Pre-tribbers, what do you have

[wingnut-]

 

 

Again, I will have to withdraw from discussion with you, as a denial of the Kingdom is by far the worst position one can take. It denies the thousand year Kingdom clearly prophesied throughout Scripture and discussion between an a-millennialist and a premillennial believer is usually pointless, because we approach Scripture two different ways b

That doesn't mean, my friend, that I question your salvation, only your approach to Scripture and the conclusions you have drawn. I may be interested in looking at a few items of interest such as the first resurrection, but as far as debating an eschatological timeline and how events unfold, we simply are working with two different Bibles.

God bless.

 

First, I do not deny the Kingdom.  However, scripture gives us the strong indication that the millenium is only a day based on the verse from II Peter.

 

II Peter 3:⁸ But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

 

Can you explain why this one thing is important to remember regarding the day of the Lord?

 

Secondly, I do understand your frustration, although I do not understand how ceasing discussions benefits anyone.  We are working with the same bible, and I really think what separates us from coming together is the issue of chronology.  So I would appreciate it if you could at least respond to the scripture I offered you in regards to the dead being judged.

 

Revelation 11:¹⁶ And the twenty-four elders, who were seated on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped God, ¹⁷ saying:

“We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty,    the One who is and who was,because you have taken your great power    and have begun to reign.¹⁸ The nations were angry,    and your wrath has come.The time has come for judging the dead,    and for rewarding your servants the prophetsand your people who revere your name,    both great and small—and for destroying those who destroy the earth.”

 

Revelation 20:¹¹ Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. ¹² And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. ¹³ The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. ¹⁴ Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. ¹⁵ Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

 

This only happens once by my understanding of scripture, do you have an explanation for this?

 

I appreciate you indulging me in this conversation, and do hope you will reconsider continuing, or at the very least a response to the above two inquiries.  As for anything you have offered in scripture, I read every word and passage you have offered.  I may not have responded to each one, but I always take what my brothers and sisters offer me in regards to scripture and examine it.  In regards to what you offered towards the argument over whether first means first, none of what you offered to me says what you expressed to me.  I do apologize for only responding to the first offering, not because I did not read all of them, but because I do not understand them in the way you are applying them.

 

God bless you.

Not sure if this will come through, as I have had several posts in the last day not go through, which I will attribute to the tablet.

In regards to the usage of protos, I'm not sure how my post doesn't make the view presented clear. I gave examples of its usage where a sequential meaning is impossible, and combined with the fact that we already know that, at the least, the Lord"s resurrection is the first in sequence of time, and that it makes little sense to have the Two Witnesses resurrected at the end ( because he is empowered for forty two months yet no man can hurt them), then we have to consider ''first'' as not meaning first in a series.

Also, we differ in regards to the thousand years which establishes that the dead do not rise at that time which again distinguishes this resurrection from the foundational teaching of one resurrection on the last day.

It is not a matter of frustration in regards to your view, it is simply acknowledging that if an antagonist will not address a point or issue and continues with same arguments, then we are spinning our wheels. This is true on several key points.

You say you don't deny the Kingdom (and I will clarify the thousand year physical Kingdom, not generally speaking, as I said, your salvation and sincerity is not questioned), then immediately say it is only a day based on correlating Peter's statement, which effectively denies the thousand years. This denies a clear statement in Revelation which is also reiterated by the fact that the first resurrection is simply not the same resurrection which follows and takes place at the Great White Throne.

And I will stop there because several responses I have done have not gone through and with the distractions on my end I don't want to either waste time hunting and pecking on this tablet or do a longer post which won't go through anyway, lol.

God bless.

 

 

Hello again Ranger,

 

Thanks for the response.  I want to say, I think maybe you misunderstood my position regarding the passage in Revelation 20.  I am unclear as to what you are saying in regards to this, but it appears you are taking this passage to say that the first resurrection occurs after the millenium, which it does not.

There are three different groups spoken of in this passage.

 

Those with the authority to judge, and those who had been beheaded are the first resurrection, this occurs prior to the millenium.  These two groups come to life and reign with Him during the thousand years.

 

The third group is the rest of the dead, meaning those who died outside His grace.  This group is resurrected after the thousand years, this is when the Great White Throne judgement takes place, this is the judging of the dead.

 

I also meant to clarify before, my position on this most closely resembles what people call "pre-wrath".  I don't care much for the name it was given, but I think that is because of the references within scripture that say the wrath of the Lamb.  All of that takes place after where this position places the rapture.  What I know of the a-mil position is not what I believe, but perhaps we have a different understanding of the a-mil position.

 

I see that you mentioned the scripture that I asked you about in regards to the judging of the dead and the chronology question, but I was hoping perhaps you could try explaining this in another way.  I don't understand what you are saying in your response.  I guess the most important question I have regarding this is, do you think the dead are judged more than once?

 

I look forward to your response brother, and I'm sorry you are having issues with your tablet.  I face similar struggles with this ancient computer I am using, so I sympathize with you on that, God bless you.

[wingnut-]

Wingnut, just to touch on the previous post: in regards to Revelation 11 and 20, again, we have the declaration in the former occurring within the Tribulation, and the latter occurring after the thousand year Kingdom, which makes it impossible for us to reasonably debate it because, as I said, we are viewing two different Bibles with two different timelines. The Bible you read is missing, not just the thousand year period clearly stated, but the fulfillment of the promise of God to Israel. That's not something I can change your mind about, only the Lord can do that. And the same can be said of me, just to be fair (or in other words I'm not just saying I'm right...you're wrong).

But I will say that I see no reconciliation of your view with the timeline established in Scripture. Nullifying the thousand years by correlating it to Peter's statement does not negate the rest of the relevant texts we consider when we try to be eschatologically accurate. Just do me a favor, set aside the view that Revelation is ''not chronological,'' and try an approach that we use with all other prophecy, which I am convinced negates a great deal of confusion that many debate about.

The parenthetical passages will fall into place in the timeline. We open with the seals which coincides with ministry of the Two Witnesses' they are caught up in the middle, at which point Antichrist is revealed for who he is, and then begins the forty two months in which Israel is preserved in the Wilderness. This coincides with the rise of Antichrist where there is no sacrifice and oblation, but demand of worship of the Beast.

Just give it a look. Again, I can't convince you of this, but I am confident you will see the consistency in events in this approach. It does not rely on very weak correlations, and allows us to keep events in the order they were given.

I enjoy debating with a-millennials, don't get me wrong, but I have to insist some basics are first addressed, particularly when the Rapture is in view. The resurrection which takes place at the Great White Throne truly fulfills the foundational teaching found in the Old Testament Scriptures, but if one cannot see the distinction between the two resurrections in CH.20, then we cannot draw conclusions where discussion is profitable. Until that is addressed, discussion beyond that becomes meaningless.

One last example of the use of protos would be in Hebrews, where the writer designates the Covenant of Law as the First Covenant, where we know this is not the first covenant, not even when we make this Epistle exclusive to Israel (Paul makes this clear in Galatians 3). Just as in Revelation 20, what is exclusive is...the contrast. In type only two are in view, and only one is acceptable (Law/New; unto life/unto death).

Sequence is not in view in either.

And with that I pray your studies will be blessed of God and will say I have enjoyed the discussion.

God bless.

 

Hello again Ranger,

 

There are a few things in your post that I want to discuss with you.  To begin with, let's step away from the debate about first and from this point just understand when I say first resurrection I am simply referring to what John describes in Revelation 20.  I think if we center on the events that we agree only occur one time we can make some progression.  By that I mean things such as, the dead being judged, or the New Jerusalem, just to give a few examples.

 

In Revelation 11, we see the 24 elders speaking in regards to the 7th trumpet being sounded, that is where they state that the "time has come for judging the dead."  Again, that is at your midway point, yet the dead are not raised until the thousand years have ended according to John in Revelation 20.  Then take that and look at what is said here in chapter 10.

 

Revelation 10:⁵ Then the angel I had seen standing on the sea and on the land raised his right hand to heaven. ⁶ And he swore by him who lives for ever and ever, who created the heavens and all that is in them, the earth and all that is in it, and the sea and all that is in it, and said, “There will be no more delay! ⁷ But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants the prophets.”

 

Again, this is at your midway point.  How can the mystery of God be accomplished when we are only halfway through this?

 

You also stated that no other book in the bible is not written chronologically, this is not the case, let us go back to the beginning.

 

Genesis 1:²⁷ So God created mankind in his own image,

    in the image of God he created them;

    male and female he created them.

 

When we arrive in chapter 2, we only have Adam, no Eve.  It is in chapter 2 we see Eve created.  That is not chronological.  I suppose that comes down to whether one sees the Genesis account as literal, which I do.  If you do not then this may not matter to you, but that is my understanding.

 

I look forward to your response my friend, God bless you.

[Salty]

Hi Salty,

 

Hey bro, no argument with God here. I see that the word `established,` is `yacad,` meaning to set, appoint..... Thus God does away with the first, damaged earth & creates a new one because He has `appointed `it to be forever. God did not say that He would leave it in its damaged state & creating it new, just confirms what God has said - `established, appointed forever. 

 

Marilyn.

 

As I pointed to before, to 'properly'... understand that destruction of the earth per 2 Peter 3, the examples Peter gave of God's prevoius destruction by water must... be compared to the one coming by fire. So... did God literaly destroy the earth when he brought the flood in Noah's day? No, He cleansed the 'surface' of this earth, and that's what He will also do with His consuming fire on the last day of this present world.

 

Furthermore, you really should... lookup the Greek definition of that word "elements" in 2 Pet.3:10 also, because it does not... mean material matter. It means an orderly arrangement, like a world age, a time of things on the earth. The meaning He is going to destroy the things of man of this present world age on earth, not completely destroy the earth turning it into some astroid belt.

 

In Hebrews 12 we are given another example of the coming destruction, and God's previous destruction is used as a comparison type...

 

Hebrews 12

²⁵ See that ye refuse not Him That speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused Him That spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from Him That speaketh from heaven:

²⁶ Whose voice then shook the earth: but now He hath promised, saying, "Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven."

²⁷ And this word, "Yet once more", signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.

²⁸ Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:

²⁹ For our God is a consuming fire.

[Marilyn C]

Furthermore, you really should... lookup the Greek definition of that word "elements" in 2 Pet.3:10 also, because it does not... mean material matter. It means an orderly arrangement, like a world age, a time of things on the earth. The meaning He is going to destroy the things of man of this present world age on earth, not completely destroy the earth turning it into some astroid belt.

Hi Salty,

 

Let`s have a close look at these scriptures -

 

`But the Day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, & the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth & the works that are in it will be burned up.`  (2 Peter 3: 10)

 

Clearly we see that God says the heavens will pass away - thus where can the earth be? It is all burned up - the heavens, the earth & the works.

 

`Then I saw a great white throne & him who sat on it, from whose face the earth & the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them.` (Rev. 20: 11)

 

 

As you so rightly said `that God is a consuming fire.` When God exposes to the heaven & earth His consuming fire then they are all burned up, no place for them to go, gone......

 

`And I saw a New Heaven & a new Earth, for the first heaven & the first earth had passed away.`  (Rev. 21: 1)

 

All those scriptures clearly show that the heaven (universe) & earth are all gone, passed away, burnt up, no more.

 

Marilyn. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[wingnut-]

 

Let`s have a close look at these scriptures -

 

`But the Day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, & the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth & the works that are in it will be burned up.`  (2 Peter 3: 10)

 

Clearly we see that God says the heavens will pass away - thus where can the earth be? It is all burned up - the heavens, the earth & the works.

 

`Then I saw a great white throne & him who sat on it, from whose face the earth & the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them.` (Rev. 20: 11)

 

 

As you so rightly said `that God is a consuming fire.` When God exposes to the heaven & earth His consuming fire then they are all burned up, no place for them to go, gone......

 

`And I saw a New Heaven & a new Earth, for the first heaven & the first earth had passed away.`  (Rev. 21: 1)

 

All those scriptures clearly show that the heaven (universe) & earth are all gone, passed away, burnt up, no more.

 

Marilyn. 

 

 

 

[Salty]

 

Furthermore, you really should... lookup the Greek definition of that word "elements" in 2 Pet.3:10 also, because it does not... mean material matter. It means an orderly arrangement, like a world age, a time of things on the earth. The meaning He is going to destroy the things of man of this present world age on earth, not completely destroy the earth turning it into some astroid belt.

Hi Salty,

 

Let`s have a close look at these scriptures -

 

`But the Day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, & the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth & the works that are in it will be burned up.`  (2 Peter 3: 10)

 

Clearly we see that God says the heavens will pass away - thus where can the earth be? It is all burned up - the heavens, the earth & the works.

 

`Then I saw a great white throne & him who sat on it, from whose face the earth & the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them.` (Rev. 20: 11)

 

 

As you so rightly said `that God is a consuming fire.` When God exposes to the heaven & earth His consuming fire then they are all burned up, no place for them to go, gone......

 

`And I saw a New Heaven & a new Earth, for the first heaven & the first earth had passed away.`  (Rev. 21: 1)

 

All those scriptures clearly show that the heaven (universe) & earth are all gone, passed away, burnt up, no more.

 

Marilyn. 

 

 

 

You're simply choosing to think of that in the most extreme sense, when it will not occur that way. Even in Isaiah about the new heavens and a new earth concept you'll find the meaning in the Hebrew can also mean a renewing through cleansing, exactly what He did with the time of the flood in Noah's days.

 

Another proof of this is with those Ezekiel 47 Scriptures which you so far have said nothing about. In that Scripture the "great sea" along with the locations of Engedi and Eneglaim in the Middle East are specifically mentioned (as with the borders of the 12 tribes on earth also), and those are locations from Old Testament history that are still valid today. And note 2 Pet.3:10 is timed with the day of Jesus' second coming to begin His Millennial reign.

[S.T. Ranger]

Wingnut, just to touch on the previous post: in regards to Revelation 11 and 20, again, we have the declaration in the former occurring within the Tribulation, and the latter occurring after the thousand year Kingdom, which makes it impossible for us to reasonably debate it because, as I said, we are viewing two different Bibles with two different timelines. The Bible you read is missing, not just the thousand year period clearly stated, but the fulfillment of the promise of God to Israel. That's not something I can change your mind about, only the Lord can do that. And the same can be said of me, just to be fair (or in other words I'm not just saying I'm right...you're wrong).

But I will say that I see no reconciliation of your view with the timeline established in Scripture. Nullifying the thousand years by correlating it to Peter's statement does not negate the rest of the relevant texts we consider when we try to be eschatologically accurate. Just do me a favor, set aside the view that Revelation is ''not chronological,'' and try an approach that we use with all other prophecy, which I am convinced negates a great deal of confusion that many debate about.

The parenthetical passages will fall into place in the timeline. We open with the seals which coincides with ministry of the Two Witnesses' they are caught up in the middle, at which point Antichrist is revealed for who he is, and then begins the forty two months in which Israel is preserved in the Wilderness. This coincides with the rise of Antichrist where there is no sacrifice and oblation, but demand of worship of the Beast.

Just give it a look. Again, I can't convince you of this, but I am confident you will see the consistency in events in this approach. It does not rely on very weak correlations, and allows us to keep events in the order they were given.

I enjoy debating with a-millennials, don't get me wrong, but I have to insist some basics are first addressed, particularly when the Rapture is in view. The resurrection which takes place at the Great White Throne truly fulfills the foundational teaching found in the Old Testament Scriptures, but if one cannot see the distinction between the two resurrections in CH.20, then we cannot draw conclusions where discussion is profitable. Until that is addressed, discussion beyond that becomes meaningless.

One last example of the use of protos would be in Hebrews, where the writer designates the Covenant of Law as the First Covenant, where we know this is not the first covenant, not even when we make this Epistle exclusive to Israel (Paul makes this clear in Galatians 3). Just as in Revelation 20, what is exclusive is...the contrast. In type only two are in view, and only one is acceptable (Law/New; unto life/unto death).

Sequence is not in view in either.

And with that I pray your studies will be blessed of God and will say I have enjoyed the discussion.

God bless.

 

Hello again Ranger,

 

There are a few things in your post that I want to discuss with you.  To begin with, let's step away from the debate about first and from this point just understand when I say first resurrection I am simply referring to what John describes in Revelation 20.

I cannot step away from it, lol...that is the central focus.

And this is why the discussion cannot progress, because we have to examine the events as they are given. So rather than stepping away, we hone in closer to make sure we don't miss important information.

We are indeed speaking about the resurrection seen in Revelation 20, now our task is to properly identify it. In the larger focus is the Rapture of the Church, and the resurrection here is said by some to deny that the Church is raptured prior to this time...because it is the "first" resurrection.

But we know it is not, because we already have Christ's resurrection, as well as the Two Witnesses, who cannot be said to be resurrected and raptured after Christ's Return (and this occurs in Revelation 19) because their resurrection takes place during the Second Woe, or, the Sixth Trumpet Judgment. This also denies a correlation to the Seventh Trumpet being the "last trump" spoken of by Paul.

Secondly, we see the resurrection of the dead which is specifically and undeniably stated to follow a thousand year reign of Christ. This is not called the Second Resurrection...but the Second Death.

Which again also causes us to understand that there is not just one general resurrection which takes place which we call the First Resurrection, but that the First Resurrection is a reference to the resurrection unto life. Only tribulation Martyrs are said to be raised at this time.

I think it was you (and forgive me if I am wrong about that) that said everyone in view is "dead" in Revelation 20. That is not the case. Everyone that enters into Heaven is alive in Christ. That is not a fanciful designation concluded from various Scriptures, but a clear designation for anyone who is in Christ: they have been made alive through salvation in Christ and possess eternal life because they are in Him Who is Eternal. This can be said of those seated on the thrones that John sees. We could, if we wanted to, see this as a corresponding statement, in that John sees those appointed to authority and then gives us the details, but, since we see these thrones before events begin to unfold fully, I simply take the view that these are saints already passed away. Either way, we cannot designate them as dead.

I think if we center on the events that we agree only occur one time we can make some progression.

But that is where we disagree, lol.

Denial of a Rapture is based on the argument as stated above. When we take the perspective that protos cannot be defined exclusively as "first in a series" and acknowledge that in many important passages the definition of first in rank is the only tenable way to interpret, then couple that with the fact that we cannot make this the "first" resurrection at all...then the passage becomes understandable in the timeline provided by God through John.

Then...calculate the thousand years into the equation and it becomes very obvious: Christ returns, destroys His enemies, those (who were born again) that died in the Tribulation are raised, and those that died unbelievers (which includes those that thought they were, tares, chaff, evil trees) go into eternal punishment, which begins by their descent into Sheol/Hades at physical death (their bodies devoured as carrion and cleaned up over a seven month and seven year period, Revelation 19; Ezekiel 39).

By that I mean things such as, the dead being judged, or the New Jerusalem, just to give a few examples.

But we cannot impose New Jerusalem into the Tribulation period. Scripture does not do that, but separates the resurrection of the Tribulation Martyrs from the resurrection of the "dead" by a thousand years, then the passing away of the current universe, then the Great White Throne, then the descent of New Jerusalem (which again I think we need to keep in mind a city also represents her people).

Revelation 20

King James Version (KJV)

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Revelation 21

King James Version (KJV)

21 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Again, if we maintain the sequence given us, many problems cease to be a problem. The thousand year period is prophesied in the Old Testament, and it makes little sense to negate it.

Christ did not do that, but taught specifically about this time throughout His Ministry to Israel. Again, read the Kingdom parables with that in mind and they will make more sense because they will fit into the harmonious and consistent pattern of prophecy throughout Scripture.

And I will just point this out:

Acts 1:6-8

King James Version (KJV)

6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

This, I believe, shows that this time has not been removed from God's prophetic timeline, but that the Lord here confirms that time is coming, but it is not for the disciples to be concerned with. Their concern is to be in regards to the coming Baptism with the Holy Spirit and their empowering for a ministry of witness.

 

In Revelation 11, we see the 24 elders speaking in regards to the 7th trumpet being sounded, that is where they state that the "time has come for judging the dead."  Again, that is at your midway point, yet the dead are not raised until the thousand years have ended according to John in Revelation 20.

You are leaving out the raising of the Tribulation Martyrs.

We see several declarations of the "time" being at hand, but, we cannot overlook the fact these are stated...within the Tribulation events.

What is said...

Revelation 10:5-7

King James Version (KJV)

5 And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven,

6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

...even this is...prophetic. That the Mystery of God should be finished does not mean we nullify that the Tribulation does not end until the final Vial is poured out and Christ returns. There is then the resurrection of the Tribulation Martyrs, which as mentioned before does not correlate to Paul's teaching about the Rapture, simply because those saints which have died are not said to be raised in this resurrection.

The midway point in the timeline I see is found here:

Revelation 11:11-15

King James Version (KJV)

11 And after three days and an half the spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.

12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.

13 And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.

14 The second woe is past; and, behold, the third woe cometh quickly.

15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

...and we cannot impose the end of the Tribulation...during the Second Woe, because we have the Third Woe and the Seven Vial Judgments to go. The Two Witnesses are given forty two months to minister, and no man can harm them. So too, the Beast is, right after this event...given forty two months. This coincides with the casting down of Satan, where we see another declaration, following the one in ch.11 (c.f. with 12:15), where it seems there is an "end" to events:

Revelation 12:9-12

King James Version (KJV)

9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

In view is not the end of the Tribulation, but the power once held by Satan. His last ditch effort will be the Antichrist:

Revelation 13:4-7

King James Version (KJV)

4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.

6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

So a chronological view places these events in a harmonious timeline we can follow. The declarations do not mark the end, but signal the end to Satan's established power over this world. Keep in mind that it is God, not Satan, Who is in control and ordering events. His allowance for a forty two month period for Antichrist to be empowered coincides with His judgment on Israel and the world, even as He used foreign nations to judge Israel in the past.

Trying to end the Tribulation to establish a timeline leads to the necessity of making the judgments the same judgments (only being viewed as more specific detail as Genesis Two is), and raises more problems than it settles. A chronological view of Revelation removes the mystery that was not given by God, but men who denied the Millennial Kingdom in the past, and those that have denied the Pre-tribulation Rapture in the past.

Again, just read Revelation from a perspective it is chronological, and it will fall into place. In the middle of the Tribulation, Satan is cast down, the Beast begins persecution of Israel (who is provided protection for forty two months), and the Third Woe and the Seven Vials are poured out.

Then take that and look at what is said here in chapter 10.

 

Revelation 10:⁵ Then the angel I had seen standing on the sea and on the land raised his right hand to heaven. ⁶ And he swore by him who lives for ever and ever, who created the heavens and all that is in them, the earth and all that is in it, and the sea and all that is in it, and said, “There will be no more delay! ⁷ But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants the prophets.”

 

Again, this is at your midway point.  How can the mystery of God be accomplished when we are only halfway through this?

 

You overlook what the text states:

Revelation 10:7

King James Version (KJV)

7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

It is in the days of the Seventh Angel, the Seventh Trumpet, that the mystery in view is finished. The mystery in view is the will of God revealed by His Prophets. In the last half of the Tribulation we see those that are saved and those that are not. No longer will there be doubt as to what is going on, but it will be known that the prophecies are being fulfilled.

This would take some time to develop fully, but the beginning of this chapter plays a significant role, so rather than create confusion with a short response I am going to let this go, and just say that clearly...this is not the end of the tribulation.

It is of necessity for those that deny the Pre-tribulation Rapture to make the Seventh Trumpet the trump spoken of by Paul, which is impossible because we can see that there is yet much left to unfold in the Tribulation after the Third Woe. As mentioned before, it is difficult to make the forty two months of the Two Witnesses (who are killed during the Second Woe and thus cannot be said to be raptured at the end of the tribulation) correspond to the forty two months of the Beast. Antichrist has no power over the Two Witnesses during their ministry, thus, when he does kill them, it is best to see this as the beginning of his wrath, which is for a short time.

And lastly, we see a declaration of an "end" after this (see above, Revelation 12:10), and this too is not the end of the Tribulation.

You also stated that no other book in the bible is not written chronologically, this is not the case, let us go back to the beginning.

 

Genesis 1:²⁷ So God created mankind in his own image,

    in the image of God he created them;

    male and female he created them.

 

When we arrive in chapter 2, we only have Adam, no Eve.  It is in chapter 2 we see Eve created.  That is not chronological.

There is no discrepancy of Chronology here, simply a more detailed account of the day which mankind was created. Eve's creation at no time precedes Adam's, in either text.

It is a chronological order of events still, and secondly...this is not a prophetic text. Again, prophecy is always given in chronological order, and everyone is happy to maintain that chronology unless it conflicts with their system of theology.

And that is the only reason to then displace chronological order to Revelation.

As I said before...the worst advice one can give or receive when trying to understand Revelation is to tell them Revelation is not chronological. It is, and when we maintain that chronology, as we do with every other prophetic text we look at, the necessity for reconciliations is removed. Just look at it, my friend, and I am confident you will come to agree.

I suppose that comes down to whether one sees the Genesis account as literal, which I do.

I do as well, and we are a rapidly disappearing group, my friend. We can thank the a-mil view for much of the confusion there is today about end time events. This has been the view embraced by the Church the most throughout the Church's History. This does not make it any more sound, because of that, any more than we would embrace baptismal regeneration because it too has been embraced by so many over the course of the Church's history.

But again, there is no discrepancy in chronology in the two Genesis accounts: one simply provides more information than the other. Man was created on the sixth day, neither accounts denies that, and both accounts show man created male and female.

Where some get confused (and this is just what I think), is that the naming of the animals, for example, is also thought to be said to have happened on the sixth day, but we impose that into the text. Often specific information is included in passages because they are relevant, but we do not have to make Adam created, naming the animals, and then God providing Eve all to have happened on the sixth day. God's omniscience accounts for His understanding that it was not good for Adam not to have a suitable help meet for him.

Consider:

Genesis 2:18-20

King James Version (KJV)

18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

This simply states that among animals there was not a suitable help meet for him. We impose into the text that this all takes place on the same day, when this is general information given in the course of recounting events.

It could be viewed like this: "God declared that Adam should not be alone, so He made him a help meet for him; Adam named all of the animals and birds, but among them there was no suitable help meet, thus did God give Him Eve."

Also consider:

Genesis 2:10-14

King James Version (KJV)

10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.

11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;

12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.

13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.

14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.

...here again general information which is relevant tot he time of the writing but not to the time in view is also given. We don't impose information about these lands into the text, and neither should we when it comes to the account of the sixth day. There was no thought of implying that when God created Mankind that all of these things took place at the time the information is given. These details pertain to a time that takes place after the specific event, which is the creation of the Garden in Eden.

If you do not then this may not matter to you, but that is my understanding.

 

I look forward to your response my friend, God bless you.

I am a Young Earth Creationist, which is a view that has become very unpopular in the last thirty years, to the point where, just like being a Pre-Tribulation believer, gains disdain and condescension from many I speak to. God created this world, I believe, in six literal 24 hour days.

The Genesis Two account is a more detailed account of the sixth day, in regards to the creation of man, and the naming of the beasts and birds is general information included to emphasize why it was not good for man to be alone. This applies to God's omniscience, rather than God creating man and beast, Adam naming them, and it becoming obvious that there was no mate for man among them. It is for our sake that this is included, not God's, Who knew before creating man that he would need a suitable help meet for him.

And again, enjoyed talking with you, but it is time for me to get back to work, lol.

God bless.

[S.T. Ranger]

Again, I will have to withdraw from discussion with you, as a denial of the Kingdom is by far the worst position one can take. It denies the thousand year Kingdom clearly prophesied throughout Scripture and discussion between an a-millennialist and a premillennial believer is usually pointless, because we approach Scripture two different ways b

That doesn't mean, my friend, that I question your salvation, only your approach to Scripture and the conclusions you have drawn. I may be interested in looking at a few items of interest such as the first resurrection, but as far as debating an eschatological timeline and how events unfold, we simply are working with two different Bibles.

God bless.

 

First, I do not deny the Kingdom.  However, scripture gives us the strong indication that the millenium is only a day based on the verse from II Peter.

 

II Peter 3:⁸ But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

 

Can you explain why this one thing is important to remember regarding the day of the Lord?

 

Secondly, I do understand your frustration, although I do not understand how ceasing discussions benefits anyone.  We are working with the same bible, and I really think what separates us from coming together is the issue of chronology.  So I would appreciate it if you could at least respond to the scripture I offered you in regards to the dead being judged.

 

Revelation 11:¹⁶ And the twenty-four elders, who were seated on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped God, ¹⁷ saying:

“We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty,    the One who is and who was,because you have taken your great power    and have begun to reign.¹⁸ The nations were angry,    and your wrath has come.The time has come for judging the dead,    and for rewarding your servants the prophetsand your people who revere your name,    both great and small—and for destroying those who destroy the earth.”

 

Revelation 20:¹¹ Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. ¹² And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. ¹³ The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. ¹⁴ Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. ¹⁵ Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

 

This only happens once by my understanding of scripture, do you have an explanation for this?

 

I appreciate you indulging me in this conversation, and do hope you will reconsider continuing, or at the very least a response to the above two inquiries.  As for anything you have offered in scripture, I read every word and passage you have offered.  I may not have responded to each one, but I always take what my brothers and sisters offer me in regards to scripture and examine it.  In regards to what you offered towards the argument over whether first means first, none of what you offered to me says what you expressed to me.  I do apologize for only responding to the first offering, not because I did not read all of them, but because I do not understand them in the way you are applying them.

 

God bless you.

Not sure if this will come through, as I have had several posts in the last day not go through, which I will attribute to the tablet.

In regards to the usage of protos, I'm not sure how my post doesn't make the view presented clear. I gave examples of its usage where a sequential meaning is impossible, and combined with the fact that we already know that, at the least, the Lord"s resurrection is the first in sequence of time, and that it makes little sense to have the Two Witnesses resurrected at the end ( because he is empowered for forty two months yet no man can hurt them), then we have to consider ''first'' as not meaning first in a series.

Also, we differ in regards to the thousand years which establishes that the dead do not rise at that time which again distinguishes this resurrection from the foundational teaching of one resurrection on the last day.

It is not a matter of frustration in regards to your view, it is simply acknowledging that if an antagonist will not address a point or issue and continues with same arguments, then we are spinning our wheels. This is true on several key points.

You say you don't deny the Kingdom (and I will clarify the thousand year physical Kingdom, not generally speaking, as I said, your salvation and sincerity is not questioned), then immediately say it is only a day based on correlating Peter's statement, which effectively denies the thousand years. This denies a clear statement in Revelation which is also reiterated by the fact that the first resurrection is simply not the same resurrection which follows and takes place at the Great White Throne.

And I will stop there because several responses I have done have not gone through and with the distractions on my end I don't want to either waste time hunting and pecking on this tablet or do a longer post which won't go through anyway, lol.

God bless.

 

Hello again Ranger,

 

Thanks for the response.  I want to say, I think maybe you misunderstood my position regarding the passage in Revelation 20.  I am unclear as to what you are saying in regards to this, but it appears you are taking this passage to say that the first resurrection occurs after the millenium, which it does not.

There are three different groups spoken of in this passage.

 

Those with the authority to judge, and those who had been beheaded are the first resurrection, this occurs prior to the millenium.  These two groups come to life and reign with Him during the thousand years.

 

The third group is the rest of the dead, meaning those who died outside His grace.  This group is resurrected after the thousand years, this is when the Great White Throne judgement takes place, this is the judging of the dead.

 

I also meant to clarify before, my position on this most closely resembles what people call "pre-wrath".  I don't care much for the name it was given, but I think that is because of the references within scripture that say the wrath of the Lamb.  All of that takes place after where this position places the rapture.  What I know of the a-mil position is not what I believe, but perhaps we have a different understanding of the a-mil position.

 

I see that you mentioned the scripture that I asked you about in regards to the judging of the dead and the chronology question, but I was hoping perhaps you could try explaining this in another way.  I don't understand what you are saying in your response.  I guess the most important question I have regarding this is, do you think the dead are judged more than once?

 

I look forward to your response brother, and I'm sorry you are having issues with your tablet.  I face similar struggles with this ancient computer I am using, so I sympathize with you on that, God bless you.

I will just address this...

"I guess the most important question I have regarding this is, do you think the dead are judged more than once?"

Depends on how we approach the question. From the perspective of man in his sin, judgment has already taken place, and mankind is outside of relationship with God. Restoration of that relationship which was lost in Adam is through salvation in Christ whereby we are indwelt of God thus having, for the first time in our physical existence...life. In regards to the Second Death which is contrasted with the First Resurrection, this refers primarily to the second spiritual death man receives, rather than his physical death. It is on an eternal basis, which the first death, while spiritual, can be remedied. The Second Death cannot be.

So in saying that, when men are cast into the Lake of Fire, they are ultimately and finally judged. Only those bereft of life (as opposed to those made alive through relationship with Christ) will be at that point judged, because for all who have been saved...there is no judgment remaining in the eternal perspective, because Christ has taken upon Himself the judgment we were born looking forward to, which will be exacted upon the unbelieving only.

In Matthew 25 we see the Sheep and Goat judgment, in which the goats are said to go into eternal punishment. They do not go into the Lake of Fire, but, their judgment, just like those in Christ, is already sealed. There is no remedy for those that die outside of Christ. That doesn't negate the Great White Throne Judgment, and the culmination and finality of eternal judgment, but, is the appointed time when those who have rejected God will be tried and punished. I don't believe believers stand at this judgment, because again, if they are saved through Christ, their judgment on the eternal perspective has been paid through Christ. We can't see two judgments for believers, even as we don't see two judgments for unbelievers. We simply see the finality for both in physical death.

At that point, we speculate about the physical bodies that are raised just prior to this judgment. I lean towards all believers being glorified at this point, but, I am not dogmatic about that. It could be that those among the believing that die during the Millennial Kingdom are glorified at that time, as we enter into a new Age which is significantly different from those before it. I have no doubts people will still need to be born again and come into a personal relationship with God through Christ, but again, it's a different Age, so I am not dogmatic.

What we can be dogmatic about, though, is that the Great White Throne Judgment will be the final resurrection which takes place, and Scripture distinguishes this from the First Resurrection of Revelation 20 and separates these two resurrections by a thousand years. Other distinctions have been dealt with in prior posts so no point in going over them again.

Basically, we need to remember that judgment has already fallen on man through Adam, and we distinguish this from the judgment that will be enforced through Christ. Christ taught that men are already condemned, and the remedy was to believe on Him. So that judgment is the same judgment that will exact penalty at the Great White Throne. Men will still die for their sin if they do not believe on Christ, and men enter into eternal life if they do, which remedies the penalty for sin eternally. We have been, at salvation, excused from that death, for Christ has died for us, in our place. We will be judged according to that done in the body, but Paul makes this clear this is not an eternal judgment, which is in view in regards to believing or not believing.

Hope that makes sense.

God bless.

[Salty]

The myth that Christ gathers His elect and then He and they reign up in the clouds over the nations left on earth is a creation by those like John Nelson Darby who began to preach a Pre-tribulational secret rapture in 1830's Great Britian. Their myth that God's coming destruction of this present world age by His consuming fire meaning a total, complete destruction of this earth instead of just its surface like God did with the flood, is also their creation in order to drum up support for their pre-trib rapture theory. That goes along with their myth that God's Israel is always to be kept separate from Christ's Church when God never taught that in the Old Testament prophets, nor in the New Testament. And yet another myth they have that is not written is being raptured out prior to the tribulation with their idea of "tribulation saints" of left-behind Israel on earth that go through the tribulation.

 

Pre-trib Myths:

1. myth - Christ and His elect reign off the earth up in the clouds

2. myth - God's Israel is left behind on earth when Jesus raptures His Church prior to the tribulation

3. myth - Jesus comes from Heaven half-way, raptures His Church to Him, and goes back into Heaven with them off the earth.

4. myth - "tribulation saints" meaning those of Israel that convert to Christ 'during' the tribulation.

5. myth - the holy city still in Heaven, and not on earth for Christ's Millennial reign

6. myth - God's consuming fire at Christ's second coming completely destroys the earth, turning it into an asteroid belt.

 

What's funny, is how one will often notice those on Pre-trib talking about their being in Heaven with Jesus to reign over the nations on earth for His "thousand years" of Rev.20, when they claim Israel and the nations are left-behind on earth, yet per their view the earth is completely and totally destroyed at Christ's second coming!!!

 

Man, what a confused mess that doctrine of men is.

[Judith]

Man, what a confused mess that doctrine of men is.

 

You're right - men have caused confusion  over God's word.  It really makes it difficult for new-comers -

doesn't it?

 

One important reminder we have in God's word is to "rightly divide the word of truth".   By that we

should be careful not to establish doctrines upon one or two scripture verses.

 

When the foundation isn't laid correctly, all sorts of wrong doctrines begin to appear.

 

As I stated before, I see that understanding the divisions of Israel and the Church to be necessary

in order to obtain a correct understanding of end time events - especially with the doctrines of

the Rapture and Tribulation.

 

Blessing,

 

Judith