christians is not going to have the "complete" picture, which is one reason we need to respect and listen to each other.

Unity of spirit in Christ carries us through the bumpy patches where conformity of thought is lacking. And we can continue to encourage one another to pursue Christ with everything we've got.

God is so good!

Heather; July 19, 2009 9:02 PM
The Squirrel said...: 1)He is coming back literally and to judge

2)The faithful will survive the judgment and will live with him eternally / the unfaithful will live in eternal torment - so be ready

3)no second chances

4)the conflict between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of prince of the power of the air will increase until the end, and it gets ugly.

5)the instructions Jesus gave the Apostles for how to live are the instructions that will serve us well in the end.

Yep. I'm good with it.

:o)

And regarding Anna and Simeon, I would say that they knew that the time was near from the prophecies given in Daniel 9 (the 70 7's). But, yes, they received special revelation from God, as it says in Luke 2.

~Squirrel; July 19, 2009 9:32 PM
The Squirrel said...: AND YOU'RE ALL BLIND FOOLS FOR NOT AGREEING WITH ME 100%! [sneer]

:oD

~Squirrel; July 19, 2009 9:34 PM
Craig and Heather said...: AND YOU'RE ALL BLIND FOOLS FOR NOT AGREEING WITH ME 100%! [sneer]

:oD

~Squirrel

LOL! So, what does a squirrel-sneer look like, anyway? Perhaps I've seen it before and just didn't recognize it due to my impaired vision.

H; July 20, 2009 12:08 PM
The Squirrel said...: OK, you asked for it! Here's a Squirrel Sneer :o)

~Squirrel; July 20, 2009 1:44 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Squirrel said:
"AND YOU'RE ALL BLIND FOOLS FOR NOT AGREEING WITH ME 100%! [sneer]"

Steady there pilgrim, just wanna get this lil' butterfly net over ya

:+/

Craig; July 20, 2009 4:59 PM
Craig and Heather said...: you'll be "caught away" in a flash!!

Craig

:+); July 20, 2009 5:01 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Squirrel,
All kidding aside, I want to tell you how much I appreciate the time you have spent in explaining this to us. You have pointed out resources we can use for quite some time as we study this on our own, and for that I am extremely grateful. While we have never met, I must say I consider you a friend and respect what you say and think.

We'll have to get together some time, and I promise I won't use the butterfly net.

Craig; July 20, 2009 8:13 PM
The Squirrel said...: "We'll have to get together some time, and I promise I won't use the butterfly net."

Absolutely! We're less then 200 miles apart, after all.

:o)

~Squirrel; July 20, 2009 8:39 PM
Tom Gabbard said...: This topic always illicits a multitude of varied responses and it is evident that only the coming of our Lord will finally make it all clear.
I was also raised up in the dispensational/Rapture camp and simply accepted that view for years. As I began to study on my own more and dig deeper into the scriptural context of many of the "proof texts" of the dispensational end time views I began questioning my assumptions.
For example, so much of what is used to uphold the rapture teaching now appears to me as something that one has to "read into" the text in order to come away with that interpretation. Also, the fact that many of these dispensational teachings are of fairly modern origin (1800's) gave me pause to reflect upon the possibility of error. But, one of the greatest barriers in my mind to many of the tenents of this system is that it seems to teach a "going backward" sort of Theology. What I mean by that is this: Did not the cross destroy ethnic and fleshly distinctions? Now that the Apostle Paul has made it clear that there is no more Jew and Gentile but instead, "one new man", do we divide again? I have much difficulty with a re-establishment of ethnic distinctions and of a sacrificial system that were both fulfilled and done away in Christ. Now that we have the fulfillment of the law and the prophets will we return to the shadows? I do believe that there is much mystery in the matters of end time events and that is the chief reason that I listen to the views of others, yet I have never been convinced to the point of being dogmatic toward any of the proposed scenarios. One thing I am convinced of is the point that has already been made and that is: Jesus is coming again! And I say with John, "Even so come Lord Jesus"; July 20, 2009 9:20 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Tom,
Very well said. You have voiced many of my concerns as well. I remember like it was yesterday when my "framework" of eschatology fell apart during my own personal study. I was frightened at first, and scrambled to find a new "framework" because I want to teach my children what they need to know in the last days, as I think we very well may see them. God has not replaced my old framework with a new one. (I mean a sort of "timeline" for the chronology of end time events) What He has given me in my study is much simpler. It centers around what I am to be doing, and leaves fulfillment up to Him. Several of the 7 churches were told to endure until the end and to overcome. The parables speak repeatedly of the servants who were found about their master's business when he returned. Revelation 1 says to read, hear, and keep (keep being the idea to guard or keep one's eye on) the things written in the book.

The more I study this topic, the more convinced I become that the key is to have a daily moment by moment relationship with Christ where we guard our consciences and listen to the Holy Spirit's promptings. If we know what the Bible says, (not necessarily what men say about it, just what it says) and we are walking daily where we belong, I believe we will be where we belong when the end comes, and the fulfillments of prophecy that happen in our time and need to be recognized by us - will be. "frameworks" my very well be the reason we miss it when it happens.

Just my thoughts,

Isa 26:3 You will keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on You; because he trusts in You.

Craig; July 21, 2009 4:01 AM
The Squirrel said...: “Did not the cross destroy ethnic and fleshly distinctions? Now that the Apostle Paul has made it clear that there is no more Jew and Gentile but instead, "one new man", do we divide again? I have much difficulty with a re-establishment of ethnic distinctions”

Tom, I think that you’ve left out a key phrase, Galatians 3:28 reads, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (emphasis mine)

Paul was stating that there are no ethnic divisions within the Church, not that there are no ethnic divisions at all. Paul was dealing with the people who were being deceived into thinking that there was some sort of spiritual superiority that resulted from being both Jewish and Christian. He was talking about equality, not identity. Consider that the temporal distinctions between slave and free and between male and female still exist. In the same way ethnic distinctions still exist.

It is, of course, the fact that we see a clear distinction between Israel and the Church that shapes the dispensational interpretation of end-times events.

~Squirrel; July 21, 2009 6:47 AM
The Squirrel said...: "The parables speak repeatedly of the servants who were found about their master's business when he returned."

Yes! Exactly so!

~Squirrel; July 21, 2009 6:50 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Thank you, Mr Gabbard for your input.

Craig pretty much speaks for both of us as far as how "set" we are on having a favored eschatology.

Stripping back all of the teachings and just reading the Bible for one's self can be a little frightening. I always get nervous about "what if I don't come up with the same conclusions as these obviously godly, well-studied and intelligent scholars?"--and then I start to worry that I'm just fooling myself about about truly being born again in Christ. But I think I would rather not have a definitive answer for a while than latch onto something I am not convinced is true.

I do trust that if I study and obey what I DO know, God will be faithful to supply me with what I NEED to know. There's just so much in the Bible that I don't know and I tend to want to swallow it all in huge chunks--and start to choke because I didn't "chew" well...

And I still feel compelled to read it and desire to understand. I expect that is a good thing :o)

*******************************
So far, the only thing I can say with relative certainty is that the Bible does not appear to teach a pre-tribulation removal of Christians from this planet. I do believe there is evidence of a literal "catching up" into the air of saints to Christ when He returns.

(Long-winded, continued below); July 21, 2009 8:51 AM
Craig and Heather said...: It is, of course, the fact that we see a clear distinction between Israel and the Church that shapes the dispensational interpretation of end-times events.

Interesting point, Squirrel. But Mr Gabbard also makes a good point about returning to shadows.

At this time, I still see that there is a possibility that when the "time of the gentiles" is fulfilled, God may have a plan to turn back to national Israel. In Romans 11, Paul does seem to indicate something like this. And, when weeping over Jerusalem, Jesus said "Behold, your house is left to you desolate.
For I say to you, You shall not see Me from now on until you say, "'Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.'" (Matthew 23:38-39) Considering the fact that he was looking at Jerusalem, why would He add the second half of that statement if He was forever finished with Israel-the-nation? Was He specifically talking about Jerusalem the destination rather than the people that live there?

On the other hand, I came across something interesting in Deuteronomy the other day concerning a divorced woman. (24:4) "her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife after she is defiled."
And Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:39 "The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband lives, but if her husband sleeps in death, she is at liberty to be remarried to whom she will, only in the Lord."

And I had to wonder whether Jesus' pronouncement over Jerusalem was a type of divorce after which God turned from His repeatedly unfaithful wife to a new bride (which includes both Jews and gentiles and we know as the Church). With the above verses in mind I can see evidence that:

1. Israel the nation is NOT currently God's chosen people and it is wrong to promote that idea.
2. From an eternal perspective, As long as the faithful element of the Church exists (Which will be forever) God is not free to "remarry" national Israel.
3. On a strictly temporal level, If Israel is not considered to have been remarried (although there are many secular Jews, there are also religious ones, who might be designated as "the remnant"), then the removal of the Church leaves the possibility for God to again turn to Israel the nation so that the few who are still looking for Messiah can have their blindness lifted and receive Him.

From one side, it is possible to conclude that God is done with national Israel, although individual Jews can certainly be converted.
On the other hand (I have a lot of hands) From an earthly perspective, we might conclude that if the Church is removed from the picture, the dispensational conclusion could be correct.

As I said, I've not studied this out well, and the more I look, the more questions come up.

Maybe that is the way it is supposed to be...Perhaps God wants to leave us enraptured with the intricacies of His grand-scale theatrical performance. And He wants to keep us wondering how the Master Storyteller will tie up all the apparently loose ends in His plot before the final curtain falls. Perhaps, when it's all over, our jaws will all hang open and every one of us will say "I NEVER imagined THAT was how He would do it!!!" :oO

Heather; July 21, 2009 8:51 AM
Tom Gabbard said...: Craig, Heather, and Squirrel,

There are certainly many dilemas that one faces when seeking to come to clarity on these matters with regards to physical Israel or Jews according to the flesh and their place in God's redemptive plan. I was also reminded of Paul's words in Romans when he makes the contrast between national Israel and spiritual Israel. He says: "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all chldren: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called." (Rom.9:6-7)
So, throughout the history of the physical nation of Israel there has been a preserved remnant within the Jews.
So, would this have any bearing on what Paul says in Romans 11:1-5,25-29.
Just some more "grist for the mill"!; July 21, 2009 9:58 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Mr Gabbard,

Your point is not lost on me. I think I need to go back and re-read all of Romans. It is easy to get distracted by a few verses or even a whole chapter and then neglect to note that there is an overarching context.

I also find it interesting that even though pre-Christ Israel had a unique status among nations, the opportunity to join with God's people was open to those who accepted God's terms.

God has now "thrown open the doors" to the Gentile nations and "shut up Israel in unbelief" (Romans 11:32). The Jew/Gentile roles have been reversed yet any Jew still may be granted repentance and be saved.

Thank you for the suggestion to expand the focus concerning the identity of Israel. I think I have some reading to do :o)

While browsing the text, I noticed that Paul expressed a similar sentiment to my own thoughts about being awed by the way God will work all things out to His glory.

"For God has shut up all in unbelief, so that He might show mercy to all.
O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out!
For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor?" Romans 11:32-34

What a comfort to be reminded that God has everything under control even when I'm thoroughly confused!

H; July 21, 2009 10:27 AM
Craig and Heather said...: I understand the perspective that says God has more to do with Israel. There are definite prophecies for the nation that have not been fulfilled, but do appear to be literal and do not appear to be in the next age. I agree that it appears God is finished with the nation of Israel for a time. But it does appear to me that He will return to them after that time. What I don't see is how that turning to Israel necessitates turning away from the Church or that the Church must be out of the picture for this to occur. Couldn't we still be here at the same time, and God still be active in His Church as well?

To me this possibility answers the concerns I had in that regard, but I must admit I have a hard time keeping it all straight in my head, and other than Daniel, I am pretty week in Old Testament prophecy. I could be overlooking something here.

Craig; July 21, 2009 9:18 PM
Tom Gabbard said...: It is certainly possible that the references in scripture could be to a future ingathering of Jews by God in terms of salvation. I also, like you Craig, find no reason at this point to believe in a "removal" or rapture of the church in order for this to happen. This is one of those teachings that I referred to in an earlier reply that troubles me. It does so because it seems to be espoused on the basis of silence in certain portions of scripture. The book of Revelation is often pointed to as not having any mention of the church after a particular chapter early on and therefore the conclusion is drawn that the church has been raptured out. But, is that good biblical exposition or is it simply "reading something into the empty spaces"? I have no doubt in God's power to save and turn Jews or Gentiles unto himself, I am just reluctant to believe some of the end time perspectives that teach a "backtracking" and a return to Old Testament shadows and types when the true sacrifice, tabernacle,vine, and Son has come and been evidently set forth before us.; July 22, 2009 6:59 AM
Craig and Heather said...: The book of Revelation is often pointed to as not having any mention of the church after a particular chapter early on and therefore the conclusion is drawn that the church has been raptured out.

I've wondered about this too. If there was a verse in Revelation that specifically indicated a removal of the church at some point,it would be much easier to accept certain teachings. So far, though, it seems that there is only a suggestion of such because the word "church" seems to be missing.

The term "saints" is used in Revelation. And Paul used "saints" when addressing various churches to whom he wrote. (1 & 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians etc) And the term shows up in other letters as well. I haven't checked every New Testament reference, but most of them seem to derive from the same Greek word --both in the epistles and in Revelation. So, it appears that "saints" in Revelation could be used to refer to the members of Christ's body (aka "Church") rather that a group of people who are converted after believers are removed from the planet.

I do see the suggestion of a "catching away" of saints according to Paul's writings to the Thessalonians but he doesn't draw out an elaborate timeline as to when it will occur. My best understanding is that it happens after a falling away (historicists make a pretty convincing argument that this refers to the Roman Catholic Church)and rising to power of a "man of sin" (office of the Pope?). But, has that already happened with the RC church or was that simply a "snapshot" of still future events? While reading about the historicist's teachings, I was surprised to find out that the futurist perspective was "invented" by a Jesuit Priest named Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) who was commissioned to distract people from pointing at the Catholic Church as a fulfillment of "Antichrist" prophecy. After reading that, I had to seriously question whether it is wise to adhere to a strict Revelation-is-only-about-a-seven-year end-of-time period to be followed by a literal 1,000 year reign etc line of thought.

I believe Squirrel mentioned previously that each eschatological framework has it's difficulties. That is precisely why I am unable to subscribe to any single one and wonder if we even need to.

For instance, the amillenial explanation of "two ages" was amazingly simple and refreshing. It helped me to refocus on what I need to be doing NOW, with what I already know. Yet in listening to the message, I did not in any way feel as though there is less of an urgency to be trying to learn more and remain alert so that I won't be caught "sleeping" should Jesus appear tomorrow.

The dispensational method of recognizing various divisions of "this age" doesn't necessarily clash with the "two age" perspective.

And the historicist view of events unfolding to fulfill prophecy does not absolutely negate either concept I just mentioned, nor does it prove that there is to be no rewinding and contraction of church history into a 7 year period that occurs at the end of life on this planet as we know it.

I'm not sure I could agree with "replacement theology" as it does appear that God isn't yet done with Israel. I'm reading Romans now and probably need to look at the Prophetic OT books that deal with Israel's future before I could even begin to intelligently discuss that one.

Assuming that the time of "tribulation" is a literal seven year end-of-the-age occurence (or the last 3.5 years of that), I don't see anywhere that distinctly states that the church is removed before that time.

Guess I just need to keep studying. I'm only 6 chapters into Romans and already my attention has been grabbed by a different subject that Paul was discussing.

Heather; July 22, 2009 9:28 AM
The Squirrel said...: “I don't see anywhere that distinctly states that the church is removed before that time.”

And you won’t. The timing of the rapture is difficult to puzzle out. The rapture itself is clearly taught (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17; 1st Corinthians 15:51-53) but the timing must be inferred from other passages.

~Squirrel; July 22, 2009 1:41 PM
Craig and Heather said...: And you won’t. The timing of the rapture is difficult to puzzle out. The rapture itself is clearly taught (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17; 1st Corinthians 15:51-53) but the timing must be inferred from other passages.

We can certainly agree on the complex nature of the critter.

Well, I guess I feel a little better about not being able to find anything in Rev. But that still leaves me wondering.

I'm looking at the verses again (sorry, my tenacity can get annoying, I know):

1 Corinthians 15:52 states that the "putting on of incorruptibility" will occur at (or just after) "the final trumpet".

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 has this event being accompanied by a shout and a trumpet.

There is a mention of a series of trumpets in Revelation. After the 6th trumpet, another angel comes down and cries out with a loud voice (a shout, perhaps?) 10:3 And in 11:15, the seventh angel sounds his trumpet and many voices proclaim (more shouting?) that the world has become the Lord's forever. 11:18 talks about God's wrath and judgment.

After that is recorded about the bowls of God's wrath, beginning in Ch. 15: 1

" And I saw another sign in Heaven, great and marvelous: seven angels with the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God."

It says the bowls/vials are filled with the wrath of God.

2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 Makes reference to a similar scenario which is preceded by a "falling away" and revealing of the man of sin" ( I recognize that you are not convinced this is talking about the same time period, but I'm not yet sure that it isn't, so I'll go with my own assumption for now).

So, what I see here is

1. There is a falling away of the church at some point (either historically, with the RC Church--or at a future point, involving all of professing Christianity)

2. The man of sin is revealed (again, this may either be seen as the office of the Pope--which still happens to be around and is quite influential--or is a future "Mr. Evil" who is as yet unknown)

3. According to Jesus in Matt 24: 1-14, there will be wars, persecution, false prophets and the love of sin will increase tremendously before the end. Then, the gospel of the kingdom will be preached among the nations and THEN the end will come.

Then it appears that He backs up and gives more details. It looks very similar to the seals in Revelation. And He says in v 30-31 that His coming on the clouds will be announced with a trumpet (there's that trumpet again!) and gather His elect to Him from the "four winds".

While I can't say I see an exact time line, the puzzle pieces seem to indicate that the general order is:
Generalized trouble, persecution and martyrdom throughout history(which may be intensified at certain times as evil men oppress righteous ones)
Falling away of professing Christians
Man of Sin (Antichrist)
At the "final trumpet" (#7?) and just before God pours out His 7 bowls of wrath, the true church is removed.

In Revelation, there is also reference to "Sodom and Egypt". There was a point when God was judging Egypt where He made a distinction between His people and the Egyptians. They were protected but not removed from the area until after the last plague. And they were completely out of the way when the Red Sea swept over the Egyptian army.

Just more rambling thoughts.

heather; July 22, 2009 2:49 PM
Tom Gabbard said...: Just wanted to make an observation in regards to the 1Thes.4:16-17 passage that is always referred to with regards to a "rapture" of the church. My question is: Why do we assume this is a passage that upholds such a teaching? What I mean is, there is nothing in this passage that says that those "caught up" go into heaven for the next seven years. Why do we not rather relate this scene to what Jude says for instance: "Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,"
(Jude 14b)
What I am getting at is this, when Christ comes again will His people not neccesarily be with Him? When He appears does it not follow that His body will be immediately "caught up" and be with Him at His glorious return? So, in the Thessalonian passage why is this not simply seen as the "catching up" of His people in order for them to triumphantly return with Him to the earth? Where is any referance to a "removal into heaven for seven years"? This is one of those troubling "proof texts" to me in which I can only find proof if I insert it into the passage. I just can't find clarity and assurance of a right interpretation by doing that. Just some more thoughts that I've wrestled with as I have pondered the various views.; July 22, 2009 3:48 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Mr Gabbard,

Your suggestion is very similar to thoughts I have had! Why couldn't the "catching up" coincide with Jesus' final (and only) glorious appearing and return to earth?

When our children wait for their dad to return from work, they often run out to the porch or driveway to meet him --but he doesn't send them to go sit in the truck until he comes in the house and catches up on what happened while he was away.

The kids usually accompany Craig on it, often giving him hugs or dancing around his feet on the way.

Heather; July 22, 2009 4:20 PM
Craig and Heather said...: oops, didn't proof-read.

I meant, "the kids usually accompany Craig on in to the house..."; July 22, 2009 4:21 PM
Tom Gabbard said...: Yes, thats what I have to consider seriously when I try to read these passages with a "blank slate" and leave what I grew up with behind as much as possible.
When I read such passages as 1The.4 I also take into account such verses as (1Cor.15:23/1Thes.2:19,3:13/2Thes.2:1,8/James 5:7-8)
I believe it is valid to connect these passages with the other "coming of the Lord" passages that are sometimes looked at as "rapture" declarations.
We will always be students of God's rich word!; July 22, 2009 5:05 PM
The Squirrel said...: No problem, Heather, I understand that whole “tenacity” thing.

:o)

I really don’t have time right now to develop a full defense for the timing of the rapture, so here’s a quick and dirty. It’s a combination of the fact that the church is not appointed to wrath (1st Thessalonians 5:9) and an understanding that the judgments of the tribulation are the outpouring of God’s wrath. Add to that the view that the church age will be over when the 70th Week of Daniel chapter 9 begins, and you begin to see the rationale behind the pre-tribulation rapture. There is more to it than that, of course, but that is the basics.

Regarding Francisco Ribera, it is true that he taught futurism, but he was not the first. There were futurist among the early church fathers, and even Augustine flirted with futurism for a while. Ribera apparently did teach a type of rapture that he placed 45 days before the end of a 3 ½ year tribulation.

~Squirrel; July 22, 2009 5:07 PM
The Squirrel said...: As I said earlier, the problem I see with a post-tribulation rapture is who will populate the millennial kingdom? Also, it would appear that the wedding feast of the Lamb takes place in heaven during the tribulation. One could expect that the bride would be at the wedding feast. Yes, while there are similarities between the rapture passages and the glorious appearing passages, there are also differences. In the rapture passages, Christ is coming for his church. And the glorious appearing passages, Christ is coming in judgment.

~Squirrel; July 22, 2009 5:15 PM
The Squirrel said...: Oh, yes, the whole “the rapture is a Jesuit plot by Francisco Ribera” seems to be an invention of the Seventh Day Adventists, a group not exactly known for sound doctrine. If it is not an invention of theirs, it certainly found mostly on web sites affiliated with them.

Look at me! I'm as bad as Mary with the multiple comments thing!

:o)

~Squirrel; July 22, 2009 5:22 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Squirrel,
It's awful getting old. I can't remember where the Bible discusses the marriage feast of the Lamb.
Craig; July 22, 2009 5:29 PM
The Squirrel said...: Revelation 19, right before the Second Coming in Judgment passage.

~Squirrel; July 22, 2009 6:12 PM
Tom Gabbard said...: I just want to say that this type of discussion is a great opportunity for growth and learning! Any time that we as believers are stirred to deeper thought and a desire to dig into the scripture it is a worthy endeavor.
I wanted to add another thought question to the "stew" and continue to delve into this matter of last things.
Squirrel mentioned the announcement of the marriage of the lamb as found in Revelation 19 and I read it again. I noticed that there is no mention in the passage of where the bride is at the time that John hears these words. Is she on earth or in heaven? It is evident that she has been clothed and prepared for the bridegroom but where is she?
If she is on earth would this not accord with the coming of Christ in the air,gathering His people,and coming with them to judge the earth? I recalled the teaching of Jesus in Matthew 25:1-13 where He speaks a parable concerning His coming to earth which is then followed by a marriage. What are your thoughts?; July 22, 2009 8:44 PM
Craig and Heather said...: We will always be students of God's rich word! Agreed, Mr Gabbard! It is hard to imagine that after this life will be all of eternity to be amazed by an awesome God!

It’s a combination of the fact that the church is not appointed to wrath (1st Thessalonians 5:9) and an understanding that the judgments of the tribulation are the outpouring of God’s wrath. Okay, I checked that reference and see what you mean. And the context is that of "watchfulness" so the Day of the Lord does not overtake us as a thief in the night. So it does appear Paul is talking about Christ's return for His bride...But it also mentions those who will experience sudden destruction that they were not expecting. It still looks to me as though there is a two-fold prediction of simultaneous "rapture" plus "judgment".

Oh, yes, the whole “the rapture is a Jesuit plot by Francisco Ribera” seems to be an invention of the Seventh Day Adventists, a group not exactly known for sound doctrine. If it is not an invention of theirs, it certainly found mostly on web sites affiliated with them. This I did not know. But it's kind of interesting because while neither of the historicist books I looked at were written by obvious SDA's, but tonight Craig mentioned that the one author used to be one...and I remember telling Craig that it seemed a little odd that the author of the other one was very adamant about the keeping of "The Big Ten", (including the Sabbath)in order to be counted as one who obeys the commands of the Lord. I remember thinking it sounded a little like he had been influenced by the SDA church. But he also said he is Jewish, so I thought that might have something to do with it.

I honestly don't know what to make of SDA teachings. Other than Sabbath-keeping, the interest in end-times prophecy and the centrality of Ellen White's writings, I'm kind of ignorant there.

At any rate, I'm not latched onto the whole "evil Jesuit priest" concept. It was just something that threw up a flag about simply accepting futurism without question.

H; July 22, 2009 11:03 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Squirrel, I interrupted myself concerning God's wrath. I meant to say that IF the bulk of Revelation does indeed focus on the wrath of God, I can see how 1 Thess. 5:9 might indicate that we won't be here. But what about the other parts of that chapter that seem to point the other direction?

What if the the outpouring of God's wrath is, as I suggested, limited to the seven bowls and the use of "saints" actually refers to the church?

Do you perhaps feel a *sneer* coming on?

I just want to say that this type of discussion is a great opportunity for growth and learning! Any time that we as believers are stirred to deeper thought and a desire to dig into the scripture it is a worthy endeavor. It's good to be challenged :o)
I do believe we tend to cheat ourselves when we only are willing to associate with those who think just the same.I'm learning to actually listen to other people's thoughts and follow "Berean Protocol".

Mr Gabbard, I think Craig was mulling over your thought about the marriage supper this evening. He might have something tomorrow.

It sure seems to me that the gathering of God's people and the judgment happen at the same time--or, one immediately following the other.

After skimming Revelation 19, I was left with an odd impression created by the contrast of two suppers. First, the marriage supper is mentioned. Then, the feast for the birds. On the one hand is unimaginable happiness. And on the other hand is unspeakable horror. And again it looks to me like a joint picture of not only a gathering of believers but also a time of judgment.

I think Daniel 9 and Revelation 19 have bumped to the top of my reading list.

Heather; July 22, 2009 11:46 PM
Craig and Heather said...: And Squirrel-

Mary's a master at the art of multi-comment posting. I've been taking notes myself, but she still has me beat.

If you really scurry, you might be able to catch up, though :o)

H; July 22, 2009 11:52 PM
Craig and Heather said...: So Squirrel,
Are you reading Revelation chapters 19-21 as a summary of the end times, or does 19 follow in sequence after chapter 18?
Craig; July 23, 2009 3:51 AM
The Squirrel said...: Craig:

I would place Revelation 19 and 20 as chronologically following chapter 16. Chapters 17 and 18 seem to me to be a parenthetical study of Babylon throughout the tribulation. And I do see Tom’s point of the announcement taking place right before Christ’s appearance is the Conquering King.

The chronology of Revelation is extremely difficult. As I’ve said before, all of the end-times schemes have difficulties and unanswered questions. I look at charts and graphs and stuff as fallible attempts to understand where and when something takes place. I’ve read 4 or 5 verse by verse commentaries on Revelation from the dispensation a viewpoint, and I’ve listened to countless more sermons on the subject. One thing that I noticed early on, even among commentators who agree on the “big picture,” is variations in their understandings of the chronology of events.

As a result, I’ve come to the conclusion that we are not supposed to understand the exact chronology of events. I see two reasons for this: 1- while we should be ready for the “there and then” our primary focus should be the “here and now.” And 2- God wants us to keep studying these things. He could have inspired someone to draw us a detailed flow chart, but He didn’t; neither for Christ’s First Coming, nor for the Second.

Heather:

My adventures with Seventh Day Adventists are a whole other story! Maybe I’ll blog about it someday. I will say this; it served to affirm not just my eschatology but my soteriology as well. In fact, my studies of Seventh Day Adventists confirmed me in both my Dispensationalism and my Calvinism.

~Squirrel; July 23, 2009 8:06 AM
Tom Gabbard said...: Squirrel, Amen to that. There is much mystery in the advent accounts. I have thought often about how badly the first advent prophecies were misunderstood by the contemporaries of Jesus and so it is not hard for me to accept that fact that there are deep truths here that, as you say, we must continue to labor in. But at the same time realizing that some things may not be known until the actual Revelation of our Lord.; July 23, 2009 12:33 PM
Craig and Heather said...: Squirrel said:I look at charts and graphs and stuff as fallible attempts to understand where and when something takes place.

This I can relate to. A couple months ago, we skimmed through a book written by a guy who believes he has the future mapped out. The book had a very detailed timeline and the guy made a case for why his variation was the right one.

He had a simple statement of faith on his website and makes a profession of being a Christian. But almost as soon as I started reading, I got a "nagging" feeling that something was not right and the question of whether the man was even a believer kept bothering. To be fair, I DON'T know if the man is saved, but after a bit more looking into his background, it turns out he used to belong to Herbert Armstrong's church and left around the time it started making changes He said he preferred the "uniqueness" of the original. And after realizing that, I can see how a lot of the stuff in the guy's book mirrors some of Armstrong's teaching about Bible prophecy.

And it reaffirmed to me that being sincere and speaking authoritatively are not acceptable substitutes for waiting on the Lord's wisdom which He grants in His timing.

I don't mind that I can't put all the puzzle pieces together right now. Having blank spots is far preferable to building an elaborate, tight fitting scenario which is not set on the right Foundation.

Heather; July 25, 2009 7:25 AM
The Squirrel said...: “I don't mind that I can't put all the puzzle pieces together right now.”

I know what you mean. I have been seriously studying bible prophecy for 10 years or so, and I don’t have all the pieces put together yet. I’ve read a lot of books by a lot of guys who’ve been studying this a lot longer than I have, and if they don’t have all the pieces put together yet. So don’t feel too bad.

:o)

~Squirrel; July 25, 2009 8:33 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Squirrel said, "I’ve come to the conclusion that we are not supposed to understand the exact chronology of events. I see two reasons for this: 1- while we should be ready for the “there and then” our primary focus should be the “here and now.” And 2- God wants us to keep studying these things. He could have inspired someone to draw us a detailed flow chart, but He didn’t; neither for Christ’s First Coming, nor for the Second."

I agree. We must keep studying this because we are told to, and because He is our hope. We live for another place and time, but mostly we live for Him. I was thinking about our family study in Proverbs the other day. We were in chapter 2 and I noticed some things that have been on my mind since.

Verses 1-6 tell us to seek wisdom as for a hidden treasure, to long for it, to cry out for it.

If we do this, we will understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God.

Verses 7-10 speak of how wisdom and knowledge come from God, and that this wisdom will enter us, become a part of us.

The rest of the chapter tells us what the benefits of this wisdom will be. Interestingly, the benefit is not that we will map out life and have all the answers. What it says is that it will guard our paths. We will find wisdom and knowledge pleasing to our souls. We will recognize the perverse man, an will not desire what he desires. We will recognize the harlot and not want what she has to offer. I see this as including two categories, the charlatan and the hedonist. Wisdom will enter our hearts and guard us from those paths. We will (in real life) recognize the true path from the destructive ones.

This is why we seek wisdom, so His word will be a lamp to our feet and a light to our path. Not a floodlight that encompasses the entire area, just one for our steps.

Just my thoughts,

Craig; July 25, 2009 8:35 PM
Tom Gabbard said...: Amen Craig,

Just as the Israelites of old had to gather manna each day for their physical sustenance, so we must glean from the word of God day by day that which feeds our soul.; July 27, 2009 8:23 AM
Bobby Mosteller said...: Hey y'all,

This has been an interesting read...I wish that I had more to say but eschatology has been something I have put off, for several reasons, studying for some time now.

I know I am jumping in late but I do want to make a few quick observations.

The elite mentality is not Calvinism being brought to it's final conclusion. That is a twisting of Biblical teaching known as Hyper-Calvinism. Which neither Calvin, the Reformers or Puritans taught as Biblical.

Also the anti-evangelism theory is a misnomer. The greatest missionaries/preachers that have ever been produced were all Reformed in their theology (William Carey, A.Judson, Hudson Taylor, Spurgeon, George Mueller etc...They were all products of Reformed teaching.

Also Calvin did not write a commentary on Revelation out of humility and respect for such a difficult yet important book. He felt inadequate to comment. This however does not mean Calvinist have no stance on the end times. Throughout history Calvinist have held many end times positions. Calvin is not the fountain head for all things Reformed. All that Calvin did was codify Biblical Christianity.

Also the teaching that says you should figure out if you are elect as opposed to believing the Gospel is something Calvin never taught. Calvin along with the rest of orthodox Christianity taught salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Again that is not Calvinism.

I agree that there are many difficulties with all of the views on the end times. For me I try to remember that Revelation was written to Christians who were being slaughtered and the key things John wanted them to know - Christ is coming back, there is a judgment day and we will spend eternity with Christ.

Eschatology is an important study but nothing to replace the Gospel or the central doctrines of the Bible.

The church is asleep because of Gospel ignorance. I do not think a right view of the end times is what will wake up the church. Only the Gospel can do that and it is the only thing that ever has.

BM; July 28, 2009 11:02 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Bobby Mosteller Said: For me I try to remember that Revelation was written to Christians who were being slaughtered and the key things John wanted them to know - Christ is coming back, there is a judgment day and we will spend eternity with Christ.

Good point! While I think it is important to read and study to whatever capacity God has allowed, it is not wise to forget the whole point of Revelation is the central figure of Christ and His ultimate triumph and restoration of creation.

I was talking to a friend recently and she told me her husband grew up in a fellowship that took end-times prophecy so seriously, there were church splits over differing perspectives!

Thank you for your input on Calvinism. I know there are a lot of misunderstandings concerning the perspective and while I hesitate to label myself "Calvinist" because of those misunderstandings, I can't say that (in my limited exposure) I have yet come across any Calvinist teaching that is unbiblical.

Craig and I have seen a variation of "hyperCalvinism" in action and it isn't pretty. I can understand how those who have encountered that would believe that Calvinists are "anti-evangelical", "harsh and unloving" or simply "elitist".

Sometimes, I will watch a YouTube speaker defending Calvinism and it rubs me wrong because there is so much emphasis on "election" and how God is the One who initiates and does the work of salvation. What bothers me is not that I disagree with what is being said but that it leaves me feeling "beat up" and hopeless even though I don't have any argument with the teaching. I wonder if the problem is simply the personality of the speaker...

Eschatology is an important study but nothing to replace the Gospel or the central doctrines of the Bible.

Yes again! I recall hearing Brother Paul Washer state that when we see Jesus return, our eschatology questions will be cleared up. But his point seemed to be that if I'm not right with Christ when I meet Him, it will be a terrifying thing rather than a joy.

The song "Trust and Obey" comes to mind. We are to come to Christ like helpless little children and rely solely on Him for our spiritual and physical care. When I run ahead or drag behind what I actually know, I end up depressed or anxious.

Heather; July 28, 2009 11:28 AM
Craig and Heather said...: Bobby,
Thanks for stopping by. I value your opinion and deeply appreciate your blog. Heather already addressed this to a point, but I wanted to put it in my words as well. I hesitate to label myself Calvinist, or Arminian, or dispensational, etc because I find that different people mean (or think) different things when they say (or hear) these words. If someone put a gun to my head and forced me to label myself, I would have to say that I tend toward calvinism, and possibly dispensationalism. My loosely held eschatology is that I believe in a literal rapture of the faithful very near the end of the tribulation. (possibly as little as 10 days from the end). I do not define the entire tribulation as God's wrath, most of it is Satan's wrath as he is cast to the earth knowing he has a short time. God's wrath (in my opinion) lasts a short time and is extremely effective, ushering in his literal 1000 year earthly reign. I believe the armies of the wicked will be destroyed, but many of the wicked will be ruled against their will in the millenium. (this is why Jesus settles disputes between the nations, and Satan is able to deceive the nations at the end of this time).

As far as calvinism goes, I find that some people call themselves calvinist who have not read a word of his writings, while others assume they have studied and agreed with everything in his Institutes. Or worse yet, they met a hyper-calvinist one time, and so they think they know what one believes.

As to dispensationalism, I do think I see dispensations in scripture, and I think history is about God's glory, not about man's salvation. But I don't necessarily have all of time neatly broken down into dispensations.

So for the sake of clear communication, I really try to say things in normal every day English, and avoid "churchese" Because after all, I am "Just A Simple Guy" :-)

Long winded comment, I know.

Thanks again for clarifying what main stream calvinism is. I appreciated it, and must say I agree with pretty much every point you made.

Craig; July 28, 2009 6:08 PM