This hit me as I was listening to this Podcast from Chris White arguing agaisnt Imminence.
https://bibleprophecytalk.com/a-hopefully-more-clear-refutation-of-an-imminent-rapture/
I'm listening to how baffled he is at the way a verse just being about The Parusia at all is enough to make Pre-Tribbers label it a proof text for Imminence, when in fact there are passages that that refer to certain things clearly happening first.
I'm ironically sympathetic because Endless Torment is defended the same way. When some traditional Christian just lists verses that "prove" the doctrine in a context where they won't be challenged on them. What they give are mostly a list of verses showing that God will judge sinners, a couple where it might be necessary to argue what a certain Greek word means, but most of them don't even include that word.
There are Bible verses that show God's Punishments/Chastisements are for Correction, from Habakkuk 1:12 to Job 37:13 to Proverbs 3:11. Jesus affirms in Matthew 5, Luke 12 and Matthew 18 that the punishment is till the price is paid. Deuteronomy 29-30 to Hosea to Ezekiel 16 all show that God's judgments on Israel are to bring her to repentance and that even Sodom will be restored. Malachi 3 says the fire of God is for purging and purification and promises the children of Jacob they will not be consumed.
To them that proof texting is what's inappropriately picking and choosing in ignorance of the grander context. And again like how Pre-Tribbers approach their Imminence passages feeling like anything less then their most extreme interpretation is tantamount to rejecting the passage entirely. And both groups apply the same tactic to how they struggle to claim as much support as they can from the Pre-Nicene fathers
Endless Torment is only more respectable then Pre-Trib because it's been around longer. But Pre-Trib won't go away and so if the Age of Grace lasts long enough we'll reach a point where Pre-Trib has more antiquity then Endless Torment has now. Endless Torment was not unambiguously taught by anyone not later condemned as a heretic before Augustine of Hippo who couldn't read Greek at all.
Chris White's Pre-Wrath view does believe in a very similar kind of Imminence, just that it doesn't become Imminent till after the Abomination of Desolation. I believe it's Imminent after that but not in a "nothing specific happens first" sense but in a it happens immediately sense, 10 days at the absolute most and that is being generous. The Pre-Wrath position is functionally the same as Partial Preterism and Historicism, they just think we are already in that point on the timeline between what must happen first and the Rapture.
Showing posts with label Imminence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Imminence. Show all posts
Saturday, April 25, 2020
Friday, April 17, 2020
Victorious Eschatology
My past posts on preterism have typically had Full Preterism in mind. Patrial Preterism I assume comes in a variety of forms, in theory so could Full Preterism. I had been struggling to even find information on Partial Preterism even though one Futurist website I visited said most preterists are partial preterists.
Then I heard about the book Victorious Eschatology and found some YouTube videos from one of it's authors. This form of Partial Preterism is, as I expected, basically Post Millennialism in terms of Revelation, but with an odd detail I'll get to later.
On Matthew 24, verse 34 is his cut off point, by 70 AD the first 34 verses are fulfilled and what's after is yet future. This is a nonsensical cut off point, it is obvious to any unbiased observer that what follows this verse is about the same thing that proceeded it. In fact after verse 34 it's mostly poetic idioms and parables.
When talking about "this generation shall not pass" he mentioned some futurists argue "generation" means "race" or "tribe". I kind of assumed that was a straw man especially as he refuted it with how this Greek word is never used that way. I've generally gone with how the Greek Grammar of "this" is clearly meant to be understood in the context of those who see the signs he just talked about. But then I noticed how the Aramaic Peshita says Sharbtha, a word that absolutely means tribe or family and only very rarely means "generation". I am possibly going to make a post on my other blog where I'll argue for Peshita Primacy for Matthew. But what Jesus was actually speaking was certainly a Semitic language not Greek. Now the ecclesialogical implications of what "tribe" is meant I don't wanna get into here, but either way it hasn't passed away yet.
Back on topic. Preterists and Futurists both like to talk about the "three fold question" of Matthew 24:3. Thing is the grammatical structure of that verse is clearly presenting it as only two questions, so yes the Disciples may have had what Jesus recently said about The Temple in their mind when they said "Tell us when these things will be", but when they said "and what is the sign of Your coming, and the end of the age", the Parusia and the end of the age are clearly the same thing, the expression is one sign or set of signs that herald both. The Parusia is by definition the end of the Age of Grace. The Age of the Law had already ended with John The Baptist.
So if you're going to hinge your "partial" Preterism on saying two of these happen at the same time but the other is separated, those two are the inseparable ones.
Now what I think in regards to Matthew's Olvite Discourse is that the Disciples were assuming all of this will happen at the same time when they asked this question, or at least hoping they will. The "beginning of sorrows" comment is not in Luke 21's discourse (which wasn't on the mount of olives) even though it describes the circumstances associated with that term.
So the Beginnings of Sorrows are events that can be associated with 66-73 AD (though not unique to then), but Jesus is saying that when that happens the end is not yet. Matthew 24 talks about persecutions that are not Jewish in origin and clearly says not till The Gospel is proclaimed to the whole world. This author abuses verses from Romans and Colossians to say Paul was saying the Gospel had reached the entire world, Paul's intent in each of those (however flawed the translation) is about this being a process he is a part of.
They have a tendency to act like Futurists don't think 70 AD was predicted at all. I indeed see 70 AD in more Prophecies then most Futurists do, Luke in particular records multiple prophecies Jesus made on that destruction.
Now we get to the clincher, which is the real divergence from Full Preterism. He says Matthew 24 isn't about the Second Coming, as in it isn't the same thing as the Parusia of 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4. This is the Pre-Tribulationist argument all over again. Everything Paul says about eschatology in the Thessalonian Epistles is his commentary on the Olivite Discourse, Matthew's Gospel was the first written down and I believe it and Mark's were both written down before the events of Acts 13.
When Paul is talking about Him Coming in the Clouds and Gathering His people after a heavenly Trumpet sounds, he is referring back to this teaching of Jesus that every Christian knew about whether it was written down already or not. Matthew 24 seemingly doesn't explicitly refer to the Resurrection of the dead, but Jesus is basically quoting Old Testament passages about the in-gathering of the Tribes of Israel and Ezekiel 37 already told us to associate that with the Bodily Resurrection of dead Israelites, and Isaiah 26 told us to associate The Resurrection with The Rapture.
I then watched another Partial Preterist talk about Revelation 20. He says that John didn't mention The Rapture, but if he did it would have to happen before fire comes down from Heaven. He believes we're currently between verses 6 and 7 and that what first starts happening in verse 7 is mostly spiritual realm stuff not noticeable on Earth. This makes them functionally the same as the Pre-Trib Imminence Doctrine, no prophesied events between now and The Rapture.
A Post Millennial Rapture is just as incompatible with that nonsense as a Pre Millennial one. If it's in Revelation 20 but Post-Mil then it obviously happens at the Bodily Resurrection of The Dead. I made a post before about how Full Preterists are like Pre-Trib in terms of it being a Secret Rapture. But this Patrial Preterism is what's truly teaching literally the same idea in terms of what The Church should expect to happen next.
Now back to the Author of Victorious Eschatology, the title of the book reflects how he really wants to promote this as an Optimistic view. Yes all Christians think Jesus wins in the end but since he isn't predicting things to get worse before Jesus comes back he's telling believers to stop being so fearful. He seems to not know Pre-Trib exists and that most American Futurists are Pre-Trib.
I don't want Christians to live in constant fear, but Jesus warns us to be prepared for tribulation, we still live a fallen world and sometimes things will go bad whether it's a specific fulfillment of Bible Prophecy or not. What I as a Mid-Tirbber think must happen before the Parousia/Rapture may not from a secular material point of view need to even be that much worse then right now, the point is something very specific has to happen first. Great Tribulation as a technical term I view as referring to what's been going on since Stephen was stoned, most of the Body of Christ is living in countries where they are not the mainstream majority religion. And the "Falling away" is arguably similarly already covered.
The "Antichrist" will become the worst tyrant ever, but the phase of his career that precedes the Abomination will I think possibly be beneficial to "The Church" from terrestrial eyes. And what happens in Revelation 9 believers are promised protection from.
I'm promising neither the worst or the best in terms of what will happen between now and the Parousia, my advice is to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
Believe it or not I try not to get into my Soterology too much on this blog, I want what I talk about here to be potentially appealing to people who will never agree with it. I mentioned it perhaps unnecessarily in "why was Jesus rejected" and on one Facebook group that indeed became a distraction from the post's main point.
But if the Optimism of your view is the selling point, and you're repeatedly criticizing Futurism as inherently Pessimistic. Then with me you don't have a leg to stand on if in your view Death and Hades win even one single soul.
Then I heard about the book Victorious Eschatology and found some YouTube videos from one of it's authors. This form of Partial Preterism is, as I expected, basically Post Millennialism in terms of Revelation, but with an odd detail I'll get to later.
On Matthew 24, verse 34 is his cut off point, by 70 AD the first 34 verses are fulfilled and what's after is yet future. This is a nonsensical cut off point, it is obvious to any unbiased observer that what follows this verse is about the same thing that proceeded it. In fact after verse 34 it's mostly poetic idioms and parables.
When talking about "this generation shall not pass" he mentioned some futurists argue "generation" means "race" or "tribe". I kind of assumed that was a straw man especially as he refuted it with how this Greek word is never used that way. I've generally gone with how the Greek Grammar of "this" is clearly meant to be understood in the context of those who see the signs he just talked about. But then I noticed how the Aramaic Peshita says Sharbtha, a word that absolutely means tribe or family and only very rarely means "generation". I am possibly going to make a post on my other blog where I'll argue for Peshita Primacy for Matthew. But what Jesus was actually speaking was certainly a Semitic language not Greek. Now the ecclesialogical implications of what "tribe" is meant I don't wanna get into here, but either way it hasn't passed away yet.
Back on topic. Preterists and Futurists both like to talk about the "three fold question" of Matthew 24:3. Thing is the grammatical structure of that verse is clearly presenting it as only two questions, so yes the Disciples may have had what Jesus recently said about The Temple in their mind when they said "Tell us when these things will be", but when they said "and what is the sign of Your coming, and the end of the age", the Parusia and the end of the age are clearly the same thing, the expression is one sign or set of signs that herald both. The Parusia is by definition the end of the Age of Grace. The Age of the Law had already ended with John The Baptist.
So if you're going to hinge your "partial" Preterism on saying two of these happen at the same time but the other is separated, those two are the inseparable ones.
Now what I think in regards to Matthew's Olvite Discourse is that the Disciples were assuming all of this will happen at the same time when they asked this question, or at least hoping they will. The "beginning of sorrows" comment is not in Luke 21's discourse (which wasn't on the mount of olives) even though it describes the circumstances associated with that term.
So the Beginnings of Sorrows are events that can be associated with 66-73 AD (though not unique to then), but Jesus is saying that when that happens the end is not yet. Matthew 24 talks about persecutions that are not Jewish in origin and clearly says not till The Gospel is proclaimed to the whole world. This author abuses verses from Romans and Colossians to say Paul was saying the Gospel had reached the entire world, Paul's intent in each of those (however flawed the translation) is about this being a process he is a part of.
They have a tendency to act like Futurists don't think 70 AD was predicted at all. I indeed see 70 AD in more Prophecies then most Futurists do, Luke in particular records multiple prophecies Jesus made on that destruction.
Now we get to the clincher, which is the real divergence from Full Preterism. He says Matthew 24 isn't about the Second Coming, as in it isn't the same thing as the Parusia of 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4. This is the Pre-Tribulationist argument all over again. Everything Paul says about eschatology in the Thessalonian Epistles is his commentary on the Olivite Discourse, Matthew's Gospel was the first written down and I believe it and Mark's were both written down before the events of Acts 13.
When Paul is talking about Him Coming in the Clouds and Gathering His people after a heavenly Trumpet sounds, he is referring back to this teaching of Jesus that every Christian knew about whether it was written down already or not. Matthew 24 seemingly doesn't explicitly refer to the Resurrection of the dead, but Jesus is basically quoting Old Testament passages about the in-gathering of the Tribes of Israel and Ezekiel 37 already told us to associate that with the Bodily Resurrection of dead Israelites, and Isaiah 26 told us to associate The Resurrection with The Rapture.
I then watched another Partial Preterist talk about Revelation 20. He says that John didn't mention The Rapture, but if he did it would have to happen before fire comes down from Heaven. He believes we're currently between verses 6 and 7 and that what first starts happening in verse 7 is mostly spiritual realm stuff not noticeable on Earth. This makes them functionally the same as the Pre-Trib Imminence Doctrine, no prophesied events between now and The Rapture.
A Post Millennial Rapture is just as incompatible with that nonsense as a Pre Millennial one. If it's in Revelation 20 but Post-Mil then it obviously happens at the Bodily Resurrection of The Dead. I made a post before about how Full Preterists are like Pre-Trib in terms of it being a Secret Rapture. But this Patrial Preterism is what's truly teaching literally the same idea in terms of what The Church should expect to happen next.
Now back to the Author of Victorious Eschatology, the title of the book reflects how he really wants to promote this as an Optimistic view. Yes all Christians think Jesus wins in the end but since he isn't predicting things to get worse before Jesus comes back he's telling believers to stop being so fearful. He seems to not know Pre-Trib exists and that most American Futurists are Pre-Trib.
I don't want Christians to live in constant fear, but Jesus warns us to be prepared for tribulation, we still live a fallen world and sometimes things will go bad whether it's a specific fulfillment of Bible Prophecy or not. What I as a Mid-Tirbber think must happen before the Parousia/Rapture may not from a secular material point of view need to even be that much worse then right now, the point is something very specific has to happen first. Great Tribulation as a technical term I view as referring to what's been going on since Stephen was stoned, most of the Body of Christ is living in countries where they are not the mainstream majority religion. And the "Falling away" is arguably similarly already covered.
The "Antichrist" will become the worst tyrant ever, but the phase of his career that precedes the Abomination will I think possibly be beneficial to "The Church" from terrestrial eyes. And what happens in Revelation 9 believers are promised protection from.
I'm promising neither the worst or the best in terms of what will happen between now and the Parousia, my advice is to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
Believe it or not I try not to get into my Soterology too much on this blog, I want what I talk about here to be potentially appealing to people who will never agree with it. I mentioned it perhaps unnecessarily in "why was Jesus rejected" and on one Facebook group that indeed became a distraction from the post's main point.
But if the Optimism of your view is the selling point, and you're repeatedly criticizing Futurism as inherently Pessimistic. Then with me you don't have a leg to stand on if in your view Death and Hades win even one single soul.
Tuesday, November 26, 2019
The Timing of The Rapture is not The Point of the Olivte discourse Parables
In Matthew 24's Olivite Discourse Verse 31 is the end of the straight forwards description of future events Then verse 32 onto the end of chapter 25 is a series of figures of speech and parables, some have parallels in the others Gospels but most do not.
Pre-Tribbers and Post-Tribers and Pre-Wrathers all talk about MOST of these parables as if the timing of the Rapture is their point, and both sides of the "Imminence" debate will try to argue these parables support their position.
I don't believe the timing of the Rapture is the point. I do believe they are about the Parusia in a sense, but whether the people involved were or should be expecting prior events or not isn't the point.
I should remind everyone that building doctrine on Parables is always sketchy.
Here is the thing, I'm Anti Pre-Trib, early in this blog's history I made a trilogy of posts debunking Imminence (both Pre-Trib and Pre-Wrath versions of it). But if the timing of the Rapture was the point of these parables I'd have to agree they support Pre-Trib more. I know Chris White keeps saying "what's the point of watching if there is nothing to watch for" but Pre-Tribbers view it as you're not watching for the return if you're instead watching for prior events.
In these parables the narratives in question have no prior events, the Bridegroom or Thief or whoever just shows up. If the point is about timing then the point is the bad servants and foolish virgins seemed to think they had more time then they actually did.
And these are warnings given specifically to believers, most appear only in Matthew who's version was a speech given ONLY to the 12. So the common Post-Trib and Pre-Wrath explanation that it's the World who it comes on like a Thief doesn't hold up in this context, maybe when 1 Thessalonians 5 uses that idiom but not here.
The problem with applying the Pre-Trib interpretations of the Parrables to the actual Doctrine of the Rapture is that they imply you won't be Raptured if you weren't properly watching for it. And that's not how the Rapture will actually work. when it's directly described all believers regardless of what they are doing get Raptured.
I said most up above, but you see the Sheeps and Goats parable that ends chapter 25 is treated differently, no one thinks that one's point is the timing of The Rapture, it's usually viewed as either a Post-Armageddon judgment Revelation doesn't mention or as the White Throne Judgment. But the opening of the parable is just as explicitly about the coming of the Son of Man as all the others, so separating it so it's about something different isn't justified. Revelation 11 refers to a Judgment of the Saints after the Seventh Trumpet.
The moral point of the Sheeps and Goats Judgment is that we should act as if Jesus is already here regardless. And I think the other parables are the same.
I think the best modern expositor on the Parables is Peter Hiett, even though I don't agree with his basic views on Revelation and Genesis.
Pre-Tribbers and Post-Tribers and Pre-Wrathers all talk about MOST of these parables as if the timing of the Rapture is their point, and both sides of the "Imminence" debate will try to argue these parables support their position.
I don't believe the timing of the Rapture is the point. I do believe they are about the Parusia in a sense, but whether the people involved were or should be expecting prior events or not isn't the point.
I should remind everyone that building doctrine on Parables is always sketchy.
Here is the thing, I'm Anti Pre-Trib, early in this blog's history I made a trilogy of posts debunking Imminence (both Pre-Trib and Pre-Wrath versions of it). But if the timing of the Rapture was the point of these parables I'd have to agree they support Pre-Trib more. I know Chris White keeps saying "what's the point of watching if there is nothing to watch for" but Pre-Tribbers view it as you're not watching for the return if you're instead watching for prior events.
In these parables the narratives in question have no prior events, the Bridegroom or Thief or whoever just shows up. If the point is about timing then the point is the bad servants and foolish virgins seemed to think they had more time then they actually did.
And these are warnings given specifically to believers, most appear only in Matthew who's version was a speech given ONLY to the 12. So the common Post-Trib and Pre-Wrath explanation that it's the World who it comes on like a Thief doesn't hold up in this context, maybe when 1 Thessalonians 5 uses that idiom but not here.
The problem with applying the Pre-Trib interpretations of the Parrables to the actual Doctrine of the Rapture is that they imply you won't be Raptured if you weren't properly watching for it. And that's not how the Rapture will actually work. when it's directly described all believers regardless of what they are doing get Raptured.
I said most up above, but you see the Sheeps and Goats parable that ends chapter 25 is treated differently, no one thinks that one's point is the timing of The Rapture, it's usually viewed as either a Post-Armageddon judgment Revelation doesn't mention or as the White Throne Judgment. But the opening of the parable is just as explicitly about the coming of the Son of Man as all the others, so separating it so it's about something different isn't justified. Revelation 11 refers to a Judgment of the Saints after the Seventh Trumpet.
The moral point of the Sheeps and Goats Judgment is that we should act as if Jesus is already here regardless. And I think the other parables are the same.
I think the best modern expositor on the Parables is Peter Hiett, even though I don't agree with his basic views on Revelation and Genesis.
Sunday, August 10, 2014
But of that day and hour knoweth no man
"But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only."Matthew 24:36 (Also Mark 13:32).
Of all the verses on supposed Imminence that Pre-Tribbers obsess over. This is the only one that is really specific about anything. And if you think Matthew and Mark are just separate recordings of the same speech you don't even truly have a second witness.
Pre-Wrathers also often fixate on opposing date setting, they don't believe the Rapture exact timing can be known, just that it's somewhere during the second half of the 70th Week.
The incredibly interesting detail that even "The Son" (Jesus himself as He's speaking) doesn't know the exact timing, is compelling considering He is also God. And Pre-Wrathers also make a point out of this. To some of them at least Mid-Trib is date setting, but they're not, it could be almost anywhere in the Second Half of the 70th Week to them.
Pre-Tribbers say this leaves only Pre-Trib possible because once in the 70th week you can time everything to some extent (most of them don't know how Pre-Wrath actually works). And the Revelation 19 return is when the 70th Week ends. Back when I was Post-Trib I retorted that what ends the 70th Week exactly is The Beast's defeat/Armageddon, and that the Revelation 19 return could very well be an unspecified time before, where he is reunited with Israel in their Hiding place. (I was a very rare Post-Tribber who didn't believe in Replacement Theology.) Where they look upon his wounds and mourn for him. Now, as you know if you saw the title of this blog, I'm Mid-Seventieth Week.
The irony is, it was a Pre-Tirbber, Chuck Missler, who made known to me the insight I'm about to share with you. But he refuses to see the full significance of it.
Revelation 1:1
"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:"I'm going to suggest to you. That Matthew 24:36 and Mark 13:32 are only describing a temporary condition. Jesus was God made Flesh, but still in a Human form, and not yet Resurrected.
But once He was back in Heaven, and seated at the Right Hand of The Father. The Father revealed to Him what he didn't know at that time. And then He revealed it to us via John.
Since the only thing ever defined in Scripture as something The Son didn't know is the Day and Hour of his Return. Revelation must make the Day and Hour or at least the Day knowable or else it failed at fulfilling it's opening verse.
There is another objection some have made to how Matthew 24:36 is used, they say the context of verse 35 tells us what Jesus is referring to is when "Heaven and Earth pass away" which would be the after the Millennium, not The Rapture/Second Coming. But the grander context of the chapter, especially given what he talks about next makes that unlikely, the question the promoted the discourse was the time of his Coming and the end of this age, not a future age.
The verses on people being unprepared are about warning us to be prepared, you don't want to be among the unprepared. And that the World will certainly be unprepared because they reject that it'll happen at all.
So you can't say that we still can't know the timing pretty closely. But I certainly agree that date setting is a mostly futile enterprise until we are actually in the 70th Week. Even then I only know for certain I can calculate the day of the Two Witnesses' Resurrection and Rapture. I'm still not 100% certain the Rapture of The Church is simultaneous with that. But I certainly view there as being a highly probable link.
For the First Advent of Christ, the exact timing of the Triumphal Entry could be known from Daniel 9. And Scripture, rather then implying it was safer not to try "date setting" because of how embarrassing it might me to be proven wrong, Jesus explicitly condemned the Jews of his Day for not knowing "the Time of thy Visitation" in Luke 19:41-44.
So it doesn't matter how many "date setters" are proven wrong, I think when it's said and done someone will have predicted the correct date. I don't expect it to be me, but I'm certainly investigating.
I could also point out what many others have that "No man knoweth the hour" is an expression that every First Century Jew would have known to link with New Moons, but especially the New Moon of Tishri. That backs up in a sense my view, because I believe the 7th Trumpet/Revelation 12 have many clues further pointing to the beginning of Tishri.
The Sensationalist Date Setters like mark Blitz and his Blood Moon theory, or that Rapture would happen in May 2011 guy are clearly a major problem. But my point here is, at a certain point, the Date will be knowable. If it's not possible to deduce it now, it will be once we've clearly entered the 70th Week.
Correction on some of what I said above, I believe the Last Trump is the 7th Trumpet and will sound the at the halfway point of the 70th Week.
The Reason why I'm so upset at the people who get over reactionary to any date setting, condemning them as heretics based on this one statement of Jesus. Is that they need to remember Ezekiel 33.
If someone honestly believes they have good reason to suspect a certain date, they have an obligation to inform others of that.
Saturday, August 9, 2014
Knowledge shall be increased
Daniel 12:4 "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of
the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."
The "knowledge shall be increased" is often taken out of context to just be about the increase in Scientific Knowledge we see in the modern world. But Chuck Missler likes to point out the context here is clearly about Knowledge of God's Word. Indeed it should not surprise us that these two things go together.
The thing I want to say here is, that this is reason against refuting any new Biblical interpretation or insight purely on the grounds that it's brand new. Especially not when it comes to Prophecy.
So that's why I don't care that clearly the Post-Trib understanding of how 1 Thessalonians 4 and Matthew 24 relates to Revelation 19 was the one clearly taught by the Early Church fathers and all Christian teachers before the Reformation. Regardless of what Pre-Tribbers try to take from their misuse of the quotes on "Imminence".
I think lots of important new insights in Bible Prophecy are potentially being made. Like Jeremiah 49 and the Hidden Prophecies in The Psalms.
Until fairly recently access to the word was limited, even before the Catholic Church outright made lay people reading the word for themselves a crime, it was uncommon to be literate. And the fact that having Chapter and Verse divisions didn't even exist till very recently made studying the word a lot more difficult for most generations.
Now we can use computers to do key word or phrase searches, and checking the Greek and Hebrew is easier then ever. Some people hate the ramifications of studying Scripture in that way, like Alan Kurshner. And we should be careful, but the fact is things like that are exactly what Daniel 12:4 was about.
The "knowledge shall be increased" is often taken out of context to just be about the increase in Scientific Knowledge we see in the modern world. But Chuck Missler likes to point out the context here is clearly about Knowledge of God's Word. Indeed it should not surprise us that these two things go together.
The thing I want to say here is, that this is reason against refuting any new Biblical interpretation or insight purely on the grounds that it's brand new. Especially not when it comes to Prophecy.
So that's why I don't care that clearly the Post-Trib understanding of how 1 Thessalonians 4 and Matthew 24 relates to Revelation 19 was the one clearly taught by the Early Church fathers and all Christian teachers before the Reformation. Regardless of what Pre-Tribbers try to take from their misuse of the quotes on "Imminence".
I think lots of important new insights in Bible Prophecy are potentially being made. Like Jeremiah 49 and the Hidden Prophecies in The Psalms.
Until fairly recently access to the word was limited, even before the Catholic Church outright made lay people reading the word for themselves a crime, it was uncommon to be literate. And the fact that having Chapter and Verse divisions didn't even exist till very recently made studying the word a lot more difficult for most generations.
Now we can use computers to do key word or phrase searches, and checking the Greek and Hebrew is easier then ever. Some people hate the ramifications of studying Scripture in that way, like Alan Kurshner. And we should be careful, but the fact is things like that are exactly what Daniel 12:4 was about.
Saturday, July 26, 2014
More refuteing of Pre-Tribulational Imminence
I dealt with the main reasons I'm not Pre-Trib.
I want to address some other Pre-Trib arguments here. Mostly I felt
like making this in response to some arguments from Dave Hunt in a radio
debate I saw him have with a "Pre-Wrath" supporter (who sounded more
like he was Post-Trib). When I wrote the first draft of this I didn't
know Dave Hunt had passed away. So I apologize if this sounds harsh at
all, he is a man I respect.
Like a lot of Pre-Tirbbers he obsesses over the Parables in Matthew 24 and 25. Insisting they demonstrate it's not just the World but the Church caught off guard. Problem is you have to be careful building doctrine on parables. And I can't help but think the simple fact of both Pre-Trib and Pre-Wrath being proven wrong not very long into the 70th week may cause a lot of believers who've always taken the Mid-Trib view the least seriously to just accept the Post-Trib arguments, which sadly could lend themselves to becoming enemies of Israel, since Post-Trib is virtually inseparable from Replacement Theology.
But I actually don't think the point of those parables is technically an issue of the Rapture's timing at all. They're about attitudes. Attitudes that even Pre-Tribbers can take, I know most don't but they can, if they engage in date setting, or just see that the Temple Reconstruction hasn't even started yet as assuring them they have time. What I'd say to any Mid-Trib, Post-Trib or Pre-Wrath believers temped to use their beliefs about the timing of The Rapture as an excuse to take such an attitude. Is that you could Die at any moment, and will be with Jesus then.
Like a Thief in The Night
Pre-Tribbers obsess over this phrase. Those who aren't Pre-Trib insist it's the World taken by surprise. Pre-Tribbers respond with "Jesus wasn't talking to the world" then reference back to those Parables again.
The point isn't who he was talking to but what he was talking about.
I Thessalonians 5 is one of the places that uses this phrase of the Second Coming, and a favorite one. They kind of ignore it's usage in Revelation 16:15 where it's said as the Bowls of God's wrath are being poured out. Which Post-Tirbbers think helps them, but the KJV uses Present tense in Revelation 16:15, he is already Coming.
But back to I Thessalonians 5.
Like a lot of Pre-Tirbbers he obsesses over the Parables in Matthew 24 and 25. Insisting they demonstrate it's not just the World but the Church caught off guard. Problem is you have to be careful building doctrine on parables. And I can't help but think the simple fact of both Pre-Trib and Pre-Wrath being proven wrong not very long into the 70th week may cause a lot of believers who've always taken the Mid-Trib view the least seriously to just accept the Post-Trib arguments, which sadly could lend themselves to becoming enemies of Israel, since Post-Trib is virtually inseparable from Replacement Theology.
But I actually don't think the point of those parables is technically an issue of the Rapture's timing at all. They're about attitudes. Attitudes that even Pre-Tribbers can take, I know most don't but they can, if they engage in date setting, or just see that the Temple Reconstruction hasn't even started yet as assuring them they have time. What I'd say to any Mid-Trib, Post-Trib or Pre-Wrath believers temped to use their beliefs about the timing of The Rapture as an excuse to take such an attitude. Is that you could Die at any moment, and will be with Jesus then.
Like a Thief in The Night
Pre-Tribbers obsess over this phrase. Those who aren't Pre-Trib insist it's the World taken by surprise. Pre-Tribbers respond with "Jesus wasn't talking to the world" then reference back to those Parables again.
The point isn't who he was talking to but what he was talking about.
I Thessalonians 5 is one of the places that uses this phrase of the Second Coming, and a favorite one. They kind of ignore it's usage in Revelation 16:15 where it's said as the Bowls of God's wrath are being poured out. Which Post-Tirbbers think helps them, but the KJV uses Present tense in Revelation 16:15, he is already Coming.
But back to I Thessalonians 5.
But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.
Verse
4 clearly says WE are not to be taken as a Thief. But Hunt just writes
this off when it's pointed out to him and references other passages I
already addressed rather then letting Paul elaborate on what he said.
Let's talk about the origin of this Phrase. because while the New Testament uses it in various places, it is in fact secular in origin. It was coined in reference to how Cyrus sneakily captured Sardis. Jesus reminds us of it's origin by using it in his message to the Sardis Church in Revelation 3:3.
However not everyone in Sardis was taken by Surprise, the spies and collaborators he no doubt had in the city that helped him uncover this vulnerability were not surprised. Which is why I think Jesus may want us to be thinking of Joshua and the Siege of Jericho, and the two spies who got Rachab saved. We as part of The Church are citizens of God's Kingdom but are dwelling in Satan's. We're his spies, as are The Two Witnesses. And Rachab could be viewed as a type of he Church.
What about the idiom of as a Woman who travails? Does she have no warning signs? No, she has a pretty good estimate of when to expect her child to be born. If she's taken by surprise at all it's because of there being so many false alarms.
"For when they shall say, Peace and safety" is a specific phrase Dave Hunt loves to dwell on.
First thing is, I don't see how that could accurately describe Christ's return if he returns today? The world isn't remotely saying that now. But his fixation is an assumption that this phrase can't work if any of the Seal or Trumpet Judgments are already going on. (He'd also include the Bowls, but I don't disagree that those are post Rapture).
I believe this refers to after the Abomination of Desolation. When the Antichrist is trying to convince the world he's ushered in a new Golden Age of peace and tranquility, a Pax Romana. if he's using a false Judeo-Christian religious premise then he'll probably be saying the Millennium/Messianic era has begun and convince people somehow that the first half of the 70th week was really the last. Post Post-Tribbers and Pre-Wrathers garble the chronology of Revelation in ways that would lend help to that.
But perhaps he won't be claiming anything Biblical, perhaps he'll be saying it's the "Age of Aquarius" or some other BS.
Point is either way every eschabological tradition agrees that things get worse before they get better. As Harvey Dent said "The Night is darkest just before the Dawn". And Lucifer is the Dawn bringer according to Albert Pike.
Now, allow me to explain my view. I'm Mid-Trib, though probably not your standard form of it, I prefer the label Mid-Seventieth Week. I've never even read or listened to a Mid-Trib teacher. I've come to this conclusion listening to Pre-Trib, Post-Trib and Pre-Wrath people and taking note of both what I find right and what I find wrong in their teachings while studying The Word for myself with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
I believe all 7 Seals and the first 6 Trumpets all happen before the Abomination of Desolation. So I agree that the people being martyred for not taking he mark are not part of The Church. I also believe Joel 2:1-14 is the Sixth Trumpet and Joel 2:15 the Seventh Trumpet.
I believe the Ministry of the Two Witnesses is the first half of the 70th Week, because Malachi said Elijah would return BEFORE the Great and terrible Day of The LORD. During which time they will smite the Earth with plagues and withhold rainfall, and turn water to blood, and call fire down form heaven.
I believe The Beast kills the Two Witnesses the same day he does the Abomination of Desolation and causes the Sacrifice and Oblation to cease. Probably soon after.
They then lie in the streets of Jerusalem for Three and a Half days. During which time the people of the Earth celebrate their death.
Let's talk about the origin of this Phrase. because while the New Testament uses it in various places, it is in fact secular in origin. It was coined in reference to how Cyrus sneakily captured Sardis. Jesus reminds us of it's origin by using it in his message to the Sardis Church in Revelation 3:3.
However not everyone in Sardis was taken by Surprise, the spies and collaborators he no doubt had in the city that helped him uncover this vulnerability were not surprised. Which is why I think Jesus may want us to be thinking of Joshua and the Siege of Jericho, and the two spies who got Rachab saved. We as part of The Church are citizens of God's Kingdom but are dwelling in Satan's. We're his spies, as are The Two Witnesses. And Rachab could be viewed as a type of he Church.
What about the idiom of as a Woman who travails? Does she have no warning signs? No, she has a pretty good estimate of when to expect her child to be born. If she's taken by surprise at all it's because of there being so many false alarms.
"For when they shall say, Peace and safety" is a specific phrase Dave Hunt loves to dwell on.
First thing is, I don't see how that could accurately describe Christ's return if he returns today? The world isn't remotely saying that now. But his fixation is an assumption that this phrase can't work if any of the Seal or Trumpet Judgments are already going on. (He'd also include the Bowls, but I don't disagree that those are post Rapture).
I believe this refers to after the Abomination of Desolation. When the Antichrist is trying to convince the world he's ushered in a new Golden Age of peace and tranquility, a Pax Romana. if he's using a false Judeo-Christian religious premise then he'll probably be saying the Millennium/Messianic era has begun and convince people somehow that the first half of the 70th week was really the last. Post Post-Tribbers and Pre-Wrathers garble the chronology of Revelation in ways that would lend help to that.
But perhaps he won't be claiming anything Biblical, perhaps he'll be saying it's the "Age of Aquarius" or some other BS.
Point is either way every eschabological tradition agrees that things get worse before they get better. As Harvey Dent said "The Night is darkest just before the Dawn". And Lucifer is the Dawn bringer according to Albert Pike.
Now, allow me to explain my view. I'm Mid-Trib, though probably not your standard form of it, I prefer the label Mid-Seventieth Week. I've never even read or listened to a Mid-Trib teacher. I've come to this conclusion listening to Pre-Trib, Post-Trib and Pre-Wrath people and taking note of both what I find right and what I find wrong in their teachings while studying The Word for myself with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
I believe all 7 Seals and the first 6 Trumpets all happen before the Abomination of Desolation. So I agree that the people being martyred for not taking he mark are not part of The Church. I also believe Joel 2:1-14 is the Sixth Trumpet and Joel 2:15 the Seventh Trumpet.
I believe the Ministry of the Two Witnesses is the first half of the 70th Week, because Malachi said Elijah would return BEFORE the Great and terrible Day of The LORD. During which time they will smite the Earth with plagues and withhold rainfall, and turn water to blood, and call fire down form heaven.
I believe The Beast kills the Two Witnesses the same day he does the Abomination of Desolation and causes the Sacrifice and Oblation to cease. Probably soon after.
They then lie in the streets of Jerusalem for Three and a Half days. During which time the people of the Earth celebrate their death.
Revelation 11:10 "And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth. "
I've
considered the possibility that this might be during Chanukah, the 3rd
day of which is the traditional day for gift giving. And the 25th of
Kislev is the anniversary of both the Maccabees victory over Antiochus
Epiphanes but also of his Desolation in the first place. Allowing this
date too fit two conflicting views of what the heresy for the coming
Abomination might look like. But I now preferring seeing the 7th Trumept as the First of Tishri. Either way I wouldn't be dogmatic on it.
The point is that this roughly 84 hour period is the time period I believe Paul was describing. Everyone thinks the bad times are over and they are now in eternal peace and safety. Then the Two Witnesses Resurrect and Ascend, and the Seventh Trumpet sounds, and the Sign of the Son of Man, the Ark of his Covenant (The Cross I believe) is seen in the Heavens. This is when the Rapture occurs for the Time of the Dead is at hand, to give rewards to the Saints. And then God's Wrath is poured out. Revelation 14 also describes the Son of Man coming on the Clouds, an the 144,000 who sound like their in their Resurrected state.
The 70 weeks of Daniel
Dave Hunt and other Pre-Tirbbers feel the Church Age must exactly match the gap between the 69th and 70th week.
Problem is, the 69th week points to the Triumphal Entry and Crucifixion, which both occurred in Nisan. Not Pentecost which was 49 days after the Resurrection.
Study Daniel 9 closely and you'll see that the 70 weeks revolves around the Temple. So I believe the moment the 69th week ended was when the Veil was torn at the moment Jesus died. The Talmud says that for 40 years before the Temple's destruction the crimson thread never turned white. I've written elsewhere on why I date the Crucifixion to 30 A.D.
The Second Temple was effectively dead for 40 years before it actually ceased to stand. It lost it's divine anointing when Jesus became the True Sin Offering. So I believe the 70th week is initiated by the consecration of the Third Temple. Revelation 11 confirms for me it's standing during the Ministry of the Two Witnesses, refuting the view that it's only under construction during the first half. The outer court being given to the Gentiles I believe refers to the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, because I support the Al-Kas fountain view of The Temple's location.
It's always confused me how Daniel 9's last verse doesn't tell us really anything about what happens when the 70th week ends, just what marks the midst of it. We know Daniel was told his vision was sealed up. Perhaps Gabriel's vision for Daniel here was meant to end about when the Rapture will happen.
The point is that this roughly 84 hour period is the time period I believe Paul was describing. Everyone thinks the bad times are over and they are now in eternal peace and safety. Then the Two Witnesses Resurrect and Ascend, and the Seventh Trumpet sounds, and the Sign of the Son of Man, the Ark of his Covenant (The Cross I believe) is seen in the Heavens. This is when the Rapture occurs for the Time of the Dead is at hand, to give rewards to the Saints. And then God's Wrath is poured out. Revelation 14 also describes the Son of Man coming on the Clouds, an the 144,000 who sound like their in their Resurrected state.
The 70 weeks of Daniel
Dave Hunt and other Pre-Tirbbers feel the Church Age must exactly match the gap between the 69th and 70th week.
Problem is, the 69th week points to the Triumphal Entry and Crucifixion, which both occurred in Nisan. Not Pentecost which was 49 days after the Resurrection.
Study Daniel 9 closely and you'll see that the 70 weeks revolves around the Temple. So I believe the moment the 69th week ended was when the Veil was torn at the moment Jesus died. The Talmud says that for 40 years before the Temple's destruction the crimson thread never turned white. I've written elsewhere on why I date the Crucifixion to 30 A.D.
The Second Temple was effectively dead for 40 years before it actually ceased to stand. It lost it's divine anointing when Jesus became the True Sin Offering. So I believe the 70th week is initiated by the consecration of the Third Temple. Revelation 11 confirms for me it's standing during the Ministry of the Two Witnesses, refuting the view that it's only under construction during the first half. The outer court being given to the Gentiles I believe refers to the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, because I support the Al-Kas fountain view of The Temple's location.
It's always confused me how Daniel 9's last verse doesn't tell us really anything about what happens when the 70th week ends, just what marks the midst of it. We know Daniel was told his vision was sealed up. Perhaps Gabriel's vision for Daniel here was meant to end about when the Rapture will happen.
The Seventh and Last Trumpet
First I want to address those who refute the Seventh Trumpet view by claiming the "Last Trump" (1 Corinthians 15:52) being called the "Trump of God" (1 Thessalonians 4:16) means it can't be sounded by an Angel. Everything in Heaven is of God, and the Seventh Trumpet being clearly separated from the rest in it's sounding makes it unique. In Revelation 15 and 16 the Seven bowls of Gods Wrath are poured out by Angels, even though we all know the Wrath in question is Of God, the Trumpets are the same.
A debate exists over whether or not the "Last Trump" that signals the Rapture in Thessalonians, and Corinthians and Matthew 24 is the Seventh Trumpet of Revelation 11 or the Last Trumpet sounded on the Feast of Trumpets.
Chris White argues it's neither and that we should look at the Silver Trumpets of Numbers 10.
It is true that the Biblical Hebrew text does not explicitly link Trumpets to the First of Tishri feast in Leviticus 23:24, that's an assumption we make based on Trumpets being added in translation, and extra Biblical traditions about that day. Chris White however seems to assume the Trumpets affiliated with the First of Tishri are the Ram's Horns. But a book I have on Hebrew customs (by Ethan Allen) says Silver Trumpets and Shofar were both sounded on that day.
Numbers 10:10 does say the Silver Trumpets are to be sounded "Also in the day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, and in the beginnings of your months". Now "solemn days" in the Hebrew texts refers to the "appointed times' or High Holy Days, meaning all of them outlined in Leviticus 23. And the beginning of each month would also include the First of Tishri.
The single word translated "blowing of trumpets" in Leviticus 23:24 is T@ruw`ah (ter-oo-aw'); Noun Feminine, Strong #: 8643. Is used in Numbers 10:5&6 where it is translated "Alarm".
"When ye blow an alarm, then the camps that lie on the east parts shall go forward.
When ye blow an alarm the second time, then the camps that lie on the south side shall take their journey: they shall blow an alarm for their journeys."
In verse 7 it's a different word translated alarm, but one that is probably the root of the final syllable of Taruwah.
At any rate I'd agree we can't build solid doctrine on any extra Biblical assumptions about Rosh Hoshana. But this one may have more of a Biblical basis then he realized. The First of Tishri is the one day there is double the reason to sound those Trumpets. And the only thing we are told about it in Leviticus is a key word also used in Numbers 10 about blowing Trumpets.
Actually Psalm 81 I feel kind of refutes the claim that there is no Biblical basis for linking Trumpets to the First of Tishri. In verse 3 Asaph wrote "Blow up the trumpet in the new moon, in the time appointed, on our solemn feast day." The only day that is both a New Moon and one of the Leviticus 23 ordained major Feast Days is the First of Tishri. Here though Shofar is used rather then the word for the Silver Trumpets.
I don't think we should distinguish between the Rams Horns and Silver Trumpets in terms of how they may symbolically point to Heavenly/Eschatology Trumpets. Whether it's the verses indisputably about The Rapture or the Seven Trumpets in Revelation. Earthly Trumpets needed to be made from separate materials for Earthly reasons, but the Heavenly Trumpets are probably not really made from any Earthly substance at all. Silver is Levitcully a symbol of Redemption, and Ram's Horns are taken from Sacrificial offerings. So symbolically both point to Jesus as our Sin Offering, who's voice is sometimes described as "like a Trumpet". And the New Testament only uses one Greek word for Trumpet.
Hosea 5:8 Poetically uses both words for Trumpet as if their synonyms. But the KJV renders one of them Cornet to avoid sounding redundant.
He's also wrong that the Trumpet themes through out the Prophets are always the Silver Trumpets. Hosea 5:8 is the only time the Silver Trumpets are mentioend in the Porphetic Books. And Psalm 98 the only time they're in the Psalms. Both have the Shofar also in the same verse. Every other Trumpet reference in the Psalms or Prophets it is the Shofar. And Plenty seem linked to The Rapture/Day of The LORD.
I believe that the references to the Trumpets in Revelation are meant to draw on all the earlier Trumpet themes of Scripture. Both the Silver and the Rams Horns. Because I view Revelation as explaining the rest of Scripture, and unveiling all things that were before mysteries. Meaning if the Trumpet that signals the Rapture isn't in Revelation, then Revelation has arguably failed to serve part of it's purpose.
Post-Tirbbers often agree with seeing the Rapture in the same Revelation passages Mid-Tirbbers do, but make it compatible with their view by garbling the chronology of Revelation in ways that are ridiculous. Those would also agree with my on the Seventh Trumpet being sounded on he First of Tishri, I would point out that there is no Biblical basis for God post Exodus ever returning to Tishri rather then Nisan years.
Of the passages outside Revelation viewed as being the most indisputably about The Rapture, a Trumpet sounding is the most nearly universal detail. Matthew 24:31, 1 Thessalonians 4:16 and 1 Corinthians 15:52, and I feel the most solid Old Testament reference in Joel. Yet Pre-Trib and Pre-Wrath people refuse to look for a Trumpet in their placement in Revelation, and Pre-Wrathers feel their position is proved by Rapture signs only used in the Olivite Discourse yet never by Paul.
Both Post-Tribbers and Mid-Trib/Pre-Wrath supporters love to refute the Pre-Trib argument that Matthew 24 isn't referring to the same coming/gathering as Paul by pointing out all the parallels between that account and Paul's from Thessalonians and Corinthians. There are at least 20. But what many either miss or ignore is that a number of those same parallels apply to the Seventh Trumpet in Revelation 11.
We have a Trumpet sounding followed by great voices in Heaven. The use of the word "Archangel" in Corinthians is a different from then when Jude uses it of Michael. It ends with an "n" making it technically plural in Greek.
We have The Four Cherubim declaring God's Wrath is come, in a way that makes clear it hadn't come before the 7th Trumpet.
We have talk about it now being the "Time of the Dead" and time to judge and reward the saints. That sounds like the Bema Judgment to me.
I also think "And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament" could correlate to "The sign of the Son of Man" being seen in the Heavens. One can argue the Ark of the New Testament is the Cross on which The Lamb's Blood was shed for our Sins.
There is lighting and another Earthquake. The Seventh Trumpet account lacks reference to the Sun or Moon being darkened. But this could be left over effect for the Fourth Trumpet, and/or when the Smoke form the Abyss covered The Earth following the Fifth.
Also there were no Chapter breaks originally, to Revelation 12's beginning is still the Seventh Trumpet. The word Harpatzo is used, and stars fall from heaven. And possibly a layer of meaning here is astronomical clues pointing to the New Moon of Tishri.
Then after the rest of 12 and 14 continue laying out the Mid-Trib drama, we come to 14.
The 144 Thousand are seen on Mt. Zion, and it sounds to me like they're in their Resurrected state, with talk of being "Redeemed from the Earth" and being the "First Fruits". I do not allegorize the 144 Thousand, they're a specific group of believer. But I do think their part of the Church and Resurrected already here. A better argument certainly then the weak one that the Multitude in Chapter 7 are Resurrected already.
And latter we have "And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of Man" in verse 14. And with it's Harvest imagery.
And further reading shows the pouring out of God's Wrath is still only about to happen.
And then supplemental to what follows the Seventh Trumpet, is what proceeds it. It seems to immediately follow the Resurrection and Rapture of the Two Witnesses. Again, I do not allegorize the Witnesses, they're Enoch and Elijah to me. But I do think it's possible their Rapture could have a connection to ours. Their being taken out of the Earth alive before are each seen as types of The Rapture after all.
I think there is more then enough connection between the Seventh Trumpet and the Last Trump to see them as connected.
Revelation 9:20 shows the Image of the Beast hasn't been set up yet. Because the Idols these people are being judged for worshiping "neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:". So the life like Image of the beast isn't here yet.
Actually, Revelation 9 is a major Death nail for the Pre-Wrath position. No damned individual should be able to Ascend out of the Bottomless Pit before it is unlocked. But the Pre-Wrath position needs this to be well after the Abomination of Desolation, which can't happen until after The Beast ascends out of the Bottomless Pit. We're told he's ascended out of it already when he kills The Two Witnesses.
I believe Revelation 9 is the Removal of The Restrainer. As I explained in this blog's first post.
Pre-Wrath people usually insist the ministry of The Witnesses is the second half of the 70th week. But Malachi clearly says Elijah returns BEFORE the great and terrible Day of the LORD.
I've also decided I see Joel 2:1 as the Sixth Trumpet, what happens after it sounds has some clear parallels to what happens in Revelation 9:13 and up, with a bizarre Supernatural army of Fiery Horsemen.
And so Joel 2:15 I see as the Seventh Trumpet, where the people are Gathered and the Groom collects his Bride. Between them in verse 10 the Sun and Moon are described as being darkened.
I did a Google search on the subject, and it seems no one else has noticed this yet, Which surprises me. Many I've seen, like in J.R. Church's book on the Minor Prophets, link Joel Chapter 2 to the Fifth Trumpet, though to me that doesn't work quite as well. I don't like Allegorizeing the Locust of Revelation 9 into an Army, when the next Judgment is explicitly defined as an Army. To me the creatures let out of the Abyss are Demons taking temporary physical forms, like the ones they sometimes take from TransYughothian Ceremonial Magick rituals. That's the significance of The Smoke.
The Invading Army in Joel 2 is usually either taken as the Gog and Magog Invasion, or Armageddon. But to me it seems to be placed before The Rapture, which doesn't fit the latter. And I've become convinced that the former happens after the Millennium.
It seems people identifying as Pre-Wrath think a lot still happens between the Abomination of Desolation and the Rapture. Enough to account for months or even years. Basically, to them the Persecution of The Church the Matthew 24 Olivite Discourse describes happening before the Abomination of Desolation, and as correlating to the Fifth Seal, actually happens after the Abomination.
Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2 clears places the "Falling Away" before the Abomination of Desolation. This falling Away is seen by Pre-Wrather as correlating to the Matthew 24 persecution.
There are two coming end times Persecutions I believe. As I explain in the "Great Tribulation" post.
I believe the sounding of the Seventh Trumpet is on the Feast of Trumpets. So it's not either/or between those two options.
A debate exists over whether or not the "Last Trump" that signals the Rapture in Thessalonians, and Corinthians and Matthew 24 is the Seventh Trumpet of Revelation 11 or the Last Trumpet sounded on the Feast of Trumpets.
Chris White argues it's neither and that we should look at the Silver Trumpets of Numbers 10.
It is true that the Biblical Hebrew text does not explicitly link Trumpets to the First of Tishri feast in Leviticus 23:24, that's an assumption we make based on Trumpets being added in translation, and extra Biblical traditions about that day. Chris White however seems to assume the Trumpets affiliated with the First of Tishri are the Ram's Horns. But a book I have on Hebrew customs (by Ethan Allen) says Silver Trumpets and Shofar were both sounded on that day.
Numbers 10:10 does say the Silver Trumpets are to be sounded "Also in the day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, and in the beginnings of your months". Now "solemn days" in the Hebrew texts refers to the "appointed times' or High Holy Days, meaning all of them outlined in Leviticus 23. And the beginning of each month would also include the First of Tishri.
The single word translated "blowing of trumpets" in Leviticus 23:24 is T@ruw`ah (ter-oo-aw'); Noun Feminine, Strong #: 8643. Is used in Numbers 10:5&6 where it is translated "Alarm".
"When ye blow an alarm, then the camps that lie on the east parts shall go forward.
When ye blow an alarm the second time, then the camps that lie on the south side shall take their journey: they shall blow an alarm for their journeys."
In verse 7 it's a different word translated alarm, but one that is probably the root of the final syllable of Taruwah.
At any rate I'd agree we can't build solid doctrine on any extra Biblical assumptions about Rosh Hoshana. But this one may have more of a Biblical basis then he realized. The First of Tishri is the one day there is double the reason to sound those Trumpets. And the only thing we are told about it in Leviticus is a key word also used in Numbers 10 about blowing Trumpets.
Actually Psalm 81 I feel kind of refutes the claim that there is no Biblical basis for linking Trumpets to the First of Tishri. In verse 3 Asaph wrote "Blow up the trumpet in the new moon, in the time appointed, on our solemn feast day." The only day that is both a New Moon and one of the Leviticus 23 ordained major Feast Days is the First of Tishri. Here though Shofar is used rather then the word for the Silver Trumpets.
I don't think we should distinguish between the Rams Horns and Silver Trumpets in terms of how they may symbolically point to Heavenly/Eschatology Trumpets. Whether it's the verses indisputably about The Rapture or the Seven Trumpets in Revelation. Earthly Trumpets needed to be made from separate materials for Earthly reasons, but the Heavenly Trumpets are probably not really made from any Earthly substance at all. Silver is Levitcully a symbol of Redemption, and Ram's Horns are taken from Sacrificial offerings. So symbolically both point to Jesus as our Sin Offering, who's voice is sometimes described as "like a Trumpet". And the New Testament only uses one Greek word for Trumpet.
Hosea 5:8 Poetically uses both words for Trumpet as if their synonyms. But the KJV renders one of them Cornet to avoid sounding redundant.
He's also wrong that the Trumpet themes through out the Prophets are always the Silver Trumpets. Hosea 5:8 is the only time the Silver Trumpets are mentioend in the Porphetic Books. And Psalm 98 the only time they're in the Psalms. Both have the Shofar also in the same verse. Every other Trumpet reference in the Psalms or Prophets it is the Shofar. And Plenty seem linked to The Rapture/Day of The LORD.
I believe that the references to the Trumpets in Revelation are meant to draw on all the earlier Trumpet themes of Scripture. Both the Silver and the Rams Horns. Because I view Revelation as explaining the rest of Scripture, and unveiling all things that were before mysteries. Meaning if the Trumpet that signals the Rapture isn't in Revelation, then Revelation has arguably failed to serve part of it's purpose.
Post-Tirbbers often agree with seeing the Rapture in the same Revelation passages Mid-Tirbbers do, but make it compatible with their view by garbling the chronology of Revelation in ways that are ridiculous. Those would also agree with my on the Seventh Trumpet being sounded on he First of Tishri, I would point out that there is no Biblical basis for God post Exodus ever returning to Tishri rather then Nisan years.
Of the passages outside Revelation viewed as being the most indisputably about The Rapture, a Trumpet sounding is the most nearly universal detail. Matthew 24:31, 1 Thessalonians 4:16 and 1 Corinthians 15:52, and I feel the most solid Old Testament reference in Joel. Yet Pre-Trib and Pre-Wrath people refuse to look for a Trumpet in their placement in Revelation, and Pre-Wrathers feel their position is proved by Rapture signs only used in the Olivite Discourse yet never by Paul.
Both Post-Tribbers and Mid-Trib/Pre-Wrath supporters love to refute the Pre-Trib argument that Matthew 24 isn't referring to the same coming/gathering as Paul by pointing out all the parallels between that account and Paul's from Thessalonians and Corinthians. There are at least 20. But what many either miss or ignore is that a number of those same parallels apply to the Seventh Trumpet in Revelation 11.
We have a Trumpet sounding followed by great voices in Heaven. The use of the word "Archangel" in Corinthians is a different from then when Jude uses it of Michael. It ends with an "n" making it technically plural in Greek.
We have The Four Cherubim declaring God's Wrath is come, in a way that makes clear it hadn't come before the 7th Trumpet.
We have talk about it now being the "Time of the Dead" and time to judge and reward the saints. That sounds like the Bema Judgment to me.
I also think "And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament" could correlate to "The sign of the Son of Man" being seen in the Heavens. One can argue the Ark of the New Testament is the Cross on which The Lamb's Blood was shed for our Sins.
There is lighting and another Earthquake. The Seventh Trumpet account lacks reference to the Sun or Moon being darkened. But this could be left over effect for the Fourth Trumpet, and/or when the Smoke form the Abyss covered The Earth following the Fifth.
Also there were no Chapter breaks originally, to Revelation 12's beginning is still the Seventh Trumpet. The word Harpatzo is used, and stars fall from heaven. And possibly a layer of meaning here is astronomical clues pointing to the New Moon of Tishri.
Then after the rest of 12 and 14 continue laying out the Mid-Trib drama, we come to 14.
The 144 Thousand are seen on Mt. Zion, and it sounds to me like they're in their Resurrected state, with talk of being "Redeemed from the Earth" and being the "First Fruits". I do not allegorize the 144 Thousand, they're a specific group of believer. But I do think their part of the Church and Resurrected already here. A better argument certainly then the weak one that the Multitude in Chapter 7 are Resurrected already.
And latter we have "And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of Man" in verse 14. And with it's Harvest imagery.
And further reading shows the pouring out of God's Wrath is still only about to happen.
And then supplemental to what follows the Seventh Trumpet, is what proceeds it. It seems to immediately follow the Resurrection and Rapture of the Two Witnesses. Again, I do not allegorize the Witnesses, they're Enoch and Elijah to me. But I do think it's possible their Rapture could have a connection to ours. Their being taken out of the Earth alive before are each seen as types of The Rapture after all.
I think there is more then enough connection between the Seventh Trumpet and the Last Trump to see them as connected.
Revelation 9:20 shows the Image of the Beast hasn't been set up yet. Because the Idols these people are being judged for worshiping "neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:". So the life like Image of the beast isn't here yet.
Actually, Revelation 9 is a major Death nail for the Pre-Wrath position. No damned individual should be able to Ascend out of the Bottomless Pit before it is unlocked. But the Pre-Wrath position needs this to be well after the Abomination of Desolation, which can't happen until after The Beast ascends out of the Bottomless Pit. We're told he's ascended out of it already when he kills The Two Witnesses.
I believe Revelation 9 is the Removal of The Restrainer. As I explained in this blog's first post.
Pre-Wrath people usually insist the ministry of The Witnesses is the second half of the 70th week. But Malachi clearly says Elijah returns BEFORE the great and terrible Day of the LORD.
I've also decided I see Joel 2:1 as the Sixth Trumpet, what happens after it sounds has some clear parallels to what happens in Revelation 9:13 and up, with a bizarre Supernatural army of Fiery Horsemen.
And so Joel 2:15 I see as the Seventh Trumpet, where the people are Gathered and the Groom collects his Bride. Between them in verse 10 the Sun and Moon are described as being darkened.
I did a Google search on the subject, and it seems no one else has noticed this yet, Which surprises me. Many I've seen, like in J.R. Church's book on the Minor Prophets, link Joel Chapter 2 to the Fifth Trumpet, though to me that doesn't work quite as well. I don't like Allegorizeing the Locust of Revelation 9 into an Army, when the next Judgment is explicitly defined as an Army. To me the creatures let out of the Abyss are Demons taking temporary physical forms, like the ones they sometimes take from TransYughothian Ceremonial Magick rituals. That's the significance of The Smoke.
The Invading Army in Joel 2 is usually either taken as the Gog and Magog Invasion, or Armageddon. But to me it seems to be placed before The Rapture, which doesn't fit the latter. And I've become convinced that the former happens after the Millennium.
It seems people identifying as Pre-Wrath think a lot still happens between the Abomination of Desolation and the Rapture. Enough to account for months or even years. Basically, to them the Persecution of The Church the Matthew 24 Olivite Discourse describes happening before the Abomination of Desolation, and as correlating to the Fifth Seal, actually happens after the Abomination.
Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2 clears places the "Falling Away" before the Abomination of Desolation. This falling Away is seen by Pre-Wrather as correlating to the Matthew 24 persecution.
There are two coming end times Persecutions I believe. As I explain in the "Great Tribulation" post.
I believe the sounding of the Seventh Trumpet is on the Feast of Trumpets. So it's not either/or between those two options.
Friday, July 25, 2014
Why Pre-Trib and Pre-Wrath both fail
I was not quite as decided on this as I am now when I wrote the first draft of what's below.
I used to be firmly in what is called the Post-Trib camp. (Even though unlike many Post-Tribbers I've always been completely against Replacement Theology.) And certainly never liked the Pre-Trib argument. What Chuck Missler explains about the uniqueness of the Church alters my perspective however. Once you understand that not all saved are part of The Church then the references to believers on the Earth during theTribulation
no longer inherently contradicts the Pre-Trib view. Chuck also seems
certain that if you're not Pre-Trib on the Rapture your problem is
Ecclesiology not Eschatology. Well I am the same as Chuck on
Ecclesiology, yet I still have issues with the Pre-Trib view. I'm still
not sold on the Pre-Trib argument, however rather then being firmly
Post-Trib I'm now leaning towards a Mid-Trib, I had also considered the
Pre-Wrath view.
First off, the Pre-Trib camp seems to consider Imminence their cornerstone argument. Verses where the Bible tells us to "Expect" The Return of Jesus at any moment. Problem is the intent of those verses aren't about chronology, their about the attitude believers should take and how we should behave. Pre-Tribbers insist it means that the Rapture must be the absolute next thing to happen Chronologically, even though plenty of Prophecies have already been fulfilled while we've been waiting (Israel Restored, the first portion of Isaiah 19 ect.) Now it's the Gog&Magog invasion that can't possibly occur until after the Rapture. But logically before 1948 they'd have had to say the same thing about Israel being reestablished. Then till 67 them reclaiming all of Jerusalem.
When my Dad first starting teaching me how to use a gun, he told me before even letting me touch it to always treat it like it's loaded, even when I know for certain it is not. The point of that instruction is to make sure I'm always very very very careful with it, which is a very smart approach to take. But it doesn't change the fact that an unloaded gun still needs to be loaded before you can actually shoot something with it.
TheBible verses
that imply Imminence are there to tell us to behave like he can return
at any moment, to before committing any Sin think "Is that what I want
to be doing in the middle of when Jesus comes back?" and to motivate us
to work tirelessly in spreading the Gospel and doing God's work
by acting like we could run out of time at any time. After all, in a
sense it does happen for you immediately when you die. But the fact
remains that there are at least two Bible passages that make it clear
the Rapture won't occur at least until after the "Abomination of
Desolation".
Matthew 24's account of the Olivet Discourse reaches the "Abomination of Desolation" in verse 15. Then it goes on describing more End Times drama in very broad terms until verses 29-31 when Jesus (And Pre-Tribbers tend to ignore this) explicitly says
I used to be firmly in what is called the Post-Trib camp. (Even though unlike many Post-Tribbers I've always been completely against Replacement Theology.) And certainly never liked the Pre-Trib argument. What Chuck Missler explains about the uniqueness of the Church alters my perspective however. Once you understand that not all saved are part of The Church then the references to believers on the Earth during the
First off, the Pre-Trib camp seems to consider Imminence their cornerstone argument. Verses where the Bible tells us to "Expect" The Return of Jesus at any moment. Problem is the intent of those verses aren't about chronology, their about the attitude believers should take and how we should behave. Pre-Tribbers insist it means that the Rapture must be the absolute next thing to happen Chronologically, even though plenty of Prophecies have already been fulfilled while we've been waiting (Israel Restored, the first portion of Isaiah 19 ect.) Now it's the Gog&Magog invasion that can't possibly occur until after the Rapture. But logically before 1948 they'd have had to say the same thing about Israel being reestablished. Then till 67 them reclaiming all of Jerusalem.
When my Dad first starting teaching me how to use a gun, he told me before even letting me touch it to always treat it like it's loaded, even when I know for certain it is not. The point of that instruction is to make sure I'm always very very very careful with it, which is a very smart approach to take. But it doesn't change the fact that an unloaded gun still needs to be loaded before you can actually shoot something with it.
The
Matthew 24's account of the Olivet Discourse reaches the "Abomination of Desolation" in verse 15. Then it goes on describing more End Times drama in very broad terms until verses 29-31 when Jesus (And Pre-Tribbers tend to ignore this) explicitly says
Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
This
is clearly the same event described in 1 Thessalonians 4, and clearly
described as AFTER a tribulation. And also in this narrative it seems
to be clearly after the "Abomination of Desolation". It has the coming in the clouds, the gathering, the Trumpet being sounded. Some may consider that the Resurrection is mentioned disproved this being the same event. Well 1 Corinthians 15:52 doesn't mention the gathering or the coming in the clouds, only the Trumpet and the Resurrection and the living in Christ being changed.
I should add that the term "elect" contrary to Calvinist assumptions is not always a synonym for the saved, in many places it seems to refer rather to Israel. Doug Hamp has written a book on that subject and been interviews about it on "Prophecy in The news". Both he and Gary are of course Pre-Trib, and they'd probably respond that this part of the Olivet Discourse isn't about The Rapture because it refers to the Elect. But regardless of what that one word strictly means, this passage still clearly uses a lot of common imagery with 1 Thessalonians 4, the Trumpet, the Clouds ect and so on.
The word Elect can refer to more then one thing, it's simply a word meaning "chosen". When Jesus returns on a White Horse at the end of the 70th week Israel will not be gathered to him, he'll be going to where Israel is in hiding. Israel and The Church are both his "Elect" in different senses, we both have the opportunity to be part of very special covenants that not all of the Saved have the opportunity to be part of. With neither meaning would I consider how the Calvanist co-opt the word to fit their version of "predestination" valid.
The only other argument I've seen Pre-Tribbers try to prove this isn't the same as 1 Thessalonians 4 is that Jesus refers to sending many Angels, while Paul refers to the voice "The Archangel". First of all it is perfectly consistent to say that many Angels gather while one Archangel is shouting. Second the Greek text in Thessalonians is "Archangelon" which is technically plural. So I feel that back up a Seventh Trumpet view, which refers to many voices in Heaven.
Pre-Wrathers and Post-Tribbers may feel Mathew 24 favors their model over Mid-Trib because a lot seems to happen between the Abomination and the Gathering. It may seem like a lot happens, but it's all described pretty broadly, and sometimes a lot can happen in very little time. To me this could all fit easily into the three and a half days the Two Witnesses are dead.
2nd Thessalonians Chapter 2.
First, many take the language of "By letter as from us" in verse 2 as referring to a letter falsely attributed to Paul. It is not, he's referring to people misunderstanding or outright misusing what he said in 1st Thessalonians Chapter 4. He certainly is referring to that exact same event when he says "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him". Now he goes on to explain in no uncertain terms.
I should add that the term "elect" contrary to Calvinist assumptions is not always a synonym for the saved, in many places it seems to refer rather to Israel. Doug Hamp has written a book on that subject and been interviews about it on "Prophecy in The news". Both he and Gary are of course Pre-Trib, and they'd probably respond that this part of the Olivet Discourse isn't about The Rapture because it refers to the Elect. But regardless of what that one word strictly means, this passage still clearly uses a lot of common imagery with 1 Thessalonians 4, the Trumpet, the Clouds ect and so on.
The word Elect can refer to more then one thing, it's simply a word meaning "chosen". When Jesus returns on a White Horse at the end of the 70th week Israel will not be gathered to him, he'll be going to where Israel is in hiding. Israel and The Church are both his "Elect" in different senses, we both have the opportunity to be part of very special covenants that not all of the Saved have the opportunity to be part of. With neither meaning would I consider how the Calvanist co-opt the word to fit their version of "predestination" valid.
The only other argument I've seen Pre-Tribbers try to prove this isn't the same as 1 Thessalonians 4 is that Jesus refers to sending many Angels, while Paul refers to the voice "The Archangel". First of all it is perfectly consistent to say that many Angels gather while one Archangel is shouting. Second the Greek text in Thessalonians is "Archangelon" which is technically plural. So I feel that back up a Seventh Trumpet view, which refers to many voices in Heaven.
Pre-Wrathers and Post-Tribbers may feel Mathew 24 favors their model over Mid-Trib because a lot seems to happen between the Abomination and the Gathering. It may seem like a lot happens, but it's all described pretty broadly, and sometimes a lot can happen in very little time. To me this could all fit easily into the three and a half days the Two Witnesses are dead.
2nd Thessalonians Chapter 2.
First, many take the language of "By letter as from us" in verse 2 as referring to a letter falsely attributed to Paul. It is not, he's referring to people misunderstanding or outright misusing what he said in 1st Thessalonians Chapter 4. He certainly is referring to that exact same event when he says "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him". Now he goes on to explain in no uncertain terms.
| for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. |
I put "and" in bold, because some Pre-Tribbers like to insist only the first of these two things has to happen first.
The Pre-Trib camp likes to make this fit their view by insisting the "Restrainer" mentioned latter is The Holy Spirit. Even if it where, that doesn't undermine the clear chronological implication that Paul is unambiguously saying that the Gathering Together will NOT happen till AFTER the "Man of Sins" is revealed. Yet so many Pre-Tribbers insist the Church will never encounter that individual. That's part of the danger of the Pre-Trib view to me, The Bible gives us all these clues about his identity for a reason, the Church should be using them, not just insisting "We'll never meet him anyway".
Now, let's get into this "Restrainer" verse, first of all the KJV rendering in verse 7 is.
The Pre-Trib camp likes to make this fit their view by insisting the "Restrainer" mentioned latter is The Holy Spirit. Even if it where, that doesn't undermine the clear chronological implication that Paul is unambiguously saying that the Gathering Together will NOT happen till AFTER the "Man of Sins" is revealed. Yet so many Pre-Tribbers insist the Church will never encounter that individual. That's part of the danger of the Pre-Trib view to me, The Bible gives us all these clues about his identity for a reason, the Church should be using them, not just insisting "We'll never meet him anyway".
Now, let's get into this "Restrainer" verse, first of all the KJV rendering in verse 7 is.
| For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. |
There could possibly be translational issues with the phrase rendered "taken out of the way" but that's incidental.
It's "He who now letteth" is who is commonly called here the "Restrainer" Restrain is what the Greek word translated "letteth" actually means. The previous verse uses the same word in a different form and the KJV translated it "Withholdeth". In verse 6 it's a present tense verb, there it should be "restraining" and in verse 7 "letteth now let" should be "restrains will continue to do so".
The use of "he" in verse 7 is added by the translators, they're not in the Greek. It is "what" not "who" that identifies the restrainer in verse 6. Chuck Missler insists it's "what" only because it's Gender neutral. The Holy Spirit is never described with Gender Neutral pronouns, poetically he's feminine more often, but is also frequently masculine. However he never lacks gender. It could very well be an object not a personage.
Job makes clear God does restrain Satan, and many verses describe God as restraining Sin, and those verses get cited to prove this verse is referring to The Holy Spirit, but none of those other verses about restraint affiliate it with a specific person of The Trinity.
The Pre-Wrath camp believes The Restrainer is Michael. I agree with them that Daniel 12:1 and Revelation 12:7 correspond. But to define him taking an offensive against Satan as ceasing to restrain something is silly to me.
Revelation 20 says
It's "He who now letteth" is who is commonly called here the "Restrainer" Restrain is what the Greek word translated "letteth" actually means. The previous verse uses the same word in a different form and the KJV translated it "Withholdeth". In verse 6 it's a present tense verb, there it should be "restraining" and in verse 7 "letteth now let" should be "restrains will continue to do so".
The use of "he" in verse 7 is added by the translators, they're not in the Greek. It is "what" not "who" that identifies the restrainer in verse 6. Chuck Missler insists it's "what" only because it's Gender neutral. The Holy Spirit is never described with Gender Neutral pronouns, poetically he's feminine more often, but is also frequently masculine. However he never lacks gender. It could very well be an object not a personage.
Job makes clear God does restrain Satan, and many verses describe God as restraining Sin, and those verses get cited to prove this verse is referring to The Holy Spirit, but none of those other verses about restraint affiliate it with a specific person of The Trinity.
The Pre-Wrath camp believes The Restrainer is Michael. I agree with them that Daniel 12:1 and Revelation 12:7 correspond. But to define him taking an offensive against Satan as ceasing to restrain something is silly to me.
Revelation 20 says
| And
I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless
pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that
old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand
years, and cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a
seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the
thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a
little season. .............. And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth |
Being
locked in The Abyss is what will restrain Satan during the Millennium.
Right now Satan isn't restrained, but something else is which Paul
alludes to. That removal of Restraint is in Revelation 9, when The
Abyss is first opened.
I believe that the restrainer being removed refers to when the Abyss is opened in Revelation 9. I believe it's the lock keeping the Abyss sealed and the entities inside chained. Note, the word translated "perdition" in "Son of Predition" is Apolyea, a Greek word related to Apollyon, Apollyon is just the proper noun form. He is being restrained because he's in the Abyss, the removal of that restraint is what happens when the 5th trumpet is sounded.
Some I know object to viewing Apollyon as an evil entity however. But that's incidental, my view does not require viewing either the First or Second beast as being a specific personage in Revelation 9. The fact simply remains that The Abyss is unlocked and things restrained there are set free.
Revelation 11:7 and 17:8 both refer to " the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit". The death nail of the Pre-Wrath view (which places all the Trumpets after the Abomination of Desolation) is that no damned personage can ascendeth out of the abyss before it's unlocked.
I believe this is an idiom of The Beast's resurrection, when his mortal wound is healed. In 17:8 it's followed by "and goeth into perdition". The Beast and The False Prophet are in Revelation 19 cast alive into the Lake of Fire without apparently being killed first. I believe this implies that their early partakers of the Second Resurrection. Their also the first two personages sent there. No one else goes there till after The Millennium.
So I think it's possible both ascend out of The Abyss. I have studies that deal more with that.
Another problem Revelation 9 has for the Pre-Wrath view is verse 20. " that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:" The idols being worshiped as this time don't move or walk or hear. The lifelike Image of The Beast from Revelation 13 clearly has not been set up yet.
So to me, both these passages are insurmountable obstacles for the Pre-Trib view, and Pre-Wrath also. But I am very open to Mid-Trib/Seventh Trumpet.
I believe that the restrainer being removed refers to when the Abyss is opened in Revelation 9. I believe it's the lock keeping the Abyss sealed and the entities inside chained. Note, the word translated "perdition" in "Son of Predition" is Apolyea, a Greek word related to Apollyon, Apollyon is just the proper noun form. He is being restrained because he's in the Abyss, the removal of that restraint is what happens when the 5th trumpet is sounded.
Some I know object to viewing Apollyon as an evil entity however. But that's incidental, my view does not require viewing either the First or Second beast as being a specific personage in Revelation 9. The fact simply remains that The Abyss is unlocked and things restrained there are set free.
Revelation 11:7 and 17:8 both refer to " the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit". The death nail of the Pre-Wrath view (which places all the Trumpets after the Abomination of Desolation) is that no damned personage can ascendeth out of the abyss before it's unlocked.
I believe this is an idiom of The Beast's resurrection, when his mortal wound is healed. In 17:8 it's followed by "and goeth into perdition". The Beast and The False Prophet are in Revelation 19 cast alive into the Lake of Fire without apparently being killed first. I believe this implies that their early partakers of the Second Resurrection. Their also the first two personages sent there. No one else goes there till after The Millennium.
So I think it's possible both ascend out of The Abyss. I have studies that deal more with that.
Another problem Revelation 9 has for the Pre-Wrath view is verse 20. " that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:" The idols being worshiped as this time don't move or walk or hear. The lifelike Image of The Beast from Revelation 13 clearly has not been set up yet.
So to me, both these passages are insurmountable obstacles for the Pre-Trib view, and Pre-Wrath also. But I am very open to Mid-Trib/Seventh Trumpet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)