How is it possible that all Israel will be saved and yet people will be going into the millennial reign of Christ without being transformed and having new bodies?

Will all Israel that’s a part of the church be transformed into heavenly bodies?

How will there be people going into the millennium without heavenly bodies?

It doesn’t make sense to me

What makes sense matters, but the first question of paramount concern is what does the text SAY?!

Secondly, what is the evidence for how the biblical writers expected to be understood? Were they correct in how they understood their own prophecies? Or was there a deeper, allegorical meaning that eluded their limited understanding?

Was their interpretation of what Yahweh spoke merely a reflection of a “primitive, nationalistic, time bound” understanding that would someday be replaced by a different interpretation that could not have been understood or recognized by the prophets or their contemporaries? That’s the hermeneutical question in debate.

After establishing the plain person’s plain reading of plain language, we can then begin to look for light as to how certain antinomies (difficulties / paradoxes) can be reconciled WITHOUT violence to the original author’s intention.

The very meaning of the millennium is at stake here. Why should God make such a point of ending the age around the “controversy of Zion”, a conflict that is destined to draw all nations into an insoluble, inescapable dilemma over the Land and people of Israel that sets off the final world conflict? (Isa 34:8; Zech 12:2-3).

It will be a kind of valley of decision designed to test hearts, primarily over the issue of the nature of saving grace and the ‘kind’ of righteousness (not one’s own but the Lord’s alone) that can stand in the judgment.

In other words, why should God be so determined on saving an elect remnant of ethnic Jews (“natural branches”) unless it is to set the wayward nation of an irrevocable divine election forth as the statement and demonstration of His free and sovereign prerogative to change and qualify them for a final and secure inheritance of the Land by predestined grace.

He has set them at the center of the nations, that He might show in them for a thousand years of public demonstration, the power of His ability to choose whom He will, and quicken whom He will (Mt 11:27; Jn 5:21; Ro 9:18) at the “set time” of His choosing (Ps 102:13; 110:3; Isa 30:18; Gal 1:15-16), and thus finally and forever preserve, not only them but each and everyone of their children after them in abiding holiness, never again to depart (Isa 59:20-21; Jer 32:40, et al.).

Why? What’s He out to prove? What’s His point?

The design is to press upon the consciousness of the nations God’s faithfulness to His immutable covenant word that most of the world doesn’t even know exists, as multitudes are even now being preconditioned to despise and dismiss this word by the events that are swiftly hurling us to the time of final reckoning.

That covenant (called synonymously “new” / and “everlasting”) is not fully complete or satisfied (in all its original terms) until there is not a living Jew on the post-tribulation earth that is not born again and preserved in the “everlasting salvation” of the “everlasting righteousness” of Christ throughout the entirety of the millennial interim as an all holy nation, “never again” to depart (Isa 45:17, 25; 59:20-21; 60:21; Jer 31:34; 32:37-41, Dan 9:24, with so many more that could be listed ).

This uniformity of a completely saved and eternally preserved Jewish population at peace in their own, covenanted Land is the goal of the covenant, since only then will the long blinded Jewish nation have their spiritual eyes opened. A coming day when the blind shall see, and those who always before resisted the Spirit opposer shall learn doctrine is promised all throughout Moses and the prophets (compare Deut 29:4 with Deut 4:25-31; 30:1-6; Isa 29:18, 24; Acts 7:51).

Only when, not a mere remnant, but “all” the people are righteous (Isa 60:21; Jer 31:34), with an eternal righteousness not their own (Isa 45:24; 54:17; Jer 23:5-6; Dan 9:24), can they fulfill the covenant conditions and thus keep the Land forever in abiding peace and security.

This will be possible because the tendency to backslide and come back under the curses of the covenant will be forever cured by the everlasting righteousness of the everlasting covenant. No more will the righteous remnant suffer the sins and exile of the larger apostate nation, since all will be preserved in new covenant righteousness forever, “world without end” (Isa 45:17).

It is one thing for God to bring the Jews into the Land, but a radical transformation is required for them to be assured of permanent security in the Land. This is the very thing the everlasting / new covenant guarantees. From this, it is clear to see why the prophets understood that nothing short of a climactic, apocalyptic day of the Lord could ever bring about such a radical and permanent change in the whole of the nation.

More specifically, not all the nation but only the remnant who escaped death in order to arrive at that ultimately transformative day (Ps 102:13; 110:3; Isa 66:8; Eze 39:22; Zech 3:9; 12:10; 13:8-9; Mt 23:39; Acts 3:21; Ro 11:26; Rev 1:7) .

This is why, not only a remnant, but the entirety of the nation must “all” know Him (Jer 31:34; Eze 39:22, 28-29) in order for them to be able to keep the Land forever, as promised in the plain language of the covenant. As I like to say, “in order for the Jews to inherit the Land forever, they must have a righteousness that is forever”.

This righteousness, which is the Lord’s own righteousness alone (Isa 45:24-25; 54:7; Jer 23:5-6), must extend, not only to a remnant, but the whole of the nation and all the children born to them in future generations, lest the tendency to backslide send them back under the curses of the broken covenant.

This “everlasting righteousness”, which is none their own, but the Lord’s alone, is that righteousness that was perfected in the Son and imputed to the believer whose faith is counted for righteousness. This righteousness, once imputed, is invariably made manifest by the gift and fruits of the enlivening Holy Spirit.

Of course, all of this applies now to every true-born believer of this age and the assurance of eternal inheritance in the age to come (both the millennium and the new heavens and earth), but God intended an earthly demonstration of His ability to accomplish this divine, self assigned “mission impossible” here, on this earth with the Jewish people, here, at the scene of the crime, so to speak, in the presence of a helplessly bound enemy (Satan).

It was necessary that this grace be exhibited and put on display by weak, natural jars of clay, supernaturally upheld in holiness by the gift of the Holy Spirit and nothing of human power.

Manifestly, God has set this interim period as the demonstration of His ability, not only “to graft them in again” but to keep them in, forever!. This requires an interim that is a glorious advance on the present age, yet short of the final, ultimate perfection that follows the millennium.

This newly and suddenly saved remnant of penitent survivors (like Paul’s sudden arrest on the Damascus road) will enter the millennium in their natural bodies and be assisted back to their Land by surviving gentiles compare Isa 14:2; 40:22; 60:9; 66:20; Zech 8:23). Manifestly, these survivors from among the nations did not take the mark, but were also not yet born again (not yet “in Christ”) at the time of the last trump, when Jesus was revealed from heaven (Isa 26:12-13 with Mt 24:29-31; 1Cor 15:52).

Many scriptures speak of this sudden salvation of the surviving remnant of penitent Jewish survivors at the Lord’s post-trib return (Ps 102:13; 110:3; Isa 59:17-21; 66:8; Jer 30:6-7; Eze 39:22, 28-29; Zech 3:9; 12:10; Mt 23:39; Acts 3:21; Ro 11:26; with Rev 1:7) with the result that now, an all saved Jewish population will never again backslide and fall back under covenant judgment, but “all”, from the least to the greatest will know the Lord (Isa 59:21; Jer 31:34; 32:40; Eze 37:25; 39:22). THIS is the OT context behind Paul’s statement, “and so all Israel shall be saved”.

This sudden national salvation of a surviving remnant is everywhere shown to take place at the post-tribulational day of the Lord. It’s purpose is the open and public vindication of “My covenant with THEM (natural branches) when I shall (future) take away THEIR (the irrevocably elect and no less beloved enemy’s) sin …”

Several scriptures show very definitely that the time Paul has in view is the post-trib day of the Lord, which the NT obviously equates with Christ’s return. When Jesus arrives in glory, the dead in Christ, together with all those alive in Christ at the time, will be changed in an instant, immediately translated into glorified immortality.

At the same time (“in one day”; Ps 102:13; 110:3; Isa 66:8; Zech 3:9; Eze 39:22; Mt 23:39; Ro 11:26; Rev 1:7) ; a surviving remnant of Jews, having just been brought to the end of their power (Deut 32:36; Dan 12:7), “look upon their pierced Messiah”, and immediately go apart to weep in deepest contrition, as when Joseph revealed himself to his estranged brethren (compare Gen. 45 with Mic 5:3-4; Zech 12:10; Mat 23:39; Rev 1:7). After the great purgation of tribulation judgment, the newly saved Jewish remnant (Eze 20:33-40; Amos 9:9-10) goes into the millennium in natural, albeit Spirit filled bodies (Eze 39:22, 28-29).

Now, with it established that the scripture is very clear that a surviving remnant will make up the newly born nation, entering the post-tribulational kingdom in natural bodies, returning by every natural means of transport back to the Land to build and plant, raise families, and witness to the nations, the question is naturally raised, “what will be the relationship of those who enter the millennial kingdom in their natural bodies and those who have been translated at the rapture?”

When taken together, the cumulative evidence of scripture creates what can be called a “necessary inference”. I believe the puzzle is only solved, with due respect to all that the scripture says, by recognizing what I like to call, a “dimensional divide”.

The mystery of the rapture is not a mystery as to its time. That is no mystery (compare Hos 13:14; Isa 25:7-8; 27:12-13; Mt 24:29-31 with 1Cor 15:5-54 ). The mystery has to do with a ‘dimensional divide’ between those who will be putting on resurrected bodies with capacities that are like the angels and like the Lord in His post-resurrection appearances for the purpose of spiritual rule, (as for example, ruling over 5 or 10 cities), but in a realm of existence, not any less on earth, but not immediately visible to saved and unsaved mortals in the millennium (compare Mt 19:28; 22:30; Lk 19:17:18; 1Cor 13:12).

There is so much more that can help clarify and harmonize, but the greatest problem (other than failure to fully depend on the Spirit for the mercy of illumination) is lack of OT literacy on the popular level, and on the scholarly level, the tendency to embrace of a set of a-priori presuppositions that seeks to harmonize the testaments by a radical method of reinterpretation and spiritualization. It’s a great, historic deficiency in the church due to centuries of neglect of the OT and artificial, unsatisfactory solutions that fail to convincingly harmonize the testaments.

Second point implicit in your question is the relationship of the body to national Israel:

To be clear, Israel can only be saved as it becomes the body of Christ by the transforming, regenerating revelation of Christ. If they are alive to God, they are “in Christ”, and thus part of His body sharing in the unity of the Spirit, equally with all saints, whether Jew or Gentile.

1 Corinthians 6:17
But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

In the natural order, there is a necessary and crucial distinction between Israel and the church, just as between male and female. But there is no distinction at all in the unity of the one new man, that is all who know the Lord, whether in times past, in this age, or the millennial age to come.

This unity of the Spirit in the God-Man is not a new truth, but an old truth that has come to full light in the revelation of the mystery. (Remember this: something that is newly revealed, or has come to much greater light, does not mean that it did not exist before, just as the revelation of Jesus has brought much clearer light on the triune nature of the Godhead. Yet no one would say that such new revelation created something that did not exist before).

In distinguishable contrast from the one new man of the Spirit, natural Israel and the supernatural preservation of Jewish identity throughout the generations, belongs to a corporate election that does not guarantee the salvation of any individual in the set apart nation. Instead, precisely because of the covenant mandate, belonging to the Jewish race commends the covenant breaker to a “double” discipline, as foretold in scripture and witnessed throughout history.

So when Israel comes to faith on that day, they will be no less the living body of Christ, albeit with a unique and special calling, role, and stewardship to be lived out openly in the presence of the nations throughout the millennium.

Thus, the millennium exists primarily for this open covenant vindication and demonstration of every word and aspect of His everlasting covenant, to be lived out in literal detail before the nations and also the onlooking principalities and powers. This will show show for a thousand years of open, fully visible demonstration that God was indeed able, not only to bring the people He first brought out of Egypt back into the Land, but now, because of an “everlasting righteousness” (namely, the righteousness of the Son), eternally secure to one and all, they will abide, preserved in holiness and peace in the Land, within the originally specified borders of the promise.

We are led then to infer, most necessarily on the basis of 1Cor 15:50-52, that all who come to faith during the millennium, with any who die in the Lord during the millennium, will be raised with their new body at the end of the millennium when the great transition to the new heavens and earth follows the final rebellion.

If that explanation does not fully satisfy every question, it is also to be considered that there is a mystery about time in the realm of the Spirit as it intersects with natural historical time. In any event, lingering questions must not be permitted to impose on the clarity of what the text plainly ‘SAYS’.

May the kind Shepherd, “come alongside”, and cause our hearts to burn within us, as He opens to us the Scriptures.

Reggie

Paul knew the trumpet of Isa 27:12-13 (also Ps 47:5; Joel 2:1; Zeph 1:16-18) sounds at the same time the nation is being born “at once” / in “one day” in Isa 66:8 (with Ps 102:13; Eze 39:22; Zech 3:9; 12:10; 14:7). That is the same moment the AC is being destroyed in “one day” (Is 9:14; 10:17; 47:9) by the breath of the Messiah’s mouth / voice (Isa 11:4; 30:27-33; 31:8-9; 42:11-14; 66:6-8; Joel 3:16; Zeph 1:7, 14-18; Zech 9:14).

As Paul’s manifest use of the Septuagint’s translation of Isa 11:4 in 2Thes 2:8 makes clear, the AC is destroyed at the instant of the Lord’s return to judge the wicked, raise the dead, and assert His rod iron rule over the nations the “last trump” (1Cor 15:52; Rev 10:7; 11:15). It all lines up with the moment (“twinkling of an eye”) of His return like the lightning flashing across the sky (Mt 24:27, 29-31; Rev 1:7).

Obviously, the NT writers believe their OT, literally! They put the pieces together by the help and leading of the Holy Spirit. They are not advancing ‘new truth’ but unraveling the mystery of what stood written in the OT prophetic scriptures (Acts 26:22-23; Ro 11:25-29; 16:25-26; 1Pet 1:11). That’s the glory and compelling proof of the gospel, that it was all foretold!

But the timing of the resurrection and the last trumpet was NOT the mystery! Observe that Paul very plainly identifies that the post-tribulational resurrection of Isa 25:8 & Hos 13:14 is “brought to pass” (“THEN shall be brought to pass”) at the last trumpet (1Cor 15:51-55). So what is the “mystery” that Paul is showing us? I would suggest that it is the phenomenon of the “change” (compare Job 14:14 NKJV) into a new dimension of existence, with new powers and capacities for rule that Jesus says will be “like the angels” (Mt 22:30; Lk 20:36).

It is a dimension that will permit the everyday believer of this age to “know as they are known” (1Cor 13:12) with the capacity to “judge angels” (1Cor 6:3). Recognition of this “dimensional divide” helps to explain how the now glorified saints can, “like the angels”, exert a spiritual rule over that number from the nations who were not raptured, but survived to enter the millennium in their natural bodies.

Paul is giving us a resolution to a paradox (antinomy) that has perplexed many.

If our view of scripture commits us to take the scriptures of the OT in their plainly intended meaning. And if we believe that these can and should be harmonized with NT revelation, then Paul’s mystery of the translation becomes most helpful in making some crucial distinctions. For example, how do we reconcile the many OT scriptures that show Jewish and gentile survivors of the final tribulation entering the post-DOL millennial age in natural bodies, building, evangelizing, having children, etc.

How do we understand the nature of this cohabitation of the glorified redeemed and the un-resurrected, Spirit filled survivors of Israel on the millennial earth? Will the resurrected be visible to one another but not to the unresurrected. It would appear so from a number of scriptures (e.g., Isa 26:10; 60:12; Zech 14:16-19; Rev 20:7-9).

If the plain language and context of many OT scriptures be given due respect and weight, and if a reconciling harmony can be expected to exist without ignoring or neglecting the plain meaning of any text of the inerrant scripture of truth, then Paul’s revelation of this “mystery” leads to what we might call a “necessary inference” that serves to very satisfactorily explain this perplexity.

Not only will the DOL bring the separation between the righteous and the mark taking wicked, the last trump will also bring a ‘dimensional divide’ between those who were already “in Christ” at that time (1Cor 15:23, 52) and the penitent remnant of Israel who are just then receiving the transforming “revelation” (not mere physical sight) of Jesus at the moment of His return in the clouds of heaven (notably analogous to Paul’s sudden arrest on the Damascus road; compare Ps 102:13; 110:3; Isa 66:8; Eze 39:22; Mic 5:3-4; Zech 3:9; 12:10; Mt 23:39; Acts 3:21; Ro 11:26; Rev 1:7).

At this revelatory self disclosure of their long rejected “Joseph” (Mic 5:1-4; Zech 12:10; 13:1 with Mt 23:39; Rev 1:7), the penitent survivors of Israel “go apart to mourn” in deepest contrition (Zech 12:10). With every Jewish survivor now saved and filled with the Spirit, and with the assistance of earnestly seeking gentile survivors (Isa 14:2; 49:22; 60:9; 66:20; Zech 8:23), the broken and beautified, uniformly saved “Jewish” nation, begin their long trek back home across land and sea (notably across the dried up riverbeds of the great historic rivers of Nile and Euphrates; see Isa 11:12, 15-16; 19:4-8; 27:12-13; Zech 10:9-11; Rev 16:12).

My grace granted aim at this year’s conference will be to address the two inextricably related questions: “Why the Jew?” & “Why a Millennium?” What has God invested in a thousand years of open vindication and public demonstration of His everlasting covenant, not only in the sight of the nations, living and past, but of the principalities and powers who continually raise the question ,”has God really said?”, in their long war on the Word.

(1hr:15min)
 

Right Click to Download Four Beasts Rise from the Sea – Dan Ch 7 (35mb)

Daniel’s vision of the four beasts is the second vision in the book of Daniel (Chapter 7) and provides additional detail to the first vision in Chapter 2. They all point to a climax that will occur in “the last days.” Reggie Kelly and Phil Norcom lead us through the five visions of Daniel with emphasis on what they mean for Israel and the Church (The Mystery of Israel).

Video of this messages is also available. See Course below

Can you send me a few scriptures that reveal that pre-tribulation rapture is also a deception? One of my friends must have been reading a book other than the Bible lately concerning this issue.

I can make a few suggestions right off hand, and perhaps look about for something brief on the subject to recommend. In the meantime, I’m including a url to our website for a piece I wrote on at least one part of their whole complicated system.

Here is that rather long article: The Rapture Question Decisively Answered by the Timing of the Day of the Lord

To be very brief, I usually do two things. The first is simple and quick. The second is more complicated, requiring more time and interest than you’ll usually have with most.

First, I use the scriptures that seem very clear about a final trumpet that sounds in obvious connection with the Lord’s post-tribulational return (Isa 27:13 with Mt 24:29-31; Rev 10:7; 11:15) in order to ask this question: “How could Paul call ‘last’ a trumpet that allegedly sounds seven years earlier?” This would have been a recipe for utter confusion, since many of Paul’s readers would have known of the Lord’s mention of a trumpet in connection with His return (Mt 24:31), as Jews would naturally associate the time of the resurrection with the ‘last day’ (Jn 11:24).

If time permits, I also point out that it is very significant that Paul connects this ‘last trump’ (1Cor 15:52) with the resurrection of OT believers by quoting Isa 25:8: “Then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, death is swallowed up in victory.” It is important to note that “that saying” appears in a context that combines the resurrection of the OT righteous with the post -tribulational deliverance of Israel (Isa 25:6-9; 26:16-21; 27:13). Daniel is also very clear that his own resurrection with all the righteous of Israel is AFTER the unequaled tribulation (Dan 12:1-2, 13). Job expects his “change” (Job 14:14; 1Cor 15:51-52) to come when his Redeemer’s feet will stand upon the earth in the “latter day” (Job 19:25-27), and Zechariah puts this at the day of the Lord (Zech 14:1, 5). This makes the THEN of Paul’s “THEN shall be brought to pass the saying …” very significant for the timing of the rapture. WHEN is THEN? Clearly, it is the post-tribulational resurrection of the OT righteous in manifest connection with the ‘great trumpet’ of Israel’s post-tribulational deliverance (Isa 27:13). What God hath joined, let no man put asunder!

Pretribulationists were forced by a post-trib writer (Alexander Reese; “The Approaching Advent of Christ,” 1937) to change their earlier view that the OT saints are resurrected with the church at the rapture before the tribulation. They now acknowledge that the OT saints are resurrected after the tribulation by holding that OT saints belong to a completely separate company from so-called, ‘church saints.’ The saints of the church age are believed to have a “heavenly destiny” in contrast to the ‘earthly’ (millennial) destiny of the OT saints. But what then of such scriptures as Mt 8:12; 19:28; Jn 10:16; Ro 11:17; Eph 2:12, 14, 19; Heb 11:16, 40; Rev 21:12, 14, to mention only a few that speak of the unity of all saints in one body? Not only so, but Jesus puts the resurrection of those who believe on Him at the ‘last day’ (Jn 6:39-40, 44, 54), the same ‘last day’ that those who have rejected the Word are judged (Jn 12:48).

It is therefore plain that Jesus puts the resurrection of regenerate believers at the ‘last day’ in keeping with the common Jewish expectation (Jn 11:24). By no means can the term, ‘last day,’ be strained to include a pre-trib rapture of the church some seven years earlier. The context makes it clear that Jesus is using the term in the same way that his Jewish contemporaries used and understood it (Jn 11:24). That understanding came from scriptures that clearly put the resurrection of the OT faithful (Job, Isaiah, and Daniel) at the post-tribulational day of the Lord, the ‘last day’ of this present evil age.

Since pre-tribulationists believe the rapture comes as a thief in the night, without preceding signs, it is believed to be imminent, subject to happen at any moment. However, this view runs into manifest difficulties when it is pointed out that it is NOT the rapture, but the day of the Lord (also called, “the day of God”) that comes as a thief (compare Mt 24:43; 1Thes 5:2, 4; 2Pet 3:10, 12; Rev 16:14-17 with Eze 39:8). Realizing this, they extend they day of the Lord to include the entirety of the seven years. In this way, the any moment rapture can be seen as coming as a thief, simply because it is “presumed” to start the day of the Lord that come as a thief.

Of course, the belief that a pre-tribulational rapture starts the day of the Lord is strictly inference based on the presuppositions of an already held position. There is no scripture that says the rapture starts the day of the Lord, or that the day of the Lord includes the entire 7 years of tribulation. More precisely, the great tribulation is the last 3 1/2 years, since until then, Israel is dwelling in unprecedented false security under the peace lie of the Antichrist (Isa 28:15, 18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; Dan 8:25; 9:27; 11:23-24; Mt 24:15-16; 1Thes 5:3).

Thus, according to pre-tribulationism, the day of the Lord includes the entire final week of Daniel (Dan 9:27), as a continuous day of wrath and tribulation, but this becomes a huge problem when it is realized that an imminent rapture can hardly start the day of the Lord, since Paul says “that day” (the day of the Lord; 2Thes 2:2) cannot come until the ‘Man of Sin’ is first revealed (2Thes 2:3). You can’t have it both ways! If the day of the Lord is NOT imminent, how can the rapture that allegedly starts it be imminent? Furthermore, it should not be overlooked that Paul’s language concerning our “being gathered together unto Him” at His coming is very similar to the Lord’s description of the “gathering” of His elect at His post-tribulational return (Mt 24:31 with 2Thes 2:1-2). How likely then that Paul is speaking about a coming that happens 7 years earlier?

So, time permitting, the second thing I usually do is to point to the considerable number of scriptures that show that the day of the Lord / ‘day of God’ comes only AFTER the tribulation. For example, Mt 24:29 shows that the Lord returns only AFTER the stellar darkness that comes AFTER the tribulation. Very significantly, Peter, citing Joel’s prophecy (Joel 2:30-31), puts this post-tribulational darkening of the stellar bodies BEFORE the coming of that great and notable day of the Lord (Acts 2:20).

Clearly, the early church saw the day of the Lord as synonymous with the post-tribulational return of Jesus. This is confirmed by a considerable number of NT texts that put no difference between the day of the Lord and the return of Jesus for His own (1Cor 1:8; 5;5; 2Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6,10; 1Thes 5:2, 4; 2Thes 2:2-3; 2Tim 4:8; 2Pet 3:10, 12; Rev 6:17; 16:14). Notice too that in the prophets the day of the Lord is spoken of as ‘at hand’ or ‘near’ only as the armies of the nations are gathering against Jerusalem for the last time (Eze 30:3; Joel 1:15; 2:1; 3:14; Zeph 1:14). Only then is the day of the Lord said to be ‘near.’ That’s not the same as already ‘here,’ as in the pre-trib view.

Even so late as the 6th bowel, “the great day of God Almighty”is presented as yet future (Rev 16:12-14). Clearly, the day of God is the seventh bowel. Significantly, Jesus’ thief-like return is announced as imminent after the 6th bowel has accomplished the summoning of the armies of the earth to Armageddon (Rev 16:12-15).

At this time, His coming is truly imminent, since with the passing of the sixth bowel, the seventh bowel, which is the “the day of God Almighty” is about to be poured out (Rev 16:15-17). Manifestly, His coming brings the great day that accomplishes the final stroke of wrath upon the wicked, even as the Antichrist is destroyed (2Thes 2:8) at the same time His elect are “gathered” (Mt 24:31; 2Thes 2:1-2), the dead raised, and Israel delivered (Dan 12:1-2).

A comparison of  2Pet 3:10, 12 with Rev 16:14-15 will show that the day of the Lord and the day of God are synonymous and happen when Jesus returns as a thief to execute the final stroke of wrath upon the head of the wicked (Jer 29:19-20; 3-:22-24; Mt 24:43, Rev 16:14-17). Furthermore, many scriptures combine to indicate that the deliverance of Israel and the final destruction of Babylon happen ‘at once’ and in ‘one day’ (see Isa 10:17; 29:5; 47:9; 66:8; Eze 39:22; Zech 3:9; 14:7; Rev 18:10, 17-19).

By any reckoning, this can be no protracted period, but a very concentrated point in time (compare  Rev 11:15, 18-19; 16:17-18 with Eze 39:8). It is much to observed that all of these things happen in immediate conjunction with the revelation / appearing / coming of Christ from heaven (Mt 24:27, 29-30: 26:64; Lk 17:30; Ro 2:5-6; 1Cor 1:7; 15:23; 1Thes 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2Thes 1:7-8; 2Thes 2:1, 8; Col 3:4; 1Tim 6:14; 1Tim 1:10; 2Tim 4:8; Tit 2:13; James 5:7-8; 1Pet 1:7; 4:13; 5;4; 2Pet 3:4, 12; 1Jn 2:28; 3:2; Jude 14; Rev 1:7). According to Acts 28:20, Paul did not differentiate between the hope of Israel and the ‘blessed hope’ of the church, as in dispensational eschatology.

None of the above the texts that speak directly or indirectly of the day of the Lord support the idea that it begins with an any moment rapture. On the contrary, the church is enjoined to soberly and vigilantly watch for the day of the Lord (1Thes 5:6), which will not overtake them as a thief (1Thes 5:4), since to be overtaken by such a well signaled event (Mt 24:15; 2Thes 2:3-4) would be a sure sign of advanced apostasy (1Thes 5:7; 2Thes 2:11-12).

Therefore, if the day of the Lord must be preceded by the prior revelation of the man of sin (2Thes 2:1-3), how can ‘that day’ be supposed to start with a rapture that can happen any moment? And why would a pre-tribulational Paul direct the church to watch for the day of the Lord if it must be preceded by the revelation of the man of sin? (2Thes 2:3-4) It just doesn’t add up. No, it is NOT a pre-tribulation rapture that comes as a thief in the night, but the post-tribulational day of the Lord.

In conclusion, the emotionally charged theory of a pre-tribulation rapture is quite strained and forced. At least twice, its advocates have been required to change their former position on the day of the Lord. I point this out in the paper I mentioned.

Any historian of the position will be obliged to note the changes that were made in the 30’s in response to Alexander Reese’s, “The Approaching Advent of Christ,” and again in the 70’s with Robert Gundry’s, “The Church and the Tribulation.”  Regardless of the sincerity of its advocates, the pre-trib rapture theory is, in my view, an end time deception of the first magnitude that threatens to exact a heavy toll.

Hope something here will be useful, Reggie

I’ve had some email exchanges with my pastor, and it seems that “the imminent return of Christ” is his main objection. Also for me this scripture seems ‘against’ our view. Although it could just have been a sentence directed to the hearers that they need not concern themselves about the restoration of the kingdom, they had work to do here and now.

“And he said unto them, it is not for you to know the times or the seasons,
which the Father hath put in his own power” (Acts 1:7).

So any thought would be appreciated….

I think our modern debate over the rapture question is making a very illegitimate use of the context and original intention of this passage.

So far from lending support to the doctrine of ‘imminence,’ Acts 1:6-7 is the Lord’s personal correction of that mistaken presumption.

Let’s notice some things:

The disciples that asked this question of Jesus on the eve of the Ascension were either not present when He gave the prophecy from the Mount of Olives, or they had forgotten His words. Only days before, Jesus had taught the disciples that “the end” would be preceded by an unequaled tribulation signaled by the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel (Mt 24:15-16, 21). But first, the gospel must be preached to all nations before the end can come (Mt 24:14).

At the time the disciples asked the question of Acts 1:6, the mystery of Christ’s twofold coming to Israel had not been revealed (Acts 3:18-21; Ro 16:25-26; 1Pet 1:11-12). They didn’t know that the risen Jesus was about to ascend to the right hand of God and there remain until His return (Acts 3:21). Even on those occasions when the disciples had heard the Lord speak of ‘going away,’ it was never imagined that this would be by way of death and resurrection and subsequent ascension.

To understand the dilemma, we must remember that the great puzzle for first century Israel was how the messianic redemption could be accomplished BEFORE and apart from Israel’s national deliverance. We know from the Jewish apocalyptic writings of the time that many looked for the redemption to follow the unequaled tribulation, or ‘Zion’s travail’ (compare Isa 66:7-8; Jer 30:6-7; Mic 5:3 with Dan 12:1), but no one knew that before this, Messiah would suffer death and be raised to return a second time. This was a mystery of the first order. It stumbled Israel. It would not come to full light until the Spirit would be poured out at Pentecost (1Pet 1:11-12).

Jesus knew that the puzzle would soon be solved when the power of the Spirit would come at Pentecost, ‘not many days from now’ (Acts 1:5). Then all would be made clear (Acts 3:18-21). But for these particular disciples at this particular time, the time for the universal witness to the gospel had come. That was the task at hand. Later, when Jerusalem’s destruction would be truly imminent, then it would be time to know that His coming is near, even at the door (Mt 24:33).

Later on, when Paul will correct a similar presumption of imminence, great stress will be laid on how the day of the Lord will be preceded and recognized by definite, known signs (Mt 24:14-15; 2Thes 2:3-4). It would therefore be a great error to interpret Jesus’ correction in a way that off sets or contradicts the great importance that He had earlier placed on reading and understanding the prophecy of Daniel (“Let the reader understand;” Mt 24:15). Jesus knew that in its time, this critical knowledge will be life or death for many (Mt 24:16, 21; Rev 12:6, 14; 13:5, 15-17).

So should this passage (Acts 1:7) be used to teach that the Lord is denying the knowableness of the time for anyone at anytime? Even pretribulationists say no. They admit that saints living at that time will surely know that the ‘end’ (i.e., the resurrection and deliverance of Israel) comes approximately 3 ½ years after the abomination (Dan 9:27; 12:11; Rev 11:2). Tribulation believers (those whom they say come to faith after the church has been removed) will surely be able to know the time when the signs appear that mark the beginning of the tribulation.

In their view, it is only believers living before a presumably imminent rapture that have no business to occupy themselves with the question of the times and seasons, since it is assumed they will be taken up before those times begin. This is how pretribulationists apply the Lord’s answer in Acts 1:7 to the question of whether anyone can know the time of the rapture and the start of the day of the Lord (i.e., “the times and the seasons;” 1Thes 5:1-2).

But the imminence of the rapture is not the question here, but the restoration of the kingdom to Israel. It is not the time of the rapture but the time of the kingdom that is not given to them to know at this time, simply because the time (and true imminence) of the kingdom cannot be known with certainty until the signs of its approach will be clearly in view.

Since the gospel must be first preached to all nations, it would have been impossible for the disciples to look for a presumed any moment rapture as a realistic potential in the earliest years before the persecution at Jerusalem (Acts 8:1), before the conversion of Paul, and before the gentile mission. Furthermore, since the final seven years begins when the Antichrist makes a false covenant of peace (Dan 8:25; 9:27; 11:23) with a recently regathered nation (Jer 30:3; Eze 38:8; Zeph 2:1-2; Dan 12:1), how can pretribulationists hold that the rapture was a truly ‘imminent’ possibility during the many centuries of Jewish exile from the Land?

Even on pretribulational assumptions, from 70 A.D. until 1948, the conditions necessary for the last seven years to begin have not been in place! Therefore, the doctrine of imminence is unsustainable for anyone committed to the necessary fulfillment of all prophecy.

As I have shown in an earlier writing (“The Rapture Question Decisively Answered by the Timing of the Day of the Lord”), the question of imminence is best decided by a study of the day of the Lord. A popular assumption that will not stand the test of scripture is that in order for the day of the Lord to come as a thief in the night, it must be secret and un-signaled. However, Paul says the day will NOT overtake believers as a thief, not because the day comes without signs, but because believers will be watching and will recognize the signs that MUST precede ‘that day’ (1Thes 5:4-6; 2Thes 2:3-4; Mt 24:15; Dan 11:21-45).

“That day shall not come except there come a falling away first and that man of sin be revealed …” (2Thes 2:3). “And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, BEFORE that great and notable day of the Lord come” (Acts 2:19-20). “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet BEFORE the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord” (Mal 4:5).

In order for an event to be imminent in the sense that pretribulationists use the term, it cannot be signaled by any other known event. This is why pretribulationists were obliged to change their position on the day of the Lord, first in the 1940’s and again in the 70’s (see the above mentioned article).

Until recently, traditional pretribulationism thought the rapture started the day of the Lord. Since the day of the Lord comes unexpectedly as a thief, it was thought that it could NOT be preceded by any known event that might alert of its approach. This view became untenable when post-tribulationists of recent years pressed the point that the day of the Lord cannot be imminent until after the Antichrist has first been revealed (2Thes 2:2-3).

In order to obviate the problem, pretribulationists proposed that a gap of some indefinite duration should be discerned between the rapture and the beginning of the day of the Lord in order to provide time for the Antichrist to be revealed. This maneuver, however, is to controvert the whole idea that in order for the day of the Lord to come as a thief, it must be imminent, un-signaled, and without warning. This still popular theory collapses when definite and recognizable signs foretold in prophecy are shown to ‘necessarily’ precede ‘that day.’

Not only does scripture make clear that the Antichrist must be revealed before the Day of the Lord can start (2Thes 2:2-3), but throughout the prophets we see a number of Old Testament passages that describe the day of the Lord to be “near” or “at hand” only at the very end of the tribulation with the final judgment on the nations that have besieged Jerusalem (Isa 13:6-11; 34:8; 63:4; Eze 30:3; 39:8; Joel 1:15; 2:1; 3:14-16; Obad 15; Zeph 1:7, 14; 2:1-2; Zech 14:1).

This order of events is especially clear in Peter’s mention of the darkening of the sun and the reddening of the moon “BEFORE that great and notable Day of the Lord” (Acts 2:20), whereas Jesus, quoting the same OT prophecy (Joel 2:31), puts this climactic sign “‘immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days” (Mt 24:29-30). Therefore, if the darkness that comes BEFORE the day of the Lord is also said to come “immediately AFTER the tribulation,” it must follow that the day of the Lord is NOT the entire seven years, as in pretribulationism, but comes at the end of the great tribulation.

If the day of the Lord is NOT the seven years (the first half of which is false peace and certainly NOT great tribulation), but rather the climax of the tribulation, it becomes most untenable to argue that the day of the Lord comes without warning, or that it starts with a secret rapture, or, in more recent pre-trib theory, begins shortly after the Antichrist is revealed. This is not the language of scripture; it is pure inference based on presupposition.

As we have seen, it is false to assume that the day of the Lord cannot come as a thief if it is placed at the end of the tribulation. Even some pre-tribulational scholars admit that the coming Christ that is compared to a thief in Mt 24:43 is His visible, post-tribulational return. This is clear from the order and language of the context (Mt 24:27-43). This is further proof that preceding signs do not keep the Lord’s return from overtaking the unbelieving world as a thief.

Furthermore, Paul speaks of yet another sign of the day of the Lord that will greatly distinguish between those who will be overtaken as a thief and those who will not be surprised. It is the declaration of “peace and safety” (1Thes 5:3). I believe Paul has in mind the ill-fated peace covenant that the Jews will enter into with the Antichrist (see Isa 28:15, 18, Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 8:25; 9:27; 11:23).

To further demonstrate that the thief like day of the Lord comes at the very end of the tribulation, notice the relation of Christ’s coming as a thief in Rev 16:15 with Peter’s reference to the day of the Lord in 2Pet 3:10, 12. It is significant to observe that, according to Rev 16:15, the thief like coming of Christ is not presented as truly ‘imminent’ until after the sixth bowel.

Even so late as after the sixth bowel (Rev 16:12), the thief like return of Jesus is presented as yet future (Rev 16:15). An examination of the context of Rev 16:12-17 will show that the warning of Jesus’ thief like coming is significantly placed between the sixth and seventh bowels, and the context makes clear that the seventh bowl is “Armageddon, the battle of the great day of God Almighty” (Rev 16:14-17). This points to the fact that Jesus’ coming to destroy the Antichrist (2Thes 2:8) is the same coming that is elsewhere compared to the coming of a thief.

Notably, the next event after this insertion of warning concerning Christ’s ‘now truly imminent’ return (as a thief) is the announcement of the seventh bowel, which is also “the great day of God Almighty.” This, and not a supposed earlier rapture, is the coming that in Rev 16:15, 2Pet 2:10, 12, and Mt 24:43 is represented to overtake the ‘earth dwellers’ as a thief. In contrast, Paul makes it clear that this will NOT be the experience of the true believer. “But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief.” (1Thes 5:4).

A careful comparison of the language of Rev 16:17 with Eze 39:8 will prove beyond question that the seventh bowl, also called “the great Day of God Almighty,” is indeed the Day of the Lord foretold by all the prophets of Israel. A further comparison of 2Pet 3:10, 12 with Rev 16:14 puts beyond question that the thief like day of the Lord and the post-tribulational “Day of God” are synonymous. Jesus comes as a thief at the great day of God Almighty to end the battle of Armageddon. This is the great and notable day of the Lord, which comes AFTER the darkness, which comes “immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days” (Mt 24:29; Acts 2:20). What could be plainer?

Hence, the term, day of the Lord, is a biblical synonym for the post-tribulational return of Christ. It is the day of Antichrist’s destruction (2Thes 2:3, 8), the gathering of Christ’s elect (Mt 24:31 with 2Thes 2:1-2), and the restoration of the kingdom to Israel (Mt 23:39; Acts 3:21; Ro 11:25-26; Rev 1:7). It does not include the tribulation; it ends the tribulation. The day of the Lord is not an imminent, un-signaled event and cannot therefore be introduced by an alleged any moment, pre-tribulational rapture. Christ returns at the day of the Lord, and this is the only return of Christ promised in scripture.

It may be asked, how can the day of the Lord come as a thief in the night when it is signaled by such clear and manifest events? That is a good question, but it leaves the question, clear and manifest to whom? It may seem a marvel, but at the time when the world will have occasion to witness perhaps the most prolific and manifest fulfillment of prophecy in history, still, the mediating angel says to Daniel, “Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand” (Dan 12:10).

We simply cannot suppose the Lord’s answer in Acts 1:7 is meant to teach that there is no need for knowledge of the times and events which He and Paul, and later John, so clearly sets out for the church’s protection (Mt 24:15-16, 21; 2Thes 2:4; Rev 12:6, 14; 13:5, 15-17; 14:9), and which so greatly glorifies God in the knowledge of His prophetic plan and revelation of His manifold wisdom.

The mystery revealed at Pentecost made clear that the restoration of the kingdom to Israel (i.e., the day of the Lord) must await the return of Jesus from heaven (Acts 3:21), but first “this gospel of the kingdom must be preached to all nations for witness, and then (only then) shall the end come” (Mt 24:14). The times and seasons of when that will be will only be knowable with certainty when the signs are fully in place. This concerns in particular the closing stages of Daniel’s vision, which the scripture says would not be fully unsealed and understood until the time of the end (Dan 12:4, 6-7, 9). This seems the more likely context and background of the Lord’s intention in His answer to the question of Acts 1:6.

We’ve come a long way to use a text intended to correct the mistaken presumption of imminence to defend the modern doctrine of an imminent pre-tribulational rapture. No, the day of the Lord is not imminent. It does not begin the tribulation; it ends it. It will not overtake believers as a thief, precisely because it will be preceded by the clear and knowable signs of its approach.

Finally, it would have required the greatest stretch of the imagination to teach an imminent, any moment rapture of the church at any time during the many centuries when there was no nation of Israel to even set the stage for the last seven years. The Lord is always “at hand” (Phil 4:5) in the sense that “the Judge is standing at the door” (Ja 5:9), signifying every person’s proximity to the ever present potential of sudden judgment (Lk 12:20, 45-46), but the doctrine of imminence from the standpoint of actual chronology is a disarming false doctrine that threatens to cost the church dearly.

In His precious service, Reggie

In order for Christ to return the Antichrist must be first revealed (2Thes 2:3), but in order for this to happen, the restrainer must first be removed by the agency of Michael (2Thes 2:7 with Rev 12:7-14). After Satan’s expulsion, “his time is short” (Rev 12:12). Space does not permit the presentation of the evidence, but suffice it to say that the great transitional event of Michael’s heavenly victory over Satan will not occur independently of the prayer and travail of the church. With Satan’s eviction, ‘the tribulation, the great one’ begins (this is the literal translation of the Greek double article in Rev 7:14). This is the short but unequaled tribulation that eclipses all other times of tribulation (Jer 30:7; Dan 12:1; Mat 24:21). The instructed believer will know that Satan’s dejection down to earth will NOT be his final end, but the beginning of his most fierce assault on the saints and the covenant itself.

This is to make the point that intelligent prayer for the full coming of the kingdom is also a prayer for the speedy removal of all that stands in the way of the fulfillment of prophecy. It means that our desire for the coming of the kingdom has become greater than our fear of what must come first. How can we then pray with singleness of heart for His return, if we are secretly desirous that His return NOT be in our time, particularly if this should mean that we and our families will not be conveniently removed from earth by way of a secret rapture? This is a sober thought, since even the pious sages and rabbis of the Jews throughout the middle ages would declare their prayer that they would not be alive to see the ‘birth pangs’ of the Messiah, which they rightly saw as immediately preceding the longed for ‘redemption’.

But how can such a prayer be prayed if we have succumbed to the prevailing mentality that says, “all this and heaven too”? How can we pray with such singleness of heart and purpose if our dominant desire is for nothing more than God’s continued blessing on our temporal tranquility? That is why a post-tribulational rapture of the church is so unthinkable to those branches of Christendom that preach an overly ‘realized eschatology’ of guaranteed present prosperity and security. This implies that in order for there to be such prevailing prayer, there must be the truest and deepest longing and even travail that is not content with the ‘presence of the kingdom’ apart from its full compliment in His glorious return, the “blessed hope” of the church. This can only come with a great revolution in our all too modern and all too Western world and life view, as even evangelicalism, for the larger part, is embarrassed by our antiquated “apocalyptic” view. What then will it take to move us to this kind of kingdom reality and urgency, particularly how we pray?

For one thing, we will have to become “glory centered” more than self centered. “No man ever yet hated his own flesh,” says Paul. There is nothing wrong with the natural and healthy desire for personal and corporate peace and safety for ones nation and for ones family. There are clear promises to that effect. But this is not the highest good. Even the world concerns itself with the same (1Thes 5:3). We are called to something beyond. The believer is baptized by the Spirit into union with the desires and goals of another, even Him who is the one being in all the universe who is perfectly right to seek His own glory as the highest good. We must reorient our thinking and our desires to this.

The highest good is the glory of God, regardless the cost to our otherwise good and acceptable temporal interests. That is why only a true experimental taste and apprehension of that transforming vision of His glory will be sufficient to keep us through the mighty tempest that must soon blow with violence upon our whole civilization. It is that vision that braced and kept Him. “Who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross …” I am reminded of the old hymn which says, “I am resolved no longer to linger, charmed by this world’s delights, things that are higher, things that are nobler, these have allured my sight.”

Is that joy, truly and without reserve, ‘set before’ us? If it is not, we dare not presume that any other form of knowledge or good works will suffice. Seek the sure and secure certainty of your calling and election, but be careful that your security is not tied to just having your own personal spiritual accounts in order; that is not the vision and love of the kingdom. Rather, be careful that ‘the full assurance of faith’ is tied to an apprehension and love for the kingdom of God, not only as a present inward reality, but in its full expanse, by the open and public vindication of His covenant promise in all the earth. We are to be moved by His vision for the glory of His kingdom and not just how it will go with us in our individual standing at the judgment seat of Christ. Such an orientation tends towards works and self centered theology that puts the emphasis where scripture does not put it, namely, on ourselves. On the contrary, we need to share His jealousy for His open vindication here on this earth, not for our sake, but for the sake and glory of Him who bought us. It must be here at the scene of the crime. This is where the test must be won or lost, here, on this earth, “in the presence of His enemies”, and against all odds. This present earth WILL see and host the fulfillment of all that God promised His elect nation, as the millennial head of the nations. That is what the powers fear.

It is the passion for His glory, first in the church, and then in all the earth through a restored Israel that should fill our longings and our prayers. It is a clear vision of that glory and that joy that will cause us to endure the cross of tribulation, even great tribulation. That is the understanding that will permit the kind of prayer needed to move heaven, so that all things that wait in heaven (such as Michael’s final removal of Satan; Rev 12:7-14) and on earth (such as the end of Muslim domination of the temple mount) and all that stands in the way of His kingdom will be removed. The more we consider it, the more we will agree that this is a prayer that is indeed costly, so that only those who’s faith is in “the God who raises the dead” can pray it truly and effectually with singleness of heart.

In answer to Phil’s forward ((Temple Mount – Spiritual Warfare
Perhaps the LORD opened their eyes and they saw a mighty army of God … armed with the sword of His WORD!
Are the principalities and powers reporting spiritual warfare?
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/151130)) which stirred these thoughts, I have this to add: So long as Muslims dominate the temple mount, barring all Jewish access, the Word of God cannot be fulfilled and Jesus cannot come. That is why the principalities and powers literally gloat so long as that usurping shrine sits firmly atop that elect place that Jews are currently forbidden even to approach. The few that do consider that something big has got to give in order for this to change, find it hard to imagine that such change could ever come by any other means short of war, perhaps, God forbid, not only regional but another world war. We are not told specifically one way or another. We are left to inference, but seismic world changes are impending.

Just as Arabs view Jewish ‘occupation’ of the Land an insult to Allah, I see the Muslim shrine in that holy place as a demonic affront to the “holy covenant” (Dan 11:28, 30), since it sits over the place where God elected to put His name ‘forever’. The church, for the far larger part, has no concept of this ‘earthly’ aspect of the war in the heavens, but the principalities know and resist anything that would move this mountain of opposition that stands in the way of the fulfillment of the necessary pre-conditions of Christ’s return. The battle is indeed in the heavenlies, and instructed believers should know that nothing can advance towards the necessary pre-conditions of Jesus’s return while this dead lock persists. Are we willing, in full light of what it will mean for our temporal comforts, to pray with one heart and mind together for the removal of this opposing mountain? Certainly, the opposing mountain that stood before Zerubbabel (Zech 4) was much more than contemporary Babylon. It was Satan’s resistance to the restoration of the “house” (“whose house we are”), the finishing of the vision, and the kingdom of God come on earth (“under the whole heaven”). To this end all creation groans. How much do we, with strong sighs and longings, also groan? “Come quickly Lord Jesus!” is the cry of a church that has counted the cost of that prayer.

I have just read another article of urgency warning of an imminent war, which I do not doubt, but what concerns me is that attached to this ever present, and now even probable possibility, is the expectation that this will set in motion the world wide persecution of the Jews, and that now is the time to prepare all possible means of transport to get Jews back to the Land.

It is not the sobriety of the warning that concerns me, but the failure to distinguish events that belong to different times and circumstances. I believe such misplacement of the order of events can lead to premature decisions and expectations that further discredit prophecy and distract from the real thing when the real time comes. This concern has moved me to point out some important distinctions that might save some from needless confusion and decisions that are based on false assumptions.

I ask of those that have little enough patience with theological hair splitting to bear with me a little, as I feel I must go into some detail in order to show the order of events that we must keep in mind if we are to avoid the false alarms of prophetic speculation, since by these, many are further disarmed and unprepared for the real thing when it comes.

While it is true that antisemitism can break out anywhere anytime, it is usually possible to “some extent” to see it coming if we are indeed expecting it to increase suddenly and pervasively, particularly as Israel is made to appear the cause of the world’s woes.

We know that the Jews are not the object of the last world wide persecution UNTIL the last 3 1/2 years. Furthermore, we know that Jacob’s trouble comes 3 1/2 years after the covenant has been confirmed that brings the deadly false peace (Isa 28:15, 18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 9:27; 11:23; 1Thes 5:3). There may indeed be tribulation, but “the tribulation, the great one” of Jer 30:7; Dan 12:1; Mt 24:21 and Rev 7:14 cannot begin before there is a sacrifice and a temple that stands again, at least in some early stage of construction (Dan 11:31; 12:11; Mt 24:15; 2Thes 2:4). This alone is sufficient to make the time clear when it is time to know the time with that degree of definite certainty.

Therefore, even if Russia and China take out America, or any other conceivable combination of events in a world war III type scenario, we know that Israel survives as a nation, and evidently comes into an even greater political and strategic advantage in the region. Why? It is because Israel must make the false peace that provides for the conditions necessary for the abomination that comes in the middle of the week, 3 1/2 years after the great delusion that presumes a lasting peace for Israel can be possible apart from an everlasting righteousness.

Now certainly, the godly remnant that has foreseen the evil has made ready to hide Jews in flight, but once again, that particular flight does not begin until the beginning of the last 3 1/2 years. Now here’s why I point out what is too little considered. The body of Christ that has been hiding and preaching the gospel to persecuted Israel in a mutual experience of persecution and flight will NOT be the direct agents of Jewish return. This is because we will have been gathered to Christ at His return by way of rapture at the “last” trump (compare Mt 24:31; 1Cor 15:52; 1Thes 4:14, 17; 2Thes 2:1; Rev 10:7; 11:15).

The true bride will be the witness that prepares them for repentance and return, but they will not be the physical agents for that return. The world wide return of Israel that comes only after the destruction of Antichrist at the day of the Lord (2Thes 2:1-3, 8) will be by the assistance of gentiles that manifestly were not “in Christ” at the time of the rapture. I’ll return to this.

If plain language is permitted to plainly describe the time and nature of Jewish return, we can see that THIS return is by natural means of transport (Isa 60:9; 66:20), employed by thankful gentiles (Isa 49:22) who have manifestly survived the great tribulation, and count it greatest privilege to bring the sons and daughters of Israel home, as an holy offering to the Lord (compare Isa 49:22; 60:9; 66:20). Context and language, both here and many places, will show that this is AFTER the day of the Lord.

The language in its proper context will further show that these gentile survivors, along with the saved of Israel, enter the millennial earth in natural bodies. This stands in marked contrast with the translation and catching up of the bride into glorified immortality to rule and reign with Christ over the millennial earth.

The day of the Lord salvation of Israel happens in conjunction with the revelation of the returning Jesus (Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39; Acts 3:20; Ro 11:26; Rev 1:7). This is why the penitent survivors of Jacob’s trouble are not changed and taken up by way of rapture. It is because they were not already “in Christ” at the time of the rapture.

The Jews that get saved before the rapture will be changed and caught up with all who are “in Christ” at the point of the rapture. This is clear from 1Cor 15:23, 52 and 1Thes 4:14. However, the penitent survivors of Israel do not go up with the church, but are shown going into the millennium, as newly filled with the Spirit, but in natural bodies. The reason seems clear. Scripture is harmonized when we recognize that at the same instant the bride is being changed and caught up, the penitent remnant of Israel are, at that same moment, able now to “look upon Him whom they pierced” (Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39; Rev 1:7). That, by the way, is the look of faith and revelation, not a mere physical seeing. It will be like Paul’s seeing of Christ on the Damascus road.

“At once,” and “in one day,” the revived nation passes from death to life (Isa 66:8; Eze 39:22; Zech 3:9; 14:7). Clearly, this is the day of the Lord when the Deliverer comes out of Zion to turn away ungodliness from Jacob (Isa 59:19-21; Acts 3:20-21 with Ro 11:26). Many hasten to point out that the day of the Lord is much more than a 24 hour period. That is true; but this point of transition is even more precise than a single day. It comes “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye” (1Cor 15:52), not only “in one day”, but “at once” (Isa 66:8).

A careful comparison of scripture with scripture will show that the spiritual regeneration of Israel comes immediately with the revelation of Christ in conjunction with the pouring out of the Spirit. The time is clear. It is the great and notable day of the Lord (compare Joel 2:28-32; 3:14-16, but especially Eze 39:29 with Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39; Acts 3:20; Rev 1:7). To make the time even more definite, note that both Jesus and Peter quote from Joel’s prophecy to show that the darkness that comes AFTER the tribulation (Mt 24:29) comes BEFORE the great and notable day of the Lord (compare Mt 24:29 with Acts 2:20; 2Pet 3:10, 12 with Rev 16:14-17 with Eze 39:8). So clearly, the ‘national’ salvation of Israel is at the end of Jacob’s trouble (Jer 30:7), but this does not mean that many Jews have not been saved all along the way with all that great multitude that comes out of ‘the tribulation, the great one’ (Rev 7:9, 13-14).

If we will “carefully” examine the context of the scriptures describing this last, and clearly post-tribulational return, we will see that it is not the preliminary return in unbelief that we see today (also foretold in prophecy, Eze 38:8; Zeph 2:1-2). We must distinguish, since this latter and final return will be world wide and complete, to the last person (Eze 39:28).

This return is AFTER Jacob’s trouble. It is AFTER the great and notable day of the Lord. It is AFTER the last trumpet (Isa 27:13; Mt 24:31; 1Cor 15:52; Rev 10:7; 11:15). It is the earliest days of the millennium. Christ has returned and the true bride has been translated into glorified immortality by way of rapture and resurrection. In contrast, the Jews are returning from every nation in natural bodies by every natural means of transport (Isa 66:20). They are NOT gathered to meet the Lord in the air. We are careless with the plain language of scripture if we do not make this distinction, since in no other way (of which I’m aware) can the scripture be harmonized. The day of the Lord will mean rapture for the true church (of this present age); it will mean repentance and return for the saved remnant of Israel.

The time is clear; and the manner and the means are just as clear. After the bride has been caught up and gathered (Mt 24:31; 2Thes 2:1) to meet the Lord in the air (1Thes 4:17) , gentiles are depicted escorting a contrite and penitent remnant back to the Land. They do not appear to be resurrected saints, but newly awakened seekers (Zech 8:23) who are implementing every conceivable ‘natural’ mode of transportation (Isa 60:9; 66:20) to get Jews back to the Land. Christ is here; the Antichrist is destroyed, and Jews can return home safely and dwell in truest eternal security, as an all holy nation forever.

We can see why the gentiles undertake this labor of love and reverence for the everlasting covenant. With the sounding of the seventh trumpet, the mystery of God has been finished (Rev 10:7), and the deeply humbled nations of the gentiles (those comparatively “few” that are left; Isa 24:6), now begin to understand the meaning behind Israel’s long and tragic experience in history (Eze 39:23, 27). This explains why these gentile survivors see their part in assisting the Jews back to the Land as an offering to the Lord (Zech 2:11; 8:23; Isa 49:22; 60:9; 66:20), but this is NOT us bringing them back; we have been taken up.

It is this clearly revealed activity of gentiles who have manifestly survived the tribulation that leads me to conclude, on the basis of 1Cor 15:23, 52 and 1Thes 4:14, that not all the unsaved of the earth take the mark of the beast, else they would not have survived Christ’s return. This seems clear, because many scriptures show that there will be some from among the nations that survive the judgments of the tribulation. These will enter the millennium in natural bodies (e.g., Isa 61:9; 65:20-23; 66:19-20; Eze 39:2, 9-16; Dan 7:12; Zech 14:16-18 et al). From this, it appears that that not everyone who is unsaved during the tribulation take the mark.

It is important that we distinguish how and by whom Jews return from all lands after the tribulation. It is clear that they do not return by way of rapture, but as newly born again, Spirit filled believers, assisted by surviving gentiles whose hearts have been lately turned towards God and His elect people, as the dust of Armageddon begins to settle.

I realize that such fine points of distinction can be difficult and even frustrating, but if we do not make these important distinctions we will be prone to engage in premature or misdirected activities. Even though the expectation of certain events may be correct, our actions and decisions must be based on an accurate reading of scripture, as to their proper time and order.

Many will, of course, simply exclaim that the Spirit has led them in a certain way. Well, that is well and good for them, but what about the rest of us? Our only truly “mutual” safety is the scripture, rightly interpreted, for which we need the greatest help of the Spirit, but this is what He has promised (Jn 16:13; 1Jn 2:27). So this is not for the “experts,” but it is for the diligent (“It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honor of kings is to search out a matter;” Prov 25:2).

All is to say, while I see it is our responsibility to anticipate and prepare for the flight of the Jews, it is NOT our job to get them back to the Land. It is, however, our responsibility to do all in our power to help them survive until the day of national salvation, which I am convinced is not accidentally the time of our translation. With the birthing of Israel, the church’s travail is complete and our unique task for this dispensation is finished in their return. The salvation of Israel does not come in a vacuum. It is the result of a combination of the church’s prophetic witness (Dan 11:33) amid an unequaled tribulation of fearful “signs” in earth and in heaven (Mt 24:3, 30; Lk 21:11; Acts 2:19) empty Jacob of his power (Deut 32:36 with Dan 12:7).

Indeed, we may say that now is the time to prepare spiritually and practically for a soon time when none can buy or sell, and when we know that not only Jews, but all true believers will be hated and hunted, but how is now the time to hide Jews? How can now be the time to prepare ships for their return? I can see where ships may indeed play a role in their flight and preservation during the tribulation, but the ships that bring them home are those put into use by the gentile survivors of the tribulation (Isa 60:9). The only reason I can imagine that we should work towards returning Jews to the Land before the time of Jacob’s trouble is if we ‘assume’ that that the greater potential for Jewish survival will be in the Land, but that is not what the evidence suggests.

I would just point out that when the great post-tribulational trumpet of Isa 27:13 sounds, it finds Jews who are near to perishing in Egypt and Assyria. Could it be that Jews have fled to these nations, because the prospect for Jewish survival is greater in these presently hostile nations than in the Land itself? This, and the clear evidence of scripture that Jewish survival will depend upon flight into the neighboring wilderness (Isa 16:1-5; 26:20; 42:11; Mt 24:16; Rev 12:6, 14) and into the “wilderness of the nations” (Eze 20:35) leads me to conclude that the time before an unequaled tribulation that begins and has its first concentration “in the Land” is NOT the time to encourage Jews back to the Land, at least not without fearlessly telling them what they’re in for.

I do not doubt the crisis or the urgency to anticipate the ever present probability of war, not only in Israel, but one that could very easily spread throughout the world. I expect just such a thing to bring about the conditions that will make the false peace possible. I do NOT, however, expect that this preliminary violence will particularly target Jews in the nations. There must be a false peace after the storm, which will be the delusive calm before the ultimate storm.

We can certainly expect that a war that begins with a strike on Iran will certainly bring an attempted retaliation on the nation. It is also possible, even likely, that terrorists cells will target Jewish population centers throughout the world, but this is not the time of the final flight of Jews, and it is not, in my view, the time to be trying to get Jews back to the Land.

Some of my closest and dearest brothers oppose me on this, but I will bear the reproach for splitting theological hairs if it can prevent well meaning believers from further embarrassing the prophetic scriptures by premature actions due to neglect of plain language in its context.

In the Beloved, Reggie

Q & A

Question: “If I read you correctly, do I understand that you believe there will be a period of time between the rapture of the saints and the second coming of Christ at the end of the tribulation?”

I’m glad you asked, brother. I should have been clearer. The answer is no; I see the two events as simultaneous. Both are triggered by nothing less than the Lord’s glorious coming in clouds “immediately AFTER the tribulation,” as He descends to the Mount of Olives (Zech 14:4; Job 19:25). At the very moment of His visible appearing (Mt 24:27; 1Cor 15:52; Rev 1:7), those who have remained alive will be caught up to meet the myriads of departed saints who are coming with him (compare Isa 13:3; Joel 3:11; Zech 14:5; 1Thes 3:13; 4:14). This becomes clear when we see that the day of the Lord is also the time of the rapture.

Question: “If so, how long?”

No time at all. The rapture happens at the last trumpet in manifest connection with the day of the Lord (Mt 24:29, 31 with 1Cor 15:52; 1Thes 5:2, 4; 2Thes 2:1-3). The day of the Lord, or the “day of God” Almighty, is everywhere shown to come AFTER the tribulation.(Compare Mt 24:29, 43; with Acts 2:20; 2Thes 2:3, 8; 2Pet 3:10. 12 with Rev 16:14-16). Note the relationship between these passages show that the ‘thief like’ day of the Lord is clearly AFTER the stellar darkness (Acts 2:20) that comes AFTER the tribulation (Mt 24:29). If we compare 2 Pet 3:10, 12 with Rev 16:14-16, we see that the day of the Lord, also called, ‘day of God’ and ‘day of God Almighty’ does not come as a thief until sometime AFTER the sixth bowel in Rev 16:14-15. This shows clearly that the thief like return of Christ is at the very end of the tribulation and not sooner.

Therefore, it is a fallacy to try to separate the Lord’s return from the day of the Lord, and the time of the day of the Lord is very clearly AFTER the tribulation. (Mt 24:29 with Acts 2:20; Rev 16:14-15). Although the day of the Lord comes as a thief, this does not mean that it takes the godly by surprise (1Thes 5:4). Contrary to popular opinion, Christ’s does not come without sign or warning, as in pre-tribulationism. Even if misinterpreted as to their proper meaning, the principal sign will be clear and outward for all to see (Mt 24:15). The only reason the signs will be ignored or misinterpreted is because of an unparalleled deception that scripture warns will prevail in those days (Mt 24:24). For this, Jesus prescribes only one safe antidote (Mt 13:23).

Question: “If I read you correctly, if unsaved Gentiles who survive until the end of the tribulation are going to be the ones who bring the Jews back to Zion, then this would imply a period of days, if not weeks or months. Would it not?”

Yes, it takes time to traverse sea and land on the long trek back home from the lands of their dispersion, but this is what a host of Old Testament passages depict. Again, the question will come to whether such passages are properly to be interpreted literally according to the original author’s intention, or some other way? From this we see that the saved remnant of Israel (such that survive the tribulation to go into the millennial age in natural bodies) were not members of the body (not yet “in Christ”) at the time of the rapture. Evidently, the penitent remnant are enabled to “look upon Him whom they pierced” (Zech 12:10) at the precise moment that He is coming in the clouds (Rev 1:7) to destroy Antichrist and to gather His elect at the last trump (Mt 24:31; 1Cor 15:52; 2Thes 2:1-3, 8; Rev 10:7: 11:15-18). At that same moment, the surviving remnant of Israel are being born (spiritually reborn) “at once” and in “one day” (Isa 66:8; Eze 39:22; Zech 3:9; 14:7). That is the day of the Lord. It is when ungodliness is turned away from Jacob (compare Isa 59:19-21 with Ro 11:25-29). It is the day the Spirit is poured out on the penitent remnant (Joel 2:28-32; Eze 39:27-29 with Zech 12:10; Rev 1:7). Because the Jewish remnant were not saved before the rapture, they were not changed into glorified immortality at the last trump, with “all” who were already in Christ (1Cor 15:23; 52; 1Thes 4:14, 17). If we let the day of the Lord be what scripture describes as “one day” after the tribulation, then we can see that the beleaguered remnant of Israel is being given the gift of repentance on the same day that the church is being caught up. That is why their experience is markedly different from that of those who were already in Christ at the time of the rapture. That is why their return to the Land in natural bodies and with the assistance of gentiles who have survived the tribulation is quite to be distinguished from the post-resurrection experience of the church.

Hello Reggie:

As for the destruction of those who take the mark of the beast. What is your scriptural basis that they will be physically killed upon the return of Jesus?

I will come to your more specific question, but first I would like to ask what many ask. “If all who are not saved take the mark, and if all who are in Christ are raptured at His return, who then is left to enter the millennium in natural bodies? This question is raised by the considerable volume of OT scriptures that show newly saved Jews and a sizable host of newly awakened gentiles from the nations taking part in many natural activities and functions that are clearly incompatible with a resurrected state of glorified immortality.

This has been a great puzzle for many who are aware enough of the many scriptures that bear upon this question. The problem has been part of the reason many have chosen to adopt a spiritualizing hermeneutic (principles of interpretation) in their approach to prophecy.

Certainly, there are some passages that seem to speak of the total destruction of “all” the lost at Christ’s return. One such example would be 2Thes 1:8-9. This passage would appear to include every person who is not born again at the time of the rapture. But what then of many other scriptures that seem to imply that some who are not raptured at Christ’s return (both Jew and gentile) are depicted as entering into the millennial age in natural bodies?. Did not all the unsaved take the mark of the beast? And were not all true believers caught up in the rapture?

From the perspective of a literal reading of the OT, a number of scriptures depict gentile and Jewish survivors of the tribulation in the millennium in un-resurrected, natural bodies. This is a problem, because from such passages as 1 Cor 15:23, 52, 1Thes 4:14-17, and 2Thes 2:1, we see that “all” who belong to Christ, and all who sleep ‘in Jesus’ are promised translation and resurrection at the time of Christ’s return. This leaves the question of what is the fate of those who are left behind? It is clear that many are destroyed in the judgments of the tribulation, but it is also clear that some survive that are neither raptured nor destroyed. Who are these that remain?

We know that a remnant of the Jewish people are not saved until the time of the Lord’s appearing (Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39; Ro 11:26; Rev 1:7). This suggests that at the same time the church is translated, the penitent remnant of Israel, who have been prepared through the judgments of Jacob’s trouble, are just then receiving the first fruits of the Spirit through repentance and faith in Christ.

I believe this is the point of the great divide between those that enter the millennial age in their natural bodies, and those that enter that time in resurrected bodies. Apparently, all who have the ‘earnest’, or ‘first-fruits’ of the the Spirit before this point are instantly changed. Whereas those who are only now seeing Him whom they pierced (not by mere natural sight, of course, but by the revelation of the Spirit) are at that same moment being transformed into new creation believers. These, together with their penitent counterparts from among the gentiles will populate the millennial earth in natural bodies.

The scripture is clear that the saved remnant of Israel is not at once resurrected with the church, but enter the millennial period as Spirit filled saints. While there will always be Jewish salvation before that day, this is not to be confused with the sudden and dramatic salvation that comes only at the day of the Lord, when the nation will be “born in one day” (Isa 66:8; Eze 39:22; Zech 3:9; 14:7). And, as often pointed out, there is no ambiguity in scripture, as to when “that day” comes in the order of last day’s events (compare Mt 24:29 with Acts 2:20; Rev 16:14-16).

There are mysteries here, but we know that many who are not resurrected at the rapture, are NOT at once destroyed by the final judgments that accompany Christ’s return from heaven, but are left to enter the millennial age in natural bodies. A number of scriptures show gentile survivors of the last tribulation assisting Jews in their return to the Land (Isa 49:22; 60:3, 5, 9; 66:20; Zech 8:23). Though “few” (Isa 24:6), there will be some “left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem … ” (Zech 14:16; see also Dan 7:12; Isa 60:5; Eze 39:2 (1/6th left in some translations).

Those that advocate for a pre-tribulational rapture argue that this is one of the greatest proofs of their position. For them, the solution is simple. Supposing that every person that is not “in Christ” is at once destroyed at the Lord’s post-tribulational return, and that only saved persons enter the millennium, they conclude for a pre-trib rapture, since, in their view, this alone can provide time AFTER the rapture for a great number to be saved, and it is this number that enter the millennium in their natural bodies along with the saved of Israel.

On other grounds that cannot be argued here, we believe the pre-tribulational view of the rapture is refuted by clear, and in our view, undeniable evidence to the contrary. So, on those good and sufficient grounds, the answer of a pre-tribulation rapture of the church is no solution at all to the problem.

As stated above, there are too many passages, taken in their clear OT context, that show a surviving remnant, not only of Israel, but also of the nations, that are depicted as freshly awakening to the meaning of the last days events (Eze 39:23; Rev 10:7). This surviving remnant from both Israel and the nations were manifestly NOT destroyed with the Antichrist and his armies; nor were they saved before the time of the rapture (see Isa 66:19-20; Zech 8:23).

Therefore, in view of a careful survey of all the relevant scriptural evidence in its proper setting and context, and in the interest that ‘all’ relevant scripture must harmonize and not contradict, I am constrained to share the view of a comparatively small number that not everyone who is unsaved takes the mark.

We may be puzzled to hear someone suggest that NOT EVERYONE who is not a Christian will take the mark. I agree; that’s a problem, because this is what we would naturally infer from a passage like Rev 13:8. My only answer to that is, the inspired scripture cannot contradict and must be harmonized! There are just too many plain scriptures that show un-raptured survivors of the last tribulation entering the millennium in their natural bodies. In some of those passages, gentiles are depicted as assisting Jews back to the Land.

A careful survey of all that scripture describes of conditions that obtain only AFTER the tribulation and day of the Lord, will confirm that there are many activities and functions that are described of the inhabitants of the millennial earth that are quite incompatible with the final state of glorified perfection. That all the unsaved do not take the mark is further confirmed by the fact that an elect remnant from among the natural branches are not saved until the very end of Jacob’s trouble (Isa 59:21; 66:8; Jer 30:7; Dan 12:1; Mic 5:3; Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39; Ro 11:26).

So the pre-tribulation solution to the problem of tribulation survivors is unnecessary, as it assumes what scripture does not assume, namely, that only those who are saved during the tribulation will survive the return of Christ in order to populate the millennial earth. As we have shown, there are many who are not saved UNTIL the time of the Lord’s post-tribulational return, and the evidence suggests that many enter the millennium, as only beginning to awaken to the full meaning of all that has lately transpired (Eze 39:23; Rev 10:7). Many of these who were not raptured will count it a great privilege to assist in Jewish return, as an offering to the Lord. What a change of mind has come!

So, if not all take the mark, and many that are not raptured are left behind to enter the millennium in their natural bodies, then who are destroyed by Christ personally at His return? My answer is those that have taken the mark, and your question is, “how do we know that all who took the mark are destroyed at Christ’s return?

You have no question concerning the ultimate fate of those that take the mark, but only whether they will all be at once destroyed at Christ’s return. You have no question of their ultimate fate (Rev 14:11). Your question is how do we know that those who have taken the mark will “all”, and to the last person, be destroyed by Christ Himself at the moment of His return?

You seem to be asking, “since not all unbelievers are destroyed at Armageddon and Christ’s return, how do we know that ‘all’ of those who have taken the mark are necessarily destroyed at that time?” You noticed that I assumed this, and you are wondering if I have proof of my assumption.

Well, Isa 11:4 is the background for Paul’s statement about the destruction of the Antichrist by the ‘breath of the Lord’s mouth’ in 2Thes 2:8. The wicked are slain by the Word of the returning King. But here’s the problem: Since all unsaved persons are regarded as ‘children of wrath’, how is it that some seem to survive the Lord’s return, while others do not? It is here that I propose (tentatively), in the interest of the harmonization of ‘all’ scripture, a division between those among the myriads of the lost who take the mark, and those who, for whatever reason, do not appear to take it, as, for example, the beleaguered remnant of Israel.

I reason thus: If the Antichrist is slain in that instant, I believe we can safely infer that all who have irreversibly consummated their union with Satan by a deliberate acceptance of the mark, will be destroyed by the same revelation of the Word from heaven. Note too what the mark represents. It signifies the sign and seal of final hardening. From this, there is no repentance and return. It is final reprobation.

This is not the usual unbelief that all persons have outside of Christ. Therefore, it is hard to think of people entering that millennial age in the knowledge of their hopeless state and with a fixed heart of hatred towards God, just as it is inconceivable that the Antichrist can survive a moment beyond the moment of Christ’s return. There is an ontological polarity between the two natures that cannot abide the presence of the now revealed Word from heaven, i.e., Christ’s personal presence.

I say this, because I believe that the mark represents a degree of consummated union with the Spirit of Satan from which there is no repentance. Those that take it put themselves “past feeling”, and therefore, beyond repentance, which comes only by the sovereign work of the Spirit. Call it an inference, but I don’t believe the consummated ‘mystery of iniquity’ can stand for one moment the brightness of His coming (2Thes 2:8).

However, I see from other scriptures that some who were not already believers at the time of the rapture, do, in fact, survive the radiant power of His glorious return (Mt 24:27; Rev 1:7). This is admittedly a mystery that I do not presume to fully understand, but I believe I can see how it can be. I think it is best explained by distinguishing between those that have taken the mark, and some who have managed to escape it for the entire duration of the tribulation.

What some may reasonably dispute is my contention that not all the unsaved take the mark. I respect this objection, but ask that I be corrected, not only on the basis of one or two verses from the NT, but that time and pains be taken to show how I am to better account for the several passages that depict a multitude that were not changed at the time of the rapture, but were either saved at the time of the rapture, or after the rapture, or were spared immediate damnation at Christ’s return, to enter the millennium, as greatly humbled, but perhaps not yet born again, which is the picture I get.

I cannot advance my view for anything more than it is, an inference based on an effort to take into account all that scripture reveals on the subject, but there it is. I certainly welcome correction that can better explain the problem without resort to a spiritualizing dismissal of any of the relevant scriptures.

Finally, I want to say that I believe the revelation of “the wrath of the Lamb” will be a special terror to those who have lifted themselves up in their self serving hearts to assault the outward tokens of God’s everlasting covenant, what Daniel calls the “holy covenant” (Dan 11:28, 30). I speak particularly of those who harbor a deep and unrelenting hatred of the Jew and any that would identify, or lay their lives down for the Jew (Jacob), particularly in “the day of his calamity” (Eze 35:5; Obad 13).

There is something about the nature of the incarnate Word in glorious revelation when it meets with this fixed posture of unbelief and hatred of God’s election. Those in this full union with the spirit of Satan will not be able to abide the revelation of the Word from heaven, in the same way that the Philistines were immediately slain before the opened Ark of the covenant.

According to Isa 11:4 and 2Thes 2:8, I believe it is this particular kind and degree of wickedness that will not be spared at Christ’s return. All wickedness and sin will at length come up before God for final judgement, but we must remember; with the exception of the beast and the false prophet, who are at once cast into the lake of fire, all the rest of the dead are not raised to face final judgment until after the millennium (compare Dan 7:11; Rev 19:20; 20:5, 10).

This tells me that many of the judgment parables are comprehensive in their scope. It is not the interest of scripture to speak of millennial distinctions when speaking about the finality of judgement. Much that sounds as though it is being judged immediately upon Christ’s pre-millennial return, is not fully carried out until the end of the millennium. Often, the parabolic picture implies final sentence as being carried out immediately upon His return, whereas, progressive revelation shows the final casting into hell does not occur until the end of the millennium. This is because the state of the soul is sealed at death, or at the point of final reprobation, and even this is not finally judged until the second resurrection.

So I see that not only the Antichrist, but all who share a direct and full allegiance to what he represents, to be at once destroyed at Christ’s return in glory. That is to say, all who share consummated union with that spirit, will not be able to survive the revelation of the Word, because they have hardened themselves beyond the possibility of repentance, and have participated in the completion of the mystery of iniquity (2Thes 2:7-8) of the last and final ‘great falling away’ (2Thes 2:3). Hence, those that take the mark are in a distinct spiritual category from the rest of fallen humanity. Even in the tribulation, the receivers of the mark are singled out for many special plagues that are not aimed at the rest of humanity (Rev 16:2, 10).

I believe the unveiled wrath of God is somehow related to the full unveiling of the unapproachable meekness of God, which, of course, is just one attribute of His infinite holiness. That is why “the wrath of the Lamb” is so unbearable to all that is high and lifted up (Isa 2:17; Zeph 2:3). It is just one part of the picture, but according to many depictions in the prophets, the wrath of ‘that day’ is particularly directed against those who have lifted themselves up against the ‘holy covenant’ (i.e., the chosen and set apart things of God; Isa 24:5).

It is particularly the unveiled meekness of God that will be unbearable to the now unveiled pride of man (represented in the ‘revelation of the man of sin’) in this final act of the gentiles against the covenant (Jews have no less opposed the covenant in their own way). Not only this, but all who presume to stand before God in any other righteousness than the righteousness of Christ are equally lost, whether or not they ever lived in a final tribulation to take the mark in that particular form.

I ask the patience of many who have sent questions. Many are forthcoming, as time permits, not so much in the order they arrive, or their value, but in terms of the time and labor that is required. Some of the best must therefore be last :-). For those who would be willing to remember us in prayer, I am going through more than the usual distress in both health and home. Your prayers are greatly coveted.

Your brother in His goodness, Reggie

A comparison of Rev 8:12-13 with Rev 11:13-15 will show that the three woes are also the last three trumpets. The public ascension of the two witnesses takes place at the time of the second woe, which is also the sixth trumpet (Rev 11:12-14). At this point Christ has not yet returned. The announcement of the imminence of the third woe is followed by the sounding of the seventh trumpet, which finishes the mystery of God with Christ’s return to raise the dead and judge the nations (Rev 10:7; 11:14-15, 18).

Although the later revelation of the seven trumpets was not yet written at the time of Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians, it is most unlikely that Paul would have used the term ‘last’ to speak of a trumpet that is earlier than the well known trumpet that the prophets mention in connection with Israel’s deliverance at the day of the Lord (Isa 27:13; Joel 2:1, 15; Zeph 1:14, 16). Clearly, this is the trumpet that Jesus has in mind when speaking of His return after the tribulation to “gather together” His elect (Mt 24:31). [Compare also the Lord’s language, ‘great sound of a trumpet’, with Isaiah’s ‘the great trumpet shall be blown’ (Isa 27:13).]

Pretribulationists believe that the trumpet mentioned by Jesus is a different trumpet than the one mentioned by Paul, different trumpets for different comings. But a trumpet that sounds seven years earlier than the trumpet associated with Christ’s post-tribulational return would hardly be called ‘last’.

If Paul intended the kind of distinction that pretribulationists want us to find between comings and trumpets, it is surprising that he did not more clearly distinguish and qualify his meaning. Consider the following:

Paul was aware that many would know the prophets, if not also the circulating tradition of the Lord’s Olivet Discourse (Mt 24-25). Many would certainly have occasion to be aware of a trumpet that sounds at the end of the tribulation.

Surely a pre-tribulational Paul would have anticipated the ease with which many would naturally associate his mention of a resurrection trumpet with the trumpet that was expected to sound in climactic conjunction with the deliverance of the last day.

A pre-tribulational Paul becomes even more misleading when he says “then shall be brought to pass the saying which is written …” (1Cor 15:52). The ‘saying’ is written in Isa 25:8. Paul declares the time of the ‘last trump’ to be the time that Isa 25:8 is fulfilled.

This becomes very significant for the rapture debate when we examine the surrounding context in Isaiah chapters 24-27 (known as “Isaiah’s little apocalypse”). The entire context is clearly post-tribulational. The resurrection mentioned in Isa 25:8, which includes Isaiah’s personal resurrection (Isa 26:19), stands in indivisible connection with the deliverance of Israel at the post-tribulational day of the Lord (Isa 24:21; 25:9; 26:1; 27:12). “That day” is significantly heralded by the blowing of ‘the great trumpet’ (Isa 27:13).

The connection is clear. If “then” means then, then Paul’s mention of the last trump in connection with the Isaiah passage is further confirmation that he has in mind the same eschatological trumpet that Jesus associates with His return to ‘gather together’ His elect (Mt 24:31). It should not pass notice that Paul applies this very language to the rapture of the church in 2Thes 2:1 (“our gathering together unto Him”). Such similarity of terms make it most unlikely that Paul has a different coming in mind, much less that he would expect others to distinguish between comings that are described in such similar language.

Whether understood literally or metaphorically, it was well known that the resurrection of the penitent nation awaited the post-tribulational deliverance of God (Isa 25:8;Hos 6:1-2; Eze 37:12-13). This would also be the time of the personal resurrection of such OT worthies as Job (Job 19:25-26), Isaiah (Isa 26:19), and Daniel (Dan 12:1-2). This gave rise to the term, “the resurrection at the ‘last day’,” as used by Jesus and His Jewish contemporaries (Jn 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:24; 12:48).

This is why pre-tribulationists, in order to maintain their view, are forced to conclude that the OT saints continue to “sleep in the dust of the earth” (Dan 12:2) for an additional seven years after the church has been raptured to heaven to participate in the marriage supper of the Lamb.

For such a notion to be seriously entertained, a number of presuppositions have to be brought to the text, some of which have no recorded precedent in the history of Christian doctrine. The view that the saints of the tribulation period are not part of the body of Christ was first introduced by John Nelson Darby around 1832 (“Until brought to the fore through the writings and preaching and teaching of a distinguished ex-clergyman, Mr J. N. Darby, in the early part of the last century, it is scarcely to be found in a single book or sermon through a period of sixteen hundred years”. (Harry Ironside, The Mysteries Of God, 1908).

Until the advent of modern pretribulationism, the day of the Lord was the OT term for the salvation of the ‘last day’. The NT would reveal this to be the time of Christ’s return to raise the dead, destroy the Antichrist, and judge the nations (Jn 6:39-40, 44, 54;11:24; 12:48; 2Thes 2:3, 8; Rev 11:15, 18). However, the modern adaptation of the term to the concept of an any moment rapture has greatly obscured its original context and use.

Both sides of the debate understand that the rapture question is primarily decided by where we see the day of the Lord on the time-line of last day’s events. For reasons we will show, the pretribulational view of the rapture cannot be defended unless the day of the Lord is interpreted to include the entire seven years, which pretribulationists see as continuous tribulation.

[Note: For pretribulationists, the day of the Lord is synonymous with the tribulation. They see the entire seven years as tribulation, and often represent the period as a continuous ‘day’ of wrath. This is incorrect. The first half of the tribulation is false peace, at least for Israel (Isa 28:15, 18, Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 8:25; 11:23-24;1Thes 5:3). The ‘great tribulation’ is only the last half of the seven year week (Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7, 11; Mt 24:15, 21; Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5, 7).]

So where does the day of the Lord come in relation to the events of the end? Scripture clearly pin points the time. Very simply and plainly, it comes AFTER the darkness that comes AFTER the tribulation (compare Mt 24:29 with Acts 2:20). If we carefully observe the preposition, AFTER, in Mt 24:29, and the preposition, BEFORE, in Acts 2:20, it becomes clear that the great stellar darkness that comes AFTER the tribulation in Mt 24:29, is shown in Acts 2:20 to come BEFORE the day of the Lord.

While the precise term, ‘day of the Lord’, does not appear in the Lord’s Olivet prophecy, the term, ‘that day’ (Mt 24:36) is certainly used in clear reference to the Lord’s return after the tribulation (see Mt 24:27, 29-30, with Mt 24:36-37, 39). It is important to note that it is the coming of ‘that day’ (i.e., the day “immediately after” the tribulation; Mt 24:29) that Jesus compares to a thief in Mt 24:43.

[Note: Among pretribulationists there is sharp difference of opinion whether or not the thief-like coming mentioned by Jesus in Mt 24:43 should be interpreted to refer to Christ’s post-tribulational return. Prophecy expert, Hal Lindsey, breaks rank with many leading pretribulational scholars when he applies the Lord’s reference to ‘that day and hour’ in Mt 24:36, not to the Lord’s return after the tribulation in Mt 24:29, but to an earlier coming before the tribulation, one that has received no mention in the narrative until this late point. Other notable defenders of the pretribulational view, such as John F. Walvoord, point out that Lindsey’s view is seriously inconsistent with the larger context, as any fair examination will confirm (compare Mt 24:27, 29-30, 36, 37, 39,42-43).]

So Peter and Paul’s common use of the phrase, ‘thief in the night’, clearly has in view the Lord’s thief-like return that is specifically at the end of the tribulation. A day of the Lord that comes after the tribulation certainly makes better sense of why Paul can say that “that day” cannot come until after the Antichrist has come first (2Thes 2:3).

[Of course we know that ‘that day’ does not come on believers as a thief, but only the unwary “children of darkness” (compare Dan 12:10; Lk 21:34; 1Thes 5:4;Rev 3:10; 16:15). The reason is clear. Believers will recognize the well defined events that signal the end (Mt 24:15; Dan 11:23-31). Paul fully expects the Thessalonians to be able to recognize the Antichrist in association with his abominable act in the temple of God at Jerusalem (2Thes 2:3-6).]

Whereas Jesus uses the language of Joel 2:31 to describe the phenomena that attends His return after the tribulation (Mt 24:29), Peter cites the same passage in Joel to describe the phenomena that precedes the day of the Lord (Acts 2:20). Certainly for Peter, ‘that great and notable day of the Lord’ intends the post-tribulational return of Jesus. That is why Peter can identify the thief-like day of the Lord with the “day of God” (2Pet 3:10, 12), which Rev 16:14-15 will show comes at the very end of the tribulation, also like a thief, as it is manifestly the same day.

If we grant that the day of the Lord and the day of God are the same day, then it becomes clear that Rev 16:14-17 locates the day of the Lord / day of God at the seventh bowl. A comparison of Rev 16:17 with Eze 39:8 leaves no question that the great day of God is the OT day of the Lord that brings the renewal of Israel (Eze 39:22-29).

Now if we come to the book of Revelation with the knowledge that the day of the Lord is also called the day of God (Peter makes this clear in 2Pet 3:10, 12), we are helped to see that both the seventh trumpet and the seventh bowl arrive at the same point, namely, “that great day of God Almighty” (Rev 11:15, 18; 16:12-14).

We understand this, because the sixth bowl is only final preparation for “that great day of God Almighty” (Rev 16:12-14). At this point, Christ has not returned. It is important to note that the announcement of the imminence of the day of God also announces the imminence of Christ’s thief-like return (Rev 16:14-15). The day arrives with the pouring out of the seventh bowl. This is conclusive evidence that Christ’s return at the seventh trumpet is the catalyst for the final outpouring of wrath at the seventh bowl.

This is not splitting hairs, because, as we shall see, the question of where we locate the day of the Lord is decisive for the rapture question. To locate the day of the Lord at the end of the tribulation is fatal to a pre-tribulation view of the rapture. Here’s why.

In 1937 Alexander Reese published, “The Approaching Advent of Christ.” Before this, earlier pretribulationists put the day of the Lord at the end of the tribulation. They also put the resurrection of the OT righteous at the time of the pretribulation rapture until Reese pointed out that the Old Testament righteous do not rise until the end of the tribulation at the last day (Job 19:25-26; Isa 26:19, 20; Dan 12:1-2; Jn 6:39-40, 44,54; 11:24; 12:48).

It is a little known fact that in reaction to the inconsistencies pointed out by Reese’s book, pretribulationists began to teach that the OT righteous would not be raised with the church at the rapture (as formerly believed), but would continue to ‘sleep in the dust of the earth’ until the ‘last day’ at the end of the tribulation (Dan 12:1-2).

At the same time, Reese pointed out that Paul had instructed the church to be on guard for the day of the Lord (1Thes 5:2, 6-8), as also Peter exhorts believers to be always “looking for and hasting to the coming of the day of the God” (2Pet 3:12 ASV). This would hardly make sense if the church has been removed from the earth seven years before a post-tribulational day of the Lord. The force of Reese’s argument induced some of the earlier pretribulationists to rethink their placement of the day of the Lord.

After the publication of Reese’s book, pretribulationists moved the day of the Lord forward to the beginning of the seven years. The day of the Lord would now be seen as starting with the imminent, unsignaled, pretribulation rapture. In this way, both the rapture and the day of the Lord could be seen as coming suddenly, unexpectedly, and without preceding signs, “like a thief in the night” (1Thes 5:2; 2Pet 3:10). It seemed the perfect solution.

In 1973 Robert Gundry wrote, “The Church and the Great Tribulation. In the years following Reese’s landmark rebuttal, pretribulationists taught that the day of the Lord should be understood to begin with the any moment rapture. This would soon change, at least in academic circles.

Gundry pointed out the simple fact that regardless of where the day of the Lord is thought to begin, if we say it starts with the rapture, then the rapture cannot be maintained as an imminent event, simply because Paul says that ‘that day’ shall not come until after the man of sin has first been revealed (2Thes 2:2-3).

This is decisive, because if the rapture is held to be imminent and un-signaled, it cannot start the day of Lord, since the day of the Lord must be preceded by the revelation of the Antichrist. It is not the rapture, but the day of the Lord that comes as a thief (1Thes 5:2; 2Pet 3:10; Rev 16:15) and this cannot mean, as previously believed, that the day of Lord comes as a thief because it is imminent and un-signaled, since it is clearly preceded by the revelation of the Antichrist (2Thes 2:1-3). Gundry’s logic sent shock waves throughout the pretribulational camp, but another strategic adjustment was soon to follow.

I have scholarly articles published in journals where pretribulationists admit the problem posed by Gundry. No longer could the day of the Lord be held to be an imminent event that starts suddenly with the rapture, or immediately after the rapture. Pretribulationists would now admit that the day of the Lord does not come on the world as thief because it is imminent, since it was now admitted that the thief like day of the Lord must be signaled by the prior identification of the Antichrist. The answer for the difficulty posed by Gundry’s argument was to propose an additional gap between the rapture and the day of the Lord in order to provide time for the Antichrist to be revealed sometime ‘after’ the imminent, un-signaled rapture, but ‘before’ the start of the day of the Lord.

By any reckoning, the acknowledgment that the day of the Lord is signaled by the advance revelation of the Antichrist puts to rest the false theory that the use of the term, ‘thief’, requires the concept of imminence (an event that, by definition, may occur any moment without warning). No, it is clear that the Lord and the apostles apply this term to an event that is by no means imminent, as now admitted by pretribulationists.

Where Jesus, Paul, and Peter liken the day of the Lord to the coming of thief (Acts 2:20 with Mt 24:29; 1Thes 5:2; 2Pet 3:10), it is represented as something for which the believer should be ‘looking’ with watchful sobriety (1Thes 5:6; 1Pet 4:7; 2Pet 3:12). But why should believers be directed to look for an event that will have been preceded by the rapture and the prior revelation of the the Antichrist? If a space of time is required to separate the rapture from the day of the Lord in order to give time for the Antichrist to be revealed, believers would hardly be directed to look for an event that will not take place until some undefined amount of time after they have been taken away by rapture.

Yet, traditional pretribulationism had always assumed that the day of the Lord, no less than the rapture that was presumed to start the day, could only come on the world as a thief if it was un-signaled by any preceding events. Why then direct believers to look for a day that they will never be here to see, since they are separated from it, not only by a prior rapture but by a further space of time after the rapture for the Antichrist to be revealed before the day can start? Does this not betray a strained effort to save a theory of suspiciously recent origin?

The Lord’s return is compared to a thief in Mt 24:43. That is the origin of the language, and for most academic pretribulationists, the reference should be interpreted as applying to Christ’s return after the tribulation. Therefore, if Lord applies the term to His post-tribulational return, and Paul puts the day of the Lord sometime after the prior revelation of the Antichrist, then it becomes disingenuous to hijack the term to continue to speak of the rapture as coming as ‘a thief in the night.’ The academic literature may abstain now from this incorrect usage, but it has certainly not been checked at the popular level. However unconscious, such misappropriation of the term creates a misleading illusion that should be checked by those who know the changes that have taken place in pretribulationism’s view of the day of the Lord.

It is a little known, but a well documented fact that pretribulationism was moved to change their position on the day of the Lord, first with Reese’s publication in 1937, and again with Gundry’s in 1973. This is not the place, but a review of that history and the literature of that debate reads as a standing embarrassment to a position that has been teetering on the verge of collapse in academic circles, but the view continues to prevail unabated at the popular level.

It is a story that demonstrates the lengths that some are prepared to go in order to defend the indefensible. Of course, we believe that such a solution (i.e., a gap of some indefinite amount of time between the rapture and the day of the Lord) would have never been invented if it were not for the crisis created by the questions raised by these and other scholars.

In the churches, many lay persons raised the same questions only to be side-lined or worse. Sadly, much of this debate is only known in academic circles, so many never hear of the revisions. In scholarly exchange, much has been done to slow the train of pretribulationism, but for every advance at the academic level, the theory is continually revitalized at the popular level.

Some who share our view of the time of the Christ’s return take a considerably different view of events from that point. Among those differences is the view that the Antichrist is not destroyed until the 1290th day of Dan 12:11. Two things seem especially awkward with this view.

The first is the scripture that says that the man of sin is “consumed by the Spirit of His mouth and the brightness of His coming” (2Thes 2:8; Rev 19:15). That word for “coming” is the same word used in verse 1 for the time when the church is “gathered together” to Christ at His coming (2Thes 2:1).

It would seem quite obvious that Paul has in mind here the same “gathering together” that Jesus speaks of in connection with His post-tribulational return (Mt 24: 31). So the coming of Christ to gather the church in 2Thes 2:1 is the same coming that destroys the Antichrist in 2Thes 2:8, which appears to happen immediately upon His glorious appearing.

The second major problem with this view is that Rev 13:5 makes clear that the time of the beast is limited to 42 months. This is the same length of time he treads Jerusalem down and persecutes the woman Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14. This is a problem, because 1290 days amounts to 43 months.
It would also mean that for the better part of a month after Christ has returned in glory, the Antichrist is free to continue to ravage Jerusalem and the Jewish people. This doesn’t seem to fit, not only with the time, but the nature of Christ’s return (Mt 24:27, 30; Rev 1:7; 6:16-17; 1Cor 15:52; 2Thes 2:1, 8).

The 1260 days, and even the additional 3 ½ days that the two witnesses lie unburied in the streets of Jerusalem, take us no further than the second woe (which is also the sixth trumpet), whereas the 1290 days takes us too far beyond the time that the Antichrist is destroyed (Rev 13:5). If the 1290th is neither the return of Christ or a later destruction of the Antichrist, what points are reached by the 1290th or the 1335th day of Dan 12:11-12?

Some have made elaborate arguments based on their study of the appointed feasts of Israel, but we may safely assume that the additional days mark definite points of special blessedness in the earliest days of the millennium. It is certainly possible that one of these terminal points may mark the time that the saved remnant comes back together after going apart for a time of mourning (Zech 12:10-12), or the cleansing and re-dedication of the new temple (?). In any event, they are categorically NOT the day of Christ’s return.

[Note: I take the view that when Jesus said no one knows the precise day and hour, He had particular reference to this mysterious extension of days in Dan 12:11-12.]

It is quite possible that the 1290th day may indeed mark the ‘cleansing of the sanctuary’ (Dan 8:14), or some such transitional point, but again, this should not be taken to mean that the Antichrist is permitted to continue until nearly a full month after Christ has returned. It may be possible that his idol image is removed at that time, but that too is speculative. In any event, the clear and undeniable difference between the 42 months and the 1290 days leaves no question that the Antichrist has already been destroyed by this time.

Furthermore, it might also be questioned whether the future temple will survive the desolations of the tribulation. Isa 64:10-11 seems clear that the future tribulation temple will be burned with fire. Notice that this happens only shortly after the Jews have come back into possession of their ancient holy places (Isa 63:18). Also,Jer 30:18 says that the city of Jerusalem will built again “upon her own heap.” This shows clearly that the time of Jacob’s trouble ends in great devastation for both the the city and the sanctuary (Isa 63:18; Dan 9:26; 11:31).

All is to say, my reading of the ‘fine print’ leads me to situate the seventh (last) trumpet return of Christ somewhere after the 1263 ½, but before the 1290. On the basis of the evidence that limits the reign of Antichrist to 42 months, we can know that the return of Christ comes very soon after the ascension of the two witnesses (Rev 11:14-15, 18), but just as the scripture says, we cannot tell the precise day and hour (Mt 24:36).

If “kept from the hour” is taken to mean physical removal, then this text alone is insufficient grounds to teach exemption from the last persecution. According to the post tribulational view of the rapture, the church is physically removed through the miracle of translation at Christ’s return to destroy the Antichrist (Mt 24:31 w/ 1Cor 15:52; 2Thes 2:1-3, 8 etc.). This is everywhere identified as the day of the Lord, or the day of God almighty.

I labor this point only to show that the post-tribulational view of the rapture can bear the physical removal interpretation of Rev 3:10 as well as the pre or mid-trib view, particularly since the final destruction that comes upon the wicked is said to come “in one hour.” Therefore, the phrase, “kept from the hour” in Rev 3:10 provides no sanctuary for pre-tribulationism.

The popular pre-tribulational concept that exemption from the wrath of God requires physical removal from the tribulation will not stand up under scriptural examination. The scriptures are clear that the measured judgments of the tribulation leading to the final strokes of divine wrath are directed most specifically upon the wicked (scriptures). Whereas saints are depicted as sealed and protected (scriptures).

Of course, the saints will suffer the wrath of man, as in all other ages. Doubtless many will also suffer from the privations (“hunger and thirst;” Rev 7:16) that will attend the distress of those days, but this is not the wrath of God. It is tribulation; and Christians have always been called to “enter the kingdom through much tribulation” (Acts 14:22).

The truth that believers are “not appointed to wrath” (1Thes 5:9) is somehow interpreted to mean that the church cannot be in the tribulation period. This would mean that the blood washed believers that are depicted as enduring the persecution of evil men during the tribulation are not to be counted as belonging to the church (according to the pre-tribulational view of the church as belonging only to the time between Pentecost and the rapture). But does this mean that believers that come to faith in the tribulation are “appointed to wrath?”

This is surely a view that is more the result of emotional wishful thinking than serious exegesis; since even pre-tribulationists allow that there are blood-bought believers who suffer persecution in the tribulation along with the elect Jews who have not yet come to faith in Jesus. Surely no one supposes that any of these have been “appointed to wrath.”

The only explanation for this kind of thinking has to be the presumption that those that miss the rapture have missed their opportunity to avoid the tribulation. Tribulation is interpreted as wrath and punishment for failure to respond to the gospel before the rapture happens. It gives the impression that those who “volunteer” to follow Christ now, enjoy special exemptions and privileges not accorded to tribulation believers. It is all too ‘meritorious’. Such an eschatology (view of the future) exposes a seriously flawed soteriology (doctrine of salvation). In fact, it reveals many things concerning our view of God and reality in general that is humanistic to the core. Reggie

Reggie, good morning…
See attached. I stumbled on to this piece: The First Resurrection by
Tregelles. I’m almost certain that you know of it but I was thinking that
it may be a good article to post on the new website.

Bro. Phil

Thanks, Phil. Excellent suggestion. I’ve always wished for a forum for apologetics of this kind, with appropriate position papers etc., dedicated to the support and defense of the view that we see as so vital to the church, especially that church that will stand before the spirit of Antichrist in its final embodiment. As Francis Schaffer said, “Apologetics is an enterprise of Christian compassion.” Indeed, to know and love the faith is to have a heart for its defense.

I knew of Tregelles’ well defended thesis from other authors. So appreciate seeing this for the first time. I’ll pass this on. Appreciatively, Reggie

The First Resurrection
By
S. P. Tregelles, LL. D. (1813-1875)
(author of “Remarks on the Prophetic Visions in the Book of Daniel”)

There are two objects which we have to keep more or less in view when discussing any controverted portion of revealed truth: the one is, that of simply establishing from Scripture the definite teaching there given; the other is, that of maintaining controversially a portion of truth against those who seek to set it aside; for this, it is needful to meet objections, and thus to discuss details such as never would have been connected with the subject had it not been for the erroneous teaching of gainsayers. From time to time we have to consider new objections. Whilst truth as revealed in the Word of God must ever remain the same, the multi-form developments of error are ever changing.

There are positions which, when once they have been definitely established from Holy Scripture, might be regarded as settled for ever; and this would be the case absolutely if it were not that every truth is questioned as soon as it is found to be of practical importance: and then for the full establishment of those who desire to hold fast Scripture teaching, and with the hope of the deliverance, through the mercy of God, of some who have been led astray, the whole subject may have to be again taken up controversially, that is to say, with the definite intention of meeting objections.

What, then, does the Scripture reveal as to the first resurrection? Who are to partake in it? When will it take place? These may be called the primary points of inquiry; and when they have been answered from Scripture, we may next ask, — In what special modes do the introducers of false teaching at present set aside any of these points? What do they set forth instead? On what grounds do they seek to maintain the positions which they assume? And what is the practical consequence of any such erroneous principles?

The one passage in the Scripture in which the first resurrection is mentioned by name, is Revelation 20:5, 6. The apostle saw certain symbols, and the interpretation of the vision which he received is: “This is the first resurrection: blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection; on such the second death hath no power; but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.” It is on this interpretation that we have especially to rest in seeking to understand what is here set before us.
The distinct points to be noticed are:
That it is an actual resurrection that is taught; that is, the resuscitation of the bodies of persons that have died.
That it is the resurrection of the believers who have died up to that time.
That as this is the first resurrection, so no resurrection of believers can possibly precede it.
That this resurrection cannot take place till after the development of Antichrist, and his reign; nor yet until the time when God sets His hand again to restore His ancient people Israel.
That this resurrection takes place when the Lord Jesus Christ comes again in manifested glory.

To consider these subjects in their order:

I. That this is an actual resurrection which is here taught
may be learned from the mere statement of the Scripture itself; for if this is not an actual resurrection, how could we suppose that to be so in which the small and great stand before the great white throne and are judged? If this be not a resurrection of persons, what can be signified when it is said that the rest of the dead live not again until the end of a certain period of a thousand years? But this point is one which need not be dwelt on in detail, since it has often been established in opposition to those who would turn the facts of Holy Scripture into some mere figures, and who seek to substitute principles for persons.

II. But who are they who shall then rise?
Some, from a partial consideration of the symbols of the vision, have thought that it was limited to martyrs for Christ, and to them only; others have seen that it must also of necessity include those who have refused to acknowledge Antichrist: the true exposition, however, being that these are here set forth as symbolical classes. Why these classes should be thus seen in the vision is most easily and simply explained. John had seen the servants of Christ in vision put to death under Antichrist, or else exposed to extreme suffering for refusing to worship the beast and his image. He now sees them set in this place of glory and blessing. The images in this book relate frequently in their form to the contents of the Revelation itself. It is a great mistake if any suppose that the book of Revelation should be interpreted in such a way as to contradict other Scriptures. This book may throw further light on what had been previously revealed; but such truths communicated before are to be assumed as already known by those that would learn from this book. Thus the second coming of Christ was a truth known by the Church as her hope before the Revelation had been given to the beloved Apostle; and so, too, the resurrection of the just had been promised as that which should come to pass at that time.

What else do we learn from the latter part of 1 Thessalonians 4? The Lord Himself shall descend with all the circumstances of publicity and manifested glory; the dead in Christ shall rise, those who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds; this was to be the comfort of the early church in connection with any of their brethren who had died: it thus teaches us authoritatively that all the dead in Christ shall rise in that day. So, too, 1 Corinthians 15:23: “they that are Christ’s at His coming.” An absolutely revealed truth like this can never be set aside by any supposed after limitation; on the other hand, we may be sure that such supposed limitation is based on some entire misapprehension. In Revelation 20, “they that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the word of God, and they that had not worshipped the beast,” etc., must be regarded as a description of the class of persons who rise, and not as a definition of who and what they are. We know from previous Scriptures that “they that are Christ’s” rise without limitation “at His coming”; we know that this was the consolation for the Thessalonian Christians as to their departed friends, whether martyrs or not; but if the principle of limitation were brought in as to martyrdom, it would apparently be right to exclude all who do not suffer in a particular way and at a particular time. No doubt that the specification of those under the antichristian persecution is wisely given; but the expression, “the rest of the dead lived not till the thousand years were finished,” must not be supposed as excluding any of those who are Christ’s, who at that time must rise. For “they that are Christ’s” would comprehend all those that are His, who have departed up to that time, and not one of them can be shut out. Nor can the Old Testament saints be in any way excluded so long as the words of Christ remain recorded by the Spirit as to those who “shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven”; the term, “the rest of the dead,” means simply all the dead who do not then rise.

III. No resurrection can possibly precede it.
I should have thought it needless to argue that the first resurrection of the saints must be one which has not been preceded by another of any portion of them, had it not been that the plain words of Scripture have been set aside. 1 Corinthians 15 teaches us the order of the resurrection: “Christ the first fruits; afterwards [next in order of succession] they that are Christ’s at His coming.” There is no room left for mistake or doubt, unless we depart from the plain words of Scripture. With all confidence we may say that God intended to teach in this place, when saying, “this is the first resurrection,” that He will not raise any of His people with bodies incorruptible prior to the time and the development of circumstances here spoken of.

It might seem superfluous to reaffirm that,

IV. No first resurrection can take place prior to the manifestation of Antichrist,
since those who suffer under his persecution then rise; and, indeed, argument is vain when plain Scripture testimony is set aside, except, indeed, as enforcing and re-asserting such testimony. But as some have thought that a first resurrection will occur before the reign of Antichrist, it may be well to ask such what the first resurrection can mean? and whether a first resurrection which shall precede the first is not such a contradiction in terms as sets aside the Scripture in such a manner as to make it impossible (if such arguments are admissible) for even inspired writers to express themselves in definite language? The fact stands on the face of the passage that there shall be no first resurrection of saints until those of them who shall be cut off in the antichristian persecution have so died; for these are some who then rise.

Also this cannot be until the time of the acting of God for the restoration of Israel; because in 1 Corinthians 15:54, we are taught, “when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, THEN shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. “Thus the resurrection of the saints takes place the same time, when the passage in Isaiah 25:8 (which the Apostle authoritatively cites) shall find its accomplishment. Any mode of interpretation which would otherwise connect it must of necessity be erroneous; for God has given us His own note of time in the synchronism of events.

If we look at the various Scriptures which speak of the resurrection of the saints, we find that

V. That event takes place when the Lord Jesus comes;
and if we ask what kind of a coming it is that we are taught to expect, we find that every adjunct of manifested glory and publicity is specified, as though there should be no excuse for our making any mistake on this point. “Behold, He cometh with clouds: and every eye shall see Him”; this is the advent in the hope of which the church responds, “Even so. Amen.” “Surely I come quickly; Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.”

This, then, is the hope of the First Resurrection; so that through the darkest period of antichristianism the church may look on rejoicing in hope, because that special and most fearful gloom shall be the forerunner of the morning; and thus in the time of persecution and of martyrdom to many, the hope of resurrection shall be then possessed of a special power. For how near then shall the resurrection of the saints, “the First Resurrection,” be; then will be the time for the people of Christ to lift up their heads, knowing that their redemption (redemption in all its fullness of meaning) draweth nigh. And if we see deepening shadows of moral evil falling on the world, and on that which professes to be the church, then may we see this hope as that which may give us a confidence while seeking to contend for the truth of God in the midst of opposing errors, whether it be Pharisaic ritualism or Sadducean infidelity.

But ours is no mere selfish hope; it unites us to all the family of faith who ever have been; for the first resurrection embraces them all; it connects us with the glory of Christ; for He shall then be glorified in His saints; it teaches us to look for no present rest; for true rest we can have none until that time “when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on those that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thess. 1:7, 8).

Such is the plain teaching of Scripture, which, as to the five particulars just specified, might be largely confirmed and extended from what we learn from other portions of the inspired word. If indeed we are content to follow Scripture, these points might be regarded as axioms. And yet there are those who profess to hold the hope of our Lord’s second coming, who deny and oppose almost every one of these points. They have the Scripture; they borrow its phrases, applying them to their own cherished fancies; they take truths from it, but they apply them in connections not only false in themselves, but even in direct contradiction of what the word of God distinctly states. How can any learn from Scripture, if they will maintain that events shall come to pass at a different time and in a manner directly contradicting what the Scripture says? Is a man a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ because he uses His name, while denying every material truth as to His very Godhead and very manhood, and the true substitutional sacrifice of His death? What, then, in a similar manner, should be said of those who hold a first resurrection, differing in time, manner and circumstances, from THE first resurrection of which the Scripture makes mention? who expect a coming of Christ (such as He Himself said should never take place) without publicity, without manifested glory, without His taking vengeance on any, without His so taking the kingdom into His own hands that thenceforth antichristian blasphemy and persecution should be impossible? Must it not be said that Scripture terms have been applied to the opposite of Scripture truths?

In opposition to the word of God it has been assumed that the hope of Christ’s coming is one which excludes the possibility of intervening events having been made known, and that if the Lord has given any warning or indication that His coming draws near, then we cannot be waiting for that day. But what is this assumption except to lay down how God ought to have communicated truth, instead of inquiring how He has done this? When it has been assumed that no intervening events can be matters of revelation, the difficulty remains that

VI. Many events are given which will precede the coming of the Lord.
How can this be disposed of? By assuming that Christ’s coming is to be divided into two utterly different events—a secret coming as the hope of the church, and a public coming when He shall be seen in manifested glory. But what is the warrant for such a division? None whatever, except the previous assumption that there can be no events revealed before Christ comes in connection with His church; that is laid down as an axiom, and the plainest facts and the clearest definitions of Scripture are set aside because they contradict this cherished hypothesis. Those who maintain the doctrine of a secret coming of Christ, often adopt any theory in order to explain away difficulties; thus it is that they have shifted their ground again and again; and distinctions, the futility of which had been long ago felt by those who once defended them, have again found their places in the array that is exhibited in opposition to truth.
To every mind that is rightly and truly subject to Holy Scripture,

VII. The doctrine of the first resurrection sets aside the notion of a secret coming of Christ as a private transaction.
For when we are told that the coming of Christ in the air (1 Thess. 4) to take away His saints may happen any day, while many events precede His manifested appearing, it is well for us to remember that when we meet the Lord in the air, the dead in Christ rise first (i.e., before the change and rapture of those still living); there is no such thing as the living believers going to the Lord without the resurrection of the sleeping saints also having taken place. Thus we find no coming of the Lord Jesus except with the first resurrection then occurring, and that first resurrection cannot be until the events which usher it in, such as the full development of Antichrist and his persecution of some of those who are then to rise, having preceded. To wait for any coming of Christ (or for anything else as the coming of Christ) without the resurrection of His people then taking place, is to substitute some mere fancy for the hope that has been given us. To suppose a resurrection prior to the first resurrection is to deny the truth and exactness of the revelation of God. To say that our hope is a secret coming of Christ, is the same as to teach that 1 Thessalonians 4 does not set forth that coming; for in that passage every adjunct speaks of publicity.

A new theory has been circulated of late, that while the first resurrection of Revelation 20 is the portion of the church in general, some for special devotedness, etc., shall previously rise and be taken away. This theory is part of a ramified system of doctrine the general principle of which is that there exist essential (and not merely circumstantial) distinctions between Christians, according to what they are in the Spirit (as shown in service, devoted-ness, etc.); and these distinctions quite set aside the oneness in Christ of the saved. I have not now to discuss this theory, and to show its unscriptural character. On this subject it is enough to say that the words. “This is the First Resurrection,” suffice to set aside the arguments advanced for the different resurrections of different classes of saints prior to the reign of Christ.

At present a danger to which true believers are exposed is that of substituting a kind of sentimentality for truth; seeming spirituality is often used for leading away from the use of the written word and reliance on its teaching. This ought to cause those who value the truth of God to be the more definite in their testimony; even though they may be sure that their statements will be misrepresented, their doctrines misstated, and they themselves regarded as unspiritual; and that, too, by true believers (in many cases), who have so accepted ethereal fancies that facts revealed by the Holy Ghost seem to them unspiritual.

A time has come in which men will not endure sound doctrine, and those who maintain it need that their souls in the midst of opposition be well stayed on the truth of God, and in the hope of His promises as He has given them.
But patience of hope is now what sentimentalists specially oppose; and those who thus oppose idealize truth and Scripture, so as to leave no definite ground of apprehending revelation as from God.

May I ask if there is room for a distinction of the Judgment of individuals and the judgement of nations – where nations are a corporate entity which will have to answer in defence to their response to their corporate destiny? – If true who will be responsible to answer for the corporate (National) Judgement – Those in power?.

Something else I have been pondering from time to time. When is a nation cursed to such an extent that it will be advisable for individuals to separate themselves from the national identity – if such a thing would be possible. – I always thought that the issue of a nation’s stance towards Israel might be the watershed issue on the issue of “the curse on a nation from God directly”, not that there are not many national curses, but I had a thought in the back of my mind that as soon as our nation goes against Israel it might be a good idea to find a another nation to live in?

Please bear with me, my questions might be very basic and not well informed. Your thoughts?
Kind regards, Hans

In scripture, particularly the OT, we see definite nations dealt with as nations. Many are described as having a distinct corporate personality. Scholars note the prominence in scripture of what is called, “corporate solidarity.” We see this also in the NT in the particular judgements threatened on some of the seven churches of Asia, which are each regarded as discrete corporate entities with their own unique personalities, gifting, strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies. Nations like churches have particular angels associated with them. There is a mystery of corporate solidarity that is intimated throughout scripture.

The book of the Revelation also speaks of the ‘glory’ of nations (Rev 21:24), suggesting that nations have a distinct character all their own, as do churches. This seems to suggest that the glories of their distinguishing attributes and excellencies are brought into the eternal city, as now regenerate and delivered of their former dominance by the principalities and powers that pervert true nationhood. That passage says, “the nations that are saved.” Does this mean that some whole nations are lost? Perhaps, but I think it is talking about the saved individuals that are out from those nations. Israel will be a completely saved nation because it will be purged of all that is not saved.

In considering judgment on nations and particular localities, we should remember the pattern we observe in scripture. However righteous and set apart, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel were required to taste the bitterness of exile along with the rest of the apostate nation. Therefore, though the end of an individual may be quite different in the ‘long run’, he or she may well be required to suffer in the judgements that descend on a nation whose iniquity has come to full. That is the pattern we see in Israel’s exile, and I can’t see where it would be too different in a world where the church is called to be a ‘diaspora’ people, scattered throughout the earth as a witness people. Why, even the church’s sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s table are suitably quite portable. We are a pilgrim people, in every place, and often on the move.

The church is called to be a light in a dark world. What part of the world does not lie in wickedness? Where does one go to hide their loved ones from the judgment that hovers over a cursed land? If we flee from certain levels of societal debauchery that seems to especially concentrated in some cities or nations more than others, we might well be fleeing to a worse place where God has marked a perhaps more hidden but just as hateful kind of pride.

Of course, there are examples of special revelation of the Spirit, such as Joseph’s dream, or Agabus’ warning of imminent famine in a specific region. There is the specific and prophetically knowable time to flee Judea in Mt 24:16 etc. We are indeed to ‘follow the cloud’ in our sojourn in this world. But except in such special instances of divine revelation and leading, it has usually been the experience of the remnant people of God to endure some measure of the suffering that judgment has brought on their nation or locality. There was no special immunity for even the most righteous in Israel, though sometimes miracles would happen, that was always the exception and not the rule according to Heb 11.

So unless specially directed, the church is not at liberty to flee off to the “safe spots” of the earth, even if it knows of such. It is usually our lot to abide in our localities in order to extend ourselves as ‘the servant of the Lord’ to our surroundings. I heard that Oswald Chambers died after giving up his bed to another during an epidemic. Dare we presume to assess the mind of the Lord whose way is perfect with each of His children (Ps 138:8; Ro 8:28).

Until we die or the Lord returns, we are to be Christians, just Christians, reflecting the Light that is in us to the dark world around us. As Paul said, “whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s.” This world is not our home; here we have no continual dwelling place. We are the people of the tent.

But it does matter greatly what nations do with Israel. Particularly when Israel in its awkward circumstance becomes even more of a scandal in the proud and condemning eyes of the nations, Israel will be a divinely ordained test of the heart. It is already a sign that judgment has progressed to a very advanced stage when a nation turns against ‘the Jew in the midst.’ As for this world, and all the nations in it, there’s not much any believer can do that’s more important than to continually pray, “thy kingdom come,” all the while knowing that the kingdom comes in clouds of suffering and judgment.

The old adage must have known something about the nature of apocalyptic when it said, “it’s always the darkest just before the dawn.” Many a time, when our dear Jewish counterparts were in terrific circumstances, they would think that Messiah must be near. Thus the famous phrase, “the footsteps of the Messiah.” If only more of them had known the Light of Israel who would have brightened even the worst circumstance by a liberating power that does not depend on the outward circumstance for its effectual working. Even when not outwardly vindicated, Christ’s salvation is a secret sealed in the believer’s heart that cannot be shaken, because it is not the believer but God that sustains it. Such faith, ‘the faith of God’s elect,’ is a gift of sovereign grace and mercy. It is a transcendent kind of knowing. John said, “He has given us an understanding.” It is hidden place that the believer knows with the Lord. “The righteous run in and are safe.” His Spirit is faithful to quicken us afresh in crisis, most especially and precisely when all other strength is gone. So the believer ‘should be’ one that knows that come what may, however great the darkness, “joy comes in the morning.”

“Come quickly Lord Jesus!”

But even before His final return at the end of the tribulation, we may take heart that He is free in His sovereignty to come in so many wonderful ways to those who look for Him in even the little things, since in joy or sorrow, in little or much, in life or in death, Jesus is Lord of all.

Further input on this important subject welcomed. Reggie

On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Bill Nordstrom wrote:
Reggie,
Perhaps you remember that I pray regularly with an Assembly of God pastor regarding his church and ministry in our city. This is the same pastor who brought a halt to plans for me to teach on the end times after objections to my post trib approach to eschatology. I have given him the little book, ‘Rapture… sure but when,’ and recently asked if he has had a chance to give it a read. I believe his response is typical of so many entrenched in pre trib doctrine…… Any insight?

[I have had a struggle getting into the book but I will. What confuses me is how I feel so outside the anointing and the heart of God when I start considering doctrines that are contrary to what I have known all my life. I can tell you, my “blessed hope” (Titus 2:13) is not to spend up to 7 years in incredible suffering and danger. I am purposed to find out what the Holy Spirit reveals to me about this end time. I know you have said you have already had such a revelation, but I must have it for myself. I cannot take an other’s revelations or opinion as my own unless I have a confirmation by the Holy Spirit about it So far I do not have such a revelation and without that I can not walk in assurance. I will seek to know truth…]

—
B

First, the “blessed hope” has been sadly misinterpreted and misappropriated if it is understood only to mean exemption from the church’s common experience of tribulation (see Acts 14:22; 1Thes 3:4). The blessed hope is not exemption from tribulation, but perfected union with Jesus.

The great tribulation is not called ‘unequaled’ simply because of some unprecedented degree of human suffering. Though the ‘scale’ of human suffering will indeed be without precedent during the last tribulation, what individuals might face personally cannot be worse than what others of our brethren have faced throughout history without a rapture. The the final tribulation is said to be without equal because it extends to all the natural order. So, of course, human suffering will be co-extensive with the upheaval of a creation that has come to its greatest time of travail.

Therefore, it is not the ‘degree’ of personal suffering that makes this tribulation exceptional from all others, but its ‘scale’ of impact on the world of nature. So I ask: Do we detect a certain selfishness, or subtle presumption of moral superiority in the modern church’s expectation of exemption from a last repeat of the same kind of persecution that their ‘fellow servants and their brethren’ have faced in every age (see Rev 6:11)? I must say that such a doctrine sounds suspiciously accommodating of a soft and untested church that has embraced the cross only in theory as a historical fact in Jesus’ experience, and not as the invariable pattern of the very ‘way’ of God in the experience of every believer before and after Christ (but see Act 14:22).

The same is true of Jewish suffering. Except for its unprecedented global scale, the personal suffering of individual Jews throughout the ‘time of Jacob’s trouble’ (Jer 30:7) will not necessarily exceed what their forebears have endured in past calamities. I believe that the reason this time will have such a different end from those earlier tribulations is precisely because of the presence of a martyr witness church. The church will use the prophetic key of interpretation (Dan 11:33; Mt 24:14) to explain these events in the light of God’s age old covenant contention with Israel. It is something the church should be doing now.

Through God’s use of the church’s witness, an unprecedented entire third of the nation will be born in one day by the transforming revelation of Christ (Isa 66:8; Ezek 39:22-29; Zech 3:9; 13:8-9). This happens as the saved remnant will say with one voice, “blessed is He that cometh …” (Mt 23:39; Zech 12:10 with Acts 3:21; Ro 11:25-26; Rev 1:7). However, this doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It is the result of God’s gracious use of a preceding travail and witness of the church! I see this transforming revelation in analogy with the delayed impact that Stephan’s martyr witness had on Saul, the persecutor.

Of course, pre-tribulationists assign this task of final witness to Israel and the nations to the 144,000, whom they assume to be Jewish evangelists that have come to salvation sometime after the rapture. But here is a great curiosity: Pre-tribulationists acknowledge the presence in the tribulation of a witnessing people called ‘the elect and the saints’. However, they deny to them the name ‘church’. This brings the great question as to how we define the church, which is the real heart of the debate. In any case, it is evident that the saints of the tribulation are both ‘sealed’ and ‘fed’ (Rev 7:3; 12:6), and this does not require a rapture. How then, I ask, is the ‘blessed hope’ of Christ’s glorious appearing any the less ‘blessed’ for these tribulation servants of God? One does not require removal from tribulation, or the common experience of persecution in order to be assured exemption from the wrath of God. It is a mistake to confuse tribulation with divine wrath. In fact, the judgments of the bowels of wrath are not directed on Israel or the saints, but upon the wicked that have followed the Beast.

We must not confuse the blessed hope, which is the common inheritance of every believer with some special privilege of exemption from tribulation. It is an error to suppose that our present standing in Christ owes to some moral advantage over those that are not called of God until after the tribulation has begun. The church as I understand the meaning of that term necessarily includes the saints of the tribulation and all those that God has called and will call henceforth. The saints of the present time are not entitled to a special exemption from tribulation only because their salvation has taken place on the ‘happier side’ of an expected pre-tribulational rapture. Many have represented the tribulation as a punishment for those that have neglected to avail themselves of salvation on this side of the rapture. There is a subtle humanism in this presumption that reveals an erroneous, and I think prideful view, of the very nature of divine calling, but that is another discussion.

Rather, through the refinement that comes to the church through these events (see Dan 11:35 w/ 12:7), the church will attain to its promised fullness of stature (Ro 11:25; Eph 4:13), as it gives its final witness by an obedience unto death (Rev 12:10), which results in the salvation of a number too great to number [Note: This is evident since the ‘tribulation’ mentioned in Rev 7:14 carries the double article in Greek which is literally translated “the tribulation, the great one,” showing that this vast multitude of the saved has specific reference to the future and final tribulation; see also Dan 11:33 with 12:3]. It will be the church’s ‘finest hour’.

Finally, I believe the brother’s natural aversion to consider something “contrary to what he has known all his life” is not because this necessarily moves him “outside the anointing and the heart of God,” but because it is inherently ‘up-ending’ of ‘safe’ and trusted categories, and this implies a suffering in its own right. It is nothing less than a holy resignation to follow the Lamb wheresoever He may lead (invariably to a death of one form or another) that can free us from the security (and sometimes presumption) of the ‘safe’ and the familiar. We tend to shrink from suffering, but that is the test of our profession. Why don’t we consider that the church that is so manifestly ‘sub-apostolic’ is in this condition for a reason? We need to identify the reasons.

Through the humility that comes from the blessed experience of being completely wrong, the church will be truer priest that can more fully identify with the ‘ignorant, the blind, and the out of the way’. Nothing less than a church that has passed through the searching judgment that must begin at the house of God could ever be entrusted with bearing final witness to Israel. In her final flight from Antichrist persecution, Israel will meet a humbled church that has been raised out of its own profound self-judgment. It is only a church that has known the real meaning of ‘mercy’ that can bring an effective witness to Israel (Ro 11:31).

I would urge this pastor to be ruthlessly exegetical, and follow the evidence wheresoever it may lead, even to the death of some familiar categories and modes of thinking. The evidence will show that there is no trace that the early church knew anything of such a doctrine, as even the more academically informed pre-tribulationists will admit. The time is short; the stakes are high.

Yours in the Beloved, Reggie

In His great grace, Reggie

We certainly believe there is a rapture for the church; the question is when?

In addition to the resurrection of “the dead in Christ” (1Thes 4:16), all those who belong to Christ (1Cor 15:23) that survive the final tribulation must also be ‘changed’ at the last trump (1Cor 15:52). The so-called ‘rapture’ pertains to the “catching up” of these remaining living believers (1Thes 4:17). This happens in connection with the change mentioned in 1Cor 15:52. The requirement for this “change” is based on the principle that Paul establishes in 1Cor 15:50. “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither does corruption inherit incorruption” (15:50).

So we fully affirm that a rapture will occur, but not as it is being taught. Those that teach that the rapture is BEFORE the tribulation (called the “pre-tribulational” view. ‘Pre’ means before) see it as escape and exemption from the last persecution, which they confuse with the wrath of God, and point out that believers are not ‘appointed to wrath’ (1Thes 5:9). There is, of course, a clear distinction between tribulation and divine wrath. There is a clear distinction throughout the book of Revelation between the saints endure the wrath of man and those that are called ‘earth dwellers’ that experience the wrath of God. Manifestly, there are many saints in the tribulation period that are not “appointed to wrath,” but this exemption does not require physical removal from the scene (Lk 21:18; Rev 7:3; 12:6).

We too believe in the rapture. The difference is that we believe the resurrection and rapture of the church takes place AFTER the tribulation, at the “last day,” which we understand as the one and only ‘second’ coming of Christ (see Mt 24:29; Jn 6:39, 44, 54; 11:24; 12:48; Heb 9:28). Therefore, we are called ‘post-tribulationists’ (‘Post’ means after). Both positions recognize the rapture in some form, but differ significantly concerning its time and purpose.

We are clear that all those that survive the great tribulation to the point of the Lord’s return MUST undergo this change, and this ‘catching up’ into the clouds of glory, in like manner to the Lord’s own ‘taking up’ into the clouds, as described in Acts 1:11. The question is: Having now been ‘caught up’ into the air, where do we go from there? This is the question that ‘pre-tribulationists’ will press. Where do the newly resurrected saints abide? What is their relationship to those that populate the millennial earth? I want to come back to that question, but first I want to further establish the time of the rapture.

Notice that Paul locates the resurrection and rapture “at the last trump” (1Cor 15:52). Jesus also mentions the sounding of “a great trumpet” in connection with the “gathering together of His elect” (compare Mt 24:31 with 2Thes 2:1). Now notice that this takes place “immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days” (Mt 24:29-31). It is evident from Paul’s use of similar language in 2Thes 2:1 that he has this same event in mind. Listen to the language he uses: “Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto Him,” He continues by adding that ‘that day’ cannot come until AFTER the Antichrist has been revealed. Listen again to the words of Paul: “Let no man deceive you by any means. For that day (the ‘Day of the Lord’) shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition” (2Thes 2:2-3).

Therefore, if Paul says that the ‘day of the Lord’ cannot come until AFTER the Antichrist has been revealed, how can the rapture be considered an imminent event? Pretribulationists teach that Christ could come any moment and that nothing by way of necessary fulfillment stands in the way. They say He might come today. Well, we may not know when any individual may be called into final judgment, but we can say with utmost certainty, “Christ CANNOT come today!” The reason is plain. Paul tells us that the Antichrist must come first.

Both Testaments treat the ‘Day of the Lord’ as the conclusion to the time of unequaled trouble. This means the day of the Lord ‘IS’ the post-tribulational return of Christ. As proof, compare Joel 2:30-31 with Mt 24:29. Notice that the Lord’s return comes AFTER the darkness that comes AFTER the tribulation. Now observe that Joel places the darkness immediately BEFORE the day of the Lord. Do you see that? Examine those passages closely. This is an important distinction, because it prohibits spreading the ‘day of the Lord’ out to include the entirety of the tribulation (as in pre trib rapture teaching). Indeed, all the prophets show that Israel’s deliverance and regeneration takes place at this time. And the day of the Lord is consistently presented as the climax to the unequaled time of trouble, a time that Daniel and Revelation limit to 3 ½ years. Many may not be aware that this is also the time that the Old Testament faithful are raised (see Dan 12:1-2; Isa 25:8; 26:19; Job 19:25).

[As an aside, I’d like to point out the importance of Dan 12:1-2 for our view of the time of Jacob’s trouble. This is not the place to show all the reasons, but this passage is the ‘nemesis’ (threat or obstruction) to many false interpretations. For this cause, it is often spiritualized. However, if this is not a definite reference to the literal resurrection of the literal dead, then where is there a plainer reference to resurrection to be found that is not subject to the same dubious procedure? Through such a method, the plain meaning of language and the author’s original intent is effectively vaporized. The authority of scripture is not questioned, but the end is the same unbelief that asks “has God really said?” But all the evidence defies spiritualizing this passage. Notice the similarity of language between Jer 30:7, Dan 12:1, and Mt 24:21. There can be no doubt that the same event is in view. Now observe that the time of the unequaled tribulation ends with the deliverance of Israel in both Jeremiah’s and Daniel’s prophecy, while in Matthew the tribulation ends with Christ’s return (Mt 24:29-30). Do you see that? Now notice that the tribulation that ends in Israel’s deliverance, Christ’s return, and the resurrection of the righteous happens in connection with the standing up of Michael. It is noteworthy that we see Michael again in Rev 12. Here again, the context is the threshold of the final tribulation. This marks the time that Satan is evicted from heaven and comes down with great rage because he knows his time is short (Rev 12:12). This ‘short time’ of Satan’s unrestrained fury is obviously the time of unequaled tribulation, the time of the Antichrist’s final 3 ½ year persecution of the saints and of the woman (Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:11; Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5). Here again in John’s apocalypse, the time of the first resurrection that begins the thousand years is set in relation to the destruction of the Beast (Rev 19:20; 20:4-6), and all of these events terminate in the ‘great day of God Almighty’ (compare 16:14, 17 with Ezek 39:8). The same order is observed in Dan 7:11-13, 21-27). Paul likewise sees the ‘Man of Sin’ destroyed by the personal appearing of Christ (2Thes 2:8). So whoever would spiritualize the resurrection in Daniel 12:2 must spiritualize a great deal besides. Typically, the resurrection in Dan 12:2 is spiritualized only because it stands in the way of placing the unparalleled tribulation in 70AD. If the resurrection is literal, then the tribulation is future, and this is fatal to ‘preterism’. If the tribulation is past, then the deliverance of Daniel’s people’ must also be past. This denies the evidence for Israel’s future salvation (Ro 11:25-29) in obvious connection with a yet future tribulation. Such a reckless mission becomes more than exegetically reprehensible; it becomes morally suspect.]

So it is clear that Paul shares the perspective of the prophets that depict the day of the Lord as the terminal point that ends the tribulation with the deliverance of Israel (Isa 59:19-21; Ro 11:25-29), the resurrection of the dead (Dan 12:2; Isa 25:8; 26:19), and the destruction of the Antichrist ( 2Thes 2:8). So where does Paul place the resurrection of the church in relationship to the resurrection of the Old Testament faithful?

It must not be overlooked, as it was certainly NOT overlooked by Paul, that the events of the ‘day of the Lord’ happen in connection with a ‘great sound of a trumpet’ (see Ps 47:5; Isa 27:13; Joel 2:1; Zeph 1:16; Mt 24:31; 1 Cor 15:52-54; Rev 10:7; 11:15). Even pretribulationists must admit that the resurrection of the OT faithful happens in connection with the trumpet that sounds the ‘day of the Lord’ (Isa 27:13; Joel 2:1).

In light of such evidence, it becomes quite impossible to say that Paul’s ‘last trump’ sounds seven years BEFORE the trumpet that Jesus mentions in connection with His post-tribulational return (1Cor 15:52; Mt 24:29-31). Undeniably, both testaments witness to the fact that the ‘day of the Lord’ comes with the “great sound of a trumpet.” How then can any trumpet sounding an alleged seven years earlier be intelligently called last? But this is precisely what is being taught among the larger part of those that believe the tribulation is future and that Israel (“the natural branches”) has a destiny beyond this present age (called the ‘futurist view’).

So we believe that the church is gathered to the Lord by rapture, but only after the final persecution. This is the Lord’s personal return to destroy the Antichrist, reveal Himself to Israel, and raise the righteous of both testaments. It should have been that simple.

There is one more point that I would like to make in this connection. I’ve not seen it addressed anywhere else. Remember that we said the prophets make frequent mention of a trumpet in connection with the day of the Lord. Now with that in mind, notice a particularly important phrase in Paul’s exposition of the mystery of the rapture (1Cor 15:50-54). It appears in verse 54.

“So WHEN this corruptible shall put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, THEN shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, “Death is swallowed up in victory.”

The phrase is “then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written.” This is decisive in showing the background of Paul’s understanding of the time of the resurrection. ‘The saying’ that Paul has in mind is found in Isa 25:8. Now notice that Isa 25:8 is set in a very distinct context. It belongs to a section made up of four chapters that scholars mark off as a unit. It is called “the little apocalypse of Isaiah.” From the beginning of ch 24 to the end of 27 of Isaiah, the topic throughout is the ‘day of the Lord’, and concerns itself with those transitional events that cluster around that day as the terminal point of Israel’s tribulation.

So when is the THEN? It is WHEN this corruptible shall put on incorruption.” It is THEN that the saying (Isa 25:8) is fulfilled, and Paul says this happens ‘at the last trump’. Now go back and look over the larger context reaching back to ch 24 and forward to the end of ch 27. In the passages immediately preceding 25:8 (Isa 25:7), you will notice that “the veil is destroyed that covers the face of all nations.” Before this, there is a poetic description of a wedding feast on Mount Zion. The entirety of Isaiah’s little apocalypse (24-27) concerns the time of Israel’s salvation and the final world judgment. The entire context is undeniably ‘post-tribulational’. In the following chapter (26), Isaiah announces his own expected resurrection together with the faithful of Israel (Isa 26:19). Note especially that in ch 27, the surviving remnant of Israel are “gathered” in connection with the sounding of “the great trumpet” (Isa 27:13).

Paul’s application of Isa 25:8 to the time of the church’s resurrection is undeniable evidence that he identified the time of the church’s resurrection with that of the Old Testament faithful. This is fatal to the pre trib view, because both Daniel and Isaiah are very clear that the righteous dead are raised in connection with Israel ‘s deliverance at the end of the tribulation (Dan 12:1-2, 13; Isa 26:16-21). It was also well known that Israel’s final deliverance at the day of the Lord would be accompanied by the ‘great sound of a trumpet’ (Joel 2:1; Isa 27:13). So if the adverb “then” means anything, it becomes impossible to place the resurrection of the church seven years earlier than the event described in Isa 25:8.

Contrary to pretribulational presuppositions concerning the nature of a New Testament mystery, we see that Paul’s mystery has a definite relation to OT prophecy. Not only does it further address the question of the order of the resurrection, it also solves the problem of the relationship of the resurrected and glorified redeemed in contrast to those that come to faith on the other side of Christ’s return. In order to understand the point of Paul’s mystery, it is important to distinguish between what was and was not a mystery. The time of the resurrection is not the object of Paul’s mystery; this was understood. As in 1Thes 4:13-17, the mystery of the rapture particularly explains the relationship of living believers to those that sleep. In 1Cor 15:50-52 the stress falls on the change that fits the living to participate in resurrection glory. But this is not all that the mystery of the rapture answers. Paul’s mystery makes evident that no regenerate survivor of the tribulation will go unchanged into the millennium. This becomes a significant point of contrast with the penitent remnant of Israel that are not transformed UNTIL the appearing of Chirst (compare Isa 59:21; 66:8; Ezek 39:22; Jer 30:7; Dan 12:1; Zech 12:10; 3:9; with Mt 23:39; Acts 3:21; Ro 11:25-29; Rev 1:7). These go into the millennium in natural bodies, as do many survivors from among the nations. From this new beginning, the millennial earth is repopulated.

So the evidence of the general order of events and the time of the rapture and resurrection of the church just keeps piling up. For just one more example, consider Rev 11:15. Here again is the trumpet that sounds the end of the tribulation and the finishing of the mystery of God (see Rev 10:7), and the final passing of this world’s dominions over to the Lord and His Christ. Now observe that this is also the time that the righteous dead are raised and rewarded (Rev 11:18). The evidence for a post-tribulational rapture of the church is simply massive and irrefutable. The plain, simple, and straightforward reading of scripture would never make one a pre tribulationalist. This is evident since the view was unheard of till modern times.

Brother, pray for me. We have work to do. It is by no means equal to the essential gospel in importance, but there is a need to present our pre-tribulational brothers with the alternative to what they’ve been taught. Many have never seen the case for our view, and when any of us are entrusted with anything from the Lord, it makes us a steward and a debtor. The pre trib rapture is the ‘Trojan horse’ of the end time that has been smuggled into the evangelical camp (for such a time as this). It needs to be exposed while it is yet day. I, therefore, urge my brothers and sisters to count these matters worthy of their study (Prov 15:28; 2Tim 2:15, 25; 1Pet 3:15). The righteous studies to give answer. We want to help ourselves be prepared to help others. Many are unaware of an alternative to such a disarming and potentially costly error. As Francis Schaffer once said, “apologetics (giving an answer) is an enterprise of Christian compassion.”

Unless the body of Christ can escape this error in time, much physical life stands to be lost. This is not to even mention the spiritual shock and the general effect that such a distortion takes on how we see God’s, His workings and ways. The same is true of the view that says the great tribulation passed already into history with the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem (a view called preterism). This view, no less than the pre trib view, also robs the church of critical readiness and understanding (Dan 11:33) It is even much more widespread than pretribulationism, because Roman Catholicism and most of world wide Christendom subscribes to this view in some form. This is what is called ‘replacement’ theology. In either view, the church is disarmed for what’s coming. Not only this, but such systems obscure and eclipse the true glory of God that is best seen in its divinely chosen context (Ro 11:33), and this is the greatest loss of all.

While I too can rest in the sovereignty of God, I also know that a lie is always costly and can exact a heavy toll. That is part of the judgment that is built right into believing a lie. This happens anytime a believer fails to properly depend on the Spirit to be their teacher (1Jn 2:27). When we defer these matters to the so-called experts, we sacrifice a sacred trust, namely, the “priesthood of every believer”. We defraud ourselves of God’s desire to confide His secrets to His friends (Gen 18:17; Isa 41:8; Amos 3:7 with Jn 15:15) and to lead even ‘the least of these’ into all truth.

I said I would return now to the question: Where do believers go after ‘meeting’ the Lord in the air? And what is the purpose of being ‘caught up’? The most popular view as taught by pretribulationism is that the church goes back to heaven with Christ to celebrate the ‘marriage supper of the Lamb.’ In their view, the church is in heaven while the Old Testament saints remain in their graves for seven more years (Dan 12:1-2). (Academic pre trib scholars actually teach this). But there is no evidence that Jesus stops in mid air and returns back to heaven with the church for a seven-year interim.

When we come to the famous rapture passage (1Thes 4:17), many have pointed out that the term ‘Parousia’ (coming, presence, or arrival) is used in significant combination with the Greek noun for ‘a meeting’. This was a technical term in the Hellenistic culture of the day for the custom of sending an official delegation out of the city to greet an approaching dignitary and to escort the royal figure back into the city with great ceremony. For such a momentous event, advent (epiphany) coins were struck; monuments built, and sacrifice offered. Sometimes a new era would be dated from the event of the “Parousia” of the royal personage (Adolph Deismann, “Light from the Ancient East, pg. 68-73). So, there is no evidence that the saints return with Christ to heaven, but rather accompany Him in His triumphant return to earth.

“And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south. And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee” (Zech 14:4-5, see also Isa 13:3; Joel 3:11; 1Thes 3:13; 4:14; Rev 19:14).

Significantly, Christ’s ‘day of the Lord’ descent is to the very place of His post-resurrection ascent (Acts 1:11-12), but the effects of His return are radically different from His quiet departure.

Before leaving this subject, I’d like to ask a question that is more than it first appears: Why is the part of the body of Christ, which survives the final tribulation, changed at this point in time? The simple and easy answer is that the dead are raised at Christ’s return. That is true; but there remains the problem of the resurrection of millennial believers, those saved after the rapture. Of course, this is no problem at all for those that believe that the millennium is not literal, that it is only symbolic of the present reign of Christ and the martyrs from heaven. This view is called ‘a-millennialism’. But for those that believe that the millennium begins with Christ’s return (pre-millennialism), there is the problem of the relationship of the resurrected church to those that do not come to faith until after Christ has returned. The problem presents itself on the basis of two facts:

Fact one: The scripture is clear that not only the ‘dead in Christ’, but ‘all’ (not only some) that truly belong to Christ will be changed at the point of the Lord’s post-tribulational return. This is clear from many texts (see especially 1Cor 15:23, 52; 1Thes 4:16).

Fact two: The millennium will be populated by many that do not come to faith until the day of the Lord, which, as we have seen, ends the great tribulation (Isa 59:19-21; 66:8; Jer 30:7, Dan 12:1-2; Ezek 39:22-25, 26-29; Zech 3:9; 12:10; Ro 11:25-29 with Mt 23:39; Acts 3:21). Many scriptures show that Israel and the multitudes that populate the millennial earth are still in their natural bodies until the end of the millennium (Rev 20:7-9). Where then are the glorified redeemed that were changed at the rapture? How do we understand the difference between the saints that are changed at the rapture, and those that populate the millennial earth in their natural bodies? Do they dwell together on the millennial earth? When will those that come to faith during the millennium be changed? How are we to understand the nature and purpose of this distinction?

Notice the contrast. Those that put on immortality and final perfection at the Lord’s return pass instantly (“in a moment”) into a transcendent state of existence that beggars description, evoking comparison with angels and stars (Dan 12:3; Mt 22:30; 1 Cor 15:41). It is a wonderful kind of existence that will enable the perfected saint to “know even as he is known” (1Cor 13:10-12). In marked contrast, the surviving remnant of Israel does not receive the transforming revelation of Christ until the point of His return at the day of the Lord (Isa 66:8; Ezek 39:22; Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39; Rev 1:7).

Many lines of evidence show that at the same moment that the church is changed and ‘caught up’, the penitent remnant of Israel receives the revelation of their Messiah (“in one day”). This happens in a way that is best compared to Paul’s revelation on the Damascus Road. However, rather than rapture, the penitent remnant of Israel are seen going each one apart to mourn for the great repentance that has broken upon them at that time. Furthermore, many scriptures show that the gentiles that are left among the nations volunteer every mode of transport to assist the Jews in a massive exodus back to the Land (Isa 49:22; 60:9; 66:20). This second exodus (Isa 11:11-13, 14-16; 27:13) is to be distinguished from an earlier return in unbelief in preparation for the crucible of the final tribulation (Jer 30:3-7; Ezek 22:19-22; 38:8; Zeph 2:1-2). This final return begins only after the Antichrist has been destroyed at the day of the Lord. All of the scriptures depicting the final and complete return (Ezek 39:29) assume the presence of the new heart and Spirit. Then will be brought to pass the saying that is written:

“Thus saith the Lord of hosts; In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you” (Zech 8:23).

So where is the church? Well, by definition, those that are in union with God by new birth are the body of Christ. “Now the Lord is that Spirit, and he that is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.” Wherever the Spirit indwells, Christ indwells. This means that the Jews and those that turn to Christ during the millennium will be no less the body of Christ on earth at that time, (albeit with some distinctions of function, role, and stewardship suited to that unique dispensation). Now, since it is clear on the basis of 1Cor 15:50 that no saint can enter final perfection without this ‘change’, we know that any saint that comes to faith after the rapture must at some point undergo this change as well. That much is certain. The question becomes, when will millennial saints be changed? For more reasons than I can enter into here, I would submit that the best inference is at the end of the millennium.

Now my question does not concern the time that the faithful of both testaments are raised. As I pointed out, it was no mystery that the Old Testament faithful would be raised after the tribulation. Nor was it a mystery that the day of the Lord comes in connection with the sounding of a trumpet. As I said, the primary focus of the rapture concerned the relationship of departed saints to the living at Christ’s return. In 1Cor 15:50-54, Paul is interested to show the change that is necessary for the final perfection of glorified immortality. If Paul had not told us that “we shall ALL be changed” at the last trump, we might have supposed that those in Christ that survived the tribulation would simply proceed into the millennium in their natural bodies along with the redeemed of Israel and all ‘that are left’ from among the nations. (Isa 24:6; Ezek 36:36; Zech 14:16).

We know that there is a surviving remnant of Jews that do not come to faith until Christ’s return and these do in fact go into the millennium in their natural bodies. The saved of Israel receive the new heart and the fullness of the Spirit at the appearing of Christ, but they remain unchanged in the sense of the final perfection of resurrected glorification. This means that no surviving believer will go into the millennium unchanged. This is in marked contrast to the newly saved remnant of Israel that go into the millennium in natural bodies and they have children born to them. The question is not why believers MUST be changed. That is clear. But why are they changed at this time? Why don’t believers that survive the last persecution to the Lord’s coming NOT simply proceed into the millennium together with the saved remnant of Israel and those that believe afterward?

Try to get the picture. Christ has returned; the Antichrist is dead; the tribulation is over; the Jews are returning from all the lands of their captivity (Isa 11:11-12), and the gentiles are voluntarily assisting in their return. The penitent remnant of Israel has now received the Holy Spirit by reason of the revelation that has broken upon their collective understanding (see Isa 44:3; 59:21; Zech 12:10; Ezek 36:26; 37:14; 39:29; Joel 2:29); the face of God is no longer hidden (Isa 8:14-17; Ezek 39:29); and the Jewish people and their children after them are ‘all’ holy from that time and forward (Isa 4:2; Isa 59:21; Isa 60:21; Jer 31:34; 32:40; Ezek 39:22-29).

But here’s the problem. We know that Israel and those that come to faith after the rapture are not yet changed. In all the prophets they are always depicted as living in natural bodies, and activities and functions are ascribed to them that are incompatible with resurrected saints (contrast Ezek 39:11-16 with Mt 22:30; 1 Cor 13:12). So what is the relationship of those in glorified bodies to those not yet resurrected? See what I mean? Surely we are not to suppose that these dramatically different kinds of existence will co-habit the millennial earth and intermix in a physical way. But if not, where are the glorified saints?

I believe the reason the godly of this age do not go into the millennium with those that believe after the rapture is partly because theirs is a different role and purpose. Remember that those living on this side of the day of the Lord are under different conditions than those that live on the other side of Christ’s return. On this side of the Lord’s return, the mystery of God is not yet finished (Rev 10:7). Satan is not yet bound.

Notice that both ends of the millennium are marked by a resurrection, and in each instance, this high point of apocalyptic (revelatory) transformation is immediately preceded by an ultimate manifestation of evil. There is something here of awesome significance. My regeneration came after an unveiling of my sin, and such revelation is always devastating; and where there is death of this kind, there is also resurrection. There must be a death before there is resurrection. All sinners are dead, but they are insensible of their death until they are made to feel it by the awakening grace of the Spirit. ‘Confidence in the flesh’ is the strength of the veil, and the veil is only shattered by revelation. But the revelation that finally pierces the veil does not come apart from crisis, travail, and suffering, as in the crucible of Jacob’s trouble (Dan 12:7). Even the moment of spiritual regeneration is preceded by a crisis when our need and helplessness comes home to us by the convicting power of the Spirit. See the pattern? This pattern was realized in Isaiah’s vision of the Lord; it was realized in Paul’s divine arrest on the Damascus Road; and it will be realized in Israel’s transforming vision of Christ at the end of ‘Jacob’s trouble’ (Jer 30:7 with Zech 12:10). So it is no accident that two resurrection events that bound both ends of the millennium are preceded by an ultimate demonstration of evil. Resurrection follows revelation of what is in man.

So I suggest that Christ’s appearing accomplishes an Enoch – Elijah-like translation in those that have been previously prepared by the work of the Spirit. There is a confluence (coming together) of conditions and redemptive influences that reach an intensity and a peak in the tribulation that the prophets compare to the time of travail and transition in child birth. This suggests to me that the transfiguration of the church at Christ’s appearing is not incidental, but is the capstone of a process that has reached its goal.

Finally, I want to point out that there is such a thing as a ‘necessary inference’. Even though scripture is not explicit that the millennial saints must at some point be changed, the rule that is established in 1Cor 15:50 makes this an invincible necessity, hence, a ‘necessary inference’. It is awkward to conceive of the resurrected and un-resurrected redeemed of all ages dwelling together at once in the Promised Land, even with its expanded millennial borders. The thought seems ridiculous. But there is a good and reasonable explanation that harmonizes the scripture without spiritualizing the plain meaning.

Of course, unlike replacement theologians, I believe that Paul looked for a future expression of Christ’s kingdom on this earth beyond this present age (1Cor 15:28). Though John’s revelation of the thousand years would come later into the canon of revealed truth, Paul shared with many a view of the future that required an interim of earthly fulfillment beyond the day of the Lord return of Christ. He would have therefore been keenly aware of our question concerning the distinction between the resurrected and glorified saints and those dwelling in mortal bodies. Though not its primary purpose, Paul’s revelation of the rapture answers the problem. But Jesus had already pointed us in this direction. In response to demands concerning the nature of the resurrection, Jesus likens the resurrected redeemed to the angels. This could only mean that the future life of the resurrection is a new kind of existence, free from the constraints of the former (Lk 20:35).

Furthermore, Jesus describes the rewards of the resurrected redeemed in terms of ruling over cities (Lk 19:17). How do glorified saint rule over earthly cities? I suggest it is because we are not visible to those living on the millennial earth, but have been assigned places of rule from heavenly places, invisible to mortal eyes. At that time, we shall judge angels, and if angels, why not entire cities? Regardless of our view of the millennium, it is limited. It is not the final resting place. It has a unique purpose that ends in a final demonstration of human depravity. The ultimate inheritance of every saint is the “heavenly city that has foundations, whose builder and maker is God” (Heb 11:10; Rev 21).

In summary, here are some lines from an earlier response on this topic.

The translated saints of this dispensation, together with the resurrected saints of the OT (Is 26:19; Dan 12:2; Jn 11:24), do not so much inherit the Land of Israel in a physical way, as the enduring city (Heb 11:10) of glorified immortality, the final perfection (1Cor 13:10, 12). At the rapture, the redeemed of this dispensation enter the fullness of the kingdom according to 1Cor 15:50. Those that come to faith after the rapture must wait for their change. Throughout the millennial dispensation, the glorified redeemed will have positions of rule (“five or ten cities”) over the millennial earth. It is our belief that the translated and glorified saints of all past ages will exercise an invisible rule (they shall be “like the angels”). This rule will evidently be exercised from out of the heavenly places that have been cleared of the influence of the now evicted principalities and powers. We believe that all that come to salvation after Christ’s return must also be changed according to the rule established in 1Cor 15:50. It is best to infer that this change will come for millennial saints at the ‘second resurrection’. Though the righteous are not explicitly mentioned in connection with the second resurrection, this is the most reasonable time to expect the final perfection for millennial saints, since this is the next great climactic apocalyptic transformation.

Faithfully yours, Reggie