10 Top Errors of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture View

[John 07]

Eclipsenow, I am not going to discuss this matter with you for several reasons; Your rude, and your disrespectful. You and Zeke must have gone to the same school, do they call it the "School of know it alls."

Phil

oh my, how totally ironic...lol
philip is all-knowing...full of godly humility.

 

[eclipsenow]

Eclipsenow, I am not going to discuss this matter with you for several reasons; Your rude, and your disrespectful. You and Zeke must have gone to the same school, do they call it the "School of know it alls."

Phil

1. Show me where I was rude to you?

2. Then I'll show everyone where you just previously called me a liar. I think I held my tongue quite admirably after that one!

3. I put a lot of work into answering your accusations about my 'spiritualising' certain texts. I conclusively showed where the Apostles and Jesus himself spiritualise the entire OT kingdom of God; God's people living God's way in God's land through the new super-spiritual Prophet, Priest, and King, Jesus!

4. If you can't handle the heat, then get out of the kitchen; and just go quietly. You don't have to go sulking and skulking and calling people liars and rude just because you can't handle a debate.

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post #298:

Do you want to justify your assumption that Revelation is a book about the future?

Revelation chapters 6-22 are about (to us) still-future events, "things which must be hereafter" (Revelation 4:1). For just as the glorious return of Jesus in Revelation 19 has never been fulfilled, but will be fulfilled almost entirely literally in our future, so the highly-detailed events of the preceding tribulation in Revelation chapters 6-18 have never been fulfilled, but will be fulfilled almost entirely literally in our future (see the "Details" part of christianforums.com/blogs/u77506-e14708/ ).

eclipsenow said in post #298:

John clearly wrote that the things were to begin SOON

Keyword begin. For part of what Revelation chapters 2-3 foretold could have begun unfolding "shortly" after John saw his vision (Revelation 1:1,3), near the end of the first century AD. For the letters to the seven literal first-century local church congregations (Revelation chapters 2-3) in the Roman province of "Asia" (Revelation 1:11) could have foretold a first-century persecution (Revelation 2:10, Revelation 3:10) under the Roman Emperor Domitian which happened shortly after John saw his vision around 95 AD, near the end of Domitian's reign (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5:30:3c).

But note that even all the (to us) still-future events of the coming tribulation and the subsequent second coming (Revelation chapters 6-19) will unfold "shortly" (Revelation 1:1,3) or "quickly" (Revelation 22:20) after John saw his vision. For from the viewpoint of God, even the passing of some 2,000 years is like the passing of only two days (2 Peter 3:8). Christians should look at the future fulfillment of Revelation chapters 6-19 from the viewpoint of God, not men, for whom the passing of some 2,000 years seems like a long delay for its fulfillment (cf. 2 Peter 3:9).

eclipsenow said in post #298:

Once Dispensationalists and futurists start separating out *some* promises as belonging to Israel and *some* belonging to Christians, then the whole fabric of the gospel starts coming undone.

Regarding the promises God gave to Israel, note that if even those who are "strangers" in Israel can inherit the land of Israel (Ezekiel 47:21-23), then certainly believing Gentiles, who are "no more strangers" to Israel (Ephesians 2:12,19), will inherit the land (during the coming millennium of Revelation 20:4-6), and the other promises given to Israel:

"That at that time ye [Gentiles] were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise . . . Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens" (Ephesians 2:12,19); "That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise" (Ephesians 3:6); "If ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Galatians 3:29); "Unto thy [Abraham's] seed will I give this land" (Genesis 12:7).

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post #298:

We are a spiritual kingdom, and this spiritual kingdom is superior to the old physical one.

While the kingdom of God is spiritual and in the present (Romans 14:17), within people (Luke 17:21), the kingdom of God will also be physical in the future (Luke 22:30, Matthew 19:28), on the earth (Revelation 5:10), first during the millennium (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 2:26-29) and then on the new earth (Revelation 21:1-4).

Jesus Christ's kingdom is Israel (John 12:13b-15, John 1:49b, John 19:19, Luke 22:30). That's why at his second coming, he will sit on the earthly throne of David (Luke 1:32, Isaiah 9:7) and restore the kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6-7, Acts 3:20-21). Jesus is, in his humanity, the son of David (Matthew 1:1, Matthew 21:15-16, Romans 1:3), of the house of David (Luke 1:69). So at Jesus' return he will restore the tabernacle, the house, of David (Isaiah 16:5, Amos 9:11), to its royal glory (2 Samuel 5:12), which it had lost (2 Kings 17:21a), and fulfill the prophecy and prayer of 2 Samuel 7:16-29.

After Jesus' second coming (Revelation 19:7-20:3) will occur the millennium (Revelation 20:4-6), during which, Gentile nations will come up to seek the returned Jesus ruling the whole earth (Zechariah 8:22, Zechariah 14:9, Psalms 72:8-11) upon the restored throne of David (Isaiah 9:7) in the earthly Jerusalem (Isaiah 2:1-4, Zechariah 14:8-11,16-19). And the physically resurrected church will reign on the earth with the returned Jesus for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:4-6). For the church is Israel (Revelation 21:9b,12b).

eclipsenow said in post #298:

"My Kingdom is not of this world"

John 18:36 meant that Jesus' future physical reign on the earth, with the resurrected church (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29), won't be of this world in the sense that it won't come by worldly means, such as by the church fighting physically to establish it (cf. 2 Corinthians 10:3-4a, Matthew 26:52, Matthew 5:39). Instead, it will come only by Jesus returning from heaven to establish it (Revelation 19:7-20:6, Zechariah 14:3-21). Also, after the millennium and subsequent events are over (Revelation 20:7-15), a new earth will be created and God's kingdom will be on the new earth (Revelation 21:1-22:5).

 

[eclipsenow]

Keyword begin. For part of what Revelation chapters 2-3 foretold could have begun unfolding "shortly" after John saw his vision (Revelation 1:1,3), near the end of the first century AD. For the letters to the seven literal first-century local church congregations (Revelation chapters 2-3) in the Roman province of "Asia" (Revelation 1:11) could have foretold a first-century persecution (Revelation 2:10, Revelation 3:10) under the Roman Emperor Domitian which happened shortly after John saw his vision around 95 AD, near the end of Domitian's reign (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5:30:3c).

But note that even all the (to us) still-future events of the coming tribulation and the subsequent second coming (Revelation chapters 6-19) will unfold "shortly" (Revelation 1:1,3) or "quickly" (Revelation 22:20) after John saw his vision. For from the viewpoint of God, even the passing of some 2,000 years is like the passing of only two days (2 Peter 3:8). Christians should look at the future fulfillment of Revelation chapters 6-19 from the viewpoint of God, not men, for whom the passing of some 2,000 years seems like a long delay for its fulfillment (cf. 2 Peter 3:9).

But you don't get to do that to the text, only the bible gets to do that to itself! If there is a good reason for inserting 2000 years for some reason, try me. But there isn't. It's all contingent on simply adopting assumptions you've made about the text. You've done your normal routine:-

1. Assert interpretation
2. List a few verses
3. Ignore analysing why you think those verses back your interpretation.

I'm sorry, but Revelation says "Soon" and "The Time was Near" and does not mention "1000 years like a day". It nearly does, when it mentions the Millennium, but here's the conundrum.

YOU WANT TO READ THE MILLENNIUM "LITERALLY", BUT ALSO WANT THE LICENCE TO JUST INSERT 2000 YEARS WHEN IT SUITS YOU!

Why would I believe anything you say when you can't even live consistently by your own hermeneutic?

So don't use this as an excuse to blab blab blab about all your silly Millennial beliefs.
I'm at least consistent. I think the whole book is Symbolic. So you don't have the right to talk about reading the Millennium literally until you've explained your contradictory attitudes to Revelation!

This is you:
Jesus with 7 eyes and 7 horns? Oh, that's symbolic.
"Time is near" and "SOON!" Oh, that's symbolic.
Millennium? NOOOOO, my precious end times tables all say that's REEAAAAAALLLLL!!!

I'm afraid you've got a lot of presuppositions to explain mate, and you DON'T do with your usual 123 formula above.

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post #305:

If there is a good reason for inserting 2000 years for some reason, try me.

See the good reasons in post #303.

It's all contingent on simply adopting assumptions you've made about the text.

What assumptions are you referring to?

Ignore analysing why you think those verses back your interpretation.

How do you feel they don't?

I'm sorry, but Revelation says "Soon" and "The Time was Near" and does not mention "1000 years like a day".

Regarding "soon" and "near", see the "soon" part of post #303.

Regarding "1000 years like a day", that comes from 2 Peter 3:8, which Revelation doesn't contradict.

It nearly does, when it mentions the Millennium, but here's the conundrum.

YOU WANT TO READ THE MILLENNIUM "LITERALLY", BUT ALSO WANT THE LICENCE TO JUST INSERT 2000 YEARS WHEN IT SUITS YOU!

The millennium (Revelation 20:4-6) can be read literally, because in the Bible, the number 1,000 can indicate 1,000 literally (e.g. Numbers 31:4-6, 35:4, Judges 20:10, 2 Kings 15:19, 1 Chronicles 19:6, Song of Songs 8:11, Revelation 20:2-6).

Also, reading the millennium literally doesn't contradict that it, like the preceding and highly-detailed tribulation and second coming events of Revelation chapters 6-19, have never been fulfilled, but will be fulfilled almost entirely literally in our future.

Why would I believe anything you say when you can't even live consistently by your own hermeneutic?

What inconsistency and what hermeneutic are you referring to?

So don't use this as an excuse to blab blab blab about all your silly Millennial beliefs.

How are they silly?

I think the whole book is Symbolic.

Why?

Parts of Revelation are literal and parts are symbolic. For example, parts of Revelation 5:6 are literal (the throne of God in heaven, the four beasts, the 24 elders, Jesus having been slain, the seven Spirits of God, the earth) and parts of Revelation 5:6 are symbolic (Jesus being a Lamb, Jesus having seven horns, Jesus having seven eyes).

Also, Revelation 1:1b doesn't mean (as it sometimes claimed) that Jesus in Revelation chapters 6-18 is expressing the events of the future tribulation through only symbolic images, instead of indicating those events almost entirely literally. For just as the original Greek word (deiknuo: G1166) translated as "show" in Revelation 1:1a doesn't have to refer to something being shown through symbolic images, but can refer to something being shown literally (e.g. Matthew 8:4), so also the original Greek word (semaino: G4591) translated as "signified" in Revelation 1:1b doesn't have to refer to something being indicated through symbolic images, but can refer to something being indicated literally (e.g. Acts 25:27).

Revelation is an unsealed book (Revelation 22:10), meaning that it shouldn't be difficult for Christians to understand it if they simply read it as it's written: chronologically and almost entirely literally. The few parts of it that are symbolic are almost always explained afterward (e.g. Revelation 1:20, Revelation 17:9-12), and the few symbols in Revelation that aren't explained afterward (e.g. Revelation 13:2) are usually explained elsewhere in the Bible (e.g. Daniel 7:4-7,17).

So you don't have the right to talk about reading the Millennium literally until you've explained your contradictory attitudes to Revelation!

What contradictory attitudes are you referring to?

This is you:
Jesus with 7 eyes and 7 horns? Oh, that's symbolic.

Right.

"Time is near" and "SOON!" Oh, that's symbolic.

It's literal, from God's point of view. See the "2 Peter 3:8" paragraph of post #303.

Millennium? NOOOOO, my precious end times tables all say that's REEAAAAAALLLLL!!!

Right. For the end times table of Revelation 19:7-20:15 shows that the millennium won't begin until after Jesus' second coming and the physical resurrection of the church at that time (1 Corinthians 15:21-23,51-53). And Revelation 19:7-20:15 shows that the Gog/Magog event (Ezekiel chapters 38-39) and subsequent resurrection and white throne judgment won't happen until 1,000 years after Jesus' second coming.

I'm afraid you've got a lot of presuppositions to explain mate, and you DON'T do with your usual 123 formula above.

What presuppositions are you referring to?

 

[Bible2]

PeterAV said in post #1:

Fib #1
Jesus comes BEFORE the tribulation.

That idea is mistaken because Jesus won't come and gather together (rapture) the church until immediately after the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6-18/Matthew 24 (Matthew 24:29-31, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8). That's why the marriage of the church doesn't happen until Revelation 19:7, in connection with Jesus' second coming and the physical resurrection of the church at that time (Revelation 19:7-20:6, 1 Corinthians 15:21-23,51-53, 1 Thessalonians 4:15-16). Matthew 24:30-31 is referring to the same second coming of Jesus and gathering together (rapture) of the church as 2 Thessalonians 2:1, which is referring to the same second coming of Jesus and catching up together (rapture) of the church as 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17.

Jesus won't return and gather together (rapture) the church until sometime after there's a falling away (an apostasy) in the church and the Antichrist sits in a third Jewish temple in Jerusalem and proclaims himself God (2 Thessalonians 2:1-4, Daniel 11:31,36, Matthew 24:15-31, Revelation 11:1-2, Revelation 13:4-8), and the abomination of desolation (possibly a standing, android image of the Antichrist) is set up in the holy place of a third Jewish temple (Matthew 24:15-31, Daniel 11:31). For when Jesus returns to gather together (and marry) the church he will destroy the Antichrist (2 Thessalonians 2:1,8, Revelation 19:7,20). Before Jesus returns, the church will have to go through the future, literal 3.5 years of the worldwide reign of the Antichrist (Revelation 13:5-10, Revelation 14:12-13, Revelation 20:4-6, Matthew 24:9-31).

This is the falling away.

The pre-trib idea per se isn't the falling away, but it could contribute to it, because when no pre-trib rapture occurs, and pre-trib believers and their little ones begin to suffer in the tribulation, they could think that God has somehow been defeated by Satan, that Satan by his power has caused a pre-trib rapture not to happen despite God wanting one to. Or they could think that God has cruelly broken his promise, that he's pulled the rug out from under them, that he cruelly lied to them and must now be laughing at their surprise and suffering (Proverbs 1:26), so that in their rage they will curse God and commit apostasy during the tribulation (Isaiah 8:21-22, Matthew 24:9-13, Matthew 13:21), to the ultimate loss of their salvation (Hebrews 6:4-8, John 15:6, 2 Timothy 2:12).

And even if they instead rightly think, "Okay, we must have just been mistaken in thinking that the rapture was supposed to be pre-trib. Satan hasn't defeated God, and God didn't lie to us", nonetheless, because they'd held so strongly to the pre-trib idea for so long, their minds could be completely unprepared to face the long tribulation that lies ahead of them (just as holding too strongly to the mistaken idea of partial preterism, or full preterism, or historicism, or symbolicism, or spiritualism, could leave some believers less prepared mentally to endure the future tribulation). The Bible gives believers clear warning ahead of time about everything that they're going to have to face during the future tribulation (Mark 13:23, Revelation 1:3, Revelation 22:16) of Revelation chapters 6-18/Matthew 24, so that they can be better prepared mentally not to be blindsided (cf. 1 Peter 4:12-13) or deceived by anything that's coming (Matthew 24:4-5,23-25, Revelation 13:13-18, Revelation 19:20), and so that they can be better prepared mentally to endure the future tribulation with patience and faith unto the end (Matthew 24:9-13, Revelation 13:7-10, Revelation 14:12-13).

 

[eclipsenow]

Bible2, because you kept directing me to post 303 I just responded to that again. Unfortunately, I missed everything else in your most recent post because... there's only so many hours in the day, if you get my meaning!

Revelation chapters 6-22 are about (to us) still-future events, "things which must be hereafter" (Revelation 4:1). For just as the glorious return of Jesus in Revelation 19 has never been fulfilled, but will be fulfilled almost entirely literally in our future, so the highly-detailed events of the preceding tribulation in Revelation chapters 6-18 have never been fulfilled, but will be fulfilled almost entirely literally in our future (see the "Details" part of christianforums.com/blogs/u77506-e14708/ ).

Fail! The many scholars I read on Revelation say everything in the book either happened once for all (like Jesus death and resurrection) or keeps happening through history as a general description of life now, in this age.

Keyword begin. For part of what Revelation chapters 2-3 foretold could have begun unfolding "shortly" after John saw his vision (Revelation 1:1,3), near the end of the first century AD. For the letters to the seven literal first-century local church congregations (Revelation chapters 2-3) in the Roman province of "Asia" (Revelation 1:11) could have foretold a first-century persecution (Revelation 2:10, Revelation 3:10) under the Roman Emperor Domitian which happened shortly after John saw his vision around 95 AD, near the end of Domitian's reign (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5:30:3c).

Fail again! Persecutions and troubles KEEP hitting the church! Repeatedly throughout history! All the time. Even today Christians are martyred every day. Why should the *incredibly metaphorical and symbolic* descriptions of suffering be read as specific historical events? They're not. They are generic descriptions, not specific predictions! It's a sermon, not a timetable!

But note that even all the (to us) still-future events of the coming tribulation and the subsequent second coming (Revelation chapters 6-19) will unfold "shortly" (Revelation 1:1,3) or "quickly" (Revelation 22:20) after John saw his vision. For from the viewpoint of God, even the passing of some 2,000 years is like the passing of only two days (2 Peter 3:8). Christians should look at the future fulfillment of Revelation chapters 6-19 from the viewpoint of God, not men, for whom the passing of some 2,000 years seems like a long delay for its fulfillment (cf. 2 Peter 3:9).

This argument fails because you've based one presupposition on another without proving either.

It goes like this.

BECAUSE Revelation is a *timetable* of events that haven't happened yet, THEREFORE it is about our future.

Hint: It's not a timetable of specific events.
But it *is* most definitely about our future. And our past. And *right now*, if you have the ears to hear! It's a generic description, just like when Jesus said "Because they hated me they will hate you" or taught in parables.

Regarding the promises God gave to Israel, note that if even those who are "strangers" in Israel can inherit the land of Israel (Ezekiel 47:21-23), then certainly believing Gentiles, who are "no more strangers" to Israel (Ephesians 2:12,19), will inherit the land (during the coming millennium of Revelation 20:4-6), and the other promises given to Israel:[/quote

There is no Millennium! EVERY TIME Jesus speaks of 'this age' he speaks of the temporally bound, of death and disease and mortality and life now and suffering and persecution. EVERY TIME they speak of the age to come it's eternal and resurrected and perfect and sinless and heavenly!

There is simply no way to have an 'in-between' Millennium.

 

[zeke37]

i dont think that the difference between pre mill post trib and amil is all that different.
iow, i don't think either will have a negative baring on ones future with the church or being gathered to Christ
however, pre trb.....that is another story.

 

[eclipsenow]

i dont think that the difference between pre mill post trib and amil is all that different.
iow, i don't think either will have a negative baring on ones future with the church or being gathered to Christ
however, pre trb.....that is another story.

Good point. Both systems are ready for persecution and tribulation. However, Covenant Amils don't spend time worrying about who the Anti-Christ might be, or missing Revelation's 'big picture' sermon about life between the Lord's ascension and his return.

 

[Bible2]

eclipsenow said in post #308:

Fail!

Pass.

The many scholars I read on Revelation say everything in the book either happened once for all (like Jesus death and resurrection) or keeps happening through history as a general description of life now, in this age.

Based on what? Rev. chs. 6-18 aren't about Jesus' death and resurrection, but about "things which must be hereafter" (Rev. 4:1). Also, Rev. chs. 6-18 aren't a general description of life, but a very specific future timetable. That's why they're so highly detailed and so long. To reduce all of Rev. chs. 6-18 to a general description of life renders all of the myriad and amazing details in them utterly useless. It's like throwing them into the trash, just to be done with them. Also, please indicate how you (and your "scholars") feel each of the details of Rev. chs. 6-18 depicts a general description of life.

Fail again!

Pass again.

Persecutions and troubles KEEP hitting the church!

Sadly, yes. But how does that require that Rev. chs. 6-18 aren't future or almost entirely literal?

Why should the *incredibly metaphorical and symbolic* descriptions of suffering be read as specific historical events?

Rev. chs. 6-18 aren't incredibly metaphorical and symbolic, but almost entirely literal, and aren't describing historical events, but future events.

This argument fails because you've based one presupposition on another without proving either.

It goes like this.

BECAUSE Revelation is a *timetable* of events that haven't happened yet, THEREFORE it is about our future.

The argument passes, for it hasn't been proven false. Also, how do you feel your position been proven true? For the argument is that symbolicists have never shown how every trib detail in Rev. chs. 6-18 keeps happening through history as a general description of life.

There is no Millennium!

There is (Rev. 20:4-6), and it won't begin until after Jesus' 2nd coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6, Zech. 14:3-21), when he will reign on the earth with the physically resurrected church for 1,000 years (Rev. 20:4-6, Rev. 5:10, Rev. 2:26-29, Ps. 2, 66:3-4). During the millennium, Jesus will place obedient Christians over cities (Lk. 19:17-19) and nations (Rev. 2:26-29) and political divisions within nations (Mt. 19:28, Lk. 22:30), while Jesus himself will be King of Kings (Rev. 19:16) over the entire earth (Zech. 14:9, Ps. 72:8-11), reigning in the earthly Jerusalem (Mic. 4:1-4, Zech. 14:8-21).

EVERY TIME Jesus speaks of 'this age' he speaks of the temporally bound, of death and disease and mortality and life now and suffering and persecution.

While the apostles asked Jesus about the end of the age (Mt. 24:3), he didn't tell them that the end of the age would occur immediately at his 2nd coming, or when it would occur, just as he didn't tell them many other things during his ministry (Jn. 16:12). It wouldn't be until much later that he would show the apostle John, through the vision in Rev., that the end of the age, when all the unsaved will be cast into the lake of fire (Mt. 13:40, Rev. 20:15), won't occur until over 1,000 years after his 2nd coming (Rev. 19:7-20:15).

Also, why can't mortality include the millennium? For the elect Jews who won't become believers until Jesus' 2nd coming (Rom. 11:25-29, Zech. 12:10-14) could enter the subsequent millennium (Zech. 14:5-21, Mt. 19:28, Lk. 22:30) in their mortal bodies, for the resurrection/changing of believers into immortal bodies (1 Cor. 15:21-23,51-53) could be experienced only by those who'd become believers before the 2nd coming. Also, the people left alive at the 2nd coming (Mt. 24:39b-40) who won't get saved at that time will also enter the millennial kingdom in their mortal bodies. They will be its forced subjects (Zech. 14:16-19, Ps. 66:3), ruled over with a rod of iron (Rev. 2:26-29, 5:10, 20:4-6, Ps. 2).

EVERY TIME they speak of the age to come it's eternal and resurrected and perfect and sinless and heavenly!

The age to come will be on the new earth in the descended New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:1-22:15), after the future millennium and subsequent events are over (Rev. 20:7-22:15). Also, even the new earth could include mortality.

For Isa. 65:20 could refer to a new race of humans which will be created along with the new earth (Isa. 65:17), but which will fall into sin and mortality like Adam and Eve did. But even as mortals, they could live for about 900 years, like Adam and generations after him lived that long (Gen. 5:5-27), so that if one of them dies at 100 years old, it will be like he died in his youth (Isa. 65:20b). Isa. 65:20 can't refer to any humans born on our present earth, because by the time the new earth is created (Rev. 21:1), all humans born on our present earth who got saved and remained obedient will have been resurrected or changed into immortal bodies (Rev. 21:4, 1 Cor. 15:21-23,51-53, Rom. 8:23-25), and all who didn't get saved or who remained disobedient will have been cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 21:8, Isa. 66:22,24, Mk. 9:45-46, Rev. 20:10,15, Rev. 14:10-11, Mt. 25:41,46). The resurrected, immortal humans could minister to the new race of fallen, mortal humans (Isa. 65:20) in the same way that angels now minister to us (Heb. 1:14), for resurrected, immortal humans will be equal to the angels (Lk. 20:36).

There is simply no way to have an 'in-between' Millennium.

There is, for the millennium will occur after the 2nd coming and before the new earth (Rev. 19:7-22:15).

 

[Bible2]

PeterAV said in post #1:

FIB#2
The Rapture is with a Secret coming.

Some people who hold to the (mistaken) pre-trib rapture view feel that 1 Thes. 5:2 supports the idea of a pre-trib, secret coming of Jesus to rapture the church and begin the trib. But not all thieves in the night come secretly, like cat burglars, some like to rob homes via what's called a home invasion, which is quite obvious and which can involve the thieves not only stealing, but also killing and destroying (Jn. 10:10, 2 Thes. 1:8-10, Rev. 19:7-21). Jesus' coming as a thief in the night (1 Thes. 5:2, Mt. 24:43-44, Rev. 16:15) doesn't mean that he will come quietly or secretly, "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God" (1 Thes. 4:16), "with a great sound of a trumpet" (Mt. 24:31). And "as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be" (Mt. 24:27,43-44). "Behold, I come as a thief" (Rev. 16:15); "Behold, he cometh with clouds [1 Thes. 4:17]; and every eye shall see him" (Rev. 1:7).

Instead, Jesus' coming as a thief in the night means that he will come upon even Christians when they aren't expecting him if they stop watching (staying awake, spiritually) during the trib. Compare the if principle of Rev. 3:3b. Also, some in the church will still be alive on the earth during the final stage of the trib, still waiting for Jesus' coming as a thief (Rev. 16:15). So his coming won't overtake them like a thief (1 Thes. 5:4, Mt. 24:43). With regard to Jesus coming as a thief to the unsaved world, when it isn't expecting him (1 Thes. 5:2-4, Mt. 24:39), nothing requires that the unsaved world will be expecting Jesus' 2nd coming after the trib. For during the trib, the unsaved world could come to believe that his 2nd coming has already happened (Mt. 24:24-26).

Revelation 11:12

The future raising of the 2 witnesses from the dead (Rev. 11:11) won't occur at the church's resurrection into immortality, but will be like, e.g., the past resuscitation of the mortal bodies of Lazarus and Tabitha (Jn. 11:43-44, Acts 9:36-40). And the future ascension of the 2 witnesses "up" into heaven (Rev. 11:12) won't occur at the rapture of the church, but will be like, e.g., the past ascension of the mortal bodies of Enoch and Elijah into heaven (Heb. 11:5, 2 Kin. 2:11).

For the resuscitation and ascension of the 2 witnesses will occur during the trib, as part of the trib's 2nd woe/6th trumpet (Rev. 11:14, 9:12-13), before the trib's 7th trumpet sounds (Rev. 11:15). And then out of the 7th trumpet's heavenly temple opening will come the 7 plagues of the 7 vials (Rev. 11:19, 15:5-16:1), the final stage of the trib (Rev. 16). But the resurrection of the church into immortality and its being raptured (gathered together to Jesus) won't occur until after the entire trib is over (Mt. 24:29-31, 2 Thes. 2:1-8), after the 7th vial has been completed (Rev. 16:17,19, 19:2-20:6), at Jesus' 2nd coming (1 Cor. 15:21-23,52-53, 1 Thes. 4:15-17). Also, the 2 witnesses, like Enoch and Elijah did (and also like the apostles Paul and John did, temporarily, at one point during their lifetimes in the 1st century AD: 2 Cor. 12:2,7, Rev. 4:1-2), will ascend all the way "up" into the 3rd heaven (Rev. 11:12). But the church will be raptured only as high as the clouds of the sky (the 1st heaven) to hold a meeting in the air with Jesus at his 2nd coming (1 Thes. 4:15-17).

 

[eclipsenow]

Pass.

Based on what? Rev. chs. 6-18 aren't about Jesus' death and resurrection, but about "things which must be hereafter" (Rev. 4:1). Also, Rev. chs. 6-18 aren't a general description of life, but a very specific future timetable. That's why they're so highly detailed and so long. To reduce all of Rev. chs. 6-18 to a general description of life renders all of the myriad and amazing details in them utterly useless. It's like throwing them into the trash, just to be done with them. Also, please indicate how you (and your "scholars") feel each of the details of Rev. chs. 6-18 depicts a general description of life.

It's interesting how you justify yourself. It's literally about the future because it's all (according to your presuppositions before you even get to the passage) detailed literal future events that happen "hereafter". Cool! But there's one problem with your detailed literal events after the "hereafter". They include Jesus having 7 horns and 7 eyes and a sword tongue! As you point out, "hereafter" is in Rev 4:1. But Jesus has 7 eyes and 7 horns in Rev 5.

No wonder you want to jump to Chapter 6, where you take the 'literal' reading of Revelation and do anything but read it literally! Androids indeed!

Sadly, yes. But how does that require that Rev. chs. 6-18 aren't future or almost entirely literal?

How's Jesus 7 eyes and 7 horns again? Are we literal yet?

Rev. chs. 6-18 aren't incredibly metaphorical and symbolic, but almost entirely literal, and aren't describing historical events, but future events.

Oh, I see, pick which bits of Revelation you want to be literal and just ignore the earlier bits in the same genre by the same author and in the same time-frame (hereafter 4:1) and rigidly, stubbornly ignore that Jesus has 7 eyes and 7 horns. Cool. Don't forget the sword for a tongue either.

BTW, horns, eyes, and sword tongues are not literal, but are profound biblical symbols with rich theological meanings, and would have been immediately recognisable to a first century Jew utterly familiar with their Old Testament. But you want to make the vast majority of this book utterly incomprehensible to all Christians throughout history but this special generation who get to read your special 'lens' to this book. Yeah, that's a fail again.

You asked how us Symbolists read some of the chapters as Symbols? OK, here's a piece I wrote on Rev 12 to give you an example. And you'll note that I never just rush to modern TV headlines and do a little creative writing like a 'compare and contrast' essay. Symbolists look to the greater biblical context of the whole bible for the theological meaning of Revelation. Not today's newspaper headlines or comic book heroes, but the same Old Testament characters and even New Testament books that the early church would have already had. So that they too could understand the book! (After all, it was written TO THEM, wasn't it!)

Revelation 12 is a gospel recap, like "the story so far" in a TV series recap. This is an example of a Symbolist reading of a portion of Revelation for Bible2's benefit.

///1 A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2 She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. 3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. 4 Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.”[a] And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. 6 The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days. ///

To understand this we need to know who this woman is. She has the sun, the moon, and the stars. Check out Genesis 37:9, Joseph's dream.

///Then he had another dream, and he told it to his brothers. “Listen,” he said, “I had another dream, and this time the sun and moon and eleven stars were bowing down to me.” ///

She is a sign for Israel or, as the New Testament understands it, God's people generally. Then there's the pregnancy, which was promised to Eve (a serpent crusher would be born!), which means this woman is a sign of the deliverer promised all through the Old Testament (the child!).

Look at the tragic longing for this child in Isaiah 26:17-18.

///17 As a pregnant woman about to give birth
writhes and cries out in her pain,
so were we in your presence, LORD.
18 We were with child, we writhed in labor,
but we gave birth to wind.
We have not brought salvation to the earth,
and the people of the world have not come to life.///

Psalm 2 also hopes in this child... the Lord Jesus.

///7 I will proclaim the LORD’s decree:
He said to me, “You are my son;
today I have become your father.
8 Ask me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession.
9 You will break them with a rod of iron;
you will dash them to pieces like pottery.” ///

Woah, hang on a minute... there's that rod of iron or iron sceptre of the child in verse 5!

The child is born "And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne." After his death and resurrection Jesus ascends to heaven from where he rules God's kingdom, the church. The woman resting in the desert for the 1,260 days is symbolic of the church resting like Elijah in the wilderness, being nourished by God, and also of Moses leading the Israelites during the Exodus.

Which brings us to a bit of Biblical Theology about the land promises in the Old Testament, and what is being done here in Revelation! To understand this *pilgrimage* language, we need to go all the way back to Genesis 12 where God basically promises that he will fashion Abraham's descendants into being "God's people living God's way in God's land, and this will bless the whole earth". As we trace Abraham's journey and then Moses Exodus through the wilderness, and all the petty battles with the various ...'ites', and then Israel are even judged in the wilderness, we are to see the wilderness as a hard place and a time of testing and great Exodus and the saving grace of God! How long does Jesus go out into the wilderness to be tested? 40 days, which reminds us of the 40 years Israel were left in the wilderness.

It's a metaphor for our ongoing quest towards the ultimate 'rest' or 'land' in heaven. The Old Testament is filled with promises and curses relating to the land. It is promised to be a place of rest from God's enemies, security and freedom to worship God the right way, and rest from toil every 7 years. (The Sabbath year rules). God's land will have Jerusalem on Mt Zion, the ultimate symbol of security, and the temple, the ultimate symbol of God working to save his people. It's the very means of our salvation!

So where are we? The New Testament spiritualises all of these themes. Jesus says he is the temple which will be destroyed and raised in 3 days. He explains the kingdom of God is not of this world. The book of Hebrews even goes as far as to spiritualise the temple, the High Priesthood, and even has the church meeting around Mount Zion every time we meet together!

Not only this, but the land is now in heaven! Hebrews 11 interprets Abraham as actually looking beyond the physical land to a 'heavenly country'. In other words the New Testament spiritualises the promises of land and lifts this promise up into the New Heavens and New Earth.

Back to the wilderness imagery from Revelation 12. As Hebrews 4 says, we are to make every effort to enter that 'rest' or security of being God's people living God's way in God's land in heaven. We are aliens and strangers in this world, even though in a sense the gospel is free to go out into the whole world and bless the whole world now. Right now we are God's Kingdom on earth, fulfilling the promise made to Abraham of being God's people living God's way in God's land as we *bless the whole earth*.

Paul even writes in Romans 4:13 that "13 It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith." Ephesians even says we are already seated in heaven! That is, our eventual rest in heaven is so secure we are considered citizens of that country already, as we already are the Kingdom of God on earth sharing his gospel and blessing the world and fulfilling God's promises to Abraham.

It's part of the 'now and not yet' tension of living in this world. We are NOW the Kingdom of God blessing the 'land' of this whole planet, which is our current home. But we are still in the wilderness, still pressed in on every side and tempted and under pressure and prejudice and persecution and even martyrdom.

Having done a 'big picture' analysis of the land in the Old Testament, we can now understand Revelation 12 and the wilderness.

The 1,260 days of Rev 11:2,3 are clearly the period between the Lord's ascension and his return.

We need to go back to Revelation 1 to know what this is all about.

///The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2 who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ.///

It's the revelation of Jesus Christ, the testimony of Jesus Christ, the word! It's the gospel and how it works out under what must SOON take place, the Roman persecution of the believers.

John is making sense of the 'failure' of the Messiah to kick out the Romans and bring on the Kingdom temporal. That's what it's all about. It's the gospel breathed out to a suffering church, not some silly End Times Timetable that only Christians 2000 years later might really understand! It traces the spiritual kingdom of God that is secure even after martyrdom and death. John explains in biblical symbols how Jesus did not fail when he refused to take up arms and kick out the Romans. The Kingdom of God is bigger than that. It's a spiritual kingdom that will ultimately be victorious. We just have to trust God as we go through this wilderness exodus, and long for the security of our future home.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

so where does the android fit in to all this?

 

[eclipsenow]

so where does the android fit in to all this?

Bible2 keeps going on about an Android AntiChrist. My my, what a literal reading of Revelation!

It seems Bible2 (like many other futurists) think literal means "Translate biblical symbols into anything I want them to be!"

A classic is Hal Lindsay turning Revelation's 'giant locusts' into Hui helicopters. Great hey? It totally misses the point. Revelation covers God's judgement of this world and, and in part explains natural disasters as God's judgement. The giant locusts or grasshoppers are a symbol of famine from God's terrible judgement on Egypt. They were a terrifying force of nature in the era before pesticides. They represent famine and death. When John carefully constructs Revelation using these images he is not asking readers to grab newspaper headlines from 2000 years later to try and match the locusts to famines in Africa (or wars, if you're Hal Lindsay seeing 'locusts' as Hui helicopters! My, how literal! ) John is cleverly writing about famine and dread of the forces of this world. He is asking us to see beyond the here and now, and that from "God's heavenly control room" that we see in earlier chapters it really is all under control. He has the situation in hand! We should not be terrified out of our minds!

That doesn't mean I rob my mind of all emotions and act indifferent to concerns like peak oil or global warming. Indeed, I maintain that there is a time to grieve and even fear for our brothers in the 3rd world. Compassion demands it! They are going to feel the impacts of climate change before we do. And far more severely. But hey? Ultimate God is in control, even though he judges us by letting us play with our guns and inappropriate contentography and drugs and violence and wars and even our climate. One day we will inherit a New Heavens and New Earth. But we don't know when. We really don't. And there's NOTHING, NOTHING at ALL, in the New Testament that lets us calculate when the Lord is going to return. We do NOT get to be indifferent to these concerns, or plunder the earth at our children's expense. The Lord might not return for 20,000 years! We just don't know!

 

[zeke37]

Bible2 keeps going on about an Android AntiChrist. My my, what a literal reading of Revelation!

It seems Bible2 (like many other futurists) think literal means "Translate biblical symbols into anything I want them to be!"

A classic is Hal Lindsay turning Revelation's 'giant locusts' into Hui helicopters. Great hey? It totally misses the point. Revelation covers God's judgement of this world and, and in part explains natural disasters as God's judgement. The giant locusts or grasshoppers are a symbol of famine from God's terrible judgement on Egypt. They were a terrifying force of nature in the era before pesticides. They represent famine and death.

ya, i agree that helicopters do not fulfill the 5th trump.

not literal famine...Amos8
prob not literal death either, as Rev9 states that the locusts cannot kill anyone.

so while both literal famine and death exist today, and will even in the end times,
those literal renderings are obviously wrong in light of OT prophetic scripture such as Amos8

as you and others correctly say, the bible interprets itself...
many if not all of those Rev symbols are found in the prophets...
and Amos8 teaches us outright what the famine is

When John carefully constructs Revelation using these images he is not asking readers to grab newspaper headlines from 2000 years later to try and match the locusts to famines in Africa (or wars, if you're Hal Lindsay seeing 'locusts' as Hui helicopters! My, how literal! ) John is cleverly writing about famine and dread of the forces of this world.

no he is not...
the famine in the end times, is not for food...
again, see Amos8

He is asking us to see beyond the here and now, and that from "God's heavenly control room" that we see in earlier chapters it really is all under control. He has the situation in hand! We should not be terrified out of our minds!

it's true..God is in control.
even from a futurist point of view

That doesn't mean I rob my mind of all emotions and act indifferent to concerns like peak oil or global warming. Indeed, I maintain that there is a time to grieve and even fear for our brothers in the 3rd world. Compassion demands it! They are going to feel the impacts of climate change before we do. And far more severely. But hey? Ultimate God is in control, even though he judges us by letting us play with our guns and inappropriate contentography and drugs and violence and wars and even our climate. One day we will inherit a New Heavens and New Earth. But we don't know when. We really don't.

but we have the signs to guide us in THAT season,
or else they would not have been given...but they were.
there are many, many last days/end days/end times/time of the end scriptures in the OT.
it's not a suprise to see things future to the first century.
so why you are so adiment against Rev being fulfilled futuristic, is beyond me.
us futurists agree that Rev is about stuff from the past, present and future.
and it most assuredly includes Christ's Coming and the Day of the Lord, and the resurrection of the dead, the wrath of God Almighty
and His judgement
and that is yet all future.

And there's NOTHING, NOTHING at ALL, in the New Testament that lets us calculate when the Lord is going to return. We do NOT get to be indifferent to these concerns, or plunder the earth at our children's expense. The Lord might not return for 20,000 years! We just don't know

there is plenty of signs given in both the OT and NT so that the elect shall know the season.
special people chosen by God for a special reason, during a special time.
reading Rev as at least partly future is in no way incorrect.
it's mandated.

you've said some things here that bother me.

don't you beleive that the revelation of Jesus Christ given to John,
is directly given to him from above?

it is not his "vivid imagination" but a revelation from Jesus Christ.
he repeatedly speaks of "visions"

the way i read your responces, it's like you think John was "cleverly" writing something of his own thinking.

 

[Butch5]

The central error of the OP is in assuming that the scriptures only speak of one future coming of Christ.

This is the error that the Jewish leaders made when studying the Old Testament prophecies concerning the coming of their Messiah. They concentrated on the prophecies that spoke of Him as the conquering warier, and simply ignored other prophecies that spoke of Him as the suffering sacrifice.

Now that His first coming is past, we realize that the answer to this apparent contradiction was that He was coming more than one more time.

In the same way, many modern scholars concentrate of some of the prophecies of His coming, and fail to realize that these prophecies contain many details that would be contradictions if He were only coming one more time. The OP lists some of these that speak of His future coming to judge the world, and pretends that the other prophecies that speak of him coming to remove his own simply do not exist.

Actually some have cataloged more than fifty apparent contradictions between details of prophecies concerning these future comings. All of these apparent contradictions disappear when we realize that He is still coming more than one more time.

Not even one of the claims he so easily dismisses is even an error, much less a lie. And understanding the simple fact in this post will explain all his objections except those about the seven years.

In regard to the seven years, he should notice that two halves make a whole. Some of the three and a half year periods he mentions are the first half of Daniel's seventieth week, others are the second half.

What prophecies are you referring to when you say 'he comes to remove his own'?

 

[eclipsenow]

ya, i agree that helicopters do not fulfill the 5th trump.

not literal famine...Amos8
prob not literal death either, as Rev9 states that the locusts cannot kill anyone.

so while both literal famine and death exist today, and will even in the end times,
those literal renderings are obviously wrong in light of OT prophetic scripture such as Amos8

as you and others correctly say, the bible interprets itself...
many if not all of those Rev symbols are found in the prophets...
and Amos8 teaches us outright what the famine is

no he is not...
the famine in the end times, is not for food...
again, see Amos8

Why do you choose Amos 8 over other locust images in the bible? Why not remember Egypt?

And why, oh why, do so many futurists interpret the New Testament via a specific lens from the Old Testament, rather than looking back into the Old Testament through the clarifying lens of the New Testament?

but we have the signs to guide us in THAT season,
or else they would not have been given...but they were.

It depends what you mean by 'signs'. We have wars and rumours of wars, droughts, famines, floods, disasters, persecutions; and all of it fulfils Jesus warnings of what the 'end times' or 'last days' would be like. Peter says the 'last days' began in Acts 2. That's 2000 years ago.

there are many, many last days/end days/end times/time of the end scriptures in the OT.

Yet there is only one 'Day of the Lord' in the Old Testament. It's true! Sometimes the same prophet will be speaking of the Day of the Lord as Christ's judgement day,and other times he will be speaking of the End of the World, and other times of salvation and forgiveness and the suffering servant. But it is all the one Day of the Lord. Only in the New Testament does it become clear that there are 2 days of the Lord, the Resurrection and the Return!

it's not a suprise to see things future to the first century.
so why you are so adiment against Rev being fulfilled futuristic, is beyond me.

Because:
1. It ignores the obvious symbolic nature of the writing
2. It makes the majority of Revelation incomprehensible to the majority of Christians.
3. It ignores the fact that John said it was all to start SOON for the time was NEAR, and that ultimately the whole book is about the gospel of Jesus. See chapter 1.

us futurists agree that Rev is about stuff from the past, present and future.

No you don't! All I hear is futurists disagreeing about everything! Which bit is past, which is present, which is future, what it is, blah blah blah... it's all disagreement from you guys!

and it most assuredly includes Christ's Coming and the Day of the Lord, and the resurrection of the dead, the wrath of God Almighty

Yep, the gospel. Just like I said.

and His judgement
and that is yet all future.

Of course! Every declaration of the basic gospel should say that Jesus died for our sins, rose again, reigns in heaven, will not leave his people, and is coming back again to rid the world of evil once and for all! The gospel has 'future bits' in it, but that no more makes Revelation a road map of the future than say reading the parable of the 10 virgins is a road map of the future!

there is plenty of signs given in both the OT and NT so that the elect shall know the season.

Which season? So many of the signs you futurists read as future I read as about the basic gospel! Daniel 9 is not about the antiChrist in the future but about what the Christ did in the past, 2000 years ago in fact! Matthew 24 is not about the future but about how Jesus warned the disciples to get out of town when the temple they could see with their own eyes was about to be destroyed. In AD70. The fact that Jesus compares silly false Messiahs with his glorious return only adds to the confusion when futurists jump in and try and twist the whole passage to be about the future. Somehow they ignore that Jesus specifically warns that NO ONE will know, and that he will return like a thief!

But hey, there's all those signs, right? No wonder I'm not filled with overwhelming confidence! They are NOT generally indicating when he is likely to return, but are either:
1. Misunderstood OT prophecies concerning the establishment of the New Covenant and saving work of the Messiah.
2. Misunderstood statements about the literal restoration of Israel as has already been fulfilled before Rome, and how the 2nd temple was literally built, and then literally destroyed just as Jesus said in Matt 24.

reading Rev as at least partly future is in no way incorrect. it's mandated.

By whom? How? On what basis do you make this claim? The genre is clearly symbolic, the subject matter is the gospel and the suffering church, and there is no clear timeline at all as the 'plot' keeps repeating itself and waltzing around and around until we are all dizzy. It's snapshot theology, not timeline.

don't you beleive that the revelation of Jesus Christ given to John, is directly given to him from above?

Yes John is inspired but I don't believe John is a secretary while God dictates a letter. Writing scripture is a bit like the mystery of the Incarnation. Just as Jesus is fully human and fully God, writing the bible fully used the personality and language and culture of the author while they remain fully inspired.

it is not his "vivid imagination" but a revelation from Jesus Christ. he repeatedly speaks of "visions"

Yes, but exactly what he saw and felt are a mystery to us, all we have are the words and images he used.

the way i read your responces, it's like you think John was "cleverly" writing something of his own thinking.

In a way, he was! Apocalyptic writing was a common genre with its own rules and syntax and symbols. It was popular for 4 centuries, 200 BC to 200 ADish. So just as one doesn't read a Shakespeare poem literally but instead uses all the literary tools in the kit, so we too shouldn't read Revelation literally. It's literary. It's full of rich traditions and symbols and theological meaning that John is communicating.

Reading John literally here is as bad as opening up the gospel of John Chapter 1 and insisting Jesus was a word written on paper, or a lamp. It's simply that bad.

 

[zeke37]

Why do you choose Amos 8 over other locust images in the bible? Why not remember Egypt?

what do you mean "over"?
the bible does not contradict itself.
i don't choose one scripture OVER another.
gotta use em all Bro.

there will be famine, but not for food.
it's not literal...you of all people should see that.

And why, oh why, do so many futurists interpret the New Testament via a specific lens from the Old Testament, rather than looking back into the Old Testament through the clarifying lens of the New Testament?

why do u assume that futurists do that?

but we have the signs to guide us in THAT season,
or else they would not have been given...but they were.
​

It depends what you mean by 'signs'. We have wars and rumours of wars, droughts, famines, floods, disasters, persecutions; and all of it fulfils Jesus warnings of what the 'end times' or 'last days' would be like. Peter says the 'last days' began in Acts 2. That's 2000 years ago.

but the end is NOT YET. so obv. not fulfilled 2000 years ago, right????
and that does not negate the fact that the signs were given....
and btw, more signs were given than you seem to accept.

there are many, many last days/end days/end times/time of the end scriptures in the OT.
​

Yet there is only one 'Day of the Lord' in the Old Testament. It's true! Sometimes the same prophet will be speaking of the Day of the Lord as Christ's judgement day,and other times he will be speaking of the End of the World, and other times of salvation and forgiveness and the suffering servant. But it is all the one Day of the Lord. Only in the New Testament does it become clear that there are 2 days of the Lord, the Resurrection and the Return!

Bologna
the "Day of the Lord" in the OT covers the 2nd Coming of Christ.
it falls to you to prove your assertation that there are 2 day of the Lord's.
there is not.

ps. the resurrection happens at His 2nd Coming/return.
see 1Thes4/1Cor15

now the acceptible "year" of the Lord, is another matter.

it's not a suprise to see things future to the first century.
so why you are so adiment against Rev being fulfilled futuristic, is beyond me.
​

Because:
1. It ignores the obvious symbolic nature of the writing

to say so does not make it so...proof.
plus you were just arguing for literal famine, and i, for symbolic...lol???

2. It makes the majority of Revelation incomprehensible to the majority of Christians.

lol, you mean like Daniel and John and Mat (Peter) said it would be?
do you think all who profess Christ are "wise", so as to understand?

3. It ignores the fact that John said it was all to start SOON for the time was NEAR, and that ultimately the whole book is about the gospel of Jesus. See chapter 1.

soon can mean different things to different people.
obv. it's not soon (as we understand soon today), because that 2nd Coming has not occured yet.
plus Rev states that it is about the present and future, including the 2nd Coming

19Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;
​

us futurists agree that Rev is about stuff from the past, present and future.

No you don't!

sure we do...

All I hear is futurists disagreeing about everything! Which bit is past, which is present, which is future, what it is, blah blah blah... it's all disagreement from you guys!

well, i can't argue that we all for the most part disagree...even with you. lol.
still, that does not negate the "future" portion of the Revelation.

and it most assuredly includes Christ's Coming

and the Day of the Lord, and the resurrection of the dead, the wrath of God Almighty

Yep, the gospel. Just like I said.

you say it is not about the future...yet you say YEP.
some of those events, are future events described in Revelation.

and His judgement

and that is yet all future.

Of course! Every declaration of the basic gospel should say that Jesus died for our sins, rose again, reigns in heaven, will not leave his people, and is coming back again to rid the world of evil once and for all! The gospel has 'future bits' in it, but that no more makes Revelation a road map of the future than say reading the parable of the 10 virgins is a road map of the future!

sorry, i don't buy it that way.
it certainly has a "timetable" or "order" to it.
you have not disuaded me in the least.
i see the Gospel there too, but i see a future "timetable" aswell.

there is plenty of signs given in both the OT and NT so that the elect shall know the season.

Which season?

the season of the hour of temptation
ending with His Coming.

So many of the signs you futurists read as future I read as about the basic gospel!

ya, and?

Daniel 9 is not about the antiChrist in the future but about what the Christ did in the past, 2000 years ago in fact!

it's about lots of things.
Messiah cut off after 62 weeks, was about Jesus 2000 years ago.

Matthew 24 is not about the future but about how Jesus warned the disciples to get out of town when the temple they could see with their own eyes was about to be destroyed. In AD70.

i disagree, because of the context of the chapter itself.
it is about a great long amount of time,
from Christ until the gospel is preached in all the world...
and then the end shall come.

wars, rumors of wars...those have been happening continuously.
immidiately after the tribulation of those days, is the 2nd Coming.
so i don't see how you think it was all fulfilled in 70 ad.
that's preteristic.

The fact that Jesus compares silly false Messiahs with his glorious return only adds to the confusion when futurists jump in and try and twist the whole passage to be about the future. Somehow they ignore that Jesus specifically warns that NO ONE will know, and that he will return like a thief!

of the day the earth and heavens pass away....sure..no one knows.

of His return, don't date set....only the wise will understand the signs when they are IN the season....
can't guess before hand....no use.

but the "thief" analogy implies His Coming as seen by the bad guys...
to them, He comes as a thief...they are still marrying/partying etc.

that day will not overtake US like a thief. ...not if we are of the light.
see 1Thes5

But hey, there's all those signs, right? No wonder I'm not filled with overwhelming confidence! They are NOT generally indicating when he is likely to return, but are either:
1. Misunderstood OT prophecies concerning the establishment of the New Covenant and saving work of the Messiah.
2. Misunderstood statements about the literal restoration of Israel as has already been fulfilled before Rome, and how the 2nd temple was literally built, and then literally destroyed just as Jesus said in Matt 24.

let's say i don't agree with your premise

reading Rev as at least partly future is in no way incorrect. it's mandated.
​

By whom? How?

By God, in the Bible, in the first chapter.

On what basis do you make this claim?

biblical basis.

19Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;
​

The genre is clearly symbolic, the subject matter is the gospel and the suffering church, and there is no clear timeline at all as the 'plot' keeps repeating itself and waltzing around and around until we are all dizzy. It's snapshot theology, not timeline.

to each their own i guess.

don't you beleive that the revelation of Jesus Christ given to John, is directly given to him from above?

Yes John is inspired but I don't believe John is a secretary while God dictates a letter.

ahhhh, that's the problem. that's just how i see it.

Writing scripture is a bit like the mystery of the Incarnation. Just as Jesus is fully human and fully God, writing the bible fully used the personality and language and culture of the author while they remain fully inspired.

i don't believe that the author has poetic license tho. i guess you do.

it is not his "vivid imagination" but a revelation from Jesus Christ. he repeatedly speaks of "visions"
​

Yes, but exactly what he saw and felt are a mystery to us, all we have are the words and images he used.

exactly. those were not his visions nor his dictations....they were God's.

the way i read your responces, it's like you think John was "cleverly" writing something of his own thinking.
​

In a way, he was!

i think we are done.

Apocalyptic writing was a common genre with its own rules and syntax and symbols. It was popular for 4 centuries, 200 BC to 200 ADish. So just as one doesn't read a Shakespeare poem literally but instead uses all the literary tools in the kit, so we too shouldn't read Revelation literally. It's literary. It's full of rich traditions and symbols and theological meaning that John is communicating.

again, i don't think it was John at all.

Reading John literally here is as bad as opening up the gospel of John Chapter 1 and insisting Jesus was a word written on paper, or a lamp. It's simply that bad.

there are literal parts and non literal parts.
you say the same thing when it suits you.

 

[eclipsenow]

Zeke,
If you're not going to read what I actually wrote, and respond to the obvious points in what I wrote, and are just going to stand there and point your finger and stick out your tongue then I'm not going to bother to discuss this with you. You need to actually respond to the points I actually made. If you can't do that, and are just going to viscously attack straw-men of your own creation, then I'll just but out and let you have fun all on your own with that. There are many significant points above that you simply HAVE NOT responded to as a mature adult, but instead have just blown raspberries at. I'm quite disappointed.

You especially need to try and be a bit more mature as you deal with my 3 reasons for not being a futurist!

1. It ignores the obvious symbolic nature of the writing
2. It makes the majority of Revelation incomprehensible to the majority of Christians.
3. It ignores the fact that John said it was all to start SOON for the time was NEAR, and that ultimately the whole book is about the gospel of Jesus. See chapter 1.


RETURN = FUTURISM for WHOLE BOOK!?
Also, Revelation as a symbolic piece of gospel writing OF COURSE refers to at least ONE event in the future. The Return of Christ and Judgement Day. It does this again and again and again in Chapters 17 to 20. In picture language. In bible symbolism. But the event itself is, of course, real. We know that from other *more* literal parts of the bible! But, as I said, just because the gospel itself includes mention of Judgement Day does not place the WHOLE GOSPEL ITSELF in the future. The way you read Revelation it's almost as if Jesus died for our sins IN THE FUTURE! (Some chapters of Revelation are obviously gospel recaps, like Chapter 12, NOT parts of a future timeline!)

Again, it's like getting "the Four Spiritual Laws" or "2 ways to live" gospel tracts and insisting, dogmatically, that because ONE part of the gospel mentions the future return of Christ, the WHOLE GOSPEL is set in the future.

That's how "logical" your current argument appears to be! And it's weak. Worse than weak tea pouring out of a wet paper bag. And you know it or you would have put a little bit more effort into your reply and been, I dunno, more adult!

of His return, don't date set....only the wise will understand the signs when they are IN the season....

Ridiculous! There is no verse in the bible that indicates anyone other than the Father knows when the Lord Jesus is going to return. There *are* verses, however, that indicate us Christians should not be ashamed of our lifestyles or 'surprised'. That is, caught unprepared. The 10 virgins were meant to have oil in their lamps and keep it there precisely BECAUSE they did not know when he would return. They were NOT told off for being ignorant of the time of his return, but for being disobedient and unprepared. See the difference?


Anyway, please try to respond to my 3 reasons for not being a futurist. As an adult this time.