Posted on 04/07/2005 8:31:12 AM PDT by TheTruthess
Doug Focht, Jr.
On the freeway, hundreds of cars are going in all directions without drivers; in the middle of a football game—zap!—suddenly, the quarterback disappears; the UN is in turmoil; millions of people have vanished from the earth with no trace, no warning!1 Thus Hal Lindsay, in his book, The Late, Great Planet Earth, describes an event called the rapture in which millions of people will be taken from earth and transported to heaven. Maybe you've heard talk of this and wonder what it's all about.
Although there are some variations within the premillenial theology of Christ's return, the current popular theory among many fundamental evangelicals regarding Christ's second coming goes something like this:
Before Christ's actual “visible” coming, He will remove His faithful from the earth. The faithful dead will also be raised to meet them in the air. This is the event which they call the rapture, the event covered in chapter 11 of Lindsay's book. A 7-year period of tribulation follows.
With the removal of the faithful, the world will be free to “do it's own thing.” Sin will abound. Some believe that thousands of Jews will be converted to Christ during this period and begin to evangelize the world—144,000 Jewish Billy Grahams, as Mr. Lindsay refers to them in his sequel, “There's a New World Coming.”
A world leader will emerge who will promise peace, and at first seem to deliver. After 3 ½ years, though, “all hell will break loose,” literally, with Satan having his way on the earth by way of the Anti-Christ now ruling the globe. This second 3 ½ - year period is called the Great Tribulation. Some refer to the entire 7-year period as the “tribulation.”
The armies of the earth will array themselves against the nation of Israel in the northern plain of Megiddo. This is known as the battle of Armegeddon. Most believe this will be a nuclear battle and that many cities of the earth will also be destroyed during this time.
At the end of this period, Christ will return to Israel, set His foot on the mount of Olives, and begin to force His rule on the earth. Satan will be bound for 1,000 years during the period of Christ's reign on the earth (Rev. 20:1–6). Those righteous people martyred during the Great Tribulation will be raised and His faithful will rule the earth with Him from Jerusalem in a new temple, presumably rebuilt sometime before or during the 7-year “tribulation” period.
After Christ's 1,000-year reign is over, Satan will be released from his prison and go forth to gather his forces for the final battle. Before this battle can get started, Christ will end it with a “bang.” The entire earth as we know will be destroyed by fire. God will create a new heaven and a new earth.
This popular view is known as premillenialism, because Christ's return precedes (hence, pre) the 1,000-year reign (a millenium=1,000 years). A few folks believe that the church ushers in a 1,000-year period of peace after which Christ returns to claim His kingdom already set up by the church. That position is called postmillenialism. The third position poses that the 1,000-year reign is not a literal, fixed period of time, nor is it on earth, but it is symbolic of Christ's “complete” reign from heaven. This is the amillennial position.
Premillenialism is a rather involved theology and it requires much reading and studying to understand. Its complexity on the one hand and the attractive appeal of its “signs and predictions” on the other draw many Bible-believers into it. The reason for bringing this up here is to demonstrate some basic principles of Bible interpretation. Those of our readers who may be new to or unfamiliar with Scripture, will doubtless ask the question: Where do these ideas come from?
You will notice that except for the passage cited in Rev. 20, I have not listed any of the passages that premillenialists use to support their theory. The reason for this is that they tend to interpret “visionary” Scriptures literally and “literal” Scriptures figuratively. To list all of their reasons would go beyond the scope of our short articles. But a few examples here and in our next article should suffice to demonstrate a common-sense approach to biblical interpretation.
Most of the premillenial theology is based upon the prophecies of Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah and most significantly, the book of Revelation. Most of the prophecies in these books are “visionary” and “apocalyptic” in nature. That is, they use symbols and visions to predict calamities inflicted by God against the unrighteous, while offering steadfast hope to the faithful that no matter how bad things get, God and His kingdom will be victorious. Visions include horses of different colors, multi-headed beasts with horns on their heads, bowls of wrath, trumpets, scorpions, animals that are part bull, part man, part eagle, part bear, and so forth. They all mean something, but what? How are they to be interpreted?
Most of Scripture, including prophecies, are not visionary at all, but are plainly and simply stated. When both a “plain-spoken” passage and a “visionary” passage deal with the same subject, common sense would dictate that the visionary passage be interpreted in the light of the “plain-spoken” passage. For example, when Jesus predicted the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem, He said, “The days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down” (Luke 21:6). A few verses later, He gave an indication of what to look for prior to that time when He said, “When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is at hand” (vs 20). As a matter of history, Jerusalem was indeed destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D., some 40 years after Jesus predicted it. In this same discourse as it is recorded in Matt. 24, Jesus also referred to a passage in the book of Daniel that has a bearing on His prediction. He referred to something Daniel called the “abomination of desolation.” Modern premillenialists interpret this passage in Daniel to apply to some world-ruler in the 20th or early 21st century. Some refer to him as the “Anti-Christ.” But if you take the time to compare Luke 21:20–21 with Matthew 24:15–16, you will see that the “abomination of desolation” spoken of in the book of Daniel is associated with the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem. Notice:
Matt. 24:15–16.
“When you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place…then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains…” etc.
Luke 21:20–21
“When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her destruction is at hand. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains…” etc.
Putting these two “plain-spoken” accounts together, we have a “concrete” interpretation from Jesus Himself of the “abomination of desolation” mentioned by the prophet Daniel. It was the destruction of the Jewish temple by the hated Roman Gentiles. Jesus says nothing of an “anti-Christ” or “world-ruler,” yet many ignore simple statements like this and prefer to interpret Daniel in a way that goes far beyond Jesus' own interpretation.
It stands to reason that people can be easily misled by using visionary prophecy as the basis for a theology. Yet the theology of premillenialism depends upon “reverse” interpretation; that is, the “plain-spoken” is interpreted in the light of the “visionary” rather than vice-versa.
Here is another example from Revelation 20, the “keystone” of premillenial theology. There is no question that a thousand-year reign is mentioned here, but is it a literal thousand years? Premillenialists will accuse a critter like me of not taking the Bible literally because I don't believe this to be a “literal” 1,000 years. Well, let's see now: In verses 1–2, does the angel bind Satan with a “literal” chain? Is Satan actually a dragon? Are “Gog and Magog” in verse 8 actual nations that will arise to be called by that “literal” name? If all these things are to be interpreted “figuratively” why should someone bristle if the thousand years are also “figurative?” Besides, we have biblical precedent for this in “plain-spoken” passages:
It is said in Deut. 7:9 that God “keeps His covenant and His lovingkindness to a thousandth generation with those who love Him…” Does this mean He quits in the 1001st generation?
Psalm 50:10 says “Every beast of the forest is Mine, the cattle on a thousand hills.” Does this mean that God owns only the cattle on 1,000 hills?
Here's something else: if Revelation 20 is to be taken literally then,
Only souls come alive and reign with Christ (vs 4). The text doesn't say dead people were raised, it says souls came to life.
Only those souls who had been martyred for Christ reign with Him, not all the faithful (vs 4), and if the point be pressed to its fullest, only those who had been beheaded reign with Him.
Besides these things, there is no specific verse that says this particular reign is upon the earth. So important is this “missing link” to the premillenial view that Hal Lindsay, in his book, “There's A New World Coming” actually inserts the words “on earth” in his quotation of Rev. 20:4. He quotes, “…and they lived and reigned on earth with Christ a thousand years.”2 The title page of Lindsay's book indicates he uses the Living Bible, but the words “on earth” are not in the copy of the Living Bible that I read, nor have I been able to find any English Bible that has them. More importantly, no ancient Greek text has these words added to them. I wonder if Mr. Lindsay has taken to heart the words of Revelation 22:18: “I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God shall add to him the plagues which are written in this book…”
It is not sufficient to point out deficiencies and inconsistencies in another's position without offering an alternative point of view. In our next article, we will look at the “non-visionary” Scriptures that deal with Christ's second coming and will see that if you interpret the “symbolic” passages using the “plain-spoken” passages, the theology of premillenialism will not stand. There will be no world-ruler; there will be no “7-year tribulation,” there will be no literal “battle of Armageddon” fought in the northern plains of Israel, and there will be no literal reign of Christ on the earth. For as we shall see in succeeding articles, Christ is a king now; he rules the earth now from His throne in heaven, and for those who may be wondering: His kingdom has already come and now is!
Lindsay, Hal. “The Late Great Planet Earth,” (paper back) Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan: 1970.
Lindsay, Hal. “There's a New World Coming: A Prophetic Odyssey,” Vision House Publishers (paper back). Santa Ana, CA:1973. The quote is from page 272
—From “Growing in Grace” Vol. 1 #15, October 26, 1996
Agree that vs 36 is reference to the 2nd coming. The "signs" in the earlier verses are referenced to the types of things happening during the tribulation. Notice He uses the birthpangs analogy. Birth pangs for a woman produce some level of pain and discomfort, but they are only a hint of the anguish to come. Birthpangs are used by Jesus to describe all these horrible things; war, famine, earthquakes, false christs. Then comes the real bad stuff, i.e., tribulation greater than ever before.
You are still claiming that there will be definite "signs" of things leading up to Christ's return. However, Christ clearly teaches that His return will catch people off guard, as in the days of Noah.
And why is that a problem? ... Birthpangs are a sign of an impending birth, you dont know the exactly time of the birth ... but you know its coming.
Just because there are signs prior to His second coming doesnt mean you can compute the "hour and the day" when he will actually return.
You cant stop at verse 39, you must continue on to verses 40 and 41.
The point of Jesus teaching there is not that everything that happened in the time of Noah, will happen during the 2nd coming ...
His point is that there is a coming judgment that will happen upon His second coming, not that the signs will be the same. When Christ comes again, He will separate the "wheat" from the "chaff." ... Verse 40 and 41 talks about one being taken away, and another left. Some Christians mistakenly teach this is a reference to the rapture. It is not. It is a reference to Christ taking away unbelievers into judgment at his second coming. ... Think about it for a minute. In Noahs day, who were those taken away by the flood? UNBELIEVERS. ... Just as in the days of Noah, unbelievers were swept away into judgment, so shall it be when Christ returns. One will be in the field, and one will be taken ... they will be taken away into judgment, and only believers will be left on Earth at the beginning of the millenium.
It's obvious you will twist whatever verse I point out to fit your beliefs. I don't have the time to point out all the differences in the two events. If you have the time, please read this article: http://www.christiancourier.com/archives/matthew24.htm
God Bless.
It was a well written article, I did have a chance to read it ... but the author makes 2 grave mistakes, the second being the more serious.
1. He assumes Hal Lindsey is a solid theologian to represent the premillenial view, which is why he chose Lindsey; so he could build his strawman from Lindseys arguments. Lindsey is a populist, and he sells books.
2. He completely ignores, and actually mis-interprets, the most damaging passage to his position. Verse 29-30.
He tries to claim that verse 29-30 shows that Jesus is orchastrating all these events (AD 70 events) from heaven. But the passage doesnt even come close to saying that, because what the passage literally says is crushing to his position.
What does it say ?
The sign of the Son of Man (Notices Jesus calls himself the Son of Man. Jesus is telling you HE is the Son of Man of Daniel 7!!!) will appear in the sky ...
And it will appear in such a way that all the tribes of the Earth shall mourn. Why? ... Because they all see the sign. And what is the sign? ... The Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
There is nothing symbolic about this passage, despite what he claims ... it is a clear, straightforward reading of the text. That is what the text says. The author of the article ignores this passage, or worse, spiritualizes it away because he HAS to ... it is devestating to his position.
This is the second coming ... and the second coming did not occur in 70 AD.
Are you prepared to say that the 2nd coming happened in 70 AD? If verses 29-30 are not the 2nd coming, then what was it? I dont recall any Jewish historian recording seeing the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with great power and glory. Sure sounds like a major world event when all the tribes of the earth see it and mourn.
Since you only mentioned verses 29-30 as where you differ with the author, are you saying that the idea that the entire chapter is about Christ's second coming hinges on those verses? You would have to, since the author very eloquently shoots down the other arguments you have stated.
Oh no, I disagree with his analysis almost totally. What I am saying is that he includes verses 29-30 in his "all this from 1-34 happened in 70 AD" interpretation. Im saying that 29-30 is the 2nd coming ... and the second coming did not happen in 70 AD ... so his analysis is fundamentally flawed in a critical point.
Here is a site for you. It is the Pre-Trib Research site and these are the scholars and authors that someone should be reading for theological views on pre-trib premillenial views, not Hal Lindsey.
In here you will find a very in-depth analysis of Matt 24 by Thomas Ice. It will take several hours to read the set of articles on Matt 24 since its in about 32 parts and in tremendous detail. He gives exegetical explanations of various positions and would especially point out the problems with differing views. It is well worth the read, though I admit I havent gone through all the articles.
www.pre-trib.org
In Him ...
Mark 15 (KJV)
15:2 And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering said unto him, Thou sayest it.
Mark 15 (ASV)
15:2 And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering saith unto him, Thou sayest.
Mark 15 (HCSB)
15:2 So Pilate asked Him, "Are You the King of the Jews?" He answered him, "You have said it."
15:2 And Pilate asked Him, "Art thou the King of the Jews?" And answering He said unto him, "Thou sayest it." (TMB)
15:2 Pilate asked him, "Are you the King of the Jews?" He answered him, "You say so." (NRSV)
15:2 And Pilate asked him: Art thou the king of the Jews? But he answering, saith to him: Thou sayest it. (Douay-Rheims)
15:2 Pilate questioned him, "Are you the king of the Jews?" Jesus answered, "So you say." (GNT)
15:2 And Pilate asked him, "Are you the King of the Jews?" And he answered him, "You have said so." (RSV)
15:2 Pilate asked him, "Are you the 'King of the Jews'?"
15:3 The high priests let loose a barrage of accusations.
15:4 Pilate asked again, "Aren't you going to answer anything? That's quite a list of accusations."
15:5 Still, he said nothing. Pilate was impressed, really impressed.
15:6 It was a custom at the Feast to release a prisoner, anyone the people asked for. (TM)
15:2 Pilate put this question to him: "Are you the King of the Jews?" He answered him, "The words are yours." (CJB)
15:2 Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the king of the Jews?" Jesus answered, "Those are your words." (NCV)
15:2 Pilate asked him, "Are you the King of the Yehudim?" He answered, "So you say." (HNV)
15:2 Pilate asked him, "Are you the King of the Jews?" He answered, "So you say." (WE)
15:2 And Pilate put a question to him, Are you the King of the Jews? And he, answering, said to him, You say so. (BBE)
15:2 and Pilate questioned him, `Art thou the king of the Jews?' and he answering said to him, `Thou dost say [it].' (YLT)
15:2And Pilate asked him, Art *thou* the King of the Jews? And he answered and said to him, *Thou* sayest.
15:2And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering, said to him, Thou sayest [it]. (WBT)
15:2et interrogavit eum Pilatus tu es rex Iudaeorum at ille respondens ait illi tu dicis (Latin Vulgate)
Which bible are you quoting from?
Not according to the New Testament.
I did some digging into this 'rapture' business, some time back and this is what I determined.
First I noticed some variances with the following verses, depending on which bible a person uses.
Luke 17 (KJV)
33 Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.
34 I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.
35 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
36 Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
37 And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.
The verse in question is 37. I did a search on the word eagles. Got this.
From the Greek
105 aetos ah-et-os'
1) an eagle: since eagles do not usually go in quest of carrion, this may apply to a vulture that resembles an eagle
2) an eagle as a standard (Roman Military)
Matthew 16
27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
Rewards aren't given prior, they are given after.
Psalm 37 (JPS)
9 For evil-doers shall be cut off; but those that wait for YHWH, they shall inherit the land.
20 For the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of YHWH shall be as the fat of lambs -- they shall pass away in smoke, they shall pass away.
22 For such as are blessed of Him shall inherit the land; and they that are cursed of Him shall be cut off.
23 It is of YHWH that a man's goings are established; and He delighted in his way.
24 Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down; for YHWH upholdeth his hand.
27 Depart from evil, and do good; and dwell for evermore.
28 For YHWH loveth justice, and forsaketh not His saints; they are preserved for ever; but the seed of the wicked shall be cut off.
29 The righteous shall inherit the land, and dwell therein for ever.
32 The wicked watcheth the righteous, and seeketh to slay him.
33 YHWH will not leave him in his hand, nor suffer him to be condemned when he is judged.
34 Wait for YHWH, and keep His way, and He will exalt thee to inherit the land; when the wicked are cut off, thou shalt see it.
38 But transgressors shall be destroyed together; the future of the wicked shall be cut off.
39 But the salvation of the righteous is of YHWH; He is their stronghold in the time of trouble.
40 And YHWH helpeth them, and delivereth them; He delivereth them from the wicked, and saveth them, because they have taken refuge in Him.
YHWH is the deliverer, and the saviour.
Isaiah 47:4 - Our Redeemer, YHWH of hosts is His name, The Holy One of Israel.
1 Thessalonians 4:17
Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
Alive and remain. This indicates that some are dead and gone already. (The wicked)
It might be that during this period of being caught up in the air, is when the new earth and heaven are created, but not to avoid the tribulation. jmho
You have done quite alot of work. Except you assume the pre-trib rapturist sees the rapture in the Olivet Discourse. The rapture is not taught in Matt 24, or the other instances of the Olivet Discourse that have been mentioned; though some pre-tribbers might think that it does ... your analysis shows that the text does not support it; and I would agree with you 100%. Not many pre-trib scholars would view the rapture in Matt 24.
These passages refer to the 2nd coming, when you are correct, unbelievers will be removed in judgment and only believers will remain to populate the earth at the beginning of the earthly reign. The 1000 years ends, Satan is released, The Great White Throne judgment ... then the kingdom continues with a new heaven and new earth thrown in there somewhere.
The cutting edge in pre-trib thinking is found in numerous articles on the site ...
www.pre-trib.org
There wasn't a 'yes' in the 18 bibles I quoted either. Is the NIV the only bible that has the word 'yes' in that verse?
Post the verses that support a pre trib rapture.
The yes is missing from the latin, is it also missing from the Greek? I'll have to see if I can check it out later.
That isn't what the major majority of the texts say, though. You are accepting an extremely minor interpretation. The greek text will help a lot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.