Steve Gregg-Complete Eschatology (When Shall These Things

Eschatology

(LecturenotesbySteveGregg-lecture;WhenShallTheseThingsBe)

ü IntroductiontoEschatologyü InterpretationofScriptureü HistoryofEschatologicalViewsü TheMillennium-inRevelation20ü TheResurrectionandRaptureoftheChurch

ü TheCasefortheTwo-stageSecondComing-BiblicallyExamined

ü IsThereAWorld-WideTribulationPredictedinScripture?

ü TheFutureoftheChurch

IntroductiontoEschatologyI.Definitions:A.Eschatology—from“eschatos”(“last”)and“logos”(“word”or“subject”)B.Greekvocabularyforthe“comingofChrist”1.nounsa.parousia—“apresence”(from“para”[with]and“ousia”[being])trans.“coming”

OfPaul(IICor.10:10/Phil.1:26/2:12),ofStephanusandFortunatus(ICor.16:17),ofTitus(IICor.7:6,7)ofthemanofsin(IIThess.2:9)OfChrist(Matt.24:27/ICor.15:23/IThess.2:19;3:13;4:15;5:23/IIThess.2:1,8/James5:7,8/IIPet.1:16;3:4,12/IJohn2:28)

b.epiphaeia—lit.“ashiningforth”(translated“appearing”-ITim.6:14/IITim.1:10[ofChrist’sfirstcoming];4:1,8/Titus2:13and“brightness”atIIThess.2:8)

c.apokalupsis—lit.“anuncovering,orunveiling”(usuallytranslated“revelation”or“appearing”—Rom.2:5/ICor.1:7/IIThess.1:7/IPet.1:7,13;4:13/Rev.1:1)

2.verba.erchomai—regulargenericwordfor“come”(Matt.10:23/16:28/26:64/Rev.1:7;22:12)

C.Millennialviews1.millennium-fromLatin“mille”(“1000”)and“annus”(“years”)mentionedinRev.202.premillennialism-Christreturnsbeforethe1000years3.postmillennialism-Christreturnsafterthe1000years4.amillennialism-The1000yearsandsubsequent“littlewhile”(Rev.20:7-8)representthewholetimebetweenthefirst

andsecondcomingsofChrist.II.TheModernSystem(Dispensationalism)

1.SevenDispensations(accordingtoScofield)a. Innocence(Creationtillthefall)b. Conscience(thefalltilltheflood)c. Government(Post-floodtillAbraham)d. Promise(AbrahamtillSinai)e. Law(SinaitillPentecost)f. Grace(churchage)g. Kingdom(millennium)

2.Israel’seternaluniqueness

3.Professedcommitmenttoliteralinterpretation

4.Hiddengapsinprophecya.Isaiah61:1-2b.Daniel2c.Daniel9:24-27

5.Seven-yeartribulation,pre-tribrapture(two-stagecoming)

6.Judaictemple-centeredmillennium

InterpretationofScripture

“Hermeneuticsisthatsciencewhichfurnishestheprinciplesofinterpretation.Theseprinciplesguideandgovernanybody’ssystemoftheology.Theyoughttobedeterminedbeforeone’stheologyissystematized,butinpracticethereverseisusuallytrue. Atleastintheawarenessofmostpeople,hermeneuticsisoneofthelastthingstobeconsideredconsciously.” (Ryrie,DispensationalismToday,p.86)Allegeddifferenceingeneralmethodsofinterpretation:Whatdispensationalistssayabouttheirownhermeneutics:“Dispensationalistsclaimthattheirprincipleofhermeneuticsisthatofliteralinterpretation.Thismeansinterpretationwhichgiveseverywordthesamemeaningitwouldhaveinnormalusage,whetheremployedinwriting,speakingorthinking.Thisissometimes called the principle of grammatical-historical interpretation since themeaning of each word is determined bygrammaticalandhistoricalconsiderations.”(Ryrie,DispensationalismToday,p.86f)Whatdispensationalistssayaboutamillennialhermeneutics:“ThereisagrowingrealizationinthetheologicalworldthatthecruxofthemillennialissueisthequestionofthemethodofinterpretingScripture.Premillenniariansfollowtheso-called‘grammatical-historical’literalinterpretationwhileamillenariansuseaspiritualizingmethod.”(JohnWalvoord,TheMillennialKingdom,p.59)Whatamillennialistssayabouttheirownhermeneutics:“...conservativeamillenniariansinterprettheBibleinexactlythesamemannerclaimedtobeusedbyconservativemillenariansin each of the other schools! All conservative groups, including the futurist and the dispensationalist, claim to use thegrammatical-historicalliteralmethodofinterpretingScripture.”(Wm.E.Cox,AmillennialismToday,p.14)“Butifwerejecttheliteralmethodofinterpretationastheuniversalrulefortheinterpretationofallprophecies,howarewetointerpret them?Well,ofcourse, therearemanypassages inprophecythatweremeanttobetaken literally. In fact,agoodworkingruletofollowisthattheliteralinterpretationoftheprophecyistobeacceptedunless(a)thepassagescontainobviouslyfigurativelanguage,or(b)unlesstheNewTestamentgivesauthorityforinterpretingtheminotherthanaliteralsense,or(c)unlessaliteralinterpretationwouldproduceacontradictionwithtruths,principles,orfactualstatementscontainedinnon-symbolicbooksoftheNewTestament.AnotherobviousruletobefollowedisthattheclearestNewTestamentpassagesinnon-symbolicalbooksaretobethenormfortheinterpretationofprophecy,ratherthanobscureorpartialrevelationscontainedintheOldTestament.InotherwordsweshouldaccepttheclearandplainpartsofScriptureasabasisforgettingthetruemeaningofthemoredifficultpartsofScripture.”(FloydHamilton,TheBasisofMillennialFaith,pp.53-54)Dispensationalistsputafinerpointonthedistinction:“MostpremillenniarianswouldagreewithHamiltonthatobviousfigurativelanguageorinstanceswheretheNewTestamentgives authority for interpreting the Old Testament in other than a literal sense would be just grounds for the use of thespiritualizingmethod. Obviously, some Scriptures of the Old Testament have a figurativemeaning.” (JohnWalvoord,TheMillennialKingdom,p.65)“TheamillennialmethodofinterpretingScriptureiscorrectlydefinedasthespiritualizingmethod.Itisclear,however,thatconservative amillennialists limit the use of thismethod, and in fact adopt the literal method of interpretingmost of theScripture.”(JohnWalvoord,TheMillennialKingdom,p.62)“Ofcourse,literalinterpretationisnottheexclusivepropertyofDispensationalists.Mostconservativeswouldagreewithwhathas justbeensaid. What,then, isthedifferencebetweenthedispensationalists’useofthishermeneuticalprincipleandthenondispensationalists’? The difference lies in the fact that the dispensationalist claims to use the normal principle ofinterpretationconsistentlyinallhisstudyoftheBible...Headmitsthatthenondispensationalistisaliteralistinmuchofhisinterpretation of the Scriptures, but charges himwith allegorizing or spiritualizingwhen it comes to the interpretation ofprophecy.TheDispensationalistclaimstobeconsistentinhisuseofthisprinciple,andheaccusesthenondispensationalistofbeinginconsistentinhisuseofit.”(Ryrie,DispensationalismToday,p.89)“Amillenniarians use twomethods of interpretation, the spiritualizing method for prophecy and the literal method for otherScriptures.”(JohnWalvoord,TheMillennialKingdom,p.63)

“thenondispensationalistpositionissimplythattheliteralprincipleissufficientexceptfortheinterpretationofprophecy.Inthisarea,thespiritualizingprinciplemustbeintroduced.”(Ryrie,DispensationalismToday,p.91)Ryrie considers it inconsistent to take, for example, Ezekiel 39 nonliterally (exchanging the ancientweaponsmentioned therewithmoderncounterparts)whilebeingliteralinthehandlingofMicah5:2(whereBethlehemisgivenasMessiah’sbirthplace:“IftheBiblesays‘likechariots’or‘likeBethlehem,’thentheremaybesomelatitudeininterpretation.Butifspecificdetailsarenotinterpretedliterallywhengivenasspecificdetails,thentherecanbenoendtothevarietyofmeaningsofatext.”(Ryrie,DispensationalismToday,pp.89-90)Threereasonsforchoosingliteralistmethod(accordingtoRyrie):1.Philosophically,thepurposeoflanguageitselfseemstorequireliteralinterpretation. LanguagewasgivenbyGodforthepurposeofbeingabletocommunicatewithman...2....thepropheciesoftheOldTestamentconcerningthefirstcomingofChrist—Hisbirth,Hisrearing,Hisministry,Hisdeath,Hisresurrection—wereallfulfilledliterally.Thereisnonon-literalfulfillmentofthesepropheciesintheNewTestament.

3.“Ifonedoesnotusetheplain,normal,orliteralmethodofinterpretation,allobjectivityislost.Whatcheckwouldtherebeonthevarietyofinterpretationswhichman’simaginationcouldproduceiftherewerenotanobjectivestandardwhichtheliteralprincipleprovides?Totrytoseemeaningotherthanthenormalonewouldresultinasmanyinterpretationsastherearepeopleinterpreting.”(Ryrie,DispensationalismToday,pp.87-89)“Itwasshownthattheonlyrulewhichcouldbefollowedbytheamillenniarianwashopelesslysubjective—thefigurativemethodwasusedwhenevertheamillenniarianfounditnecessarytochangetheliteralmeaningofScripturetoconformtohisideas.”(JohnWalvoord,TheMillennialKingdom,p.71)WhatabouttheliteralunderstandingofDaniel9:24-27;Matt.16:28;Rev.1:1;4:1?TheBookofRevelation:provinggroundofconsistentliteralism

1.HenryMorris:HenryMorrissaysofhiscommentary,TheRevelationRecord:“I have tried to follow a strictly literal and sequential approach to the events narrated, on the assumption that the bestinterpretationofahistoricalrecordisnointerpretationbutsimplylettingthedivineAuthoroftherecordsaywhatHesaysandassumingHesayswhatHemeans...thestudentmaywell find[Morris'scommentary]tobethemost literalapproachhehasencountered.”Ofthefourhorsemen,Morriswrites:“Inheaven,thesymbolismoffourgreathorsesandtheirfearsomeridersisemployed;onearth,theterriblejudgmentswhichtheyunleashareveryliteralandreal.”(p.108,Italicsmine)

...andagain...“Thesehorses,ofcourse,areclearlysymbolic.Therearenohorsesinheaven”(p.112).

2.CharlesRyrie:“Howdowemakesenseofallthosebeastsandthronesandhorsemenandhugenumberslike200million?Answer:Takeitatfacevalue.”(Ryrie,TheLivingEnd,p.37).

Ryrie’sthoughtsaboutthelocustsfromthebottomlesspit(Rev.9):“John’sdescriptionsoundsverymuchlikesomekindofwarmachineorUFO.”(Ryrie,TheLivingEnd,p.45).

Indiscussingtheangelfallenfromheaventoreleasethelocustsfromthepit,Ryriewrites:

“Sometimestheword"star"referstoaheavenlybody(asin8:12).Butthewordisoftenusedtorefertosomekindofintelligentcreature,usuallyanangel(cf.1:20;Job38:7).Bothmeaningsareperfectlyconsistentwithplain,normalinterpretation.InEnglishweusethiswordinthesametwoways.Literally,astarmeansanastronomicalentity;andequallyliterally,thoughasafigureofspeech,weusethewordtomeanaperson,likethestarofafootballgame.”(Emphasismine)Oneistemptedtoaskwhetherthereisanymethodofinterpretationthatwouldberegardedbysuchaninterpreterasrecognizablynon-literal,since the use of "a figure of speech" is regarded (when convenient) to be "equally literal" as the ordinary lexicalmeaning of aword. Theapplicabilityoftheterm"literal"tosuchusagesuggestsanalmostinfiniteflexibilityindeterminingwhatmaybecalled"plain,""normal,"and"literal"interpretation.I have frequently heard teachers claim that, when convenient to their interpretation, "literal" interpretation does not preclude the use ofsymbolism,parableor figuresofspeech. I thinkthesepeoplearegivingthewordanovelnewflexibility. Iamusingtheword"literal"asthedictionaryandmostpeopleunderstandit,i.e.asmeaning"accordingtotheexactmeaning;notfigurative"...inotherwords,Iamusingitliterally.(me,inoriginalintro)Whentobeliteral...Dispensationalsuggestions:1.Thelawoffrequentmention:

“Allagreethat[thenumber1000]isusedsymbolicallyinPsalm50[v.10],butthephrase‘athousandyears’occurssixtimeswithinthenarrativeofRevelation20.”Theterm“theLamb”occurs22timesinRevelation,butthisdoesnotmakeitaliteraldescriptionofChrist.

2.Thelawofgenre:“Thisgenre[the1000yearsinRev.20]isnotpoetic;itisprosenonfiction.”(House&Ice,DominionTheology:BlessingorCurse?,p.325)

2.Thelawofdetaileddescription:

“ThattherewillbebloodsacrificesinthefuturemillennialtempleserviceissetforthinsuchdetailinScripturethatitisnotpossibletodenytheirliterality.ApparentlysuchsacrificeslookbackuponthefinishedworkofChrist,astheyoncelookedforward...”(TreasuryofScriptureKnowledge,p.859,atJer.33:18)Ifthisruleworks,thenweoughttoapplyittothegraphicdescriptionoftheseven-headedbeast(Rev.13:1-3)oroftheAssyriantree(Ezek.31:3-9).TheideathatthesacrificesinEzekielareamerememorialignoresEzek.45:15,17,20,wherethesacraficesaresaid“tomakeatonement.”

Theamillennialalternative:“[Calvinandotheramillennialscholars]...taughtthenowgenerallyaccepted‘grammatical-historical’literalinterpretationsofarastheScripturesingeneralareconcerned.ThattheyretainthespiritualizingmethodinexpoundingmanyoftheprophecieswasbecausetheyfoundthemselvesforcedtodosoinordertobefaithfultotheNewTestament.”(AlbertusPieters,DarbyismVs.TheHistoricalFaith,inCalvinForum,II,225-28,May,1936)“The Reformed hermeneutic is not literal nor spiritual, but surrendered to the usage, regulation, and amelioration of theinfallibleinscripturatedWord.”(Crenshaw&Gunn,DispensationalismToday,Yesterday,andTomorrow,p.38)Wasfirst-comingfulfillmentalwaysliteral?“Whenwe look at the prophecies of Christ’s first coming, we see that theywere fulfilled in a literalmanner, rather thanfiguratively...[lists31examples]...Noneof these fulfillmentswere taken in a figurativewayby theNewTestamentwriters.”(DominionTheology:BlessingorCurse?,House&Ice,pp.321-323)Amongtheexampleslistedbytheaboveauthors,severalarenotliteral:#10.ChristwouldbeastoneofstumblingfortheJews—Psalm118:22(1Peter2:7)(ThoughPsalm118:22isaMessianicprophecyfulfilledinChrist,thisPsalmsaysnothingaboutJesusbeingastoneofstumbling.TheauthorsapparentlywerethinkingofIsaiah8:14.NeitherpassageintheOTuseliteralterminology)#11.ChristwouldbealighttotheGentiles—Isaiah60:3(Acts13:47-48)

(The language isnot literal. TheOTreference thatPaulquotes isnot Isaiah60:3,but Isaiah49:6.However,neitherpassageemploys literallanguage).#14.Christwouldbesoldforthirtypiecesofsilver—Zechariah11:12(Matthew26:15)(ThisisnowhereliterallystatedorhintedatinZechariah11:12)#31.Darknesswouldcomeovertheland—Amos8:9(Matthew27:45)(Onthislastexample,theywrite:“Inexample31,darknessliterallyoccurred.Itmayalsohavesymbolizedthedarknessofsin,butitgotphysicallydarkaswell.”Apparently,symbolismmaybeadmittedasasecondarymeaning,buttheliteralmustneverbesacrificed.However,theydonotarguethatitgotphysicallylightwithreferencetoexample#11.)Crenshaw&Gunnlist97OTpropheciesaboutChrist,identifyingthenatureofeachfulfillmentintheNT—findingthatonly34(or35.05%)wereliterallyfulfilled.(Crenshaw&Gunn,DispensationalismToday,Yesterday,andTomorrow,pp.16-22)ExamplesofNTfulfillment:Matt.1:23 (Isa.7:14) literal2:5 (Mic.5:2) literal2:15 (Hos.11:1) nonliteral2:18 (Jer.31:15) nonliteral2:23 (???) nonliteral3:3 (Isa.40:3-5) partliteral/partnonliteral4:15-16 (Isa.9:1-2) nonliteralThetruecruxofliteralinterpretationcontroversy:Israel!“Thedispensationaliststudiesthewords[“Church”and“Israel”]intheNewTestament,findsthattheyarekeptdistinct,andthereforeconcludesthatwhentheChurchwasintroducedGoddidnotabrogateHispromisestoIsraelnorenmeshthemintotheChurch...allofthisisbuiltonaninductivestudyoftheuseofthetwowords,notaschemesuperimposedontheBible.Inotherwords,itisbuiltonaconsistentuseoftheliteral,normal,plainmethodofinterpretationwithouttheadditionofanyotherprinciplethatwillattempttogiverespectabilitytosomepreconceivedconclusions.”(Ryrie,DispensationalismToday,pp.95-96)TheamillennialiststudiesthesamewordsintheNewTestamentandfindsjusttheoppositeconclusion:WhenisaJewNOTaJew?Matt.3:9/John8:39-40/Rom.2:28-29/9:6-8/Rev.2:9;3:9WhenisaGentileaJew? John10:16/Rom.9:23-26/11:16-17/1Pet.2:9-10/Gal.3:28-29/Phil.3:3/Eph.2:12-18/Heb.11:39-40/12:22-24CantheOTJews’interpretationbeincorrect?Newrevelationcannotmeancontradictoryrevelation.Laterrevelationonasubjectdoesnotmaketheearlierrevelationmeansomethingdifferent.Itmayaddtoitorevensupersedeit,butitdoesnotcontradictit...Ifthiswereso,thentheBiblewouldbefullofcontradictions,andGodwouldhavetobeconceivedasdeceivingtheOldTestamentprophetswhenHerevealedtothema nationalistic Kingdom, since He would have known all the time that He would completely reverse the concept in laterrevelation.Thetrueconceptofprogressiverevelationislikeabuilding—andcertainlythesuperstructuredoesnotreplacethefoundation.(Ryrie,DispensationalismToday,pp.94-95)DidtheOTJewsunderstandthescripturesproperly?2Cor.3:14-16/1Pet.1:10-12/1Cor.2:14/Luke24:45

TheHistoryofEschatologicalViews

A.100-200’spremillennialism(chiliasm)

Papias(60-130AD),Polycarp(70-155AD),JustinMartyr(100-165AD),Ireneaus(130-202AD),

B.200’s-1700’samillennialism

Origen(185-254AD),Eusebius(260-340AD),Augustine(400)—Luther(1500),Calvin,etal.

C.1700’s-1900’spostmillennialism

DanielWhitby,JonathanEdwards,B.B.Warfield

D.1830-presentdispensationalism

J.N.Darby,C.I.Scofield,LewisS.Chaffer,Walvoord,Ryrie,Lindsey,etal

WastheEarlyChurchUniformlyPremillennial?JustinMartyr(AD100-165),DialoguewithTryphotheJew,80:

[regardingthehopeofthemillennialkingdom]Iadmittedtoyouformerly,thatIandmanyothersareofthisopinion,and[believe]thatsuchwilltakeplace,asyouassuredlyareaware;but,ontheotherhand,Isignifiedtoyouthatmanywhobelongtothepureandpiousfaith,andaretrueChristians,thinkotherwise.

Irenaeus(AgainstHeresies5:31:1)saidthattherewere“somewhoarereckonedamongtheorthodox”whodidnotholdhispremillennialviews.Dispensationalist,PatrickAllenBoyd, ADispensationalPremillennialAnalysisoftheEschatologyofthePost-ApostolicFathers(UntiltheDeathofJustinMartyr),Th.M.thesis,DallasTheologicalSeminary,1977,pp.90-91:

It istheconclusionofthisthesisthatDr.Ryrie’sstatement[i.e.thatdispensationalismwastheviewoftheearlychurchfathers] ishistoricallyinvalidwithinthechronologicalframeworkofthisthesis. Thereasonsforthisconclusionareasfollows:1).thewriters/writingssurveyeddidnotgenerallyadoptaconsistentlyappliedliteralinterpretation;2).theydidnotgenerallydistinguishbetweentheChurchandIsrael;3).thereisnoevidencethattheygenerallyheldtoadispensationalviewofrevealedhistory;4).althoughPapiasandJustinMartyrdidbelieveinaMilennialkingdom,the1,000yearsistheonlybasicsimilaritywiththemodernsystem(infact,theyanddispensationalpremillennialismradicallydifferonthebasisoftheMillennium);5).theyhadnoconceptofimminencyorapretribulationalraptureoftheChurch;6).ingeneral,theireschatologicalchronologyisnotsynonymouswiththatofthemodernsystem.Indeed,thisthesiswouldconcludethattheeschatologicalbeliefsoftheperiodstudiedwouldbegenerallyinimicaltothoseofthemodernsystem(perhaps,seminalamillennialism,andnotnascentdispensationalpremillennialismoughttobeseenintheeschatologyoftheperiod).*

Postmillennialist,DanielWhitby,ATreatiseontheTrueMillennium:

ThedoctrineofthemillenniumwasnotthegeneraldoctrineoftheprimitivechurchfromthetimesoftheapostlestotheNicenecouncil...forthenitcouldhavemadenoschisminthechurch,asDionysiusofAlexandriasaithitdid.

Epiphanius(315-403),Heresies,77:26:ThereisindeedamillenniummentionedbySt.John;butmost,andthosepiousmen,lookuponthesewordsastrueindeed,buttobetakeninaspiritualsense.

Eusebius(325AD),EcclesiasticalHistory,3:39:

Papias...givesalsootheraccountswhichhesayscametohimthroughunwrittentraditions,certainstrangeparablesandteachingsoftheSaviourandsomeothermoremythicalthing. Amongthesehesaysthattherewillbeaperiodofsomethousandyearsaftertheresurrectionofthedead,whenthekingdomofChristwillbesetupinamaterialformonthisvery

* In a footnote, Boyd writes: “[The writer of this thesis] is a dispensational premillennialist, and he does not consider this thesis to be a disproof of that system. He originally undertook the thesis to bolster the system by patristic research, but the evidence of the original sources simply disallowed this.”

earth.Isupposehegottheseideasthroughmisunderstandingoftheapostolicaccounts,notperceivingthatthethingssaidbythemwerespokenmysticallyinfigures.Forheappearstohavebeenofverylimitedunderstanding,asonecanseefromhisdiscourses—thoughsomanyoftheChurchFathersafterhimadoptedalikeopinion,urgingintheirownsupporttheantiquityoftheman.

Epiphanius(315-403),Heresies,77:26:

ThereisindeedamillenniummentionedbySt.John;butmost,andthosepiousmen,lookuponthesewordsastrueindeed,buttobetakeninaspiritualsense.

Eusebius(325AD),EcclesiasticalHistory,3:39:

Papias...givesalsootheraccountswhichhesayscametohimthroughunwrittentraditions,certainstrangeparablesandteachingsoftheSaviourandsomeothermoremythicalthing. Amongthesehesaysthattherewillbeaperiodofsomethousandyearsaftertheresurrectionofthedead,whenthekingdomofChristwillbesetupinamaterialformonthisveryearth.Isupposehegottheseideasthroughmisunderstandingoftheapostolicaccounts,notperceivingthatthethingssaidbythemwerespokenmysticallyinfigures.Forheappearstohavebeenofverylimitedunderstanding,asonecanseefromhisdiscourses—thoughsomanyoftheChurchFathersafterhimadoptedalikeopinion,urgingintheirownsupporttheantiquityoftheman.

TheEarliestFathers

(includingpremillennialFathers)interpreted“Israel”astheChurchinOldTestamentKingdomPassages

"Papias[AD60-130]appliedmuchoftheOldTestamenttothechurch...”“JustinMartyr[AD100-165]...claimsthattheChurchisthetrueIsraeliticrace,therebyblurringthedistinctionbetweenIsraelandtheChurch."(Dispensationalist,AlanPatrickBoyd:DispensationalPremillennialAnalysisoftheEschatologyofthePost-ApostolicFathers(UntilthedeathofJustinMartyr)unpublishedmaster'sthesis,DallasTheologicalSeminary,1977,pp.60-61,62).

Possibleoriginatorofpremillennialism:theGnosticCerinthus?W.G.T.Shedd(1820-1894),AHistoryofChristianDoctrine,Vol.II,pp.390f:

“[Millennialism]appearsfirstinthesystemoftheJudaisticGnosticCerinthus.”AlanPatrickBoyd,(Ibid.,p.17)callsCerinthus

“theearliestchiliast[millennialist].”PhilipSchaff,AReligiousEncyclopedia:OrDictionaryofBiblical,Historical,DoctrinalandPracticalTheology(1883),Vol.3,pp.1514f:

“The ultimate root ofmillenarianism is the popular notion of theMessiah current among the Jews...It is found inCerinthus(Eusebius,Eccl.Hist.,3:28;7:25),inTheTestamentsoftheTwelvePatriarchs(Jud.,ca.25;Benjam.,ca.10),andamongsttheEbionites(Jerome,InJes.,40:1;66:20).”

TheMillenniuminRevelation20

I.Threeschemes

A.Premillennial:Christcomespriortochapter20.TheseeventsfollowHisreturn.

B.Postmillennial:Theseeventsoccurattheendofthechurchage,priortothe2ndcoming.

C.Amillennial:Thechapterisasymbolicalrepresentationoftheageofthechurch.II.Summaryofwholechapter:

A.Revelation20:1-3—TheBindingoftheDragon

B.Revelation20:4-6—TheThousand-YearReign

C.Revelation20:7-9a—Satan’sBriefRespite

D.Revelation20:9b-15—TheJudgmentSceneIII.Theclosingevents(vv.9-15)arethoseassociatedelsewherewithChrist’s2ndcoming:

A.Rev.20:9Firefromheaven(2Thes.1:8/2:8)

B.Rev.20:12-15ResurrectionandJudgment(John5:28-29/2Tim.4:1/Matt.25:31ff)

C.Rev.20:14Thelastenemy,death(1Cor.15:26),isdestroyedattheresurrectionofthelastday(1Cor.15:54-55)

D.Rev.20:11&21:1Thedestructionofthecosmos,anditsregeneration(2Pet.3:10-13/Rom.8:18-21/1Cor.15:24)

IV.Expositionofthechapter:

A.Revelation20:1-3—TheBindingoftheDragon1.The“angel”

a.Jesuscalled“angelofthecovenant”(Mal.3:1)andan“angel”(Rev.10:1).

b.Couldanylesser“angel”manhandleSataninthemannerdescribedhere?(cf.Jude9)2.The“binding”ofSatan

a.ThisverymetaphorisusedbyJesusofwhatHeaccomplishedagainstSatan(Matt.12:29)andbytheapostlesaboutwhatwasaccomplishedagainstthedemons(2Pet.2:4/Jude6)

b.Theimageryof“binding”inMatt.12:29issubstitutedwith“disarming”inLuke11:22.

c.CompareCol.2:15/Heb.2:14/1John3:83.The“thousandyears”Theterm“1000”isneverusedelsewhereasastatisticalfigure,butisfrequentlyusedasafigureforanindefinitelylargenumber (cf. Deut.1:11/7:9/32:30/Ps.50:10/84:10/90:4/Eccl.7:28/Isa.30:17/2 Pet.3:8), even as “hundredfold”(Matt.19:29)means“many-fold”(Luke18:30)and“seventy-timesseven”contrastswith“seven”(Matt.18:21-22).

B.Revelation20:4-6—TheThousand-YearReign

1.Theenthronedsaints—Where?Heavenorearth?

a.Thrones:AllthronesseenpreviouslyinRevelation(exceptthethroneofthebeast)wereseeninheaven,notonearth.Whatevidenceisthereformakinganexceptionhere?

b.Thesoulsofthemartyrs:Thisapparentlymeans“disembodiedsouls”—whichcanonlyrelatetoatimeafterdeathbutbeforetheresurrectionatthesecondcoming.Thesamewereseeninheavenin6:9.

c.“Lived[still]”(i.e.inheaven)or“livedagain”(i.e.resurrectedonearth)?v.4(Seeaccompanyingchart)

2.Thebeastandhismark

Thebeastisnotnecessarilyan“end-times”figuremerely.ThefigureofthebeasthasbeencrediblyappliedtoapersonorsysteminJohn’sowndayor,alternately,withthe“worldsystem”ingeneralthroughouttheage.3.The“firstresurrection”

a.Sincethereisonlyonephysicalresurrectionattheendoftheage,whichwillgatherinboththerighteousandtheunrighteous,thisresurrectionisthespiritualresurrectionofregeneration,thusspokenofbyJesus(John5:24)andbyPaul(Eph.2:1,5).

b.Thischapterhastwodeaths(v.15)andtworesurrections(vv.5-6).Astheseconddeathisnotofthesamekindasthefirstdeath(physical),sothefirstresurrectionisnotofthesamekindasthesecond(physical).

4.The“restofthedead”

Theunsaveddonotexperienceresurrectionofanykinduntiltheendoftheage,whenallthebodiesoftherighteousandoftheunrighteouswillrisetogether(John5:28-29/Acts24:15)

C.Revelation20:7-9a—SatanAgain"AtLarge"

1.Deceptionofthenations—yettocome,justpriortotheendoftheage

2.The“belovedcity”—thechurch(Matt.5:14/Heb.12:22-23/Rev.21:2,9-10)

3.GogandMagog—mentionedonlyhereand,inadifferentform,inEzek.38:2,inconnectionwithabattleusuallyunderstoodasoccurringbeforethesecondcomingofChrist.

V.Conclusion:Thischapter,foundinthemostsymbolicbookoftheBible,andutilizingobvioussymbolism,doesnotinviteanoverly-literalinterpretation.WhenScriptureiscomparedwithrelevantScripture,itbecomesevidentthatthesecondcomingofChristisdepictedintheclosingversesofthechapter—notatthebeginning—andthatthebindingofSatanatthebeginningofthechapterisasymbolofChrist’svictoryatthecross.The1000yearsinthemiddleofthechapterthusrepresentsthelengthyperiodbetweenthefirstandthesecondcomingsofChrist,asinterpretersthroughouthistoryhavesuggested.

Revelation20:4

“theylivedandreigned...”or“theycametolifeandreigned...”

ThefirstoptionsupportstheamillennialviewthatthesoulsoftheChristians,thoughtheyhaddied,livedon(i.e.inheaven).

Thesecondoptionsupportsthepremillennialviewthatthesaints

camebacktolife(i.e.byresurrection)afterdeath.

“lived”or“cametolife”=ezésan,aoristindicativeactiveofzáo(tolive),andisfoundinthesametenseintwootherplacesinRevelation:

Rev.2:8—“[Christ],whowasdeadandezésan”

Rev.13:14—“...thebeastwhowaswoundedbytheswordandezésan”

—whereitisvariouslytranslatedasfollows—

BibleVersion Revelation2:8 Revelation13:14 Revelation20:4KingJames isalive didlive lived

NewKingJames cametolife lived livedNASB hascometolife hascometolife cametolifeNIV cametolifeagain yetlived cametolife

Amplified cametolifeagain stilllived livedagainTEV(GoodNewsBible) livedagain yetlived cametolife

JerusalemBible hascometolifeagain stilllived cametolifeRevisedStandard cametolife yetlived cametolifeagainRevisedEnglish cametolifeagain yetlived cametolifeagain

Notice:1.InRevelation2:8,alltranslationsexcepttheKJVtranslateezésanas“cametolife”orsomeequivalent,sincetheresurrection

ofChristisinview;

2.InRevelation13:14,alltranslationsexcepttheNASBtranslateezésanas“lived”orsomeequivalent,sinceitisthebeastthatsurvivedthewoundingofoneofitssevenheads;

3.OnlytheKJVandNKJV(probablyfollowingtheKJV)translateezésanas“lived,”(reflectingtheamillennialcommitmentsoftheKJVtranslators),whileallothers(probablyreflectingpremillennialcommitmentsofthetranslators)translateas“cametolife”orsomeequivalent;

4.OnlytheKJVandNASBtranslatedconsistentlyinallthreepassages,thoughtheyfavoreddifferenttranslationsfromoneanother.

5.Sincemostagreethatezésanmeans“cametolife”inRev.2:8,and“yetlived”in13:14,itseemsclearthatthetranslationin20:4couldgoeitherway,dependinguponone’seschatologicalleanings.

A.T.Robertsonwrote,onRevelation20:4“andtheylived”:

“Ifingressiveaorist,itmeans‘cametolife’or‘livedagain’asin2:8...Ifitisconstantiveaoristhereandinverse5,thenitcouldmeanincreasedspirituallife.”

Thesecondverb“andreigned,”isebasileusanwhichisalsothesameaoristindicativeactive(ofbasileuo),andis,accordingtoRobertson,“moreclearlyconstantive.”(WordPicturesintheNewTestament,Vol.5,p.459)

TheResurrectionandRaptureoftheChurch

I.DistinctivesoftheDispensationalscheme:A.Twophasesorstagesof“thesecondcoming”:“therapture”beforethetribulation,and“therevelation”afterthetribulation.

B.Infirststage,Christcomesforthesaints;inthesecondstage,Hecomeswiththesaints.C.Theraptureoccurswiththe“firstresurrection”(Rev.20:5-6),thatis,theresurrectionofthechurchsaints.Thelostwillberesurrectedafterthemillennium(Rev.20:11ff).

D.ThechurchisthusremovedbeforeGodpoursoutHiswrathforsevenyearsontheearth,andistakentoheaventoreceiveherrewardsandtoparticipateinthemarriagesupper.

E.Thoseinthetribulationwhobecomebelievers,willthereforenotbepartofthechurch,havingmissedthefirstresurrection.

II.Originsofthetwo-stagetheoryofthesecondcoming:A.1812,JesuitpriestEmmanuelLacunza,wrotethattherewouldbea45-dayintervalbetweenthecomingofChristforthesaintsandHiscominginjudgmentupontheearth.

B.In1826-27,EdwardIrvingtranslatedLacunza’sworkfromSpanishandtaughtsomethingsimilar,extendingtheintervalfrom45daystothreeandahalfyears.

C.In1930,JohnNelsonDarbyincorporatedthetwo-stagebeliefintohisnewdispensationalsystem,butextendedthelengthoftheintervaltosevenyears.

D.IrvingorDarby,orboth,mayhavebeeninfluencedbya“propheticutterance”givenbyagirlnamedMargaretMacDonaldaroundthesameperiod.

E.Today,thereare“mid-tribulationrapturists,”whobelieve,likeIrving,inanintervalofthreeandahalfyears,butmostdispensationalistsare“pretrib-ers,”whofollowDarbyinmakingtheintervalsevenyears.ThereisalsotheviewofMarvRosenthal,called“thepre-wrathrapture,”placingtherapturelaterinthetribulationthanthemid-tribulationalistsdo(21monthslater),butstillfindinganintervalbetweentheraptureandtherevelationofChristfromheaven.

III.Relevantbasictexts:1Thess.4:14-18&1Cor.15:51-54

A.Nomentionoftribulationineithertext.B.Nomentionofintervalbetweentwostagesofsecondcoming.C.Bothpassagesconnecttherapturewiththeresurrectionofthesaints.

IV.Whenistheresurrectionofthesaints?A.Aretheretworesurrections,oronlyone?1.Onlyone?(John5:28-29/Acts24:15/Matt.25:31ff)2.Two?(Rev.20:5-6,12-13)a.“thedeadinChristshallrisefirst”(1Thess.4:16)b.“thosewhoareChrist’satHiscoming”(1Cor.15:23)

3.Whatismeantby“thefirstresurrection”?(John5:24-29/Eph.2:1,5/Col.2:13)B.Whenwilltheresurrection/rapturebe?

1.AttheParousia(1Thes.4:15,17)[parousia=apokalupsis(cf.Matt.24:39withLuke17:30)]

2.Atthelasttrump(1Cor.15:52)

3.AtthejudgmentappearingofChrist(2Thes.1:6-8)

4.Atthe“dayofChrist”/“dayoftheLord”/“dayofGod”(allsynonymous:1Cor.1:8/2Cor.1:14)

5.Onthelastday(John6:39,40,44,54/12:48)

TheCasefortheTwo-stageSecondComingBiblicallyExamined

I.TheArguments

A.ArgumentsfrominterpretationofRevelation:

1.Theentirechurchageisencompassedinthesevenletters(Rev.2-3)

2.John’sbeingcaughtuptoheaven(4:1)representstheraptureofthechurch.

3.Theterm“church”foundfrequentlyinthefirst3chapters,isnotfoundinRevelationafter4:1.

4.ThechurchisnotseenonearthafterRev.4:1,thoughitisseeninheaven(i.e.inthe24elders).

5.Rev.3:10promisesthePhiladelphianchurch(representingthefaithfulchurchinthelastdays)thatChristwoulddeliverthemoutofthetribulationperiod.

B.Argumentsofinappropriateness

1.Wearenotappointedtowrath(1Thes.1:10/5:9).ThetribulationisthetimeofGod’swrath.

2.Thetribulation,“thetimeofJacob’strouble”(Jer.30:7),isnotforthechurch,butforIsrael.

3.Jesustoldustopraythatwemightescapethegreattribulation(Luke21:36)—Jesusapparentlythoughtwedon’tbelonghereduringthetribulation.

4. Matt.24 :40-41 andLuke17:34-36, speak of the sudden “taking” of the church, leaving others behind to endure thetribulation.

5.Theviewthattherapturehappenssimultaneouslywiththesecondcomingpositstheridiculousscenarioofthechurchgoingup,thenrightdownagain...likeayo-yo!

C.Argumentsofimpossibility

1.Passagesabouttherapture(John14:1-4/1Cor.15:51-58/1Thess.4:13-18)donotcontainthesamedetailsasdothoseaboutthejudgmentcomingofChrist(Zech.14/Rev.19/Matt.24:29-31andparallels)—sothetwocannotbespeakingofthesameevent.

2.Christcannotcome“with”Hissaints(1Thes.3:13)untilHehasfirstcome“for”thesaints.

3.Theriseofthemanofsinatthebeginningofthetribulationcannotoccuruntilthechurchisremoved(2Thes.2:6-8).The“fallingaway”(v.3)maybeareferencetotherapture.

4.JesuslikenedthetimeofHiscomingtothedaysofNoahandofLot(Luke17:26-29).Bothpersonsillustratethepretribulationalrapture:ThefloodandthedestructionofSodomrepresentthetribulationperiod.Enochwas“raptured”beforetheflood(Gen.5:24),andNoah’sfamily(representingtheremnantofIsrael)werepreservedthroughtheflood.Lot(atypeofthechurch)wastakenoutofSodombeforeitsdestruction.GodsaidHecould“donothing”toSodomuntilLothadbeensafelyremoved(Gen.19:22).

5.Ifwemustendurethetribulation,the“blessedhope”(Tit.2:13)cannotbeblessed,butwretched!

D.Argumentsfrom“imminency”(theteachingthatJesuscouldcomeatanytime)

1.Wearetobe“looking,”“watching”and“waiting”fortheany-momentreturnofJesus(1Thes.1:10/5:6/Phil.3:20/Tit.2:13/Heb.9:28).ThedoctrineoftheImminencyofChrist’scoming(i.e.thatChristmightcomeatanymoment)wouldbeinvalidiftherewereevents(i.e.thetribulation)thatmustoccurbeforeChristreturns(Matt.24:48).

2.Jesuswillcome“asathief”(1Thes.5:2-3/2Pet.3:10),meaning“withoutwarning.”Thismustapplyonlytotherapture,sincetherewillbesignsindicatingthetimeofHiscomingattheendofthetribulation.

3.ThatnooneknowsthedayorthehourofHiscoming(Matt.24:36)alsosuggestsanearlyrapture,sincetheexactdayofHiscomingcouldbecalculatedfromeventsoccurringinthetribulation.

4.Thedoctrineofimminencyistheprincipalmotivatorforholylivingandevangelism.

II.TheArgumentscross-examined

A.ArgumentsfrominterpretationofRevelation

1.ThispropositionisnotstatedorimpliedinScripture.

2.IfJohnsascensionin4:1representsthechurch’s,dothelaterpassageswhereJohnisonearth(e.g.11:1-2/17:1ff)alsorepresentthechurchbackonearth?

3.Theterm“church”isneverusedinRevelationofthewholechurch,butonlyofindividuallocalcongregations,contemporaryinJohn’sday.Thattheyarenotaddressedafter4:1isinconsequentialtothequestionoftherapture.

4.ThatportionsofthechurchareseeninheaveninRevelationdoesnotrequireapreviousrapturetohavetakenplace.Therearemillionsofsaintsinheavenevennow.Thechurchisseenonearthaswellasinheaven,becausethe“saints”(13:7)areidentifiedwith“theLamb’swife”[i.e.thechurch](19:7-8).

5.Revelation3:10doesnotpromisearapture,nornecessarilyrefertothetribulation.Ifthetribulationisinview,thechurchcouldbe“keptfrom”(Gr.ektereo)harmwithoutbeingraptured(comp.John17:15,whereektereoisalsofound).

B.Argumentsofinappropriateness

1.Thereisnoreasontoidentify“wrath”in1Thes.1:10&5:9withaperiodoftribulation(Rom.5:9).Besides,nooneeverclaimedthatChristianswouldsufferGod’swrath,eveniftheywereinthetribulation.

2.Jeremiah30:7isnotaboutthetribulation,butabouttheBabylonianexile(cf.vv.3,8,10),but,evenifthetribulationwereinview,thisdoesn’tlogicallyarguefortheabsenceofthechurchfromearth.

3.ThereisnopriormentioninLuke21ofatribulationattheendofthepresentage.ThereismentionoftheholocaustatdestructionofJerusalemin70AD(vv.5-7,20-23),fromwhichthebelieversactuallydidescape(accordingtoEusebius,EcclesiasticalHistory).

4.Matt.24:40-41andLuke17:34-36,incontext,donotspeakoftheraptureofthechurch,butofthedestructionofthewickedatChrist’scoming(seeMatt.24:38-40/Luke17:37/Psalm91:7-8/Ps.37:9-11/Prov.2:21-22/Matt.5:5/13:30,41-43,49-50).IstherapturefoundintheOlivetDiscourse?Ifso,where?Matt.24:31?

5.Theword“tomeet”(1Thes.4:17)canrefertothecustomofgoingouttowelcomeadistinguishedguestinordertoaccompanyhimontheremainderofhisapproach(Matt.25:1/Acts28:15.

C.Argumentsofimpossibility

1.Bythesamereasoning,Jesusmusthavebeenbornonearthtwice(sinceMatt.2andLuke2giveverydifferentaccounts)andHemusthavediedandarisenfromthedeadfourtimesormore,sincenotwoaccountsgiveexactlythesamedetailsoftheseevents!

2.Jesuscouldcome“with”Hissaints,evenifHehadcome“for”themonlymomentsearlier.However,evenwithouttherapture,therearemultitudesofsaintsalreadywithHim,whomHewillbringwithHim(1Thes.4:14).

3.2Thessalonians2:6-7makesnomentionoftheremovalofthechurchpriortotheappearanceofthemanofsin,andplainlystatesthatthemanofsinmustappearbeforeourgatheringuntoChrist[therapture](vv.1-3).Thus“hethathinders”(v.7)maymeananynumberofthings,butitcannotmeanthechurchortheHolySpiritinthechurch.Theapostasia[fallingaway](v.3)isnottherapture.ThewordisusedelsewhereonlyinActs21:21ofJewsfallingawayfromMoses.

4.ThefloodanddestructionofSodomarenowheresaidtorepresentatimeoftribulation,buttheyarelikenedtothejudgmentofsinnersatthesecondcoming(2Pet.3:4-10/Jude7)

5.Titus2:13doesnotequate“theblessedhope”withtherapture,perse,butwith“thegloriousappearing”ofChrist.Whywouldthehopeofbeingrapturednotbeablessedonetosaintsinthetribulation?

D.Argumentsfrom“imminency”

1.ThedoctrinethatJesus“maycomeatanytime”isnowheretaughtintheBible.Paulspecificallyrefutesitin2Thes.2:1-8.Towaitorwatchorlookforsomethingdoesnotruleoutthepossibilitythatweexpectsomeotherthingstohappenfirst(seeHeb.11:10,13).Themanwhosaid“myLorddelayshiscoming”wasjudgedforhisbehavior,nothiseschatologicalbeliefs(Matt.24:49)

2.Theideathattherewillbe“signs”indicatingthesoonnessofHiscomingisapropositionrestingupontheflimsiestscripturalfoundation.ThefactthatHiscoming“asathief”mustbeonly“forthesaints”isruledoutbyPeterapplyingittotheendoftheworld(2Pet.3:10ff),andPaulapplyingittojudgmentofunbelievers(1Thess.5:2-3).PaulplainlystatesthatthisphraseisnotapplicabletoChristiansspecially(1Thes.5:4).

3.Jesus’admissionofHisownignorance,andthatofeveryoneelse,appliedtothetime-frameofHiscomment.Thereisnoreasontoapplyittopersonslivinginsomefuturetribulationperiod.Nonetheless,attemptsatcalculatingthedateofChrist’sreturn,ifmadebythoselivinginthetribulation,wouldnotbemorelikelytobeaccuratethanhavethemanyembarrassingattemptstodothesamethroughouthistory.

4.Itisnotnecessarytoemployfalsehoodtomotivatetoholylivingorevangelism.IfJesusisnotgoingtocometoday,thereisnoreasonforGodtowishustobelieveHewillcometoday.Theimminencyofdeathandjudgment(tosaynothingofloveandgratitudetoGodasmotivators!)shouldbesufficientmotivationforallproperconduct(1Pet.1:17/2Cor.1:9/5:11)

III.ConclusionNoneoftheargumentsforatwo-stagecomingofChristisvalidwhentherelevanttextsareexegetedwithoutapre-tribbias.Itwouldrequirestrongerevidencethanthistooverthrowtheplain(“literal”)teachingofChristandtheapostlesthattheraptureandresurrectionofthechurchwilloccursimultaneouslywiththejudgment-comingofChristonthe“lastday”(e.g.Matt.25:31ff/John6:40,44,54/2Thes.1:8/2Tim.4:1/2Pet.3:10-13,etc.,etc.).

CHARTS:TheCasefortheTwo-stageSecondComing-BiblicallyExaminedchartpreparedbySteveGregg

A.ArgumentsfromtheinterpretationofRevelation:TheArguments— TheArgumentscross-examined—1. Theentire churchage is encompassed in theseven letters(Rev.2-3)“Themessagestothesevenchurches...presentanexactforeviewofthespiritualhistoryofthechurch,andinthispreciseorder.”(C.I.Scofield,6:1331-32)

1.ThispropositionisnotstatedorimpliedinScripture.

2.John’sbeingcaughtuptoheaven(4:1)representstheraptureofthechurch.“ManyBiblescholarsbelieve(andIagree)thatJohntheApostle,ashe is summoned intoheaven, represents the churchwhichwill be called out of theworld and into heaven...” (Stedman,5:113)“[Revelation4:1f]appearstobetheRaptureoftheChurchintheBookofRevelation.”(ChuckSmith,9:18)

2.IfJohnsascensionin4:1representsthechurch’s,dothelater

passages where John is on earth (e.g. 11:1-2/17:1ff) alsorepresentthechurchbackonearth?

“Itisclearfromthecontextthatthisisnotanexplicitreferencetotheraptureofthechurch...[John]wasonlytranslatedintoscenesofheaventemporarily.”(Walvoord,4:103)

3.Theterm“church”foundfrequentlyinthefirst3chapters,isnotfoundinRevelationafter4:1.“Thesingular‘church’andtheplural‘churches’togetheroccur19timesinthefirstthreechapters...However,thereisastrangesilenceoftheterminchapters4-19.”(RobertGromacki,2:355)

3. The term“church” isneverused inRevelationof thewhole

church, but only of individual local congregations,contemporaryinJohn’sday.Thattheyarenotaddressedafter4:1isinconsequentialtothequestionoftherapture.

4.ThechurchisnotseenonearthafterRev.4:1,thoughitisseeninheaven(i.e.inthe24elders).“Thereisthementionof‘saints’inthecontext(13:7,10).Thesesaints,however,arethosewhogetsavedduringthesevenyearsafter the true church has been taken into heaven.” (RobertGromacki,2:356)“ThegodlyremnantofthetribulationarepicturedasIsraelites,notmembersofthechurch...”(Walvoord,8:195)

4.ThatportionsofthechurchareseeninheaveninRevelationdoesnotrequireapreviousrapturetohavetakenplace.Therearemillionsofsaintsinheavenevennow.Thechurchisseenonearthaswellasinheaven,becausethe“saints”(13:7)areidentifiedwith“theLamb’swife”[i.e.thechurch](19:7-8).

5.Rev.3:10promisesthePhiladelphianchurch(representingthefaithfulchurchinthelastdays)thatChristwoulddeliverthemoutofthetribulationperiod.“One of the best promises guaranteeing the church’s rapturebefore the Tribulation appears in Revelation 3:10...Theguaranteeof rapturebeforeTribulationcouldhardlybemorepowerful.Nowonderonewriterlabeledit‘acardinalScripture.’”(LaHaye,3:41-42)

5. Revelation3:10doesnotpromisearapture,nornecessarilyrefertothetribulation.Ifthetribulationisinview,thechurchcouldbe“keptfrom”(Gr.ektereo)harmwithoutbeingraptured(comp.John17:15,whereektereoisalsofound).

“ThisverseneitherassertsthattheRaptureistooccurbeforetheTribulation,nordoesitsinterpretationrequireustothinkthatsuchremovalisintended.”(G.E.Ladd,7:86)

CHARTS:TheCasefortheTwo-stageSecondComing-BiblicallyExamined(cont.)page2of4B.Argumentsfrom“inappropriateness”TheArguments— TheArgumentscross-examined—1. We are not appointed to wrath (1 Thes.1:10/5:9). The

tribulationisthetimeofGod’swrath.“TheTribulationisthetimeofGod’swrathontheworld,notonthechurch.”(LaHaye,3:212)“The church is not appointed to wrath...The church thereforecannotenter‘thegreatdayoftheirwrath’(Rev.6:17).”(Walvoord,8:194)

1.Thereisnoreasontoidentify“wrath”in1Thes.1:10&5:9withaperiodoftribulation(Rom.5:9).Besides,nooneeverclaimedthatChristianswouldsufferGod’swrath,eveniftheywereinthetribulation.Whatabouttheso-called“tribulationsaints”?Arethey“appointedtowrath”?

“1 Thessalonians 5:9 says nothing about the Rapture. . . If theChurch is on earthduring theGreatTribulationbut isdivinelyshelteredfromwrath,thisverseisfulfilled.Thisisallitasserts.”(G.E.Ladd,7:84-85)

2.Thetribulation,“thetimeofJacob’strouble”(Jer.30:7),isnotfor

thechurch,butforIsrael.“Itisthe‘timeofJacob’strouble’whenIsraelfulfillsitsseventiethweek(sevenyears)ofDaniel...Whydragthechurchthroughthatdreadfultime?”(LaHaye,3:212)“NoneoftheNewTestamentpassagesonthetribulationmentionthe church (Matt.24:15-31;1Theess.1:9-10,5:4-9;Rev.4-19).”(Walvoord,8:193)

2. Jeremiah 30:7 is not about the tribulation, but about the

Babylonianexile(cf.vv.3,8,10),but,even if the tribulationwereinview,thisdoesn’tlogicallyarguefortheabsenceofthechurchfromearth.

3.Jesustoldustopraythatwemightescapethegreattribulation

(Luke21:36)—Jesusapparentlythoughtwedon’tbelonghereduringthetribulation.

“Since[posttribulationists]maintainthatthere’stobenoescape

fortheChurch,theymaketheprayerChristencouragedustoprayinLuke21:36meaningless.”(ChuckSmith,9::iii)

3.ThereisnopriormentioninLuke21ofatribulationattheendof the present age. There is mention of the holocaust atdestructionofJerusalemin70AD(vv.5-7,20-23),fromwhichthe believers actually did escape (according to Eusebius,EcclesiasticalHistory).

4.Matt.24:40-41andLuke17:34-36,speakofthesudden“taking”

ofthechurch,leavingothersbehindtoendurethetribulation.“Amanandwifeasleepinbed/Shehearsanoiseandturnsherhead/He’sgone./Iwishwe’dallbeenready...“There’snotimetochangeyourmind/TheSonhascomeandyou’vebeenleftbehind.”(LarryNorman,IWishWe’dAllBeenReady,popularsonginthe70’s)

4.Matt.24:40-41andLuke17:34-36,incontext,donotspeakof

theraptureofthechurch,butofthedestructionofthewickedatChrist’scoming(seeMatt.24:38-40/Luke17:37/Psalm91:7-8/Ps.37:9-11/Prov.2:21-22/Matt.5:5/13:30,41-43,49-50).Isthe rapture found in the Olivet Discourse? If so, where?Matt.24:31?

5. The view that the rapture happens simultaneouslywith thesecondcomingpositstheridiculousscenarioofthechurchgoingup,thenrightdownagain...likeayo-yo!“Asamatteroffact,itseemsfairtoaskwhatpurposetheRapturewould serve in a scheme where the saints immediatelyaccompanyChristtotheearth.”PaulFeinberg,1:81“...itbecomesthegreatelevatorescape:wezipuptotheFather’shouse,takeaquickpeek,andziprightbackdownmomentslaterwith Christ in His Glorious Appearing. Such a reading isludicrous!”(LaHaye,3:210)

5.Theword“tomeet”(1Thes.4:17)canrefertothecustomof

going out to welcome a distinguished guest in order toaccompany him on the remainder of his approach(Matt.25:1/Acts28:15).ThereisnopromiseassociatedwiththeRapturethatwewillbe takento“theFather’shouse”—onlyintothecloudstomeettheLordintheair(1Thes.4:17).

CHARTS:TheCasefortheTwo-stageSecondComing-BiblicallyExamined(cont.)page3of4

C.Argumentsfrom“impossibility”TheArguments— TheArgumentscross-examined—1. Passages about the rapture (John 14:1-4/1 Cor.15:51-58/1

Thess.4:13-18) do not contain the same details as do thoseabout the judgment coming of Christ (Zech.14/Rev.19/Matt.24:29-31andparallels)—sothetwocannotbespeakingofthesameevent.

“Thesetwoepisodes,theRaptureandtheSecondComing,aresodifferentthatitisimpossibletocombinethem.”(LaHaye,3:32)“...there isnoclear, indisputable reference to theRapture inanySecondAdventpassage.”(PaulFeinberg,1:81)“NopassagedealingwiththeresurrectionofsaintsatthesecondcomingineitherTestamentevermentionstranslationof livingsaintsatthesametime.”(Walvoord,8:199)[!?!?!?!]

1.By the same reasoning, Jesusmusthavebeenbornonearthtwice (sinceMatt.2 andLuke2 give verydifferent accounts)andHemusthavediedandarisenfromthedeadfourtimesormore, sinceno twoaccountsgiveexactly the samedetailsoftheseevents!

2.Christcannotcome“with”Hissaints(1Thes.3:13)untilHehasfirstcome“for”thesaints.

“It’s important to realize that theRaptureof theChurchand theSecondComing of Jesus Christ are completely different. At the Rapture Jesus iscoming forHissaints.At theSecondComingtheChurchwillreturnwithJesusChrist.”(ChuckSmith,9:12)

2.Jesuscouldcome“with”Hissaints,evenifHehadcome“for”them only moments earlier. However, even without therapture,therearemultitudesofsaintsalreadywithHim,whomHewillbringwithHim(1Thes.4:14).

3. Theriseof themanofsinat thebeginningof thetribulationcannot occur until the Holy Spirit in church is removed (2Thes.2:6-8).The“fallingaway”(v.3)maybeareferencetotherapture.

“TheHolySpiritastheRestrainermustbetakenoutoftheworldbefore‘thelawlessone,’whodominatesthetribulationperiod,canberevealed(2Thess.2:6-8)…If the expression, ‘except the falling away come first,’ betranslatedliterally,‘exceptthedeparturecomefirst,’itwouldplainlyshowthe necessity of the rapture taking place before the beginning of thetribulation.”(Walvoord,8:196)

3.2Thessalonians2:6-7makesnomentionoftheremovalofthechurchortheHolySpiritpriortotheappearanceofthemanofsin,andplainlystatesthatthemanofsinmustappearbeforeourgatheringuntoChrist[therapture](vv.1-3).Thus“hethathinders”(v.7)maymeananynumberof things,but itcannotmeanthechurchortheHolySpiritinthechurch.Theapostasia[falling away] (v.3) is not the rapture. The word is usedelsewhereonlyinActs21:21ofJewsfallingawayfromMoses.

4.JesuslikenedthetimeofHiscomingtothedaysofNoahandofLot (Luke 17:26-29). Both persons illustrate the pre-tribulationalrapture:ThefloodandthedestructionofSodomrepresentthetribulationperiod.Enochwas“raptured”beforethe flood (Gen.5:24), and Noah’s family (representing theremnantofIsrael)werepreservedthroughtheflood. Lot(atype of the church) was taken out of Sodom before itsdestruction.GodsaidHecould“donothing”toSodomuntilLothadbeensafelyremoved(Gen.19:22).

“It is characteristicofdivinedealing todeliverbelieversbeforeadivinejudgment . . .as illustrated in thedeliveranceofNoah,Lot,Rahab,etc. (2Pet.2:6-9).”(Walvoord,8:194)“In Luke 17 when Jesus makes reference to Lot’s escape, Jesus clearlypoints out that in the same hour Lot was brought out of the city, thejudgmentofGodfell.”(ChuckSmith,9:4)

4. The flood and destruction of Sodom are nowhere said torepresent a time of tribulation, but they are likened to thejudgmentofsinnersatthesecondcoming(2Pet.3:4-10/Jude7)

5.Ifwemustendurethetribulation,the“blessedhope”(Tit.2:13)cannotbeblessed,butwretched!

“...itwouldtakeamasochisttolookforwardto[theTribulation]asatimeofblessing...IfChristdoesnotraptureHischurchbeforetheTribulationbegins, much of the hope is destroyed, and thus it becomes a ‘blastedhope.’”(LaHaye,3:62,63)

5.Titus2:13doesnotequate“theblessedhope”withtherapture,perse,butwith“thegloriousappearing”ofChrist.Whywouldthehopeofbeingrapturednotbeablessedonetosaintsinthetribulation?

CHARTS:TheCasefortheTwo-stageSecondComing-BiblicallyExamined(cont.) page4of4D.Argumentsfrom“imminency”(theteachingthatJesuscouldcomeatanytime)TheArguments— TheArgumentscross-examined—

1.Wearetobe“looking,”“watching”and“waiting”fortheany-moment return of Jesus (1 Thes. 1:10/5:6/ Phil.3:20/Tit.2:13/Heb.9:28).ThedoctrineoftheImminencyofChrist’scoming(i.e.thatChristmightcomeatanymoment)wouldbeinvalid if there were events (i.e. the tribulation) that mustoccurbeforeChristreturns(Matt.24:48).

“Theexhortationto lookfor ‘thegloriousappearing’ofChrist toHis own (Titus 2:13) loses significance if the tribulation mustintervenefirst...ThechurchisuniformlyexhortedtolookforthecomingoftheLord,whilebelieversinthetribulationaredirectedtolookforsigns.”(Walvoord,8:196)

“ToputanyeventbeforethecomingofChristforHisChurchis,inessence,sayingthattheLordwilldelayHiscominguntilafterthateventhashappened. Teachingthis isverydangerous,andJesusHimselfwarnsagainstit.”(ChuckSmith,9:35)

1. The doctrine that Jesus “may come at any time” is nowheretaughtintheBible.Paulspecificallyrefutesitin2Thes.2:1-8.Towaitorwatchorlookforsomethingdoesnotruleoutthepossibility thatwe expect someother things to happen first(seeHeb.11:10,13). Themanwhosaid“myLorddelayshiscoming” was judged for his behavior, not his eschatologicalbeliefs(Matt.24:49).

2.Jesuswillcome“asathief”(1Thes.5:2-3/2Pet.3:10),meaning“withoutwarning.”Thismustapplyonlytotherapture,sincetherewillbesignsindicatingthetimeofHiscomingattheendofthetribulation.

“Theraptureisdescribedasimminent,whilethesecondcomingisprecededbydefinitesigns.”(Walvoord,8:198)

2.Theideathattherewillbe“signs”indicatingthesoonnessofHiscoming is a proposition resting upon the flimsiest scripturalfoundation.ThefactthatHiscoming“asathief”mustbeonly“forthesaints”isruledoutbyPeterapplyingittotheendoftheworld (2 Pet.3:10ff), and Paul applying it to judgment ofunbelievers (1 Thess.5:2-3). This phrase is not applicable toChristiansspecially(1Thes.5:4).

3. That no one knows the day or the hour of His coming,(Matt.24:36)alsosuggestsanearlyrapture,sincetheexactdayofHiscomingcouldbecalculatedfromeventsoccurringinthetribulation.

“The Bible says that noman knows the day or the hour. ThiscannotrefertothedayChristreturnstoreignonearth,becausethatexactdayhasbeengiventousinDaniel’sprophecy.”(ChuckSmith,9:34)

3. Jesus’ admissionofHisown ignorance, and thatof everyoneelse,applied to the time-frameofHiscomment. There isnoreasontoapplyittopersonslivinginsomefuturetribulationperiod.Nonetheless,attemptsatcalculatingthedateofChrist’sreturn,ifmadebythoselivinginthetribulation,wouldnotbemorelikelytobeaccuratethanhavethemanyembarrassingattemptstodothesamethroughouthistory.

4.Thedoctrineof imminencyistheprincipalmotivatorforholylivingandevangelism.

“Historically,beliefintheany-moment-comingofChristhasthreevitaleffectsonChristiansandtheirchurches.1.Itproducesholylivinginanunholysocietylikeours(1John3:3).2.Itproducesanevangelisticchurchofsoul-winningChristians,forwhenwebelieveChristcouldappearatanymoment,weseektoshareHimwithourfriendslesttheybeleftbehindatHiscoming.”(LaHaye,3:18)

4.Itisnotnecessarytoemployfalsehoodtomotivatetoholylivingorevangelism.IfJesusisnotgoingtocometoday,thereisnoreasonforGodtowishustobelieveHewillcometoday.Theimminencyofdeathandjudgment(tosaynothingofloveandgratitude to God as motivators!) should be sufficientmotivationforallproperconduct(1Pet.1:17/2Cor.1:9/5:11)

Conclusion—

Noneoftheargumentsforatwo-stagecomingofChristisconvincingwhentherelevanttextsareexegetedwithoutapre-tribbias.Itwouldrequirestrongerevidencethanthistooverthrowtheplain(“literal”)teachingofChristandtheapostlesthattheraptureandresurrectionofthechurchwilloccursimultaneouslywiththejudgment-comingofChristonthe“lastday”(e.g.Matt.25:31ff/John6:40,44,54/2Thes.1:8/2Tim.4:1/2Pet.3:10-13,etc.,etc.).

Bookscited:1.TheRapture:Pre-,Mid-,Post-,Tribulational?(RichardR.Reiter,ed.,Zondervan,1984)2.WhentheTrumpetSounds:Today’sForemostAuthoritiesSpeakOutonEnd-TimeControversies(ThomasIce&TimothyDemy,eds.,Harvest

House,1995)3.NoFearoftheStorm(TimLaHaye,MultnomahPress,1992)4.TheRevelationofJesusChrist(JohnWalvoord,MoodyPress,1966)5.God’sFinalWord:UnderstandingRevelation(RayC.Stedman,DiscoveryHouse,1991)6.TheScofieldReferenceBible(C.I.Scofield,OxfordUniversityPress,1909)7.TheBlessedHope(GeorgeEldonLadd,EerdmansPublishingCompany,1956)8.TheRaptureQuestion(JohnWalvoord,Zondervan,1957)9.TheTribulation&theChurch(ChuckSmith,TheWordForToday,1980)“Therearetwopositionstakeninthispaperforwhichnoargumentisoffered.First,itisassumedthatfollowingthereturnofChristtoearthinpowerandgreatgloryattheendoftheTribulationperiod,therewillfollowanearthlyreignofChrist...Second,thereispresupposedafuturisticinterpretationofDaniel9:24-27andtheBookofRevelation...ThejustificationfornotarguingthesepositionsisthattheRapturequestionhasmainlybeenanissuebetweenpremillennialists,andalsothatmostrecentpremillennialistshavebeenfuturistswithregardtoDanielandRevelation.”PaulFeinberg,1:49-50CheckinGreekRev.3:10(with1:19)“whichisabouttocomeonthewholeinhabitedworld...”onektereo,seeProv21:23diatereo-ek(diadoesnotchangethesenseoftereo,butintensifiesit.Samecombination(diatereo-ek)isusedinActs15:29InJohn12:27,asynonymoftereo(sozo)isusedwithek—“Father,savemefromthishour.”ThesamewordsareinHeb.5:7—“Totheonewhowasabletosavehimfromdeath”andinJames5:20—“Savethesinner’ssoulfromdeath.”John17:15istheonlyothertimeinclassicalorbiblicalGreekwhereek-tereoisfound.“Jesusistalkingaboutawell-knowntimeofdistressandtrouble.ThiswastheTribulationperiod(Deut.4:26-31;Isa.13:6-13;17:4-11;Jer.30:4-11;Ezek.20:33-38;Dan.9:27;12:1;Zech.14:1-4;Matt.24:9-31).”PaulFeinberg,1:69“WhileanamillennialistcanidentifyMatthw25:31-46withRevelation20:11-15becausetheSecondComingcomesattheendoftheMillennium,apremillenialistcannotdothis.AjudgmentthatoccursatChrist’sgloriouscomingandonethatoccursaftertheMillenniumareseparatedbyathousandyears.”PaulFeinberg,1:77-78“Ofteninpropheticliteraturethereistheforeshorteningoftwoeventssothattheyappeartobetemporallysuccessive,butinfactareseparatedbymanyyears(e.g.,Isa.61:1-2treatsasonetheAdventandtheSecondComingalthoughtheyareseparatedbytwothousandyears;Dan.12:1-2andJohn5:29refertoboththefirstandsecondresurrections,whichwillbeseparatedbyonethousandyears).”PaulFeinberg,1:78. TimLaHayeisconcernedaboutthewaningconfidence,amongtheevangelicalranks,inthedoctrineofthepre-tribulationalraptureofthechurch.Hewasshocked,recently,whenuponbeinginvitedtoconductafamilyseminar,hewasaskedbythehostpastornottoinjectanyeschatologyintotheseminar.“Thereasonwas,”writesLaHaye,“henolongerbelievedthechurchwouldberapturedbeforetheTribulation.Apparentlyhewaslookingforwardtogoingthroughit.” Thisfinalcausticremark,besidesdemonstratingLaHaye’sinabilitytosustainanargumentwithoutresortingtosarcasmandridicule,revealsmuchmoreaboutLaHaye’smotivationforbelievinginthepretribulationalrapturethanhemayhaveintendedtodisclose—possiblymorethanevenheishimselfawareof.Itsuggeststhat,atleasttoLaHaye’sthinking,aman’seschatologyarisesfromhispreferences. Ifitis“apparent”(toLaHaye’smind)thatapersonwhoreachescertainconclusionsmustnecessarilytakepleasureinthoseconclusions,thenitmustbethatLaHayehastoldusagreatdealabouthisownmethodologyforarrivingatatheologicalposition.Ifaperson’sbeliefthathemustgothroughtribulation,inLaHaye’sestimation,necessarilyspringsfromthatperson’sbeingfavorablydisposedtosuchaprospect,thenitisequally“apparent”thatLaHayebelievesinthepretribulationrapturebecauseofhisdisinclinationtogothroughthetribulation.Now,inclinationsanddisinclinationsdonotprovidevalidrationalesforreachingobjectiveconclusions(anditisdoubtfulthatany“post-tribulationist”haseverattainedsuchapositionbecauseofadesiretobelieveit).However,thereisreasontosuspect,thatifanyinterpreterwillbemotivatedtobendthe

meaningofatextinordertofithisprioremotionalpreferences,itismorelikelytobethepre-tribulationistthanthepost-tribulationist.Isaythisasanobjectiveanalyst,sinceIholdneitherview. Appealingtotheemotionsofhisreaders,morethantotheircriticalthinking,andagainrevealingmuchofhisownheart,LaHayewrites:“ChristianmothersnowworrythattheirprecioussonsanddaughterswillbeforcedtoundergothehorrorsoftheGreatTribulation.Christianfathersfretabouttheimpossibletaskofkeepingtheirfamiliesalivethroughthemostgruesomeperiodtheworldhaseverknown...AreyouabletolookatyourchildrenplayinginthesunlightandbelievefirmlyinyourheartthattheywillnothavetoendurethemonstroushorrorsoftheTribulation?”

Ithas“apparently”notoccurredtoLaHayethatbeliefinthepre-tribulationalraptureisnotthebiblically-prescribedremedyfor“worry”and“fret”(twoattitudesforbiddentothebeliever).Itseemsnottobeafactintheforefrontofhismindthat,whethertherebeapre-tribulationalraptureornot,manyparentstheworldover(includingChristians)lookattheirbelovedchildrendaybydayandwonderhowtheywillbeabletokeepthemalive,evenintheirpresentcircumstancesofwar,famine,plague,pestilence,povertyandpersecution(theprincipalaspectsoftheanticipatedTribulationfromwhichLaHayeexpectstoescape).Itcertainlywouldbewiser(andmorebiblical)tocounselandcomfortsuchbelieversinthewayoftrustingGodandbeingfaithfuluntodeath(Rev.2:10),committingthemselvestoHimasuntoafaithfulcreator(1Pet.4:19),andlookingforwardtotheirpartintheresurrectionofthejust(1Cor.15:)—thantodanglebeforethemthequestionableprospectofbeingsnatchedoutofpresentorfuturetroublesbytheone-timeeventthatmaywellneveroccurintheirlifetime.

IsThereAWorld-WideTribulationPredictedinScripture?

I.Featuresofthetribulationanticipatedbypopularprophecyteachers:

A.Globalcrisis(plagues,famine,persecution,etc.)ofunprecedentedproportions.

B.Cashlesseconomyandone-worldgovernmentunderAntichrist(worlddictator).

C.ProminenceofIsraelandtempleasfocusofpersecutionbyAntichrist.

D.Seven-yearduration,brokeninmiddlebyabominationofdesolation.

E.TheBattleofArmageddon(WorldWarIII).

II.Scripturalbasisforthisscenario:

A.PrincipalpassagesDaniel7,9,11-12/Revelation6-19/TheOlivetDiscourse(Matt.24/Mark13/Luke21)B.Specificdetails

1.Global

a.Matthew24:22(“noflesh”&“allflesh”—Jer.12:12/25:31/45:5/Eze.21:4f/Dan.4:12)

b.Rev.3:10(“thewholeworld”—Luke2:1/Acts2:5/Col.1:6,23)

c.Rev.6:4,8/8:7,8,12/16:2,3,8,20(“earth”=Gr.“ge”=“land”)

2.UniqueinhistoryDan.12:1/Matt.24:21/Jer.30:7/Joel2:2

(Useofhyperbole:cf.Ex.10:14/2Chron.1:12/Ezek.5:8-9/Luke1:69-70/John9:32)

3.Cashlesssociety(Rev.13:16-17)(nomentionofcashlesseconomy.Economicboycottwouldfulfillaswell.)

4.World-government

a.Dan.7:23(notanend-timesprediction;pertainstooldRomanempire)

b.Rev.13:3,7-8(seecommentsunder#1above)

5.Antichrist(1John2:18,22/4:3/2John7)

a.Dan.7:24-25/11:36ff(incontext,timingisnotrightforend-timesfigure)

b.2Thess.2:3-10(obscure.Timingquestionable)

c.Rev.13(notnecessarilyanindividual,noridentifiedwiththepreviousfigures)

6.FocusonIsrael

a.Jer.30:7(wrongtimeperiod—cf.vv.3,8,18)

b.Matt.24:15-20(wrongtimeperiod—cf.v.34,Luke21:20ff)

c.Rev.7:2-8/14:1-5/11:8(wrongtimeperiod—Rev.1:1,3,19/3:10/22:10)

7.TempleinJerusalem

a.2Thess.2:4(wrongtemple—cf.1Cor.3:16-17)

b.Rev.11:1-2(wrongtemple—cf.Luke21:24)

8.Seven-yearduration

a.Dan.9:27(wrongtimeperiod)

b.Rev.11:2,3/12:6,14/13:5(assumptionofmorethanone31/2-yearperiodnotvalid)

9.Abominationofdesolation

a.Dan.9:27(wrongtimeperiod—cf.v.26)

b.Matt.24:15(wrongtimeperiod—cf.Luke21:20)

10.BattleofArmageddon

a.Rev.16:16(timeperiodquestionable)

b.Zech.12:2-4,9/14:1-1-3(wrongtimeperiod—Luke21:22)

TheFutureoftheChurch

I.Definitionofchurch

A.IsraelinOldTestament(Acts7:38,Gr.)

B.DisciplesinNewTestament(Matt.16:18/1Pet.2:9-10)

C.Notdefinedinstitutionally,butspiritually(Heb.12:22-23/Eph.5:23-24)

II.Surveyofopinionsaboutthechurchaattheendofthepresentage:

A.Dispensational(pessimistic)churchweakandapostateintheend

B.Postmillennial(optimistic)churchtriumphantandradiant

C.Amillennial(eitherpessimisticoroptimisticdependingoninterpreter)

III.ThedestinyoftheKingdomofGod

A.Identifiedwiththechurch

B.Expansionandinfiltration(Dan.2:35,44/Matt.13:31-33)

C.CrushingthedominionofSatan(Gen.3:15/1John3:8/Heb.2:14-15/Col.2:15/Rom.16:20/Luke10:19/Rev.12:11)

D.Dominionthroughevangelism(Ps.2:8/Acts1:8/Matt.24:14)

IV.Theripenedharvest

A.Incrementalprogress(Mark4:26-29)

B.Ripeninginthemidstofopposition(Matt.13:24-30,37-43)

C.Patientenduranceuntilharvest(James5:7-8)V.ThematurityoftheBody

A.Thenewmanbecomesamatureman(Eph.4:11-16)

B.Unity(love)themeasureofmaturity(1Cor.3:1-4/Col.1:28/3:14/1Cor.13:9-13)

VI.PreparationoftheBride

A.Purity(Eph.5:25-27)

B.Righteousacts(Rev.19:7-8)

VII.TheGloryoftheLord

A.TheknowledgeoftheGlory(Num.14:21/Isa.11:9/Hab.2:14/2Cor.4:6/Tit.2:13)

B.ThehouseofHisglory(Ex.40:34-35/1Kg.8:11/Isa.60:7/Eph.2:19-22/1Pet.2:5)

C.LikenessofChrist(John1:14/Heb.1:3/2Cor.3:18/Eph.4:13-15)

D.Relationtosuffering(Luke24:25-26/Rom.8:17-18/2Cor.4:16-17/1Pet.4:12-14/5:10)

E.Dawningoftheglory(Isa.60:1-5/Luke1:78/Mal.4:2/2Pet.1:19/Prov.4:19/Matt.24:27)