Days Of Noah

[Love First]

If the letter to Philadelphia is NOT referring to the rapture, what is it referring to then?

The fact that the Philadelphia church age was kept from the end times.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

What is the Philadelphia church age, and to which end times do you refer?

 

[Timtofly]

Can you answer the question?

There are not always clouds in the sky where I live. It might happen on a cloudy day or a clear day. Does it literally matter to you?

 

[Timtofly]

No, there’s only one Great Tribulation and the second coming does not occur during the sixth seal. There is no tribulation after Christ comes on the last day.

There is no "last day". Where does that come from?

 

[Douggg]

That’s not a rapture.

It's the rapture because Jesus is in heaven where the rewards are given to Christians while the great tribulation takes place here on earth.

Luke 21:34-36 is essentially the same message to Christians as in Matthew 24:32-51... watch, be aware of the times.

Luke 21:
34 And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares.

35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.

36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

Matthew 24:
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

_______________________________________________

Matthew 24:15-31 is information to us Christians.
Matthew 24:32-51 is directions to us Christians.

 

[Love First]

There is no "last day". Where does that come from?

Quite a few places in the book of John.

Here’s one:

John 12:48
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

 

[Love First]

What is the Philadelphia church age, and to which end times do you refer?

If you want to understand the Philadelphia Church Age I suggest that you study the doctrine and exposition of the Seven Church Ages. This concept of seeing the seven churches as seven church ages was popularized by Clarence Larkin in his work The Book of Revelation that was published in 1919. It is my understanding that William Branham used much of Larkins book in his book entitled The Seven Church Ages. This doctrine has been taught by many reputable Bible teachers such as Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel. You can also find this doctrine in Willmington’s Guide to the Bible.

When I refer to end times I am referring to the time of Great Tribulation spoken of in the scriptures.

 

[parousia70]

If you want to understand the Philadelphia Church Age I suggest that you study the doctrine and exposition of the Seven Church Ages. This concept of seeing the seven churches as seven church ages was popularized by Clarence Larkin in his work The Book of Revelation that was published in 1919. It is my understanding that William Branham used much of Larkins book in his book entitled The Seven Church Ages. This doctrine has been taught by many reputable Bible teachers such as Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel. You can also find this doctrine in Willmington’s Guide to the Bible.

When I refer to end times I am referring to the time of Great Tribulation spoken of in the scriptures.

I’ll give you credit for affirming that this “7 church ages” doctrine is a man-made invention and not an actual scriptural teaching.

It’s a pity this doctrine, that can’t be found in the pages of scripture, has been taught so broadly for the past 100 years… But in 2000 years of church history we can know this unbiblical doctrine and is a relative newcomer, and has not been adhered to buy the majority of Biblical Christendom throughout its history.

 

[parousia70]

The world has not gotten any better since Nov 30, 2017

How was it better on November 30 2017 than it was on November 29, 2017?

 

[Hammster]

I have spoken with Dr. Kenneth Gentry, Junior so I am well aware of the Preterist viewpoint, and if nothing else, I have learned there are many brilliant and well-educated people behind each view of Revelation, and we should all respect each viewpoint, because there is not 100% conclusive evidence for any of thee major views, or otherwise we would not still be debating them thousands of years later.

I can respect the people who hold other viewpoints, but I don’t have to respect the viewpoints.

 

[Hammster]

If the letter to Philadelphia is NOT referring to the rapture, what is it referring to then?

The judgement that is soon to be released upon Jerusalem and the Temple.

 

[Hammster]

There are not always clouds in the sky where I live. It might happen on a cloudy day or a clear day. Does it literally matter to you?

I’m still wondering where clouds are mentioned in the passage you posted.

 

[Hammster]

It's the rapture because Jesus is in heaven where the rewards are given to Christians while the great tribulation takes place here on earth.

Luke 21:34-36 is essentially the same message to Christians as in Matthew 24:32-51... watch, be aware of the times.

Luke 21:
34 And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares.

35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.

36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

Matthew 24:
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

_______________________________________________

Matthew 24:15-31 is information to us Christians.
Matthew 24:32-51 is directions to us Christians.

“All these things”. Right. When Jesus comes on the clouds. Which happened in 70 AD.

 

[Timtofly]

Quite a few places in the book of John.

Here’s one:

John 12:48
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

If you are referring to the GWT, that is 1000 years after the Second Coming.

 

[Timtofly]

I’m still wondering where clouds are mentioned in the passage you posted.

In the sky.

 

[BuildingApologetics]

Thank you for your thoughtful response. In my estimation, however, you used some of the weaker texts you could have used to demonstrate the time statements.

There are over 100 of them in the New Testament. Can you point to any other Biblical teaching that is mentioned over 100 times in the NT that you likewise doubt the veracity of? or is this the only one?

I doubt absolutely none of the texts you listed in that post. It seems the vast majority of the texts you provided fall into the following two categories:
1) Use of the word Mello
2) Passages about His kingdom coming in the first century
I think we can immediately dismiss the texts about the kingdom coming in the first century since I agree that the Kingdom did indeed come and is indeed here. However, I simply believe it will be consummated at His Second Coming. Unless you want to argue that there is no way for it to appear in a fuller way in the future, it may be fruitless to contest this point.
That leaves us with the texts that use mello.

Let's first acknowledge your burden of proof. If you are going to use mello to demonstrate that age to come has already happened, then you must show that mellow either must mean "about to" or at least that it almost always means "about to". If "about to" is just one of several reasonable translations, then you must provide evidence for why I shouldn't pick one of the other translations.

According yo A Pocket Lexicon to the Greek New testament:
μέλλω, (a) c. infin. I am about to, I intend; (b) absol., in present participle, coming, future

So clearly according to the dictionary mello can mean "about to", but it also can mean "going to" without any reference to nearness of time. There is no reason to say that it must mean "about to".
I fact, in practice, the ESV only translates mello as "about to" or any equivalent term to imply temporal nearness about 30% of the time. So, at least according to the ESV, "about to" is the minority translation. I fact, it seems that mello should be translated "about to" only when the context demands it. And even then, "going to" is still a valid translation. Clearly, this word can mean mutliple things so it cannot be used to sustain a case for preterism.

So in my estimation, this leaves us with around 20 passages, most of which are not at all convincing for a 70 AD return. If you would like me to respond to any of them, then feel free to bring them up.

Before I move on, I would like to point out a major elephant in the room. My original question was about why "this age" should be taken as the Jewish age, and "the age to come" should be taken as the Christian age. Even if you succeeded at proving that "this age" ended in the first century, that doesn't prove that the disciples or Jesus were thinking in this "Jewish age" vs "Christian age" landscape. Yes, you have gone to other texts to show that Jesus coming (and therefore, the end of the age) occurred in the first century. However, you have not actually exegeted the texts to show what the authors meant by these terms. In fact, you have not even interacted much with the texts that are explicitly about "this age" vs the "age to come".
Consider the following passage:

Luke 20:27,33-36: Now some of the Sadducees—who deny that there is a resurrection—came up and asked him, ... in the resurrection, the woman—whose wife will she be? For the seven had her as wife.” 34 And Jesus said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, 35 but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, 36 for they are not even able to die any longer, because they are like the angels and are sons of God, because they are sons of the resurrection.

Importantly, the Sadducees often did not outright deny the resurrection, however, they simply allegorized the passages in the Old Testament, much like preterists. The gospel writers summarize their lack of belief in a literal resurrection as unbelief in a resurrection at all. If you don't believe that the resurrection is a literal event in which we rise from the earth, then you don't believe in a resurrection at all. Jesus leaves no room for a metaphorical interpretation.
According to Jesus, in the age to come, those who are worthy to enter do not marry, nor are given in marriage. Given that people still get married, then we cannot be in the age to come. To make any of Jesus' statements into symbolism here is to fall into the very same thing that Jesus criticized the Sadducees for in the passage.

 

[Hammster]

In the sky.

Okay.

 

[Love First]

If you are referring to the GWT, that is 1000 years after the Second Coming.

Nope. The Great White Throne judgement is when Christ returns at his second coming on the last day. See: Matthew 25:31-46

 

[Timtofly]

Nope. The Great White Throne judgement is when Christ returns at his second coming on the last day. See: Matthew 25:31-46

That is the final harvest. The GWT is the judgment. Matthew is referring to living humans. The GWT are dead souls. Not the same thing. Angels take the souls out of physical bodies in Matthew 25. No angels at the GWT removing souls from bodies.

 

[Love First]

That is the final harvest. The GWT is the judgment. Matthew is referring to living humans. The GWT are dead souls. Not the same thing. Angels take the souls out of physical bodies in Matthew 25. No angels at the GWT removing souls from bodies.

Where do you get your theology from? There is nothing in early Church history that speaks of more than one final judgement. The creeds and the Church Fathers did not advocate more than one final judgement. Please show me in scripture proof of more than one final judgement. It’s clear from the wording of Matthew 25:31-46 that Yeshua is speaking about the second coming and final judgement.