|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Rapture?
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
the concept of rapture itself is Biblical not 18 century. You could argue Enoch was raptured in Genesis and Elijah was raptured in 2 Kings.
By the Rapture on this thread we do not mean the sudden taking up of any individual à la Elijah et al.
We mean the Rapture as popularly understood, i.e. an end-time sudden departure of all believers, leaving behind unbelievers, usually left to face all or part of the Tribulation, for an indeterminate time before the last judgement (and, somehow or other, with the option of being saved in some other dispensation than that of the present age).
That is the idea that is a) innovative b) being hotly disputed here.
[ 29. November 2016, 15:50: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
how do you know this?
How do you know they didn't believe in small green creatures from Alpha Centauri?
We have no idea what they believed about what they didn't write down, and projecting later beliefs onto them in an attempt to provide historical credibility for these beliefs in the absence of any evidence at all is just not, well, credible.
My point is that they did write it down. You just need to have ears to hear and eyes to see. There is no Flying Spaghetti Monster in scripture but there are lots of eschatological references , certainly not a linear story mind. If you say there is no evidence at all, you could just be choosing to ignore what Biblical evidence there is. What do you do with 'one shall be taken and the other left' for instance?
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
What do you do with 'one shall be taken and the other left' for instance?
This, for instance?
To assume it means believers are "taken" and unbelievers "left" requires not only to interpret the passage against what is actually written in it (in the light of the theory of the end-time rapture), it also requires the introduction of an entire parallel system of salvation which is wholly unsupported by Matthew and, to boot, undermines Jesus' entire point that one needs to be ready at any hour - since it opens up the possibility of being saved after that.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
the concept of rapture itself is Biblical not 18 century. You could argue Enoch was raptured in Genesis and Elijah was raptured in 2 Kings.
By the Rapture on this thread we do not mean the sudden taking up of any individual à la Elijah et al.
We mean the Rapture as popularly understood, i.e. an end-time sudden departure of all believers, leaving behind unbelievers, usually left to face all or part of the Tribulation, for an indeterminate time before the last judgement (and, somehow or other, with the option of being saved in some other dispensation than that of the present age).
That is the idea that is a) innovative b) being hotly disputed here.
And, that idea is part of a Biblical pattern of 'taking up' pre tribulation is is not the only way to look at it. Agreed, it is my way and of course millions of others who do not post here,but it is not the only theological model that believes in a rapture.
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
there are lots of eschatological references , certainly not a linear story mind.
If there's no linear story in the Scriptures, why is there any pressing need to impose one? Did you miss that bit in Timothy about wasting time on speculation?
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
it is not the only theological model that believes in a rapture.
Are you backing off the model of a rapture as defined in my post?
i.e. that leaves unbelievers behind on earth?
There is no biblical passage that straightforwardly supports this. You have been presented with an alternative and more self-evident hermeneutic of Matt 24 and so far chosen to ignore it in favour of one that reverses who's taken and who's left.
If you are backing off that model, please specify what exactly you mean by an end-time "Rapture".
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Jamat;
quote:
but the concept of rapture itself is Biblical not 18 century.
I don't think that I, or Eutychus/Gamaliel/Baptist Trainfan etc are disagreeing about the Rapture - as it says in I Thess 4, any Christians living on the day of the Advent "will be caught up together with them (i.e., the 'dead in Christ' who have 'risen first') in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air".
But we also accept I Thess 5 which portrays how that day will come suddenly and for unbelievers there will be 'no escape' - nothing there to suggest any long tribulation with second chances for the 'left behind', or conversion of the Jews in that period, or whatever.
The issue here is very much the ' pre-tribulation rapture' and whether that specific 'twist in the tale' is Scriptural'.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Urfshyne
Shipmate
# 17834
|
Posted
Chick Yuill (an ex-Salvation Army officer, incidentally)in his book "Moving in the Right Circles" makes the point that we need to view this as those living in the first century would understand it.
He makes the point that a visiting ruler or dignitary would be met outside the gates of a city by its citizens. They would then escort him as he processed into their town - they were not going off with him to his palace.
This, then, was meant as an encouragement to early Christians that God's kingdom would be established in our world.
Posts: 98 | From: Maidenhead - lost | Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
@Jamat, no, I didn't say the idea of the Rapture was 18th century, it's a 19th century concept.
I don't know what positions you are referring to that apparently hedge their bets. I aim to be an orthodox(small o) Christian in the broad Nicene-Chalcedonian and creedal sense. I am not a fundamentalist. In the world I inhabit there are more choices than fundamentalism on the one hand and uber-liberalism on the other.
@Baptist Trainfan, yes, of course I've read Iain Murray's 'The Puritan Hope'. It was popular in the restorationist circles in which I moved in the 1980s.
Talking about Andrew Walker, who has also been mentioned here, I well remember a US doctoral student of his (from the Orthodox Presbyterian denomination in the US) and Walker himself joining forces to roundly refute some dispensationalist nonsense that was coming 'from the floor' at a conference 'On 'Revival' he hosted at King's College in 2003 I think it was.
That graphically made the point for me that neither the Orthodox 'Grand Tradition' nor the Big R Reformed tradition have any room or time for the febrile speculations of dispensationalism.
Sure, there are worse tendencies and bigger issues to contend with, but I&m firmly of the view that dispensationalism is a complete and utter waste of time. I was only exposed to it for around three months after my evangelical conversion when I occasionally attended a Brethren Assembly but that was enough to convince me of its paucity.
Looking back, there was sufficient in the Brethren Bible studies I attended to give me a love of the scriptures and an overview if you like of salvation history, to keep me going. But I never bought into the dispensationalist package. It all seemed so contrived.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
At the risk of a tangent, I hasten to add that I see most fundamentalists, other than the extreme and hate-filled ones, as fellow travelers. The only beef I have with them is either dispensationalism or very wooden forms of literalism ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
The other thing to add is that among the ironies is the fact that the dispensationalists I knew who would criticise the rest of Christendom for allegorising things were only too happy to allegorise the Parable of the Good Samaritan, parts of the Sermon on the Mount, the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats and almost anything else that had a practical application in terms of loving our neighbours or actually being involved in society in any way ...
Of course, we can't lay that charge to the SA but as a general rule of thumb, I'd suggest that where dispensationalism prevails the level of engagement with 'The world' diminishes to the point that it's only there to be preached at.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
criticise the rest of Christendom for allegorising things were only too happy to allegorise the Parable of the Good Samaritan, parts of the Sermon on the Mount, the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats and almost anything else that had a practical application in terms of loving our neighbours or actually being involved in society in any way ...
They don't all allegorise those things. Some take the JW line that they are part of the (NT) apostolic age and therefore do not apply to the present dispensation.
And as I recently mentioned elsewhere, within the last week or so I've read an explanation of the sheep and the goats that describes it as a "pre-trial hearing" (at the end of the Tribulation IIRC) for those "left behind": merely a kind of preliminary triage prior to the last judgement.
I wonder if somewhere in the divine conservation of momentum Keith Green is spinning in his grave at this convoluted travesty - offset by Larry Norman revolving in the oppposite direction as we diss "I wish we'd all been ready"?
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
it is not the only theological model that believes in a rapture.
Are you backing off the model of a rapture as defined in my post?
i.e. that leaves unbelievers behind on earth?
There is no biblical passage that straightforwardly supports this. You have been presented with an alternative and more self-evident hermeneutic of Matt 24 and so far chosen to ignore it in favour of one that reverses who's taken and who's left.
If you are backing off that model, please specify what exactly you mean by an end-time "Rapture".
No you are basically correct I am pretty well a pre trib dispensationalist but I have not commented on the Matt 24 ref except to acknowledge it as relevant.
I was pointing out that there is a rapture concept in the Bible that is denoted by the 'harpazeo' word that appears quite a lot e.g. In Acts when Phillip is transported supernaturally. You were stating (wrongly) as I recall that there is no evidence to support the rapture idea.
So if I was to sum your criticism, you seem to object to dispensationalism per se on the grounds that it is an imposed reading involving the cut/pasting of verses together? To which I reply that pretty well every preacher does this in every sermon. The assumption is that one concept will reinforce another so if for instance the subject is faith, Romans 5:1 might be seen in tandem with Heb 11:1.
Why then is to juxtapose say 1Thes 1,2 with Matt 24 so bad when discussing eschatology? I have seen Matt 24 seen in the light of Dan 9 and Revelation when discussing the tribulation where the 4th beast of Daniel is linked to the Antichrist power who puts the Abomination of Desolation in the Holy place. That beast is seen as the same antiChrist power who is seen in Revelation. It all goes to bed quite nicely. So essentially if you don't make these inferences, what do you do with the apocalyptic passages considering that they are apostolic writings that report some pretty amazing things?
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Urfshyne:
Chick Yuill (an ex-Salvation Army officer, incidentally)in his book "Moving in the Right Circles" makes the point that we need to view this as those living in the first century would understand it.
He makes the point that a visiting ruler or dignitary would be met outside the gates of a city by its citizens. They would then escort him as he processed into their town - they were not going off with him to his palace.
This, then, was meant as an encouragement to early Christians that God's kingdom would be established in our world.
I think I broadly agree with you on this point - that Jesus returns from heaven and his people go out to meet him and as you say effectively escort him.
But for clarification, when you say that "God's kingdom would be established in our world", are you then referring to a Millennial kingdom for a thousand years before the Judgement?
As I read it, Jesus' return, with a Rapture in terms as you portray, is followed almost immediately by the Judgement and the Kingdom established eternally in a renewed heaven-and-earth.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
As Steve Langton has said, Jamat, it's not as if anyone here is denying that there are verses in scripture about people being 'transported' as it were or 'caught up' or whatever term we wish to use. The issue is how we understand these references and whether they dove-tail together to create a particular eschatological schema.
The point us non-tribulation rapture types are making is that there are other ways to understand those references and that the neat schema you describe only makes sense if you want to make it fit. It's not obvious to everyone else nor has it been for centuries.
Are you seriously asking us to believe that the Christian Church remained in a state of collective amnesia on the issue for 1800 years?
@Eutychus, yes, you're right. If they weren't allegorising those passages they were dispensationalsing them out of the way so that they had no practical relevance of application for us today.
Indeed, from my brief sojourn among the Brethren I picked up the impression that the only passages of scripture that had any relevance to us at all were John 3:16 and the more spectacular apocalyptic passages in Revelation.
Talking about apocalyptic writings, are you aware how these function, Jamat? You do know how apocalyptic literature works?
That it isn't 'literal'?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
So Gamaliel, what then do you believe about eschatology?
You state you are neither a fundamentalist nor a liberal so does that mean you believe in a literal second coming?
Do you believe that the scriptures referring to Israel,now apply to the church? Is there room for literal Israel in your thinking?
Why are you so dismissive of a dispensational view is it because you see it as an imposed hermeneutic if so give an eg of an imposition. To me you see, it answers a lot of very basic questions for instance how the OT injunctions relate to the NT behavioural ethic on say marriage. We have one marriage partner now so why was it ok for a man to have a bunch of wives in David's time? Dispensational thinking would suggest that Christ restored the original marriage pattern which had been corrupted after the fall.
[ 29. November 2016, 21:49: Message edited by: Jamat ]
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
[x-post]
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
You were stating (wrongly) as I recall that there is no evidence to support the rapture idea (...) I was pointing out that there is a rapture concept in the Bible that is denoted by the 'harpazeo' word that appears quite a lot
My battered Strong's translates this as 'catch', 'catch away', 'catch up', 'pluck', 'pull' and 'take by force', while my equally battered Thayer's says "used of divine power transferring a person marvellously and swiftly from one place to another".
Nowhere do my reference books use the word "rapture" to translate this word.
Nowhere have I expressed any doubts that the Bible talks about people being snatched away.
What I am expressing a doubt about is that these instances amount to an assertion of the dispensationalist doctrine of the Rapture™ which includes, not only believers meeting the Lord, but also, unbelievers being left behind - with all the attendant theological problems that entails.
quote:
So if I was to sum your criticism, you seem to object to dispensationalism per se on the grounds that it is an imposed reading involving the cut/pasting of verses together?
Yes to the ground of imposed reading, but not quite for the reason you suggest.
quote:
I have seen Matt 24 seen in the light of Dan 9 and Revelation when discussing the tribulation
That is part of my problem right there. I was taught to read difficult passages in the light of simpler ones, and not the other way around.
Matt 24 is admittedly not straightforward, but by anybody's standards it's heaps more straightforward than Daniel 9 or Revelation, not least because it has some practical encouragements for believers (which largely get ignored in eschatalogical discussions).
More broadly, I object to dispensationalism because it attempts to be an all-encompassing system. Everyone brings hermeneutics to the Bible, but some hermeneutic approaches - like reading difficult passages in the light of simpler ones - are a lot more open-ended, allowing different people legitimately to come to different conclusions and, I would submit, more respectful of the integrity of the text.
Put another way, you can't be a good dispensationalist (and by implication, a good Christian) unless you have learned dispensationalism properly. To me that's precisely the kind of religious book knowledge Jesus came to set us free from.
Finally, I also object to dispensationalism because of its fruit. It is endlessly divisive - you have hinted at this yourself as regards just when in the Tribulation the saints are supposed to get raptured - and it often results in evangelism based on fear.
The church I grew up in (open brethren) was not hard-core dispensationalist but a lot of the preachers evidently were, shouting at us that Jesus might come back before the meeting ended, trying to terrorise us into the Kingdom. I became a Christian as a child but I can tell you it was despite those sermons and not because of one. The Chick comics I stumbled across terrified me. They still do.
When she was a small child (in a more innocent age) my wife fell asleep on the bus and woke to find her mum no longer there (she had moved down the bus to talk to a friend), so she promptly concluded she had been Left Behind. I just don't see trauma infliction as being very consistent with what I understand the Gospel to be all about.
quote:
what do you do with the apocalyptic passages considering that they are apostolic writings that report some pretty amazing things?
I take an "idealistic" view of Revelation. In other words I believe Revelation was meaningful to its original audience and that it also has symbolic meaning for all ages of the Church.
I think it points to a final eschaton and that it offers a hint of a final Tribulation, but I do not believe it progresses strictly chronologically, rather that it is a succession of overlapping scenes. It's more like an onion.
I also subscribe to the Roger Forster doctrine of Revelation: he points out that it is the Revelation of Jesus Christ, i.e.
a) from him
b) about him (more than anything else, so stop speculating uselessly about the rest)
c) and belongs to him (so don't go messing about with it)
I also note it has more blessings than curses in it (7 to 4) and has songs of worship on almost every page, and try to focus on these aspects.
Over the past year or so I have regularly taught on Revelation for some regional Bible seminars; not a few of the attendees appear disgruntled that I prefer this approach to calculating who the Beast is or determining exactly which type of Russian attack helicopters are being described, but there you have it.
[ 29. November 2016, 21:47: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
48 years ago I went down this long cul-de-sac which I didn't begin get out of for nearly 30 years. It's tenacious folly for those not inoculated by education. I found I still retained elements of it 5 years ago. The PDFs show the format I followed and the starting point for me was Matthew 24. I was utterly convinced that it would all start before the end of the C20th.
As for what Jesus was actually talking about? Who knows? Including Him. Was He 'in the Spirit'? I accept that still. He wasn't making it up, whatever it was. It starts with the First Jewish–Roman War and ends with His return. Two thousand years and counting. Where the ellipsis is ... it isn't. The events are continuous. They didn't happen so then. So He could be talking entirely about the far future. Far from now that is. In terms of the ancient, local past. Of what may be solely metaphoric and long fulfilled.
...
Who cares?
I majored in those minors, here a little, there a little for 30 years.
And entirely missed the point. The trajectory of the simplicity of Christ. Like everybody else except Martin Luther-King and his ilk.
There is no pre-tribulation 'rapture' even so in the integration of all the proof texts. The cult made up 'a place of safety' centred on Petra, can you believe, whilst denying the Rapture.
You can make up anything from this stuff. Everything except the obvious.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Dispensational thinking would suggest that Christ restored the original marriage pattern which had been corrupted after the fall.
But it does this kind of thing by dividing up the text irrespective of context, style, and everything else. It explains away some problems, perhaps, but at what a cost!
It doesn't let the text speak for itself, warts, problems, challenges, and all. To use your earlier expression, it makes sure "it all goes to bed quite nicely".
I honestly believe dispensationalists have a functionally lower view of Scripture than many liberals I know.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
What do I believe about the Eschaton?
What it says in the Creeds. Yes, those creedal statements are, of course, based in scripture. What they don't do is to spell out any kind of timetable nor promote any particular theory of how Christ's second advent will take place.
Do I see a place for Israel in the divine economy as it were?
Yes I do.
But I don't speculate as to what that might be. What I don't like is the kind of Replacement Theologically that verges on anti-Semitism on the one hand nor the unbalanced focus on Israel that characterises some forms of fundamentalist Protestantism.
In short, I'm comfortable with Mystery and ambiguity.
As for my reservations about dispensationalism, it's based on what I've seen of its results. The Brethren I knew used to pride themselves on their knowledge of the scriptures, but I soon realised this was a chimera - what passed for serious engagement with the scriptures was actually a two-dimensional proof-texting approach not unlike that of the JWs.
I know several people who had a similar experience to the future Mrs Eutychus - both people in the Brethren and also the future Mrs Gamaliel. Her mum was/is an evangelical Anglican but one influenced strongly by Pentecostals and independent evangelicals.
She was obsessed with Israel and the End Times. So I've seen the harm it causes.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Jamat;
quote:
Why are you so dismissive of a dispensational view is it because you see it as an imposed hermeneutic if so give an eg of an imposition.
I'm not too bothered about 'dispensationalism' as a broad idea; it is the 'pre-tribulation rapture' thing which I see as very much 'imposed' by the 19th C 'prophetic students' following Irving.
As I explained above, the first step in this was Irving's insistence on an "any-moment-now" Second Coming, and that people got hyped up to that expectation. There are in fact biblical texts that suggest a different approach.
For example, the Thessalonian Christians had got into a similar hyped-up situation about an imminent coming - and Paul points to an as yet unfulfilled prophecy as reason to calm down. But the 19th C people took things the other way round - they got hyped up, then they discovered prophecies that didn't fit the basic scheme of "Any-minute-now Second Advent followed by the Millennial Kingdom".
And the trouble is, they didn't take Paul's approach of seeing those prophecies as future and as reason to see the Second Coming as 'not yet' ("Let no one deceive you... for that day will not come unless the rebellion comes first..."), instead they simply wouldn't/couldn't give up the idea of that "Any-minute now" Return of Jesus, and they jumped at an interpretation which allowed them to retain that idea, and imposed it on, well in the end pretty much the whole of Scripture, distorting the straightforward interpretation....
This has done immense harm in all kinds of ways....
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Ok so let's say that on the one hand, you have a literal reading that attempts to synthesise the scriptures with regard to the eshaton because it wants to grasp what God's plan in history is and reconcile it with faith in Christ as saviour and his identification with God.
Also, to my mind dispensationalism doesn't do that because it opens up all sorts of hard-to-understand alternatives to the Gospel message of "faith in Christ as saviour".
Not least because it requires you to contrive a basis on which those left behind after believers have been raptured to be with their Lord can be saved, and engage in another variety of hand-waving about various dispensations being saved "by grace" and "by covenant", as Mudfrog puts it (and has yet to explain).
What is all this if not a needless complication of the Gospel?
OK I agree there is no verse that specifically teaches a pre trib rapture. Even Walvoord admits that it is inferred.
Your concern seems to be that there is a problem for those left behind. It may be more difficult to accept Christ but the gospel still hasn' t changed. It is still possible for those left behind to become believers. The scenario I' ve heard put forward by Fruchtenbaum, Prasch and others, is that with the true church gone, God now begins to operate via the literal Jews. This specifically is the 144k Jewish evangelists who are anointed to preach the Christian gospel during this dark time to their own people and anyone else who will listen. The difference is that converts give their lives,they are mainly martyred as they don't take the mark of the beast. Anyone who does cannot be saved but unless you do,you cannot buy or sell.
My question is if you reject that interpretation,what do you do with stuff like the mark,the people in white robes who have been martyred, and other scary stuff in the book of Revelation?
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Jamat;
quote:
My question is if you reject that interpretation,what do you do with stuff like the mark,the people in white robes who have been martyred, and other scary stuff in the book of Revelation?
Those things are constantly happening. It is apparently likely that when John wrote about 'the mark' he referred to a literal mark that would show people had sacrificed to the Emperor to prove their loyalty to him rather than Christ. And I once came across a Russian Imperial edict declaring the intention to make it impossible for dissenters against Russian Orthodoxy to buy and sell and even to LIVE in that state; including that their children were to be taken from them....
Martyrs are again very much a 'here and now' thing, along with plenty of other 'scary stuff'. We don't need a dubious 'extra' Tribulation period to see these things. Yes, it is likely that they may intensify towards the end when the 'man of lawlessness' is revealed; but in a very real sense these trends are always with us, and Revelation relevant to all Christians throughout the gospel era, not just to those in a supposed brief future 'Tribulation'.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
by Jamat;
quote:
My question is if you reject that interpretation,what do you do with stuff like the mark,the people in white robes who have been martyred, and other scary stuff in the book of Revelation?
Those things are constantly happening. It is apparently likely that when John wrote about 'the mark' he referred to a literal mark that would show people had sacrificed to the Emperor to prove their loyalty to him rather than Christ. And I once came across a Russian Imperial edict declaring the intention to make it impossible for dissenters against Russian Orthodoxy to buy and sell and even to LIVE in that state; including that their children were to be taken from them....
Martyrs are again very much a 'here and now' thing, along with plenty of other 'scary stuff'. We don't need a dubious 'extra' Tribulation period to see these things. Yes, it is likely that they may intensify towards the end when the 'man of lawlessness' is revealed; but in a very real sense these trends are always with us, and Revelation relevant to all Christians throughout the gospel era, not just to those in a supposed brief future 'Tribulation'.
All of which suggests you are a historicist seeing AD 70 as the major fulfilment of Matt24. I can see the apocalyptic horsemen riding through history as well. But it is not the whole story. We haven't seen Jesus coming in the clouds.
One thing that makes sense to me about futurism is the schema of the church age as a parenthesis between Daniel's 69 and 70 week. This ties with Paul's teaching in 2 Thes where he says the day of the Lord has not yet come, first the man of sin must come. For a long time I thought that caused people to look for the antichrist not the Lord but the pre trib rapture solves that. If Jesus comes once secretly for the church then later at Armageddon to save Jerusalem where every eye sees him then the paradox is resolved.
This is what I mean by a solution to the fact that in Matt 24 , you have a coming where the Earth is quiet and business as usual with people marrying etc and a different picture where he comes in the midst of upheaval,everything is in disarray and this seems to be the coming in the clouds everyone sees.
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Your concern seems to be that there is a problem for those left behind.
No, my problem is that the theory requires the invention of convoluted solutions, all to deal with a state of affairs (being "left behind") which is solely a product of the theory - there's not a shred of biblical evidence, including Matt 24 if you actually read what it says.
Apart from having to separate the saved into different categories (Christ having already returned for his own...) you have to take the 144k literally, which leads you into all sorts of problems about which figures in Revelation are to be taken literally, and so on. For the 144k you have the kind of problems JWs encounter (try taking communion at a memorial service if you're not one of the few) plus the problem of exactly which tribes they are from (check the list in Revelation and get back to me).
Like I say, all these complications are devised to fit an initial erroneous premise!
quote:
My question is if you reject that interpretation,what do you do with stuff like the mark,the people in white robes who have been martyred, and other scary stuff in the book of Revelation?
I broadly agree with Steve Langton.
If you look at the beast from the sea and the beast from the earth, to my mind you have a fake Son (complete with fatal wound and yet it lives, cf the Lamb who was slain) and a fake Spirit (directing people to the fake Son, and with a counterfeit 'mark' revolving around material goods instead of the genuine and infinitely more valuable 'seal' of the Spirit).
So you have Satan, the father of lies, doing what he does best and building counterfeits. This kind of thing has been going on ever since Babel, the city of man, was erected in mimicry of Jerusalem, the city of God. John warns us of many antichrists, another indication of this going on throughout history.
Like I say, I think Revelation is like an onion, or like childbirth. There are concentric rings, or contractions, that repeat themselves throughout history. They might get more intense and yes I believe they will eventually end up producing the new heavens and the new earth, but like Gamaliel I believe this could just as well be in the far future as tomorrow. People have mistakenly believed themselves to be at the beginning of the end ever since the early church!
And finally, your description of Revelation as containing lots of "scary stuff" demonstrates how much a dispensationalist hermeneutic blinds people to the actual purpose of Scripture. Do you really think all Scripture is inspired of God, to.... scare? If it does, you're doing it wrong somewhere. (Or at least, if that's all it does, or if that's what it does predominantly, you are).
The aim of Revelation is not to have us play guessing games as to what the mark of the Beast is (latest trend: RFID tags as opposed to bar codes which are so yesterday) but to remind us that we have a far better mark in being sealed by the Spirit. Dispensationalism misses out that kind of positive emphasis entirely.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Baptist Trainfan: Iain Murray, Andrew Walker, Os Guinness, Adrian Plass... I sometimes wonder whether our bookshelves could be indistinguishably merged.
My wife would be delighted ... she says we have far too many books (and then we order more). But here's two you may not have: I've just finished Adrian Thatcher's "Redeeming Gender" while she's been reading Steve Holmes' "The Holy Trinity: Understanding God's Life" which I have yet to read.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes. I agree with Eutychus and Steve Langton.
There is an equal and opposite error in all these things, which is something I believe we toppled into at times in my 'new church' restorationist days, and that's to react against dispensationalism to the extent that we adopted an over-realised form of hyper-positive amillenialism with post-millenialist overtones. We were looking for the triumph of the church and the 'powers' of the age to come in the here and now - revivalism on steroids.
For my money, Iain Murray strikes the right kind of note in 'The Puritan Hope ' although I'm not much of a Puritan in my approach these days.
As for the scary stuff in Revelation. It's apocalyptic literature. As such it's full of symbols and cryptic clues - 'let the reader understand' - heck, I wish I did! Give us a clue!
So no, I don't take all the stuff about locusts with stings and the 144,000 and so on in a literal sense. If we understand those passages literally, then why don't wr take the description of the glorified Christ literally? Does Christ in Majesty really have a sword for a tongue?
An overly literal reading of Revelation misses the point and fails to take into account the genre in which it is written.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
"An over-realised form of hyper-positive amillenialism with post-millenialist overtones".
Wow!!!
[ 30. November 2016, 08:03: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
You seem surprised, Baptist Trainfan.
But that's what we ended up with.
I was always happy that we'd eschewed dispensationalism, but in doing so we toppled over to another extreme.
Which only underlines the case that we'd all agree on, that we all need to exercise caution when it comes to eschatological speculation.
Liberals run the risk of under-realising it, more conservative forms of Christianity can go to the opposite extreme and over-realise their eschatology.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Does Christ in Majesty really have a sword for a tongue?
Here is how one medieval artist attempted to depict that.
(If you ever go to the French city of Angers, don't miss its Apocalypse tapestry which is truly magnificent.
My favourite tapestry in the series depicts John eating the scroll: note the second angel behind him ensuring he gets it down properly, and doesn't run away!)
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
But here's two you may not have
I basically stopped buying Christian books in 2004.
(Though I'm seriously considering getting the book touted in this chap's sig for Christmas, especially given the subject...)
[ 30. November 2016, 12:18: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
My favourite tapestry in the series depicts John eating the scroll: note the second angel behind him ensuring he gets it down properly, and doesn't run away!)
Interesting that he's eating a codex and not a scroll. Making me wonder what the Greek actually says, and whether or not the artist knew the difference.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
My interlinear says "biblaridion" which Strong's says means "little book". Of course this is a nod to Ezekiel 3:3 where Ezekiel eats a "scroll" which my Strong's says is megillah in Hebrew.
Note that for both Ezekiel and John the scroll/book is sweet, but it is bitter in John's stomach. Which I take to mean that the tough bit isn't receiving the Word, it's incarnating it.
Either that or John got a Chinese takeaway.
[ 30. November 2016, 12:50: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
My interlinear says "biblaridion" which Strong's says means "little book".
But little scroll or little codex?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
I think the Greek bibliaridion is a format neutral term, so it doesn't distinguish between a scroll and a codex (or an e-book come to that)! (Isn't that an e-reader in a fancy case in the tapestry?)
[ 01. December 2016, 08:21: Message edited by: BroJames ]
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Jamat;
quote:
All of which suggests you are a historicist seeing AD 70 as the major fulfilment of Matt24. I can see the apocalyptic horsemen riding through history as well. But it is not the whole story. We haven't seen Jesus coming in the clouds.
NO, the point is precisely that I too see "the apocalyptic horsemen riding through history" - John describes this in terms of his time to reveal trends that we see throughout history.
by Jamat;
quote:
This ties with Paul's teaching in 2 Thes where he says the day of the Lord has not yet come, first the man of sin must come. For a long time I thought that caused people to look for the antichrist not the Lord but the pre trib rapture solves that. If Jesus comes once secretly for the church then later at Armageddon to save Jerusalem where every eye sees him then the paradox is resolved.
You've expressed pretty exactly what must have been the thoughts of Darby & Co - though I'm not sure they worked it out quite so consciously.
But from where I'm standing, there is no biblical paradox. The paradox was artificially created by the 19th C interpreters like Irving insisting on an 'any-minute-now' expectation of the Second Coming which then left no room for a large group of prophecies (eg, the possible return of Israel to 'the Land') to be fulfilled before the Return. Whereas real history has fulfilled that prophecy about Israel - a fairly spectacular example of Darby & Co's thinking being simply wrong....
It seems clear to me that when Paul talks of the 'man of lawlessness' appearing he is saying "If you my readers are still alive at the time of the Second Coming you will see this". That is, it's a thing to happen before the Return, not something that happens in the hypothetical 'tribulation' period after Jesus comes back.
None of us can know for sure when the Advent will be; but it seems to me Paul is saying that watchful Christians reading the 'signs of the times' will see occasions of likely fulfillment of such prophecy and will not be taken by surprise by Jesus' return. Whereas 'the world' at that time will be carrying on 'as usual' unaware of the catastrophe about to hit them.
Worth perhaps saying that in the NT world 'Armageddon' is not necessarily a straightforward physical battle - certainly not on the part of Christians whose warfare is not with physical weapons. Battle yes - but a primarily spiritual battle rather than a matter of armies and nukes!
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
tl;dr
In response in particular to
quote:
Originally posted by Sarah G:
I think there's a large clue as to what's going on earlier in the chapter (24:1-3), and at 26:1
Full quote
The topic under discussion is the destruction of the Temple. Jesus has been asked when it's going to happen, so he answers the question, and says some more things that will happen around that time.
No-one's asked him about the end of the world. So either he's gone on a very long monologue answering a question no-one's asked about a completely different topic, or he's still talking about the events of AD 70 (which would be near topical news when Matthew wrote it).
Until 26:1, Matthew indicates no change of subject matter.
Jesus went off message in 24:30 as I discuss below.
quote:
What Jesus has done is to use a mixture of OT quotation, and a genre of picture language common to the time, to predict the events of AD70. He was talking much like an OT prophet.
Could be. But ...
quote:
The “One will be taken...” thing probably refers to the 100,000 slaves Vespasian took to fund the campaign. Making the Jewish massacre self-funding was, for the Romans, a political statement along the lines of 'Mexico will pay for the Wall'.
That is at least doubly dubious. It implies for one that God can read the un-happened future beyond extrapolation or planned non-violent intervention. There is no evidence for that anywhere.
Matthew 24-26 New King James Version (NKJV)
Jesus Predicts the Destruction of the Temple
1 Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple.
Matthew 24 - v 2 Jesus accurately foretells the destruction of the temple, fulfilled within his disciple audience's natural lifetime. It was for them: 'you/r' nineteen times in vv 4, 6, 9, 15, 20, 23, 25, 26, 32-34, 42, 44, in answer to their question when, in 3. He wasn't talking to anyone else, to future generations in a Biblical audience. Just the disciples. There was no Bible. To interpolate in to the white space that He foresaw the Bible and this thread in effect, is to destroy His humanity AND divinity in general.
Divinity cannot know what hasn't happened any more than we can. It knows what has happened and what is happening practically infinitely more of course, enabling infinitely rational extrapolation. vv 4-8 is business as usual. False messiahs happened all the time. War happened all the time and where there's war there are famines and pestilences. The four horsemen. Given enough time - and 40 years is more than enough in the region - there are earthquakes, particularly in Italy via Greece to Turkey, but as Jesus was in the Spirit, the Spirit would know where big quakes were building up to a practically infinite forecastable degree in that time period, affecting even the timing of Jesus' birth. Similarly with climate oscillations affecting agriculture, causing famines and pestilences. Epidemics (driven by earthquakes disrupting the ecology) would have been a long time coming from Asia. The Spirit's knowledge of these drivers of war that drives them further with other political factors would be more than enough. The Spirit would know what physical, ecological and political crises were going to happen, a tad better than our long range weather forecasts, for 40 years.
There is nothing here requiring the future to have happened, for God to have played the pre-recorded, infinitely spooled movie in His den and given Jesus spoilers. And in the limits of His omniscience He doesn't have to abuse omnipotence and make anything happen, apart from by the orthodox still normative workings of the Spirit, by which vv 9-14 happen. The Spirit guarantees that Christianity will be spreading at a predictable time of crisis in the Roman Empire. Which guarantees persecution, martyrdom. Which started three days later. Pre-tribulation, pre the coming of 'the end', pre the destruction of the second temple back at v 2. No rapture.
2 And Jesus said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”
The Signs of the Times and the End of the Age
3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”
4 And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many. 6 And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences,[b] and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of sorrows.
9 “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake. 10 And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another. 11 Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. 12 And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.
The church was persecuted progressively for decades which is the main reason why it spread, then the Spiritually predictable all but genocidal annihilation, holocaust of the entire Jewish homeland and all of its people began. The Spirit actually intervened spectacularly with pre-tribulation signs in heaven - in-prophesied, unbiblical; confusingly, inconveniently despite Jesus' prophecy of post-tribulation signs in heaven which didn't happen - so that Jewish Christians - the very elect - were firstly removed from the centre of the coming holocaust (to Pella) in 66 and the Spirit limited the genocide from 67 - 73 so that they were not caught up in it.
Soooooo, we get to The Great Tribulation of the Jews after the four horsemen have been riding alongside increasing persecution of the Church, which had tailed off with the death of Nero in 68. No rapture.
All pretty linear, serial, Jewish, not parallel, concurrent, Greek so far isn't it? Congruent with history. No omniscience except by rational extrapolation. No omnipotence involving God the Killer. Nothing unfulfilled. Yet.
The Spirit knew, by rational extrapolation, how it would naturally - no mention of Satan being involved - go. The Jews would bring down total annihilation of their homeland on themselves from an utterly enraged Rome. This was the greatest threat to Roman hegemony ever. They HAD to win. The eight year campaign financially ruined Rome, on top of Nero's artistic impulses, especially in the final assault on Masada in 74: Keeping 15,000 men supplied in a desert with no water for three months 40-50 kilometres from water, food, timber, fixings, tools for siege engines and massive military engineering. That'll do it.
Half way through the campaign the Greco-Roman abomination of desolation was standing in the holy place for the second time: The Roman army tore the temple down to the foundations to get the gold that had melted in to them from the holocaust. Any Christians in the countryside, not already in Pella, were encouraged to flee further, to the mountains. From that time Jesus' return or more likely the first coming of the Jewish Messiah would be falsely proclaimed, with magic. It would not have to be proclaimed as it would be so obvious.
Again, all very predictable by the Spirit. vv 15-28
The Great Tribulation
15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.
23 “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There!’ do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand.
26 “Therefore if they say to you, ‘Look, He is in the desert!’ do not go out; or ‘Look, He is in the inner rooms!’ do not believe it. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28 For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.
At last we get to the eyebrow raising, divergent vv 29-31 If they were fulfilled in 74 then they were local visions and vastly exaggerated. Jesus was quite capable of such hyperbole, but that feels weak, a cop out. Although Jesus said it would happen immediately after The Great Tribulation of the Jews, He also said He hadn't the faintest idea when: vv 36-44 (including the only rapture at His only return vv 37-40 echoed by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 and Junia in Hebrews 9:28). He was watching a linear vision in the Spirit. v 29 could have happened locally, the first half of v 30 too but not the second and v 31, not unless homeopathically diluted locally. The trouble is v 34 says it will all happen for the same generation. Theirs. It didn't. So it looks like it IS apocalyptic genre hyperbole. But it can't be.
At this point I take comfort that Jesus was looking through a glass darkly at a vision or a remembered dream, or an upwelling story in the Spirit, filtered through His own experience, understanding and desire. In other words, being 100% human, He erred. Perhaps I should revisit the cultic material from nearly 50 years ago. Because the literalist and fundamentalist and dispensationalist and futurist and millennial 'yeah buts' will try and drag in Revelation and Daniel and every other proof text and Israel (what about Anglo!) to make it all contemporary of, imminent upon us.
The Coming of the Son of Man
29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
The Parable of the Fig Tree
32 “Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors! 34 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.
No One Knows the Day or Hour
36 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only. 37 But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 40 Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left. 42 Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming. 43 But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44 Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
tl;dr
Fair enough, Martin. To be honest, it's my interpretive philosophy for the whole thread. Actually, I say this with some sadness, but this whole rapture stuff is liable to convert me into a rad trad catholic or orthodox. It really is a gigantic empire of the head.
There - I've said it. I promise to go away now.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Ron! tl;dr should have had a colon after it! I meant what follows, my stuff.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Thing is, Honest Ron, there are plenty of evangelicals who aren't dispensationalists.
You don't have to be Catholic or Orthodox not to be dispensationalist. The Reformed aren't dispensationalists.
My impression is that it's a lot more common with US evangelicals than than UK ones - even though it started over here.
I don't know about Canada, Australia, Latin America, Africa or the Far East in terms of eschatological positions.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
Tnx Martin & Gamaliel. I do realise that. It just has that effect on me.
And yes, I know all denoms. or whatever you want to call them have their far-out tendencies. It's just that this one seems to have insinuated its way in all over the place. Maybe you just catch me on a bad day - let's see what tomorrow brings. Sorry.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
I've been semi-following this discussion, with some degree of interest. But in the end, I am left wondering "Why does it all matter!"
ISTM that we have it on dominical authority that no one knows the day or hour, but only the Father, and in the meantime our duty is simply to watch and pray, and to go on fulfilling the responsibilities to which we are called.
After all, suppose I stopped bothering because somehow I knew that the end of the world was going to be next week, I might carelessly fall under a bus, and the end of my world would come then.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
I've been semi-following this discussion, with some degree of interest. But in the end, I am left wondering "Why does it all matter!"
I think what you believe about eschatology matters because like what you believe about anything, it affects the way you live particularly your prayers but also your ethics. As an eg someone who believes history is coming to a big climactic implosion is not going to be too worried about saving the planet.
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Exactly, it mattered for then.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
I think what you believe about eschatology matters because like what you believe about anything, it affects the way you live particularly your prayers but also your ethics.
Agreed. Which is why I don't like dispensational premillenialism. It is restrictive rather than liberating, strains gnats, swallows camels, fosters speculation, and generates fear and guilt as I have related. quote:
As an eg someone who believes history is coming to a big climactic implosion is not going to be too worried about saving the planet.
I understand you to espouse the above "big climatic implosion" view. Are you saying that as a result you are not worried about saving the planet?
[ 02. December 2016, 17:59: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
I think what you believe about eschatology matters because like what you believe about anything, it affects the way you live particularly your prayers but also your ethics.
Agreed. Which is why I don't like dispensational premillenialism. It is restrictive rather than liberating, strains gnats, swallows camels, fosters speculation, and generates fear and guilt as I have related. quote:
As an eg someone who believes history is coming to a big climactic implosion is not going to be too worried about saving the planet.
I understand you to espouse the above "big climatic implosion" view. Are you saying that as a result you are not worried about saving the planet?
So now you want to know if I'm a litterbug too?😀
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
No. I am genuinely curious to know whether your adherence to premillenial dispensationalism means you are unconcerned about the welfare of the planet.
Certainly I think such beliefs form a significant part of the reasoning behind resistance to environmental protection in the US.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Maktub. So it doesn't matter. Like all predestination. It really doesn't matter. Nothing matters. Nothing makes any difference. At least 97% of contemporary Britain is damned to burn forever and ever amen in Hell. Unless sending Xmas cards is salvific.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
No. I am genuinely curious to know whether your adherence to premillenial dispensationalism means you are unconcerned about the welfare of the planet.
Certainly I think such beliefs form a significant part of the reasoning behind resistance to environmental protection in the US.
Anybody remember James Watt?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif){kind=icon}
