You can find more Bible Study notes by me and books I have written free for download through my website:
http://biblestu97.wix.com/john-brough
Showing posts with label Daniel 9. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Daniel 9. Show all posts

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Daniel 9 - The 70 weeks

DANIEL Ch 9:- THE SEVENTY WEEKS OF ISRAEL'S HISTORY.

_________________________________________________________________

BOOKS: - Sir Robert Anderson - The Coming Prince.

H. Grattan Guinness - Light for the Last Days.


Author’s Note:

The following Bible study is one I did several years ago. Basically it is a summary of Sir Robert Anderson’s book, The Coming Prince. Anderson was a keen Bible student as well as being a noted astronomer and mathematician. All dates and calculations in his book were checked by his colleagues at the Royal Observatory in England.

After the summary of Anderson’s work I will give a brief summary of an alternative viewpoint by H. Grattan Guinness from his book “Light for the last Days”. I shall give some reasons why I think Guinness’ work is flawed.

Both of these books can be Googled and either downloaded or read on line. So if you find this interesting I recommend you do read the original texts. Guinness’ book has a vast treasury of other valuable insights that you will find fascinating – so even though I disagree with him on his interpretation of this point I recommend you read his work. It is outstanding.

Over the years I have entered into debates on the net with other points of view on this subject. There seems to be a multitude of opinions on exactly how this passage in Daniel has worked out. I cannot remember all of the approaches so I will not cover them here – most of them were highly personal opinions that did not seem to be rooted in historical data. The advantage of Anderson’s work is the exactness of his historical dating, and this is confirmed by the Royal Observatory – a highly respected secular institution.


DAN 9:1 In the first year of Darius son of Xerxes (a Mede by descent), who
was made ruler over the Babylonian kingdom-
DAN 9:2 in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, understood from the
Scriptures, according to the word of the LORD given to Jeremiah the
prophet, that the desolation of Jerusalem would last seventy years.
DAN 9:3 So I turned to the Lord God and pleaded with him in prayer and
petition, in fasting, and in sackcloth and ashes.
DAN 9:4 I prayed to the LORD my God and confessed: "O Lord, the great and
awesome God, who keeps his covenant of love with all who love him and obey his commands,
DAN 9:5 we have sinned and done wrong. We have been wicked and have
rebelled; we have turned away from your commands and laws.
DAN 9:6 We have not listened to your servants the prophets, who spoke in
your name to our kings, our princes and our fathers, and to all the people
of the land.
DAN 9:7 "Lord, you are righteous, but this day we are covered with shame-
the men of Judah and people of Jerusalem and all Israel, both near and far,
in all the countries where you have scattered us because of our
unfaithfulness to you.
DAN 9:8 O LORD, we and our kings, our princes and our fathers are covered
with shame because we have sinned against you.
DAN 9:9 The Lord our God is merciful and forgiving, even though we have
rebelled against him;
DAN 9:10 we have not obeyed the LORD our God or kept the laws he gave us
through his servants the prophets.
DAN 9:11 All Israel has transgressed your law and turned away, refusing to
obey you. "Therefore the curses and sworn judgments written in the Law of
Moses, the servant of God, have been poured out on us, because we have
sinned against you.
DAN 9:12 You have fulfilled the words spoken against us and against our
rulers by bringing upon us great disaster. Under the whole heaven nothing
has ever been done like what has been done to Jerusalem.
DAN 9:13 Just as it is written in the Law of Moses, all this disaster has
come upon us, yet we have not sought the favor of the LORD our God by
turning from our sins and giving attention to your truth.
DAN 9:14 The LORD did not hesitate to bring the disaster upon us, for the
LORD our God is righteous in everything he does; yet we have not obeyed
him.
DAN 9:15 "Now, O Lord our God, who brought your people out of Egypt with a
mighty hand and who made for yourself a name that endures to this day, we
have sinned, we have done wrong.
DAN 9:16 O Lord, in keeping with all your righteous acts, turn away your
anger and your wrath from Jerusalem, your city, your holy hill. Our sins
and the iniquities of our fathers have made Jerusalem and your people an
object of scorn to all those around us.
DAN 9:17 "Now, our God, hear the prayers and petitions of your servant. For
your sake, O Lord, look with favor on your desolate sanctuary.
DAN 9:18 Give ear, O God, and hear; open your eyes and see the desolation
of the city that bears your Name. We do not make requests of you because we
are righteous, but because of your great mercy.
DAN 9:19 O Lord, listen! O Lord, forgive! O Lord, hear and act! For your
sake, O my God, do not delay, because your city and your people bear your
Name."
DAN 9:20 While I was speaking and praying, confessing my sin and the sin of
my people Israel and making my request to the LORD my God for his holy
hill-
DAN 9:21 while I was still in prayer, Gabriel, the man I had seen in the
earlier vision, came to me in swift flight about the time of the evening
sacrifice.
DAN 9:22 He instructed me and said to me, "Daniel, I have now come to give
you insight and understanding.
DAN 9:23 As soon as you began to pray, an answer was given, which I have
come to tell you, for you are highly esteemed. Therefore, consider the
message and understand the vision:
DAN 9:24 "Seventy `sevens' are decreed for your people and your holy city
to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to
bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to
anoint the most holy.
DAN 9:25 "Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to
restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes,
there will be seven `sevens,' and sixty-two `sevens.' It will be rebuilt
with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble.
DAN 9:26 After the sixty-two `sevens,' the Anointed One will be cut off and
will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the
city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue
until the end, and desolations have been decreed.
DAN 9:27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one `seven.' In the
middle of the `seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on
a wing [of the temple] he will set up an abomination that causes
desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him."


INTRODUCTION.

v1- "In the first year of Darius".

The identity of Darius has been questioned here, but this statement is now thought to be correct.

Persian inscriptions tell us that "Gobryas appointed the governors and prefects" (Annalistic Tablet of Cyrus).

Gobryas is identified as a prince of the Median royal house, who was governor in Media and viceroy when Media was reduced to a province. Inscriptions tell us that he was in charge of Babylon after Media annexed Babylon and that he returned from Babylon to Ecbanta and took his archives of his short reign in Babylon with him. Hence the statement in Ezra 4:2 makes sense.

If Gobryas is Darius then the Bible is correct, and this seems likely as it was not uncommon for kings to have several names.

Darius was the chief general of the Medo-Persian armies, led by the Emperor Cyrus, the Mede. Darius led the army on its invasion of Babylon in 538 BC and took over as acting ruler for several months until Cyrus came and formally took control. Later, on the death of Cyrus, Darius became overall emperor of the Medo-Persian Empire.

Hence this verse refers to Darius' temporary rule in Babylon, immediately after the conquest.

v2 "according to the word of Jeremiah the Prophet".

Historical Background:

When Israel took the land of Canaan, God told them to allow every seventh year as a Sabbath for the land. They were not allowed to plant crops in that year.

Leviticus 25:1-7.

LEV 25:1 The LORD said to Moses on Mount Sinai,
LEV 25:2 "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: `When you enter the land
I am going to give you, the land itself must observe a sabbath to the LORD.
LEV 25:3 For six years sow your fields, and for six years prune your
vineyards and gather their crops.
LEV 25:4 But in the seventh year the land is to have a sabbath of rest, a
sabbath to the LORD. Do not sow your fields or prune your vineyards.
LEV 25:5 Do not reap what grows of itself or harvest the grapes of your
untended vines. The land is to have a year of rest.
LEV 25:6 Whatever the land yields during the sabbath year will be food for
you- for yourself, your manservant and maidservant, and the hired worker
and temporary resident who live among you,
LEV 25:7 as well as for your livestock and the wild animals in your land.
Whatever the land produces may be eaten.

This seven year Sabbath the Jews never kept, so God told them he was going to punish them as a nation, and give the land its Sabbaths.

This message came through Jeremiah the prophet but he saw that it was already written in the curses of the Law.

Leviticus 26:33-35.
LEV 26:33 I will scatter you among the nations and will draw out my sword
and pursue you. Your land will be laid waste, and your cities will lie in
ruins.
LEV 26:34 Then the land will enjoy its sabbath years all the time that it
lies desolate and you are in the country of your enemies; then the land
will rest and enjoy its sabbaths.
LEV 26:35 All the time that it lies desolate, the land will have the rest
it did not have during the sabbaths you lived in it.

2 Chronicles 36:15-21.
2CHR 36:15 The LORD, the God of their fathers, sent word to them through
his messengers again and again, because he had pity on his people and on
his dwelling place.
2CHR 36:16 But they mocked God's messengers, despised his words and scoffed
at his prophets until the wrath of the LORD was aroused against his people
and there was no remedy.
2CHR 36:17 He brought up against them the king of the Babylonians, who
killed their young men with the sword in the sanctuary, and spared neither
young man nor young woman, old man or aged. God handed all of them over to
Nebuchadnezzar.
2CHR 36:18 He carried to Babylon all the articles from the temple of God,
both large and small, and the treasures of the LORD's temple and the
treasures of the king and his officials.
2CHR 36:19 They set fire to God's temple and broke down the wall of

Jerusalem; they burned all the palaces and destroyed everything of value
there.
2CHR 36:20 He carried into exile to Babylon the remnant, who escaped from
the sword, and they became servants to him and his sons until the kingdom
of Persia came to power.
2CHR 36:21 The land enjoyed its sabbath rests; all the time of its
desolation it rested, until the seventy years were completed in fulfillment
of the word of the LORD spoken by Jeremiah.


Jeremiah 29:10-14.

JER 29:10 This is what the LORD says: "When seventy years are completed for
Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my gracious promise to bring you
back to this place.
JER 29:11 For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans
to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.
JER 29:12 Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will
listen to you.
JER 29:13 You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your
heart.
JER 29:14 I will be found by you," declares the LORD, "and will bring you
back from captivity. I will gather you from all the nations and places
where I have banished you," declares the LORD, "and will bring you back to
the place from which I carried you into exile."

After Solomon's reign the country divided in two, Judah in the South, Israel in the North. In the 8th Century BC Israel was invaded by Assyria (Nth Iraq) and the aristocrats in the population were deported to Assyria (Nth Iraq). Judah continued as a vassal state of Assyria.

In 606 BC Assyria was overrun by Babylon (Sth Iraq) and to punish the people of Judah who rebelled against them a small group of rulers were deported to Babylon as slaves. Daniel, Ezekiel and Daniel's three friends Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego were among these.

ah rebelled again, and Babylon invaded in 589 BC. As a result the whole population except a few peasants were deported to Babylon. A small leadership group was also left behind which again rebelled and then fled to Egypt before Babylon could punish them (2 Kings 25).

Jeremiah, besides prophesying a 70 year exile, also prophesied a 70 year period of "desolations" along the lines of the Leviticus 26 curse.

Jeremiah 25:1-11.
JER 25:1 The word came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in
the fourth year of Jehoiakim son of Josiah king of Judah, which was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon.
JER 25:2 So Jeremiah the prophet said to all the people of Judah and to all
those living in Jerusalem:
JER 25:3 For twenty-three years- from the thirteenth year of Josiah son of
Amon king of Judah until this very day- the word of the LORD has come to me
and I have spoken to you again and again, but you have not listened.
JER 25:4 And though the LORD has sent all his servants the prophets to you
again and again, you have not listened or paid any attention.
JER 25:5 They said, "Turn now, each of you, from your evil ways and your
evil practices, and you can stay in the land the LORD gave to you and your
fathers for ever and ever.
JER 25:6 Do not follow other gods to serve and worship them; do not provoke
me to anger with what your hands have made. Then I will not harm you."
JER 25:7 "But you did not listen to me," declares the LORD, "and you have
provoked me with what your hands have made, and you have brought harm to
yourselves."
JER 25:8 Therefore the LORD Almighty says this: "Because you have not
listened to my words,
JER 25:9 I will summon all the peoples of the north and my servant
Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon," declares the LORD, "and I will bring them
against this land and its inhabitants and against all the surrounding
nations. I will completely destroy them and make them an object of horror
and scorn, and an everlasting ruin.
JER 25:10 I will banish from them the sounds of joy and gladness, the
voices of bride and bridegroom, the sound of millstones and the light of
the lamp.
JER 25:11 This whole country will become a desolate wasteland, and these
nations will serve the king of Babylon seventy years.

The period of the exile and the period of the desolations are not the same.

The Exile is counted from the first Babylonian deportation in 606 BC.
The Desolations from the destruction of Jerusalem in 589 BC.

A) THE EXILE.

Agriculture ceased in 606 BC, and didn't resume until the first group of exiles was allowed to return home and rebuild their cities. This happened in 536 BC. This return coincided with the decree of Cyrus, in the first year of his rule as recorded in: Ezra 1:1-5.:

EZRA 1:1 In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the
word of the LORD spoken by Jeremiah, the LORD moved the heart of Cyrus king
of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his realm and to put it in
writing:
EZRA 1:2 "This is what Cyrus king of Persia says: "`The LORD, the God of
heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he has appointed me
to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah.
EZRA 1:3 Anyone of his people among you- may his God be with him, and let
him go up to Jerusalem in Judah and build the temple of the LORD, the God
of Israel, the God who is in Jerusalem.
EZRA 1:4 And the people of any place where survivors may now be living are
to provide him with silver and gold, with goods and livestock, and with
freewill offerings for the temple of God in Jerusalem.'"
EZRA 1:5 Then the family heads of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests and
Levites- everyone whose heart God had moved- prepared to go up and build
the house of the LORD in Jerusalem.


It was Persian policy to allow exiles to return home and rebuild their cities and shrines. They even provided money to help in reconstruction shrines. Though this first group of exiles returned home at that time, they did not rebuild the city or the temple because God's time was not yet - it was 17 years to early according to the word of Jeremiah's prophecy.


CALCULATIONS:

(a) Using the Julian Calendar:

Saul reigned from 1096.

1096 - 606 = 490 years = 70 x 7 (i.e. Seventy Sabbaths owing).

606-536 = 70 years.

(b) Using the Jewish Calendar:

A Jewish / Biblical year is counted at 360 days, following the lunar calendar. All of the important Bible dates are based on this calendar, hence when working out prophetic calculations a year is 360 days, hence 3 ½ years = 1260 days, or 42 months of 30 days as in Revelation.

Temple dedicated in 11th year of Solomon = 1003B.C.

Second Temple begun in 520B.C.

1003 - 520 = 483 solar years

= 490 lunar years

= 70 x 7 years.

I.e. 70 Sabbath years were owing, on both the solar and lunar calendars.


B) THE DESOLATIONS.


These began with the destruction of the city by Babylon in 589 BC and ended with he decree of Darius in:

Ezra 6:8-13.
EZRA 6:1 King Darius then issued an order, and they searched in the
archives stored in the treasury at Babylon.
EZRA 6:2 A scroll was found in the citadel of Ecbatana in the province of
Media, and this was written on it: Memorandum:
EZRA 6:3 In the first year of King Cyrus, the king issued a decree
concerning the temple of God in Jerusalem: Let the temple be rebuilt as a
place to present sacrifices, and let its foundations be laid. It is to be
ninety feet high and ninety feet wide,
EZRA 6:4 with three courses of large stones and one of timbers. The costs
are to be paid by the royal treasury.
EZRA 6:5 Also, the gold and silver articles of the house of God, which
Nebuchadnezzar took from the temple in Jerusalem and brought to Babylon,
are to be returned to their places in the temple in Jerusalem; they are to
be deposited in the house of God.
EZRA 6:6 Now then, Tattenai, governor of Trans-Euphrates, and Shethar-
Bozenai and you, their fellow officials of that province, stay away from
there.
EZRA 6:7 Do not interfere with the work on this temple of God. Let the
governor of the Jews and the Jewish elders rebuild this house of God on its
site.
EZRA 6:8 Moreover, I hereby decree what you are to do for these elders of
the Jews in the construction of this house of God: The expenses of these
men are to be fully paid out of the royal treasury, from the revenues of
Trans-Euphrates, so that the work will not stop.
EZRA 6:9 Whatever is needed- young bulls, rams, male lambs for burnt
offerings to the God of heaven, and wheat, salt, wine and oil, as requested
by the priests in Jerusalem- must be given them daily without fail,
EZRA 6:10 so that they may offer sacrifices pleasing to the God of heaven
and pray for the well-being of the king and his sons.
EZRA 6:11 Furthermore, I decree that if anyone changes this edict, a beam
is to be pulled from his house and he is to be lifted up and impaled on it.
And for this crime his house is to be made a pile of rubble.
EZRA 6:12 May God, who has caused his Name to dwell there, overthrow any
king or people who lifts a hand to change this decree or to destroy this
temple in Jerusalem. I Darius have decreed it. Let it be carried out with
diligence.
EZRA 6:13 Then, because of the decree King Darius had sent, Tattenai,
governor of Trans-Euphrates, and Shethar-Bozenai and their associates
carried it out with diligence.


CALCULATIONS:

70 lunar years = 25200 days.

Babylonian invasion began 10th Tebeth 589 BC.

= 13th Dec 589 BC.

Add 25200 days of desolation.

= 17th Dec 520 BC.

= 24th day of 9th month of 2nd year of Darius

= Haggai 2:18,19, the day then second temple was begun.

= 24 Chislein 520 BC.

10th Tebeth 589 - 24 Chislein 520 = 25202 days.

I.e. the desolation began the day after the invasion and ended the day before the founding of the second temple.

Daniel clearly had in mind the prophecy of the desolations. Until these wee fulfilled the temple could not be rebuilt in spite of Cyrus' edict.

Ezra 3:8-11 - the first attempt failed because it was too early.

EZRA 3:8 In the second month of the second year after their arrival at the
house of God in Jerusalem, Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel, Jeshua son of
Jozadak and the rest of their brothers (the priests and the Levites and all
who had returned from the captivity to Jerusalem) began the work,
appointing Levites twenty years of age and older to supervise the building
of the house of the LORD.
EZRA 3:9 Jeshua and his sons and brothers and Kadmiel and his sons
(descendants of Hodaviah) and the sons of Henadad and their sons and
brothers- all Levites- joined together in supervising those working on the
house of God.
EZRA 3:10 When the builders laid the foundation of the temple of the LORD,
the priests in their vestments and with trumpets, and the Levites (the sons
of Asaph) with cymbals, took their places to praise the LORD, as prescribed
by David king of Israel.
EZRA 3:11 With praise and thanksgiving they sang to the LORD: "He is good;
his love to Israel endures forever." And all the people gave a great shout
of praise to the LORD, because the foundation of the house of the LORD was
laid.

Haggai 1:14-15, 2:10 -19 - Now in God's time it is completed in 5 years.

HAG 1:14 So the LORD stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel,
governor of Judah, and the spirit of Joshua son of Jehozadak, the high
priest, and the spirit of the whole remnant of the people. They came and began to work on the house of the LORD Almighty, their God,
HAG 1:15 on the twenty-fourth day of the sixth month in the second year of
King Darius.
HAG 2:10 On the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, in the second year of
Darius, the word of the LORD came to the prophet Haggai:
HAG 2:11 "This is what the LORD Almighty says: `Ask the priests what the
law says:
HAG 2:12 If a person carries consecrated meat in the fold of his garment,
and that fold touches some bread or stew, some wine, oil or other food,
does it become consecrated?'" The priests answered, "No."
HAG 2:13 Then Haggai said, "If a person defiled by contact with a dead body
touches one of these things, does it become defiled?" "Yes," the priests
replied, "it becomes defiled."
HAG 2:14 Then Haggai said, "`So it is with this people and this nation in
my sight,' declares the LORD. `Whatever they do and whatever they offer
there is defiled.
HAG 2:15 "`Now give careful thought to this from this day on- consider how
things were before one stone was laid on another in the LORD's temple.
HAG 2:16 When anyone came to a heap of twenty measures, there were only
ten. When anyone went to a wine vat to draw fifty measures, there were only
twenty.
HAG 2:17 I struck all the work of your hands with blight, mildew and hail,
yet you did not turn to me,' declares the LORD.
HAG 2:18 `From this day on, from this twenty-fourth day of the ninth month,
give careful thought to the day when the foundation of the LORD's temple
was laid. Give careful thought:
HAG 2:19 Is there yet any seed left in the barn? Until now, the vine and
the fig tree, the pomegranate and the olive tree have not borne fruit.
"`From this day on I will bless you.'"

Daniel, in ch9, is recording an event in his life which happened in 536 BC - and in reading the prophet Jeremiah he realised there was only 14 years to go before the prophecy was to be fulfilled.

Jeremiah 29:12 - pray. So Daniel began to pray.
Jeremiah 29:12 Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you.

As a result of his prayer God answered with a message sent by an angel, Gabriel, to explain more of God's plan for the nation of Israel.


C) THE SEVENTY WEEKS.


Daniel 9:20-27.

NOTE: - The word "weeks" is literally "sevens" in the Hebrew, and clearly here means a period of seven years, hence the prophecy is about a period of:

70 x 7 years = 490 years.

Taking these as lunar years = 490 x 360 days

= 176400 days.

(1) The Reasons for the 70 Weeks.

(a) "concerning your people and the holy city"

It is about the nation of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.

(b) "to put an end to sin"

This time period will see God deal, once and for all, with sin.

(c) "to atone for iniquity"

In this time God will make provision for the forgiveness of sins.

(d) "to bring in everlasting righteousness"

This is the coming of the Eternal Kingdom of God in his Christ.

(e) "to seal both vision and prophets"

In this time God will show that the prophecies of the Bible are true.

(f) "to anoint a most holy (X)"

The "X" is implied by the Hebrew but is not present. It could refer to a person, place, or thing, but it is not said which. V 26 identifies it as a person, an "anointed one", i.e. Christ.

Some writers note that this is a common name for the inner room of the temple, the Holy of Holies, which is a type of the Millennium, where God reveals himself in his fullness.

Either way it doesn't matter because the intent of the prophecy is clear: The 70 weeks will bring us to a time when all Biblical prophecy is fulfilled.

C/f the seventh trumpet.

Revelation 10:7
“But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants the prophets."

So the end terminus of the 70 weeks corresponds in time to the 7th Trumpet of Revelation. But we need to remember that the 7th trumpet blows for over 1000 years of earth time (See notes on this in the Notes on Revelation Ch 10 & 11).

(2) Timing of the 70 Weeks.

(a) The Start.

v25 - "from the going forth of the word to ... rebuild Jerusalem".

Not the temple, but the city.

Nehemiah 2:1ff.
NEH 2:1 In the month of Nisan in the twentieth year of King Artaxerxes,
when wine was brought for him, I took the wine and gave it to the king. I
had not been sad in his presence before;
NEH 2:2 so the king asked me, "Why does your face look so sad when you are
not ill? This can be nothing but sadness of heart." I was very much afraid,
NEH 2:3 but I said to the king, "May the king live forever! Why should my
face not look sad when the city where my fathers are buried lies in ruins,
and its gates have been destroyed by fire?"
NEH 2:4 The king said to me, "What is it you want?" Then I prayed to the
God of heaven,
NEH 2:5 and I answered the king, "If it pleases the king and if your
servant has found favor in his sight, let him send me to the city in Judah
where my fathers are buried so that I can rebuild it."
NEH 2:6 Then the king, with the queen sitting beside him, asked me, "How
long will your journey take, and when will you get back?" It pleased the
king to send me; so I set a time.
NEH 2:7 I also said to him, "If it pleases the king, may I have letters to
the governors of Trans-Euphrates, so that they will provide me safe-conduct
until I arrive in Judah?
NEH 2:8 And may I have a letter to Asaph, keeper of the king's forest, so
he will give me timber to make beams for the gates of the citadel by the
temple and for the city wall and for the residence I will occupy?" And
because the gracious hand of my God was upon me, the king granted my
requests.

This decree was issued by Artaxerxes in his 20th Year, Nisan 445 BC.

Julian Date = 14 March 445 BC.

(Date set by the Royal Observatory, London, according to the phasis of the moon by which Passover was kept.)

(b) Five Periods Marked Out.

(i) v25 = “7 weeks” = 49 years.

"to the coming of an anointed one, a prince".

We do not know to whom this refers as there are no historical records to guide us.

(ii) v25,26 = “62 weeks” = 434 years.

Jerusalem is rebuilt, but in a troubled time - indeed it was, with repeated invasions by warring empires. Israel always got the rough end of the stick.

Daniel ch 10,11 record some of these invasions in a prophecy.

(iii) v27 = “a week” = 7 years.

Clearly in reading this prophecy there is a break after the 69th week, or in the middle of the 70th week.

This is a point many interpreters contest, arguing that there is no break after the 69th week. As we go along I will argue the case for the point of view that there is a break in the prophecy.

(iv) v26 "and after the 62 weeks".

The events recorded here are clearly not part of the 70th week, which is described in v27.

This indicates that there is an unmeasured time span between the 69th and 70th week, during which time "an anointed one is cut off, and (the city and temple will be destroyed)."

There is also an implication that the city and temple are rebuilt because in v27 they exist again.

(v) The 70th Week.

CALCULATIONS:

(From "The Coming Prince")

Starting Point = 14th March 445 BC.

69 weeks = 69 x 7 years

= 483 x 360 days

= 173880 days.

4th March 445 BC. + 173880 Days

= 6th April 32 AD.

3) Probable Reconstruction of Christ's Life.

(a) Birth date unknown - possibly 7 BC. or 4 BC.

Luke 2:1 - Date is Unknown.

(b) Luke 3:1-5.

LUKE 3:1 In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar- when
Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his
brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of

Abilene-
LUKE 3:2 during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God
came to John son of Zechariah in the desert.
LUKE 3:3 He went into all the country around the Jordan, preaching a
baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.


The actual date of the beginning of John’s ministry is unknown. However the “15th Year of Tiberius” began on 19th August 28 AD.

We are not sure how long John ministered before Christ was baptised by him. It would seem John’s ministry was about 3 years long, but it is clear from Matthew 14 that John’s ministry overlapped Jesus' ministry for quite some time.

(c) Luke 3:23 - "about 30 years old" - this is only a general statement from common usage and can mean "30 or over, but not too much over". It indicates that Christ was fully mature and fitted for all the requirements of the Law for human responsibility and Priestly service.

(d) The first Passover of Christ's ministry was 29 AD and his ministry covered four Passovers, i.e. he died Passover 32 AD.

(e) Luke 19:39 is the fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9 where Jesus is proclaimed "Messiah" = “anointed one”, c/f Daniel 9:26 "An anointed one shall be cut off".

This happened on the 10th Nisan AD 32 = Palm Sunday.

Julian date of 10th Nisan AD 32 = Sunday 6th April AD 32. (The same date arrived at from the calculations from Daniel 9 above).

From the above calculations we can see that this fulfills the terminus date of the 69 weeks.

(4) The Rest of the Prophecy.

(i) v 26 tells us that the "anointed one shall be cut off" after the 69th week, as Christ was four days later.

(ii) After that "the temple and city are destroyed". The Romans did this in AD 66 destroying the temple and in AD 132 destroying the city.

There is no way that the destruction of the temple and the city can be made to fit into a 70 “week” prophecy if there is no break after to 69th week. All attempts to explain how this could be so have resulted in far fetched explanations like you wouldn’t believe.

So it is clear there is a break between the 69th and 70th weeks of the prophecy.

The phrase "the prince who is to come" is deliberately ambiguous suggesting that the "people" who destroy the city live some time before the "prince" himself appears. It must refer to some “Roman” Emperor, but the language indicates that a greater fulfillment in the Antichrist is intended. The NT clearly interprets it to refer to Antichrist at the end of the Age. This very fact points to a time break between the events of the death of the Messiah and the Antichrist. To argue otherwise seems insane to me.

(iii) However In the 70th week we find "sacrifice and offering" for the first half of the week. This indicates that the city and temple has been restored. It is a requirement of Judaism that there be a temple in order for there to be sacrifice, so it seems implicit in the prophecy that there will be some form of temple rebuild before the return of Christ.

(iv) v27 "And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week".

This statement is obscure to say the least.

(i) Who is the "he"?

Is it the "prince who is to come", i.e. Antichrist, or is it "the anointed one" i.e. Christ?

A strong case can be made either way (see below).

(ii) What is the covenant he establishes with them?

(iii) Who are the "many"?



D) INTERPRETATION ONE: "HE" = ANTICHRIST.


This is the view taken by Sir Robert Anderson.

By this interpretation we get the following ideas:

(1) The Covenant.

The Antichrist makes a seven year covenant with a large number of people, but who they are is not clear, the text does not indicate that it is Israel, though this may be implied because the whole prophecy is essentially about Israel.

It is from this text that the idea of a seven year tribulation is built, based on the idea that Antichrist secures peace in the world by negotiating a seven year treaty, primarily with Israel.

The idea that it is with Israel is based on two other scriptures that may or may not indicate that.

They are:

(i) Isaiah 28:14,15 "a covenant with death, and with Sheol".

This verse is from a passage that relates to the covenant Israel made with Babylon, and the breaking of it by Israel. The invasion of Israel by Babylon came in judgement. The invasion by people of "strange tongues" (v11) is a covenant curse on disobedience (see Lev 26, Deut 28), i.e. breaking of covenant.

The problem is that this prophecy was not totally fulfilled in history, and there are indications in the chapter that the prophecy goes beyond the immediate threat of Babylon. The Babylonian invasion is often seen to be a prefiguring of Antichrist, indeed it is the spirit of Antichrist that causes it! (See notes on Revelation 17).

Antichrist will eventually set up his capital in Babylon also. (See notes on Revelation 17,18).

Isaiah 28:16,17 - are in the NT taken to mean the ministry of Christ which made Israel stumble.

Isaiah 28:21 - God's "strange work" of judgement on sin has a very "End of the World" sound to it.

Hence it is possible that this prophecy has a still yet future application.

(ii) Ezekiel 38:8,11,14 - Israel in peace and security in the last days?

It implies that Israel has given up her own defenses (no walls) and accepted protection from another.

Thus it may mean this, but it is not clearly so.

Hence the whole teaching of a covenant between Israel and Antichrist rests on a very insecure foundation. It is not explicitly stated, nor are the inferences clear.

Thus the idea of a 7 year tribulation is also on very shaky foundations.

(2) Daniel 9:27.

"for half the week he shall cause sacrifice and offering to cease".

If this refers to Israel's cult then we must assume that the temple and city have been rebuilt. However it does not say that it refers to Israel's cult. It could be a general reference to the practice of religion world-wide. If Antichrist demands worship as "god" then he would attempt to silence every other form of worship. It may not imply the resurrection of a Jewish Cult.

This is the event prophesied in Matt 24:15ff and 2 Thess 2:3,4.

The last half-week here is clearly meant to be tied in with the 3 ½ years of Revelation:

12:6 – “1260 days.”

12:14 – “times, time and half a time”, i.e. 3 ½ years.

13:5 –“42 months” (of 30 days each, hence 1260 days.)

These three time periods are clearly meant to be taken to be the same period, and are also clearly linked with the prophecy of the last half week of Daniel 9.

Thus there is absolutely no doubt that the second half week is still future and refers to the time period Jesus called “the Great Tribulation” (Matthew 24:15-21, especially v21).

Thus it is clear that there is a time gap in the seventy week prophecy of Daniel 9 and that this time gap occurs before the last half week of the prophecy. Interpreters who argue that there is no time gap are clearly wrong. The only question that remains is this: Is the time gap at the beginning of the 70th week, or half way through it?

My own view (concurring with Anderson) is that the Bible text as we have it places certain events in Daniel 9:26 – after the 69th week and before the 70th week is mentioned. These events seem to demand a fulfillment not long after Christ’s death and resurrection, whereas the events of Daniel 9:27 seem to be clearly events linked to the end of the age in the NT. To fit the events of Daniel 9:26 into the first 69 weeks or into the last 70th week would require rearrangement of the order of scripture verses to make them fit the theory – but scripture is the given – we are not free to rearrange the predicted events to suit ourselves or our own theory.

Thus it seems best to understand these events (Dan 9:26) as referring to the destruction of Jerusalem under Titus.

The problems with this interpretation are:

(i) The difficulty of seeing sacrifice restarted now that Christ has died.

This view seems to require that “offerings and sacrifice” are reinstated at a rebuilt Jewish temple and this practice continues for 3 ½ years until Antichrist stops it.

It seems unlikely that sacrifices can be reinstated now that Christ has died.

However this objection can be overcome in two ways:

(a) Sacrifice and offerings clearly continued after Christ’s death until the destruction of the temple in AD 70 – because those who carried them out didn’t believe in Christ. And this is the point – any Jewish temple that would be rebuilt in the last days would be rebuilt by people who don’t believe in Christ anyway so the objection really doesn’t hold up.

(b) It is possible that the latter part of this prophecy should be interpreted symbolically – thus “temple” would mean the church and “sacrifices and offerings” would mean “public worship”. Thus the objection would cease to have relevance.

While I think this symbolic interpretation is included in the meaning here I do not think it exhausts the meaning. The prophecy seems to be about Israel as a nation so a literal interpretation would seem to be consistent even if a symbolic interpretation is accepted as well. It will be clear from other articles on this blog that I feel there are often dual fulfilments of prophecies – a literal (in Israel) and a symbolic (in the Church), and this I feel is the case here.

(ii) For there to be a functioning temple it would have to be rededicated by a red heifer offering, which because of its nature cannot be repeated. This is more difficult to overcome.

(iii) We end up with a seven year Tribulation, but elsewhere in scripture we only hear of 3 ½ years. The building of another 3 ½ years on the basis of this scripture has lead to all sorts of speculation as to what happens in it, and we must admit we know nothing.

There is the implication elsewhere that Antichrist is a political ruler prior to his apostacy, but we do not know for how long. He must have been a significant international figure to negotiate a treaty of this sort with Israel so undoubtedly he was a political ruler much longer than just 7 years. Also the Apocalypse of Peter tells us that Israel accepts Antichrist as the Christ for a period before his Blasphemy.




(iv) v27 "one who makes desolation" is clearly the Antichrist, the NT identifies him as such.

But it is grammatically difficult to identify him with the "one who makes a strong covenant" later in the verse. The two seem to be different people.

Hence this interpretation is possible even though it has its difficulties.

On the whole this interpretation seems a little forced, but no more so than the second interpretation.



E) INTERPRETATION TWO: - "HE" = CHRIST.


Again the "he" makes a strong covenant with the "many".

H. Grattan Guinness favours this interpretation. In his calculations of the dates he arrives at Christ dying in AD 32, this being (according to him) 69 ½ weeks into the prophecy.

I.e. the first 3 ½ years of the last (70th) week are the ministry of Christ. With the death of Christ the clock stops and only restarts when Israel rejects Antichrist and begins to turn to God. Guinness works out his dates (I think) using the solar year or 365 days, hence ends up with a slightly longer period than if the lunar year of 360 days is used.

The “covenant” is thus the “New Covenant” that Christ established.

It is significant that using this different calendar we end up exactly at the death of Christ. Clearly we are to understand that no matter how you calculate it the time was up.

Again we have problems:

(i) What is the "covenant" he establishes with the "many"? It does not appear to be the New Covenant as it only seems to apply to the seven-year period in question. And it also seems to be limited to Israel (the prophecy is clearly said to be about Israel in v24) The New Covenant applies to all of us in the church age and so has no “7 year” limit.

One could argue that the number “7” in scripture is often used in a symbolic way to indicate “a complete amount of time” for whatever is under question, so hence a “seven year treaty” if it was the New Covenant could be taken to mean “The whole period of time the New Covenant is in operation, i.e. the church age.” But this is to mix literal and symbolic interpretation in a way that seems gratuitous.

(ii) A grammatical difficulty. It is hard to Identify the "he" with the "anointed one". But then the other theory has this difficulty too.

(iii) Why does sacrifice only stop for "half a week"? In actual fact sacrifice continued until AD 66 when the temple was destroyed.

Guinness would argue to this that the clock has clearly stopped ticking from the Crucifixion on. Hence when it begins again at the beginning of the last half-week sacrifice stops because it cannot continue, it has been fulfilled in Christ. Hence the 30 years of sacrifice until the temple was destroyed do not count on the time clock.

It could be that the prophetic clock in this prophecy measures only the period of the inclusion of Israel in God's covenants. In this case the restarting of the clock indicates that God has again included Israel in his plan of Salvation, as Paul talks about in Rom 9-11. As the "New Covenant" is not anything essentially different to the covenant with Abraham what we see here is the period of the inclusion of Israel in the New Covenant, i.e. the period of Christ's ministry and the period of their national repentance just prior to Christ's return.


NOTE: - The Gap in the Time Clock.

This leaving out of time periods in God's reckoning of his dealings with Israel is a common Biblical feature. We see it also in the OT.

Solomon built the temple 480 years after the Exodus (1 Kings 6:1).

c/f Acts 13:18-21 gives the following time periods:

40 (Exodus) + 450 + 40 (Saul) + 40 (David) + 3 (Solomon) = 573 years.

However in Judges there are five periods of rebellion against God when God sold them into the hands of their enemies:

Judges 3:8,14 4:1 13:1.

8+18+20+7+40 = 93 years.

573 - 93 = 480 years.

Clearly the clock had not recorded the periods of Apostacy. This is the same feature we see in Daniel.


F) CONCLUSIONS.

God's plan for Israel is summed up in a 70 week, 490 year period. Starting with the restoration to Palestine after the exile there was to be 69 or 69 ½ weeks of years until Christ. Following this there was to be an indefinite period during which Israel would not be counted as God's people. Finally there is a period of 3 ½ or 7 years during which Antichrist rules. In this period Israel is once again "grafted in" to God's People.

In my opinion it is possibly better to take the viewpoint of Anderson. I toyed with Guinness’ view for a couple of years and actually favoured it over Anderson’s, but now feel that the weight of evidence favours Anderson. It seems to raise less problems.

Essentially the details of the prophecy are correct, and we can see that they have been perfectly fulfilled up to this time. We can be assured that then rest of the prophecy will also be fulfilled just as accurately.

Hence we can be clear from this prophecy that:

(1) A world ruler will emerge who will exercise international influence for a considerable period – at least 7 years seems likely. He will become the Antichrist.

(2) There will be a minimum three and a half year period of the rule of Antichrist. which shall begin with some form of blasphemy which shall reveal his true nature to Israel. In their rebellion against Antichrist they will begin to turn to Christ. This 3 ½ years will end with the return of Christ and Antichrist's destruction at Armageddon.

The church that is awake will see these events and will know TO THE DAY when Christ's return will be, exactly 1260 days after Antichrist's blasphemy.

Thus Christ’s words “no man Knows the day or the hour” (Matthew 24) have a limited truth to them. There will come a time when those who are alert will know.

Saturday, June 21, 2008

A critique of "50 Evidences for the Pre-Trib Rapture"

A critique of:

**50 Evidences for the Pre-Trib Rapture**
Historical Doctrine of Imminency
By Dr. Donald V. Erickson
(Dr. Erickson operates a website/blogsite on Prophecy and other issues)

Critique by me.

The original article is in ordinary type. The critique in italics.

1. The early church believed in the immanency of the Lord's return.

While it can be debated which church father said what, there is a consistency in the early church on immanency which is essential to the pre-trib position and in opposition to some other positions.

While no one can dispute that the early church expected Christ’s return almost immediately this is no guarantee that they were right in that belief. The Early Church had plenty of other wrong beliefs - take, for instance, the whole debate about the nature of Christ and the Trinity. It was 400 years before this was sorted out and "correct" doctrine imposed.

The comment in John 21:22,23 shows that many false beliefs were around about the immediacy of the Lord’s coming. The feeling of immanency they lived with however, does not exclude the belief in events preceding that coming as Matthew 24 and 2 Thessalonians 2 show.

1&2 Peter shows Peter had an expectation of the Lord's near return, but this return was clearly expected on "the Day of the Lord" and Peter is clear in 2 Peter that there would be several events before the Lord's return:

(i) His own death.

(ii) The events of ch 3 - which it is clear by the language he uses that he expected the church to be around to see those events.

The Same is true in 2 Thessalonians - the only "Coming" Paul envisages is on the day of the Lord and that is preceded by certain events. But when Christ was to come we (the church) would be "gathered to meet him" (v1,2).

So the sense of immanency in the NT does not mean:

(i) "Christ could come at any moment" - all the NT witnesses to the Second Coming have specific events named before Christ will come.

(ii) "There are no known prophetic events to be fulfilled before the Second Coming" - rather all NT witnesses predict events before Christ's coming.

Also Christ himself repeatedly implied in his teaching that there would be a significantly long gap between his departure and return. See my previous article on the Second Coming in the NT.


2. The Pre-trib position is the ONLY one which truly teaches immanency.

This, of course, depends on how one defines immanency. If it is defined as Pre Tribs do as “Christ can come at any moment now” then by definition immanency only supports a Pre Trib rapture position. But the doctrine of immanency is not explicitly stated in scripture so is a derived doctrine, as is the Pre Trib Rapture, so it is dangerous to be too dogmatic about what immanency means. A looser definition of immanency such as. “we expect the Lord to return soon, maybe in our lifetime” would easily cover the Bible idea of immanency and not demand a Pre Trib position.

The doctrine of immanency has to stand or fall on its own merits when compared with scripture and not be bolstered by implications from other theories.


3. The fact that there is a greater development of the doctrine in recent centuries does not preclude it from the early centuries. In the very early years of the church you see the development of great
fundamentals doctrines of Trinity, Deity, God-man, canon of Scripture, etc. Following those early church councils is a time of decline in the corporate church into great apostasy. The teaching of that time are built on many of the heresies of Augustine. When the Reformation comes, there is a period of reestablishing the foundational doctrines of
salvation. Now, in these last days there is both and ability and a need in the church to better understand the doctrines of eschatology and the Spirit is continuing His ministry of guiding the church in all truth.

I agree wholeheartedly. Augustine did distort things with his reintroduction of Greek philosophy which the Church Councils had effectively weeded out of the church. The Reformation and following has led to a restoration and a discovery of truth which is a process still going on. But this point neither supports nor undermines a Pre Trib position. It just sounds good in a list.


4. The exhortation to be comforted by the "coming of the Lord" (1Thes 4:18) is valid only in the context of the pre-trib view. It could even be a fearsome thing in a post-trib view.

Not so. The context of 1 Thess and its references to the second coming cover more than just the last half of chapter 4. Refer to the following:

1:9,10. To wait for his son from heaven whom he raised from the dead, Jesus, who delivers us from the wrath to come.

2:19 For what is our hope, our joy, or the crowns in which we shall glory in the presence of our Lord Jesus when he comes…

3:13 May he strengthen your hearts so that you will be blameless and holy in the presence of our God and Father when our Lord Jesus comes with all his holy ones.

Then there is the large section from 4:17-5:11. The section quoted from ch 4 is not the whole context.

The interesting thing is that Paul nowhere says anything like the following:

“At this point I am talking about the rapture which will happen before the coming of Christ in Glory at the end of the Tribulation.” Or “At this point I am talking about Christ’s coming at the end of the Tribulation, on the day of the Lord.” Paul never makes that sort of distinction, But, in fact, he talks about the rapture (1 Thess 4:16,17) and goes right on talking about “the day of the Lord” (1 Thess 5:2) as if he is talking about the same thing. And after talking about the rapture he says we should be encouraged (4:18) which he does again after talking about the day of the Lord (5:11). In actual fact “comforted” may not be the best translation. “Encouraged” may be better. We will need courage.

But the reality is that the two “comforts/encouragements” have specific things attached to them that we should be encouraged/comforted by:

4:18 The fact that those who have already died are not going to miss out but will be raptured first. This should bring us encouragement.

5:11. The fact that we are not going to experience the wrath of God should bring us comfort. No matter what else happens we will not go through God’s wrath.

So in a sense the idea of “comfort” here does not necessarily support a pre trib rapture. There are reasons why it could support a post trib rapture position.


5. We are exhorted to look for the "Glorious Appearing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." (Titus 2:13) If there are any prophetic events (ie: tribulation) to come first, then this passage is nonsensical.

The nonsensical bit is this objection. The “Glorious appearing of our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ” is not a reference to a pretribulation rapture at all. The idea of “Glory” and “appearing” associated with the second coming always point to the day of the Lord in scripture, not to a secret, silent rapture. By definition Titus 2:13 is talking about the day of the Lord. And as that is so there are two pertinent points we can make from Titus 2:13.

(i) WE (the church of Christ) are exhorted to look for the glorious appearing of Christ – not for some secret silent affair.

(ii) The event Paul is talking about is the day of the Lord so there are known prophetic events that will happen before it. Namely the tribulation and Antichrist.

And it is this coming of Christ - in power and glory - that Paul says is "our Blessed Hope" - not some secret rapture.

6. Again, we are to "purify ourselves" in view of his coming.(1 John 3:2-3) If his coming is not imminent then the passage is meaningless.

Why is it meaningless? The fact is this: our future rewards in heaven will be based primarily on the degree of holiness we attain in this life. Because this is true we should purify ourselves so that we maximize our inheritance in heaven. That makes perfect sense to me - irrespective of whether the rapture is Pre or Post Tribulation.


7. The church told *only* to look for the Coming of Christ. It is Israel and the tribulation saints that are told to look for signs.

This objection depends, of course, on one’s interpretation methodology and hermeneutic. Matthew 24 and it’s parallel passages in Luke and Mark are Jesus’ primary teaching on his second coming and the teaching was addressed to his disciples, not to the Jews. His disciples represent us, the church. If we start saying otherwise then we might as well cut the gospels out of our bibles altogether because none of Jesus’ teaching can have any relevance to us – it was all given to his disciples.

So if Matthew 24 is addressed to the church then Jesus gives the church plenty of signs to look for.

The same could be said of 2 Thessalonians 2. Paul there gives lots of signs of the Second Coming and it is patently obvious that 2 Thessalonians is addressed to the church not to Jews.


8. Nature of the Church

(Those who do not understand the nature of the church as unique in the program of God will continually be confused about the nature of His coming for the church.)

Dispensational (Pre tribulation) teachers make a great deal out of the distinction between Israel and the church and the unique nature of each. The problem with the Dispensational position is that it ends up perverting the teaching of the apostles in the NT about the place of Israel in the plan of God. I grew up believing this distortion but eventually came to realise it was a deception. The problem is that this doctrine overstresses the differences but forgets the clear teaching of Justification by faith and covenant in the NT which clearly states that natural birth (i.e. into Israel) never brought anyone into the covenant or into justification. Those blessings only ever came by faith – the same sort of faith Abraham had and that we also have.


9. The translation of the church is never mentioned in any context dealing with the second coming of Christ at the end of the Tribulation.

Again this depends on ones hermeneutic. If one assumes this is so before one starts then of course one will never find a reference to the church being raptured at the end of the tribulation. But if one lets the Bible speak for itself one may find differently. For instance:

(i) The passage already debated in 1 Thess 4&5. Paul talks about the rapture of the church and the “day of the Lord” in the same context.

(ii) And if that wasn’t enough, because the Thessalonians still had difficulty understand Paul wrote 2 Thess to them a few months later to explain further what he meant.

2 Thess 2:1 is as clear a reference to the rapture as one could hope for. “The coming of our Lord and our gathering to meet him.” The “our” refers to the church both times.

But then Paul immediately talks about the “day of the Lord” and events leading up to it as an explanation of the rapture.

He then concludes v8 by mentioning again Christ’s “coming” – without any clarification so we have to assume that by “coming” he means exactly the same coming as in v1.

So twice – in each of the letters to the Thessalonians – Paul joins the rapture to the Day of the Lord and in 2 Thess he actually goes out of his way to list a whole string of events that are going to happen before we “gather together to meet him”.

As you can see I am not doing any real interpretation here. Only using the laws of English grammar to say what it says.


10. The church is "not appointed to wrath" (Rom 5:9; 1 Thes 1:9-10). The church cannot enter into the "great day of their wrath."

I’m happy with this claim. But the writers' mistake is to confuse the “Wrath of God” with the "Tribulation". The two are not the same. A simple word study of “wrath” in a concordance will reveal that “wrath” when it means the “end time wrath of God” only ever occurs on the Day of the Lord – That great day when Christ and God appear in power and glory to set up their kingdom. Wrath is poured out on his enemies at that point. But no wrath is poured out during the tribulation. By the time wrath comes the tribulation is over. In a sense wrath is the last event of the tribulation.

The statement above “The church cannot enter into the great day of wrath” is actually not scriptural. What the scripture says is that, “God did not appoint us to wrath…” (1 Thess 5:9)– it doesn’t actually say we can’t be there on the day, only that we won’t be the recipients of it. And we will be there - with Christ in his victory train. But we are raptured before the wrath falls. It may be only one second before (who knows) but that will be enough. If the wrath of God falls at midday on the day of the Lord and we are raptured at 11:59:59 then the scripture in 1 Thess 5:9 will still be proved true.

The relationship between the events of the Tribulation and the Wrath of God I have covered in the notes of Revelation but to recapitulate:

(1) Revelation is a series of seven visions each having seven parts. The Seals, Trumpets and Bowls are the main time sequence visions as far as the Tribulation is concerned.

(ii) The Seventh Seal, Trumpet and Bowl are the same event - they are described identically with the phrase, "lightnings, thunder, loud noises, heavy hail, etc". This phrase is a description of "the Wrath of God" is vivid terms.

(iii) Each of these three visions talk of the "wrath of God" - but it is important to see WHEN that wrath is mentioned:

(a) The 6th Seal announces the coming of the Wrath - but the 7th Seal IS the wrath.

(b) The 7th trumpet tells us "thy wrath came". This is the song sung AFTER the seventh trumpet has completed.

But before the 7th Seal and trumpet we read of the safety of God's people.

The Bowls are all "wrath" but before the wrath comes we are told again of the safety of God's people (Rev 15).

So the "wrath" is at the very end of the Tribulation - it si not the Tribulation itself. Wrath comes on the "day of the Lord", which is the "day of Wrath."

The seals and trumpets are not wrath (except for the seventh of each). As I have explained in the text of Revelation:

(i) The Seals are the final outworking of the law of Sowing and Reaping acting on the curses of the broken covenant with Adam.

(ii) The Trumpets are the final outworking of the Law of Sowing and Reaping acting on the accumulated sin of mankind from 6000 years of rebellion. The "sins of the forefathers" have finally and fully come home to roost.

So there is a sense in which the Seals and Trumpets are not direct judgments of God and so not "wrath". Wrath is the direct judgment of God. The Seals and Trumpets are, rather, the reaping of man's sin and not the Wrath of God. Of course God has been, until the time of the Tribulation, holding back the full effects of our sins (in a similar way to how Romans 1 teaches God restrains the results of sin). And it is clear that this restraint of God on the effects of man's sin is removed in the Tribulation - but the actual events are not in themselves "inspired" by God - just "allowed" by God.


10. The Church will not be "overtaken by the Day of the Lord." (1 Thes 5:1-9) (Day of the Lord is another term for the great tribulation.)

This is just bad exegesis and interpretation. The Tribulation is not the day of the Lord. I have read hundreds of books on this subject and have never heard this idea before. Every writer in the history of the church that I have ever read has agreed that the “day of the Lord” is the last day of the tribulation when Christ comes in power and glory to set up his kingdom. The phrase “the day of the Lord” has never, to my knowledge, ever been identified with the tribulation before this document was posted.


11. The church will be "kept from the hour of testing that shall come upon all the world." (Rev. 3:10)

True. But what does “kept from the hour” mean?

In actual fact the Greek is better translated “Kept in the hour” in the sense that Israel was protected from the plagues in Egypt even though they were still physically present. The Greek here does not demand that the church be removed from the scene of the tribulation.


12. The believer will escape the tribulation (Luke 21:36).

The “It” referred to in Luke 21:36 - “it will come” - is not the tribulation but is “that day” (v34). The phrase “that day” or “the day“ is a sort of shorthand used right through the OT and NT to mean “the day of the Lord. So all that is promised here is that we will not experience the wrath on the day of the Lord, it has no reference at all to the tribulation. The problem is this objection is the wrong equation by the author of: day of the Lord = the tribulation.


13. It is in the character of God to deliver His own from the greatest times of trial. (Lot, Rahab, Israel, Noah,etc).

Hmmmm. Yes, But…

Rahab had to stay in the city until the Israelites broke through the walls. As her house was fairly high in the walls of Jericho ( she had to let the spies out in a basket) and the walls had just fallen down before the soldiers came and delivered her it must have been fairly rough sitting it out.

Noah didn’t miss the flood. All 365 days of it he sat in that ark. Every windy gale, every nearby volcanic eruption, all the pouring driving rain and the fountains of the deep erupting around him. He felt them all.

So it is not necessarily the nature of God to deliver his own out of trial. Rather he promises to deliver them through the trial. And that is quite a different thing. (1 Cor 10:13)


14. It is clear that there is a time interval between the translation of the church and the Return of Christ. (John 14:3)

John 14:3 doesn’t say that at all. What it says is this:

(i) Jesus is going away.

(ii) While he is away he will prepare a home for us.

(iii) He will come back to take us back to the home he has made.

What it doesn’t say is that there is a time gap between the translation of the church and the return of Christ.


15. Only the pre-trib position does not divide the Body of Christ on a works principle as does partial rapture does so clearly and others to a lesser extent. It becomes a climatic finale to the grand plan of
salvation.

I agree - all partial rapture theories do this. Hence I reject all partial rapture and mid - tribulation rapture theories. But this criticism does not apply to the post tribulation position.


16. The Scriptures are adamant that the church is undivided. In this age the church is divided by the continuing old nature in the believers. When we are glorified at the coming of Christ, the church is no more divided.

So what? This adds nothing to the argument as the Post Trib viewpoint never argues that the church will be divided in some way.


17. The godly remnant of the tribulation has the attributes seen in OT Israel and not the church. The church is not present in the prophecies of Revelation.

Again this depends on how one interprets Revelation. Rev is an apocalyptic and one of the features of apocalyptic is that they are symbolic. On my blog

stjohnrevelation.blogspot.com

you will find many proofs of how John has used symbolism to clearly mark out the church in the tribulation. If one assumes that Rev is symbolic and the symbols mean the church then there is no difficulty in finding the church in Revelation. It all boils down to hermeneutical assumptions made before one opens the book of Revelation - but are those assumptions right or wrong?


18. The pre-trib view, unlike the post-trib view does not confuse terms like "elect" and "saints" which apply to believers of all ages, as opposed to terms like "church" and "in Christ", which apply only to those who are the body of Christ in this age.

Sorry. I have been a post trib man for 30 years and have never confused these. The ones who confuse them seem to be the pre-trib writers. For instance Matt 24:31 "gather his elect" - pre-trib writers insist that this means "Jewish elect", whereas post-trib writers say this means "the followers of Christ" as it would appear to in context. So Pre-trib writers end up with a rapture at the end of the Tribulation that is exclusively for Jews only - if there are any Gentile converts to Christ in the Tribulation they miss out.


The Work of the Holy Spirit

19. The Holy Spirit is the Restrainer of evil in the world. He cannot be taken out as prophesied unless the church which is indwelt by the Holy Spirit is taken out.

Where does the Bible say the Holy Spirit is the restrainer? Not in 2 Thess 2 that’s for sure. It is an interpretation, and it is capable of other interpretations. For instance take a look at stjohnrevelation.blogspot.com notes on ch 17.

Chapter 17 discusses the restrainer. And its not the Holy Spirit!
Furthermore there is nowhere in scripture that explicitly teaches that the Holy Spirit will be taken out of the world. Nowhere!


20. The Holy Spirit will be taken out before the "lawless one" is revealed. That lawless one will certainly be revealed in the tribulation. In fact, the tribulation begins with the signing of the covenant between that lawless one and Israel. That act will reveal him.

See above on the Holy Spirit.

Again "the coming of the lawless one being initiated by the signing of a covenant" is an interpretation of Daniel 9, the prophecy of the 70 weeks. It is an interpretation and many interpreters do not agree with it. At this point in time I personally do agree with it, and am working on a study for this blog that will cover that, and opposing interpretations. But to put it forward as a "proof" of a pre-tribulation rapture is not acceptable. It does not, in itself, prove a Pre-trib position.



21. The "falling away" in 2 Thes 2:3 would better be understood in its context as "the departure." This is a reference to the departure of the Holy Spirit as He indwells the church.

See above on the Holy Spirit. How this is a "proof" of the rapture I cannot see!

Why the phrase "falling away" cannot mean "a falling away from (the) faith, i.e. apostasy" I am not sure. This is the meaning Jesus give to it in Matthew 24:10-13:

(i) "Many will be offended".

(ii) "False prophets...will deceive many"

(iii) "The love of many will grow cold" - presumably this means "love for God" - this is the way Dispensational writers and teachers have always understood it in my experience.



22. The work of the Holy Spirit is making the church like Christ where they submit to death and persecution, whereas the OT saints (see many of the Psalms) and the tribulations saints cry out for vengeance (Rev 6:10)

Where does the Bible say, "the work of the Holy Spirit makes us Christians submit to persecution and death". Anyway submission to such on earth is not contrary to a desire for justice to be worked at the eternal Throne of God.

Again the interpretation of Rev 6 implied here depends on how one interprets Revelation. If one assumes there are no church age saints in Rev 4-19 (the Dispensational argument) then of course these are "tribulation saints" who are crying pout for vengeance.

But if these "saints" are "Christian saints" then "Christian saints" are seen to be crying out for "vengeance".

"Vengeance" is not quite the right word to describe their cry, however. What they are crying for is "justice" - a perfectly reasonable request for Christians to make of God, who is the "God of all Justice."

But this point is assuming what the writer of this article is trying to prove. He is offering "50 Proofs of the Pre-tribulation Rapture". What he has offered here is not a proof but is a corollary. It is true if there is a Pre-tribulation rapture - but it is not true if the rapture is post- tribulation.


The Hermeneutical Argument

23. Only the pre-trib view allows for a truly literal interpretation in all of the OT & NT passages regarding the great tribulation.

Not so. For the reasons:

(1) That pretrib scholars – along with everyone else – have to use the same scriptures to talk about the tribulation – and most of those are symbolic to start with. So nobody, not even pretrib scholars give a purely literal interpretation. It is just not possible given the fact that the relevant scriptures are, in many cases, symbolic.

For example: No Pre-tribulation scholar argues that:

(i) The three seven headed beasts in Revelation are literal.

(ii) "Babylon" is literal. (I do, but I have never seen a Pre-trib writer do so!).

Other examples could be given. Pre-trib writers are bound by the realisation that some of Revelation is symbolic - just as the rest of us are. The only question is, "How much?"

(2) Post -trib interpreters do not necessarily deny a literal fulfillment to OT (or NT) prophecies. For instance, I do not. Some may, I don't know. But it is not a fact that only a Pre-trib position allows one to be a literalist. In my experience Pre-trib writers often try to worm out of the clear literal, in context, meaning of passages that do not suit their theory.


24. Only the pre-trib position clearly distinguishes the church and Israel and God's dealing with each.

Not so. In fact I have read books on most of the major schools of interpretation and all clearly distinguish between Israel and the Church and God’s dealings with them. The difference is that some interpreters understand the Church to have superceded Israel in the plan of God, so that the prophecies to Israel are fulfilled in the church in a symbolic sense. There is good scriptural warrant for this position.

Other interpreters feel that those same scriptures have a double fulfillment - literally in Israel and symbolically in the Church. I would be more of this persuasion.

But the real point is that at the end of the age God’s dealings come together for Israel and the Church as the remnant of Israel are saved.


The Necessity of an Interval of Time between the Rapture and the Second Coming.

25. All believers must appear before the Judgment Seat of Christ (2 Cor 5:10). This event is never mentioned in the account of events surrounding the second coming.

All 2 Cor 5:10 indicates is that there must be a time for judgment of Christians.

But it does not indicate when it will happen.

It could happen:

(i) Some time after the day of the Lord, or

(ii) On the day of the Lord AFTER the wrath has fallen, or,

(iii) It could happen in a moment of time as we are raptured (I tend to favour this idea). After all God has no difficulty in dealing with millions of people at once now, why should it be any different at the judgment seat?

But the real problem here is that when Christ comes on the day of the Lord eternity crashes in on time and the saints, the church, are translated into eternity. And time is not the same in eternity as it is on earth. Trying to tie in an eternal event (the judgment seat of Christ) with an earthly time frame of events is actually a waste of time.

However one has only to read all the references to the judgments of the saints in Revelation and other NT writings and it is clear that this judgment happens after/ with the Second Coming on the day of the Lord.

Other references to the judgment of Christians happening after the Second Coming on the day of the Lord have been noted in my paper on the end of the age and rapture in the NT, where I quote repeatedly from Leon Morris's conclusions in his book, "The Biblical doctrine of Judgment." There are actually several places in the NT that put the judgment of Christians and their reward after the Day of the Lord.


26. The "four and twenty elders" in Rev 4:1-5:14 are representative of the church. Therefore it is necessary that the church, undivided, be brought to glory before those events of the tribulation.


See my blog again on Revelation ch 4 where I demonstrate that these 24 elders are not men but angelic beings. So their presence in heaven proves nothing about the church’s whereabouts. I offer there several reasons why this does not suggest, or prove, the rapture has already occurred.

There is no doubt that they "represent" the people of God, but this is probably best understood to the "the people of God of all ages", so the number "24" = 12 + 12, the 12 patriarchs, and the 12 apostles.


27. There is clearly a coming of Christ for his bride before the second coming to earth. Rev 19:7-10.

Rev 19:7ff does not indicate that the rapture has taken place but only announces that it is about to take place. You need to read up on Jewish marriage customs and you would understand what is being said here. It is covered in my blog. The "Announcement" precedes the "coming of the Groom". The actual "coming of the Groom" is Rev 19:11ff.


28. Tribulation saints are not translated at the second coming of Christ but carry on ordinary activities. These specifically include farming, construction, and giving birth. (Is 65:20-25).

Again this depends on where one places the rapture. If it is a post trib rapture then "Tribulation saints" get raptured with the rest of us – after all they are believers in Christ like us. Why should they be treated any different?

Those that carry on normal life after the second coming have always, in my reading, been assumed to be those non Believers who survive Armageddon – of which there will be some. This has always been the understanding of every Dispensational writer I had heard or read, and it is a viewpoint I still agree with.


29. The Judgment of the Gentile nations following the second coming (Mat 25:31-46) indicates that both the saved and the lost are in a natural body which would be impossible if the translation had taken place at the second coming.

I think we are confusing “saved” here with being “invited into the earthly kingdom of Christ”. “Saved” is not used of these in the text. All this text teaches is that those alive after Armageddon will face a judgment. Those that pass muster will be allowed to live on, on earth. Those that fail will be consigned to Hell at that point of time. But “saved” they are not, in the sense of being believers in Christ and so thus raptured previously. No Post trib teacher that I know of suggests that raptured people are at this judgment. Pre-trib writers I have read and heard have always understood that these people being "judged" in Matt 25:31ff were:

(i) Not Christians and not raptured people,

(ii) Not "saved" in the Christian sense as a result of passing the judgment.


30. If the translation took place at the same time as the second coming, there would be no need to separating the sheep from the goats at the subsequent judgment. The act of the translation would be the separation.

This objection fails because of the answer to the above statement. We are not talking about “Christian sheep” here. (In case you think I am trying to avoid the problem remember I grew up believing and studying a pre-trib position. All the pre trib-writers and preachers heard all taught that the “sheep” here were not Christians but basically “good citizens”. So I am only arguing for what Pre-trib writers generally agree on and teach anyway - or at least they used to.)


31. The Judgment of Israel (Ez 20:34-38) occurs after the second coming and requires a regathered Israel. Again, the separation of the saved and the lost would be unnecessary if all the saved had previously been separated by a translation at the second coming.

Again fails because of the above answers.


Differences between the Rapture and the Second Coming.

32. At the Rapture, the church meets Christ in the air. At the second coming, Christ returns to the Mt of Olives.

So Christ is only allowed to do one thing? Who says?

Is it not possible that Christ could begin his descent from heaven and catch up the saints as in 1 Thess 4 and then continue down to the Mt of Olives? I see no reason why not. We know there is a judgement seat of Christ and a marriage supper of the Lamb and Armageddon and the judgment of the sheep and goats and a few other events BUT WHAT WE DO NOT KNOW IS WHEN THESE EVENTS TAKE PLACE, NOR DO WE KNOW WHAT ORDER THEY OCCUR IN. Anyway, as I have already argued, the judgement seat of Christ for Christians could take place in an instant, a fraction of a second while we are being raptured. It doesn't need to take a long time.

33. At the time of the Rapture, the Mt of Olives is unchanged. At the second coming it is divided forming a valley east of Jerusalem.

Where does the Bible say that "at the time of the rapture the Mt of Olives is unchanged". This is an assumption of the writer. If, in fact, the rapture and second coming are the same event then the Mt of Olives is divided at the rapture (or actually, just after it). But this "proof" proves nothing. It is another red herring in a list to put people off the scent.


34. At the time of the rapture, saints are translated. No saints are translated at the time of the second coming.

Been said before in this list but it still has no proof for it. I have listed in my article of the Second Coming several scriptures that say otherwise. The root problem with this writers assumptions is the assumption that second coming is not on the "Day of the Lord". This is because he is assuming the following equation: "day of Lord = Tribulation" - and this equation is false.


35. At the time of the rapture, the world is not judged for sin, but descends deeper into sin. At the second coming, the world is Judged by the King of kings.

Where does the Bible teach that "after the rapture the world descends into deeper sin?" I know Dispensational teachers say so (based on 2 Thess and Rev primarily) but if the rapture is on the day of the Lord then it is simply not so.

This argument thus does not "prove" a Pre-trib rapture but is a corollary from it.


36. The translation of the church is pictured as a deliverance from the day of wrath, whereas the coming of Christ is a deliverance for those who have suffered under severe tribulation.

The first half of this I agree with – but the day of wrath is the Day of the Lord so it doesn’t help a pretrib argument.

But where does it say the coming of Christ is a deliverance for those who have suffered tribulation? Matt 24 maybe? But it doesn’t prove or disprove a pretrib rapture.


37. The rapture is immanent whereas there are specific signs which precede the second coming.

Back to this again. But it all depends on how one defines “immanent”.


38. The translation of living believers is a truth revealed only in the NT. The second coming with the events surrounding it is prominent in both OT and NT.

True. But it proves nothing about which view of the rapture is correct. We all agree with the doctrine of "Progressive Revelation" - that there were things "hidden" from the OT prophets and writers which were revealed to the NT writers. The fact that the doctrine of the rapture ONLY APPEARS IN THE NT (a point which I agree with) only proves or illustrates the Doctrine of Progressive Revelation, it offers no proof one way or the other for a pre-trib or a post - trib rapture.


39. The rapture is only for the saved, while the tribulation and second coming deals with the entire world.

Also true. But it does not prove that the rapture is not one of the events that happens at the time of the second coming. As an argument it proves nothing as to whether the rapture is Pre-trib or post-trib. It is simply a statement of fact.


40. No unfulfilled prophecy stands between the church and the rapture. Many signs must be fulfilled before the second coming of Christ.

Who says, "no unfulfilled prophecy stands between us and the rapture?" Not the Bible – only some teachers who say it on their own authority.
Funny thing – people have been saying that for nearly 200 years – and God keeps on fulfilling prophecies. Surely this means that there were, in God’s plan, prophecies to be fulfilled before the rapture and there may still be! One would think that this claim of there being “no prophecy to be fulfilled” would have died with the reestablishment of Israel as a nation. Honesty would have caused it to die, but the teachers did a bit of slight of hand and changed the statement to “there is no KNOWN prophetic event to be fulfilled before the rapture.” In that way they felt they could continue to preach an immanent rapture even though God was proving them wrong.

The trouble with this slight of hand is this: "no known event" - known by who? If God knows and knew there were events prophecied before the rapture then there were, in actual fact, known events prophecied before the rapture. The fact that some Bible interpreters can't find them doesn't change the facts.



41. No passage in either OT or NT deals with the resurrection of the saints at the second coming nor mentions the translation of living saints at that same time.

Haven’t we seen this above already? I answer it in my article on the Second Coming. It is simply not true.


The Nature of the Tribulation

42. Only the pre-trib view maintains the distinction between the "great tribulation" and the tribulations in general which we all experience.

Nonsense. Post trib views and partial rapture views all clearly distinguish these. This is a fallacious claim.


43. The great tribulation is properly understood in the pre-trib view as a preparation for the restoration of Israel. (Deut 4:29-30. Jer 30:4-11, Dan 9:24-27, Dan 12:1-2)

Why and how? One can say this but what does it mean? I'm glad he said, "In the pre-trib view". But that may not be the "proper" understanding of the passages he refers to. It is a matter of opinion.


44. Not one single passage in the OT which discusses the tribulation, mentions the church.

What a stupid objection! Of course not! That is because the church was "a mystery hidden in God" (Ephesians ch 2&3). The OT writers were not privy to this mystery, so of course they did not mention it. Again we are back to the doctrine of Progressive Revelation. The non- mention of something in the OT (or anywhere else for that matter) does not and cannot prove or disprove a Pre-trib rapture view.


45. Not one single passage in the NT which discusses the tribulation, mentions the church.

Untrue - 2 Thessalonians 2:1 is a clear case in point, "Our gathering together to meet him" - where "our" must surely mean "the church" and "gathering together" must refer to the rapture. Paul then clearly says "this will not happen until these things happen first" and then he goes on to talk about the Tribulation events.


46. In contrast to mid trib or pre-wrath views, the pre-trib view offers an adequate explanation for the beginning of the great tribulation in Rev 6. These others are clearly refuted by the plain teaching of Scripture that the great tribulation begins long before the 7th trumpet of Rev 11.

I’m not sure what you are on about here. But whatever it doesn’t apply to a post trib view.

Both post-trib and mid trib interpretations assume the Great Tribulation starts in Rev 6 - just as Pre-Trib writers do. There is no difference - the explanations given are just the same.

How "the others" (Presumably post-trib and mid-trib views) are "refuted" by the argument you put up here is totally beyond me as they argue exactly the same time chronology (from Daniel) for the tribulation as the Pre-trib view - with one exception, the rapture.



47. There is no proper groundwork provided that the 7th trumpet of Rev is the last trumpet of 1 Cor 15. It is accepted only on the basis of assumption. The pre-trib view maintains the proper distinction between the prophetic trumpets of the church and the trumpets of the tribulation.

Again read my blogs on the seven trumpets and also

christianfoundation.blogspot.com

Where I spend some time showing that the last trumpet of 1 Cor 15 and the 7th trumpet must be the same. The distinction you make here between "the trumpets of Revelation" and the "prophetic trumpets of the church" is a new one on me. Completely novel - and I have been around for over 55 years reading this stuff. Where are the "prophetic trumpets of the church" taught about in scripture so that I can go away and study up on them? Or is the idea an invention of your own (it looks like it is) to try to deflect the obvious connection between the "last trumpet" and then "seventh trumpet". Obviously if these two trumpets are one and the same then the whole pre-trib view (and mid-trib and partial views) dissolves into nothingness and a Post-trib view remains supreme as the only interpretation of scripture possible.


48.The Unity of Daniel's 70th week is maintained by the pre-trib view. By contrast, the mid-trib view destroys the unity and confuses the program for Israel and the church. The post trib view usually denies the clear teaching of the 70th weeks by subverting it into some form or another of allegory.

In my experience the post trib view does not deny the clear teaching or subvert it into an allegory. Some writers may, but the majority hold to a literal 70th week (which, of course, is not a literal week but is a symbol for a period of 7 years). The fact that the 70th "week" of Daniel is already divided into two halves by Daniel 9:27 means that your attack on the Mid-trib position is unjustified. There are significant events at the mid point of the 70th week, Daniel says so. The only question is what else should be put in there also. The mid-trib view suggests the rapture. I disagree with them, but for the same reasons I disagree with the pre-trib view.


49. The gathering of saints after the tribulation is done by angels whereas the gathering of the church is done by "The Lord Himself."

Let’s see some textual proof for this distinction. The calling of us forth by the Lord (1 Thess 4) does not exclude the angels actually doing it.

Matthew 13 may indicate otherwise in the two parables of harvest and fishing. These clearly apply to Christ's disciples and it is the angels who do the work.

Revelation 14:14-20 is a scripture of some relevance here. In this passage there are "two reapings" of the earth - one of the righteous and the other of the unrighteous. This conforms to Leon Morris' teaching on Judgement mentioned in my article on the Second Coming/rapture on this blog site: The righteous and unrighteous have to be reaped together. These two "reapings" are clearly at the end of the Tribulation - the context demands this. The first "reaping" is carried out by a Being sitting on a white cloud who looks like the Son of Man. In other words, Jesus. So the reaping of the righteous (whether the people are Jewish or Gentile is irrelevant to this point) at the end of the Tribulation is carried out by Jesus here in Rev 14. Yet in Matt 24:31 this same reaping is clearly carried out by angels. These are clearly the same reaping - unless there is suddenly going to be two reapings of the righteous on the last day. So it would seem that there is no contradiction between (i) Jesus reaping the righteous and (ii) the angels reaping the righteous - it is the same thing. Exactly the same as being "caught up with a shout and a trumpet call" (1 Thess 4). These are simply metaphors to describe a great future reality. Presumably the trumpet will sound, the archangel will shout, the angels will gather his elect and Jesus will reap his harvest - but I doubt that Jesus will literally have in his hand a golden sickle. That is a symbol.


50. Rev 22:17-20 And the Spirit and the Bride say come. And he that heareth, let him say come ... He who testifieth of these things saith .

Again this is not a proof of anything.


SUMMARY:

So "50 proofs" are reduced to very little at all. The disappointing thing about the article was the real shortage of scriptural material. Some points quoted small lines of scripture - out of their context and often incapable of meaning what was said they meant when put back into context. It was an argument of emotion, and so easily destroyed by straight exegetical work.

It is disappointing that such a pointless set of "proofs" was produced by someone who is a "Doctor" - presumably a Doctor of Theology or he wouldn't be trying to pass himself off as an expert of Scriptural things. I would have expected better exegetical work from a Doctor of Theology. If someone with as little theological background as myself can make mincemeat of it then it wasn't very well presented.

One thing which should be noted is this: The "Doctrine of the Pre-tribulation Rapture" and the "Doctrine of Immanency" are not the same thing.

Dr. Erickson in his title, and throughout the article, assumes that they are one and the same thing. They are not.

"Immanency" is an argument put forward to support a Pre-trib position, but it is not the same thing as the Pre-trib position. A defense of the Pre-trib position could be made with no reference to Immanency at all. In my view such a defense would still be wrong, but I am here simply making the point that the equation: "Immanency = the Pre-trib rapture doctrine" is not necessarily so. It is only so if one has a very specific definition of what "immanency" means. As I have suggested in this post there are other possible, broader definitions of the word that some scholars would be happy to subscribe to without adopting the Pre-trib view of the rapture.

Another very disappointing feature of the article is Dr. Erickson's very plain lack of knowledge about the very school of thought he was writing to support. For example, to make equations such as: "The Tribulation = the Day of the Lord" is completely novel, as far as I can tell, with Dr. Erickson. It is not the belief held by Dispensational (Pre-Trib rapture) writers in general.

Another disappointing feature was his clear lack of research into relevant scriptures. Bold claims were made, for example in point #49, which if he had simply bothered to read all of the scriptures relevant to that subject he would not have fallen into the trap of making wrong claims.

In all, very disappointing. Though it did give me a bit of fun pulling it apart.

John