The Great 3 1/2 yrs Tribulation

[puritan lad]

Let me repeat this so that it will sink in.

Only those who are of (Christian) faith are sons of Abraham.
Only those who are of (Christian) faith are sons of Abraham.
Only those who are of (Christian) faith are sons of Abraham.
Only those who are of (Christian) faith are sons of Abraham.
Only those who are of (Christian) faith are sons of Abraham.
Only those who are of (Christian) faith are sons of Abraham.

Bizarre. What kind of person would write such a thing?

FL

Uh, the Apostle Paul???

[puritan lad]

Now on to 1948 and most important 1967!
Do you not believe that area of the world is going to play a part in the
"End Days"?

No. Not especially...

or at least with what you believe is yet to be fulfilled.
You know there is a movement to rebuild the temple?

I've been hearing that for a long time. However, someone needs to first convince the Palestinians to give up the Dome of the Rock. Good Luck with that one...

Not to mention that there is no third Jewish Temple mentioned in the Bible...

As far as Christian TV I think some of you blanket it all by the bad ones.
What about those who have difficulty getting out of the house?

There are a handful TV Preachers that actually preach the whole council of God. Ther rest are teaching the "Chicken Little" Doctrine, or telling you how to have a Biblical Diet, or performing a circus sideshow under the guise of a "move of a Spirit". And these people need to hire some professional makeup artists instead of the "Rocky Horror Picture Show" leftovers that do their makeup and hair now...

You know there is more to the faith then just having your nose in the Bible and saying it means this and it means that.
Its an application to ones whole life.

True. But you need to know what it means before you can properly apply it.

[bluesman]

bluesman wrote:
Now on to 1948 and most important 1967!
Do you not believe that area of the world is going to play a part in the
"End Days"?

PL answers
No. Not especially...

bluesman wrote:
or at least with what you believe is yet to be fulfilled.
You know there is a movement to rebuild the temple?

PL Answers
I've been hearing that for a long time. However, someone needs to first convince the Palestinians to give up the Dome of the Rock. Good Luck with that one...

Not to mention that there is no third Jewish Temple mentioned in the Bible...

Here comes the scripture:

2 Pet 3:
3: Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4: And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
8: But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Zechariah 12:3
It will happen in that day, that I will make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all the peoples. All who burden themselves with it will be severely wounded, and all the nations of the earth will be gathered together against it.

Zechariah 14
3 Then Yahweh will go out and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

4 His feet will stand in that day on the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in two, from east to west, making a very great valley. Half of the mountain will move toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

9 Yahweh will be King over all the earth. In that day Yahweh will be one, and his name one.

12 This will be the plague with which Yahweh will strike all the peoples who have warred against Jerusalem: their flesh will consume away while they stand on their feet, and their eyes will consume away in their sockets, and their tongue will consume away in their mouth.

Luke 21:24
They will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

God will certainly raise up a Signal for the nations and gather the dispersed ones of Israel, and the scattered ones of Judah He will collect together from the four extremities of the earth.” (Isaiah 11:12)

“The God of Israel says this:...'See, the days are coming when I will restore the fortunes of My people Israel and Judah, and bring them back to possess the Land I gave to their ancestors.'” (Jeremiah chapter 3O:1).

Isaiah 2, "The vision of Isaiah concerning Judah and Jerusalem: In the days to come, the Mountain of the Temple of YHVH shall tower above the mountains ... All the nations will stream to it, people without number ... since the Law will go out from Zion."

"I saw the Glory of the God of Israel approaching ... The earth shone with His Glory ... I saw the Glory of YHVH fill the Temple ... This is the dais of My Throne ... I shall live here amongst the sons of Israel for ever” Ezek. 43:1-7


Michael Thomas

[bluesman]

For those who like to check out interesting websites

http://www.templemount.org/


On the third and fourth temple
http://www.templemount.org/TM34.html


Masjid ul Aqsa is the reconstructed Third Temple.
http://jews-for-allah.org/Why-Believe-i ... hammad.htm

(What to think of that one ? ??)


Michael Thomas

[puritan lad]

Here comes the scripture:

2 Pet 3:
3: Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4: And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
8: But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Zechariah 12:3
It will happen in that day, that I will make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all the peoples. All who burden themselves with it will be severely wounded, and all the nations of the earth will be gathered together against it.

Zechariah 14
3 Then Yahweh will go out and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

4 His feet will stand in that day on the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in two, from east to west, making a very great valley. Half of the mountain will move toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

9 Yahweh will be King over all the earth. In that day Yahweh will be one, and his name one.

12 This will be the plague with which Yahweh will strike all the peoples who have warred against Jerusalem: their flesh will consume away while they stand on their feet, and their eyes will consume away in their sockets, and their tongue will consume away in their mouth.

Luke 21:24
They will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

God will certainly raise up a Signal for the nations and gather the dispersed ones of Israel, and the scattered ones of Judah He will collect together from the four extremities of the earth.” (Isaiah 11:12)

“The God of Israel says this:...'See, the days are coming when I will restore the fortunes of My people Israel and Judah, and bring them back to possess the Land I gave to their ancestors.'” (Jeremiah chapter 3O:1).

Isaiah 2, "The vision of Isaiah concerning Judah and Jerusalem: In the days to come, the Mountain of the Temple of YHVH shall tower above the mountains ... All the nations will stream to it, people without number ... since the Law will go out from Zion."

"I saw the Glory of the God of Israel approaching ... The earth shone with His Glory ... I saw the Glory of YHVH fill the Temple ... This is the dais of My Throne ... I shall live here amongst the sons of Israel for ever” Ezek. 43:1-7

Michael Thomas

OK. So where is the third Jewish Temple?

And while you are at it, you may attempt to answer the following questions that no pre-tribber has even attempted to answer yet.

1.) Where does the 2,000 year gap come from in Daniel's 70 week prophecy? This still has to be answered, and Daniel made no mention of it. 2,000 years is a pretty significant gap to be ignored in a 490 year prophecy.

2.) Why did Jesus tell his apostle's to flee Judea during the “great tribulation” if it was going to be a worldwide calamity taking place 2,000 years into the future?

3.) Why will the days of the “great tribulation” be shortened for the elect's sake, since, according to you, the elect will be raptured away before it even takes place?

4.) Jesus said that the resurrection takes place “on the last day”? Pre-tribbers say that it will take place before a 7-year tribulation period? Who are we to believe?

5.) Jesus said that the “great tribulation” would take place within the apostle's generation. Pre-tribbers say that is has yet to occur. Who are we to believe?

6.) According to Pre-tribbers, the resurrection of the righteous dead takes place before the rapture, while the resurrection of the wicked takes place after the “millennium”. When do the “tribulation saints” and/or “millennium saints” get resurrected? Are there now 3 resurrections?

7.) What kind of literal chain can be used to bind the angel Satan?

8.) To what purposes are the animal sacrifices offered after Christ's millennial reign? According to Revelation 20, the “Gog and Magog” invasion happen after the millennium. However, according to Ezekiel, there will be animal sacrifices after the “Gog and Magog” invasion. What are they for?

[Yeshua's follower]

PL, I wasn't sure, but is what you believe called Preterism? I couldn't remember if that is what it was or not. Also, do you know of any websites that I could go, that would tell me a little bit more about preterism. I don't really know too much about it, so it would be great if you knew a site that would tell me more about it. I am a post-trib person, is that kind of like preterism at all?

Thanks,
Yeshua's follower

[August]

PL's view is called partial preterism, or historical preterism. Just be careful, there is also a view called hyper-preterism.

[puritan lad]

August is correct. When I use the term Preterist, I assume Partial. I hold that the entire Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24) was fulfilled in the First Century, as well as the Book of Revelation (up to Chapter 20). I would recommend

http://www.americanvision.org and look under eschatology. They also have some good books on the subject.

Another site, which is informative as long as you put up your guard, is http://www.preteristarchive.com/. Just be aware that it is a full preterist site (They believe that all Bible prophecy has been fulfilled, including the resurrection, Second Avent, and Final Judgement).

I would also recommend David Chilton's "Days of Vengeance". There is a free online copy here, as well as several other good books.

[Yeshua's follower]

I will take a look at the sites given.
Thanks August and PL.

[Jac3510]

I'll take care of these PL. None of them are hard. Please note, especially, the last pargraph of this reply. As for your little questionaire . . .

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

• 1. Where is the third Jewish Temple?

See especially Ez. 40:2-46:24. Much of this material is devoted to the temple's structure, priesthood, ritual, ministry, etc. James M. Gray, in the Christian Worker's Commentary, notes five understandings of this passage. Some think, a) this describes the temple at Jerusalem prior to the Babylonian captivity, and are designed to preserve a memorial of it, b) these chapters describe the temple in Jerusalem after the return from the seventy years in Babyon, c) this describes the ideal temple which the Jews shoud have built after the seventy years' return, and which they never realized, d) this temple in Ezekiel symbolizes the spiritual blessings of the church in the present age, e) this is a prediction of the temple that shall be built in the millennial age. (pp. 265-66)

Included in the commentary are solid objections to the first four views. However, the point is that we have a biblical basis for belief in a third Jewish temple. Additionally, we have the the direct statement in Dan. 9:27, "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." (NIV) Pre-tribbers understand "he" as the Antichrist, corresponding to the little horn (Dan. 7:8), typologically seen in Antioch Epiphanes. If he is to "put an end to sacrifices", then there must be a Temple in which the sacrifices can take place. There are, of course, those who believe taht "he" refers to Christ, but that makes "until the end that is decreed is poured out on him" to make little sense. The antecedant for each of the three occurances of "he" in this passage is "the prince who is to come." (9:26)

For more, see Pentecost, Things to Come, pp. 512-31, Waterhouse, Not By Bread Alone, pp. 527-29, Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom, 309-15.

• 2. Where does the 2,000 year gap come from in Daniel's 70 week prophecy? This still has to be answered, and Daniel made no mention of it. 2,000 years is a pretty significant gap to be ignored in a 490 year prophecy.

There has been a plethora of literature devoted to this question. A common answer lies in prophetic perspective, in which two events largely separated by chronological time are next to each other in Scripture. A primary example is Zech. 9:9-17. There, we have the prophecy of Jesus coming into Jerusalem riding a colt (9:9), but then in verses 10-14 we have a description of God's restoration of Israel, followed by "Then the LORD will appear over them" (9:14, NIV). Needless to say, we are still waiting for much of this prophecy to be fulfilled.

Hagee devotes a good section of the second chapter of his book From Daniel to Doomsday answering this question. In addition to the previously mentioned verse, he also cites Is. 9:6-7a, the gap in the schedule of Israel's divinely instituted feasts, and Hos. 6:3. He also points out that without the Church-age, there could be no "time of the Gentiles." (pp. 40-44)

For more, see Pentecost, 172, 256-249, Ironside, The Great Parenthesis, 131, Walvoord, 227-30.

• 3. Why did Jesus tell his apostle's to flee Judea during the “great tribulation” if it was going to be a worldwide calamity taking place 2,000 years into the future?

With reference to Matthew 24:15-21, it is not difficult to see that Christ is answering the disciples' question in verse 3, "Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?" I would sincerely hope that you are not putting the entire weight of your theology on the word "you." As Glasscock rightly states, "The "you" directly referred to the disciples (vv. 1, 3) but owing to the eschatalogical context should be understood figuratively as the people of Israel." (Glasscock, Matthew, 468). Additionally, if you insist this is fully fulfilled, you have to answer the question as to why it would be so bad for the flight to have to happen on Sabbath. Christ is the Lord of the Sabbath, and Christians are not required to keep it in the OT sense. The reality is that Jesus is talking about the Jews alive during the Tribulation, at the 3 1/2 year mark when the Antichrist puts a stop to temple sacrifices, and they are forced to flee.

For more, see Walvoord, 261-62, Pentecost, 275-313, Glasscock, 468-472.

• 4. Why will the days of the “great tribulation” be shortened for the elect's sake, since, according to you, the elect will be raptured away before it even takes place?

The elect in this passage refers to the Israelites, as it also does in 24:31. To quote from Glasscock again:

The elect (tous eklektous) would first refer to the nation, which had been thus designated for centures (Isa. 45:4), and then to all who believe in Jesus (Eph. 1:4). In this context, it is most likely used regarding the nation. Daniel identifies this time as "decreed for you people and your holy city," indicating that ISrael, not the church of mankind in general, will be the center of the Tribulation suffering. Thus, if God had not limited the number of days "for the sake of" (dia with the accusative) the elect, then all flesh would perish from the horrors being poured out on the world."

For more, see Hodges, Jesus God's Prophet: The Teaching About the Coming Surprise. (Booklet consisting of an exegesis of the Olivet Discourse, available for $4.95 here)

• 5. Jesus said that the resurrection takes place “on the last day”? Pre-tribbers say that it will take place before a 7-year tribulation period? Who are we to believe?

The phrase "last day" is an eschatological term that includes the entire spectrum of events from the rapture to the establishment of the Millennial Kingdom. Other such terms are "The Lord's Day", "The Day", "That Day", etc.

For more, see Pentecost, 229-31, Kittel, "hemera" in The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. II, pp. 943-953.

• 6. Jesus said that the “great tribulation” would take place within the apostle's generation. Pre-tribbers say that is has yet to occur. Who are we to believe?

He did not say the great tribulation would take place within the apostles generation. I have already explained this text thoroughly here. The "generation" refers to a type of people - the unbelieving. For a complete defense, see “'This Generation' in Matthew 24:34: A Literary Critical Perspective” by Neil D. Nelson in the September '96 edition of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, p. 369-385.

As an aside, should I bring up the old argument of you ignoring previous responses/arguments from me? How many times have we noted that this does seem to be your pattern . . .

• 7. According to Pre-tribbers, the resurrection of the righteous dead takes place before the rapture, while the resurrection of the wicked takes place after the “millennium”. When do the “tribulation saints” and/or “millennium saints” get resurrected? Are there now 3 resurrections?

There are two resurrections: the resurrection of the righteous and the resurrection of the wicked. The former is rather like a parade, beginning with Christ 2,000 years ago and ending at the GWT Judgment. The latter is a single event, beginning and ending at the GWT Judgment. I don't understand why, but the majority of pre-tribbers hold to the idea that the only people at the GWT will be unbelievers . . . the text does not say that. There may well be believers there . . . those who died during the Millennial Reign as believers.

For a complete discussion/overview of the program of the resurrections, see Ryrie, Basic Theology, 602-09, Walvoord, 278-84, Pentecost, 395-407, Waterhouse, 462-65.

• 8. What kind of literal chain can be used to bind the angel Satan?

This is taken from Revelation 20:1-4, “1And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. 2He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. 3He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.”(NIV)

Do you really think the “literal method” would require this to be a chain made of iron, bronze, or steel? Do you also think this would require us to believe that there is an actual key fashioned from some particular metal, and that there is a door fashioned from a good hard wood . . . perhaps a good fireproof exterior door? John is using human terminology to explain what is going on. The point is that Satan is bound and shackled, rendering him powerless, and then he is cast into an area known as the Abyss, neither heaven nor hell, and this cell is closed off during the millennial reign. I would highly suggest you read C. S. Lewis' short essay, “Transposition,” found in The Weight of Glory.

Anyway, Paul Lee Tan offers the following brief exegesis of Rev. 20:1-3:

Once the literality of Revelation 20 is accepted, difficulties begin to be resolved. Consider the chain over which the non-literal interpreters habitually wring their hands, saying, “I suppose that no one would insist that Satan is to be bound with a literal chain of iron or some other metal, for Satan is a spirit, and material chains could not hold him captive for a moment.” The text does not say that the chain that will bind Satan is to be a chain of iron or steel or some other metal. The chain of Revelation 20 is a spirit-chain of such character and consistency as would fetter and hold spirit-beings (cf. Jude 6). Spirit-beings, such as Satan himself, are real beings, and only real chains can bind real beings. It is logical to see a spirit-being (angel) bind another spirit-being (Satan). That which cannot bind anyone are the figures, tropes, and shadows let out by interpreters who themselves are hopelessly entangled in them.

Taken from The Interpretation of Prophecy, pp.134-35. And, before you comment on straw man put forward regarding those a/post-mill's who “wring their hands” . . . the quote is taken from Floyd E. Hamilton's book The Basis of Millennial Faith, 129-30.

For more, see Walvoord, pp. 291-95. A good explanation of the passage in general is offered, as well as a solid explanation and critique of Warfield's position. A cross reference is provided there that I have not yet read to William Masselink, Why a Thousand Years?, p. 202.

• 9. To what purposes are the animal sacrifices offered after Christ's millennial reign? According to Revelation 20, the “Gog and Magog” invasion happen after the millennium. However, according to Ezekiel, there will be animal sacrifices after the “Gog and Magog” invasion. What are they for?

This argument is one of the oldest arguments against a consistently literal hermeneutic, and should be placed in the same category as the “problem of evil,” as used by atheists against Christians. Both arguments two features in common: 1. they have been repeatedly refuted by dozens of authors, and yet the argument continues to be employed as if it were a death-blow to its opposition., 2. each argument, when examined in their totality, lend credibility not to their proponents, but actually to their opponents. As the problem of evil is a great proof for God's existence, the existence of Temple sacrifices in the millennium is a great proof for the literal method of interpreting prophecy.

For those who are not familiar, passages such as Ezekiel 42:18-46:24; Zech. 14:16; Isa. 56.6-8; 66:21; Jer. 33:15-18; and Eze. 20:40-41 all teach the restoration of a temple priesthood, and the re-establishment of bloody sacrifices. The primary question is “What is the purpose of these sacrifices?” Pentecost offers this conclusion on p. 527:

It is concluded, then, that these sacrifices are not expiatory, for no sacrifice ever accomplished the complete removal of sin, but are memorials of the perfect sacrifice of the One typified by all sacrifice, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.

He also quotes from Gaebelein and later Adolph Saphir as follows:

While the sacrifices Israel brought once had a prospective meaning, the sacrifices brought in the millennial temple have a retrospective meaning. When during this age God's people worship in the appointed way at His table, with the bread and wine as the memorial of His love, it is retrospect. We look back to the Cross. We show forth His death. It is “till He comes.” Then this memorial feast ends forever. Never again will the Lord's Supper be kept after the Saints of God have left the earth to be with the Lord in glory. The resumed sacrifices will be the memorial of the Cross and the whole wonderful story of the redemption for Israel and the nations of the earth, during the kingdom reign of Christ. And what a memorial it will be! What a meaning those sacrifices will have! They will bring to a living remembrance everything of the past. The retrospect will produce the greatest scene of worship, of praise and adoration this earth as ever seen. All the Cross meant and the Cross has accomplished will be recalled and a mighty “Hallelujah Chorus” will fill the earth and the heavens. The sacrifices will constantly remind the people of the earth of Him who died for Israel, who paid the redemption price for all creation and whose glory now covers the earth as the waters covers the deep.

Concerning the comparison between the Lord's Supper and the millennial sacrifices . . .

. . . may we not suppose that what was typical before the first coming of Christ, pointing to the great salvation which was to come, may in the kingdom be commemorative of the redemption accomplished?
In the Lord's Supper we commemorate Christ's death; we altogether repudiate the Popish doctrine of a repetition of the offering of Christ; we do not believe in any such renewal of the sacrifice, but we gratefully obey the command of Christ to commemorate His death in such a way that both an external memorial is presented to the world, and an outward and visible sign and seal given the believing partaker. May not a similar plan succeed the Lord's Supper, which we know shall cease at Christ's coming? It is also possible that both the glorified saints in heaven and the nations on the earth will contemplate during the millennium the full and minute harmony between type and reality. Even the Church has yet only a superficial knowledge of the treasures of wisdom in the Levitical institutions and its symbols.

Both quotes taken from Pentecost, pp-525-26.

So, in general, pre-millennialists are in agreement that the sacrifices in the millennial kingdom commemorative, non-expiatory sacrifices, that will be used to remind a world being reigned by a physical Jesus Christ of what He did, why He is in the position that He is, and why He deserves worship and praise.

As far as the Gog and Magog invasions go, the short answer is that you are speaking of two different events. Immediately after the Rapture, and prior to the rise of the Antichrist, there is the first “Gog and Magog” invasion. (We cannot be dogmatic that this first invasion will be before the rapture, however, given the doctrine of immanence, the burden of proof rests strongly on those who believe it is pre-rapture.) This particular invasion is prophesied about in Ezekiel 38. The modern geographical sites of “Meshech, and Tubal” (38:2) is the area today occupied by Turkey, Iran, and the southern provinces of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Some would identify “Rosh” with Russia, based on 1) the linguistic similarities between Rosh and Russia, Meshech and Moscow, and Tubal and Tobolsk, and 2) the unstable nature of this highly militarized country clearly depicted in Ez. 38. I don't see, personally, that we should be so specific about Russia, and the linguistic argument is just silly. Regardless, there will be a collaboration between Gog and Persia, Ethiopia, Libya, Gomer, and Togarmah (Ez. 38:5-6). Geographically, we can identify Persia with Iran, Ethiopia and Libya to the Arabian Peninsula, and Gomer and Togarmah with Turkey. This pan-Islamic collation will attack Israel and be destroyed.

The second “Gog and Magog” invasion is described in Rev. 20:7-9. Concerning these people, J. Vernon McGee believed that “the rebellion of the godless forces from the north will have made such an impression on mankind that after one thousand years, the last rebellion of man bears the same level —Gog and Magog.” Regardless, this cannot be the same as Ezekiel's war, because here “Gog and Magog” are from the “four corners of the earth.” That is, there is no geographical limitation. All those in rebellion to Jesus at the end of the Millennium will wage war against him at the bidding of the released Satan. Therefore, there is no contradiction as suggested.

For more, see Pentecost's overview of the Gog-Magog wars, pp.342-346. For an in depth discussion of why the temple proves to be a strong case in favor of a literal hermeneutic, see Pentecost, chapter 30: Worship in the Millennium. Walvoord and Waterhouse both have discussions on this matter.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Now, PL, with that out of the way . . . it is immediately obvious that the answers above are interpretive, and they are interpreted through a premillennial framework. More specifically, they are interpreted using the literal method of exegesis. You certainly don't have to believe it. I don't expect you will agree with any of this. However, you CANNOT say that no literalist has ever tried to answer these “objections.” Besides my own answers, I've provided references to Ryrie, Pentecost, Walvoord, Tan, Hagee, Glasscock, Waterhouse, etc. I could have listed dozens more. There is no lack of literature on this subject. I have absolutely no problem you believing, or even defending, preterism. What I do have a problem with is your intentional misrepresentation of premillennial dispensationalism. Further, I relied heavily on Pentecost's book precisely because you told me that you have already read it. Therefore, I am forced to conclude that you are aware of all of these answers! It is therefore extremely dishonest to pose these questions as if there are no solutions.

For the moderators, I would respectfully request that you monitor this type of behavior. The purpose of the board is to encourage and edify Christians so that they may learn more about their faith. PL's intentional misrepresentation of a very, very commonly held position goes directly against that grain. Honest debate is acceptable and desirable. This is not honest.

God bless

[puritan lad]

In response to #1,

I've already shown that Daniel's 70 week prophecy has been completely fulfilled, unless Daniel was a false prophet.

And there is no evidence that Ezekiel's Temple is future (from the present day).

In response to #2,

A primary example is Zech. 9:9-17. There, we have the prophecy of Jesus coming into Jerusalem riding a colt (9:9), but then in verses 10-14 we have a description of God's restoration of Israel, followed by "Then the LORD will appear over them" (9:14, NIV). Needless to say, we are still waiting for much of this prophecy to be fulfilled.

That's another huge assumption. I need proof that “we are still waiting for much of this prophecy to be fulfilled”.

As for Mr. Hagee, he needs to explain why the assassination of Ytzhak Rabin and the Y2K Crisis failed to bring about the antichrist.

In response to #3,

Jesus told His apostle's “you”, and there is no basis for “eschatalogical context should be understood figuratively as the people of Israel”, at least in any future sense. And I'm still waiting for the Scripture that shows “the Antichrist puts a stop to temple sacrifices”. I just can't seem to locate this in my Bible.

In response to #4

The elect in this passage refers to the Israelites.

I would tend to agree, 1936 years ago.

In response to #5,

The phrase "last day" is an eschatological term that includes the entire spectrum of events from the rapture to the establishment of the Millennial Kingdom. Other such terms are "The Lord's Day", "The Day", "That Day", etc.

Scripture please?

In response to #6,

The "generation" refers to a type of people - the unbelieving.

We have rehashed this several times. “a genea” means “this generation”, and is ALWAYS used in the normal sense of the word. It NEVER means anything else, despite the best efforts of Dispensationalists to redefine the word. (Even honest Dispensationalists like Gleason Archer would agree — Archer counts on an unlikely translation error from Aramaic to Greek, genea as a synonym for genos).

In response to #7.

There are two resurrections: the resurrection of the righteous and the resurrection of the wicked. The former is rather like a parade, beginning with Christ 2,000 years ago and ending at the GWT Judgment. The latter is a single event, beginning and ending at the GWT Judgment. I don't understand why, but the majority of pre-tribbers hold to the idea that the only people at the GWT will be unbelievers . . . the text does not say that. There may well be believers there . . . those who died during the Millennial Reign as believers.

How do you square that with John 5:28-29?
“Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth — those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation."

I guess an hour now lasts 1,007 years. I would also be tempted to use Daniel 12:2, but the meaning of that one itself is debatable. The Bible consistently speaks of one resurrection, not two. The “First Resurrection” in Revelation is symbolic of Salvation, as can easily be shown.

In response to #8, I would agree, except I believe that Satan was defeated at Calvary. The Christian's victory over the Devil is permanent. Luke 10:18-19

In Response to #9,

Absolutely sloppy and ridiculous, (particularly the Gog and Magog stuff) as David Chilton points out.

“In describing the eschatalogical war, St. John uses the vivid "apocalyptic" imagery of Ezekiel 38-39, which prophetically depicts the Maccabees' defeat of the Syrians in the second century B.C.: The ungodly forces are called Gog and Magog. According to some popular premillennial writers, this expression refers to Russia, and foretells a war between the Soviets and Israel during a future "Tribulation." Even apart from the fact that this interpretation is based on a radically inaccurate reading of Matthew 24 and the other "Great Tribulation" passages, it is beset with numerous internal inconsistencies. First, premillennialists tend to speak of this coming war with the Soviet Union as synonymous with the "Battle of Armageddon" (Rev. 16:16). Yet, on premillennialist assumptions, the Battle of Armageddon takes place before the Millennium begins — more than 1,000 years before St. John's "Gog and Magog" finally appear! Thus, premillennial prophecy buffs are treated to prolonged discussions of present Soviet military might and their supposed preparations for assuming the role of "Gog and Magog." At the same time, there is virtually a complete neglect of what the Book of Revelation actually says about the war with Gog and Magog; apparently, the specific facts of Biblical revelation occasionally get in the way of "prophetic truth."

Second, those who interpret the war of "Gog and Magog" as an end-time war involving the Soviet Union usually pride themselves on being "literalists." Yet we should take note of what a strictly literal interpretation of Ezekiel 38-39 requires:

1. Gog's reason for invading Israel is to plunder her silver and gold, and to take away her cattle (Ezekiel 38:11-13); contrary to much premillennialist exposition, nothing is said about expropriating Israel's oil or extracting minerals from the Dead Sea.

2. All of Gog's soldiers are on horseback (Ezekiel 38:15); there are no soldiers in trucks, jeeps, tanks, helicopters, or jets.

3. All of Gog's soldiers are carrying swords, wooden shields, and helmets (Ezekiel 38:4-5); their other weapons are wooden bows and arrows, clubs, and spears (Ezekiel 39:3, 9).

4. Instead of using firewood (apparently no one even considers using gas, electricity, or solar power), the victorious Israelites will burn Gog's wooden weapons for fuel for seven years (Ezekiel 39:9-10).

Third, the expression Gog and Magog does not, and never did, refer to Russia. That has been entirely made up from whole cloth, and simply repeated so many times that many have assumed it to be true. Ostensible reasons for this interpretation are based on a peculiar reading of Ezekiel 38:3, which speaks of "Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal." The word chief is, in the Hebrew, rosh; some have therefore translated the text as "Gog, the prince of Rosh." Rosh sounds something like Russia; therefore Gog is the prince (or premier) of Russia. Unfortunately for this ingenious interpretation, rosh simply means head, and is used over 600 times in the Old Testament — never meaning "Russia."

"Those who hold that "Gog" (a name supposedly derived from Soviet Georgia, since they both start with a "G"!) is the Soviet Premier generally make the further claim that "Meshech" is really Moscow, "Tubal" is Tobolsk, and "Gomer" (of Ezek. 38:6) is Germany. In his very helpful examination of this issue, Ralph Woodrow comments: "This is doubtful. 'Moscow' comes from the Muscovites and is a Finnish name. Moscow was first mentioned in ancient documents in 1147 A.D., when it was a small village. Some think Tubal means Tobolsk, but this is only a similarity in sound. Tobolsk was founded in 1587 A.D. Some think Gomer [Ezek. 38:6] means Germany. It is true the words 'Gomer' and 'Germany' both begin with a 'G.' So does guesswork."

Woodrow goes on to give reasons why the war of "Gog and Magog" spoken of in Revelation cannot be identical to that prophesied in Ezekiel:

1. In Ezekiel, Gog is a prince. In Revelation, Gog is a nation.

2. In Ezekiel, Gog is spoken of as coming against Israel with people from various countries around Israel; in Revelation, Gog and Magog are pictured as nations in the four quarters of the earth, in number as the sands of the sea.

3. In Ezekiel, Gog and his troops come against Israel, a people who have returned from captivity and are dwelling without walls; in Revelation, Gog and Magog go up on the breadth of the earth and compass the city of the saints.

4. In Ezekiel the enemy is Gog of the land of Magog; in Revelation Gog and Magog.

5. In Ezekiel, Gog's troops are defeated in Israel and the people burn the remaining weapons for seven years; in Revelation, Gog and Magog are destroyed by fire from God out of heaven. . . . Wooden weapons would be destroyed then and there.

It is not uncommon for the imagery of Revelation to be based on Old Testament subjects or places. The "Jezebel" of Revelation is not the same woman as in Kings. The "Sodom" in Revelation is not the same Sodom as in Genesis. The "Babylon" in Revelation is not the Babylon of Daniel. The "New Jerusalem" in Revelation cannot mean the old Jerusalem. But, in each instance, the former serves as a type. The woman Jezebel had already died, the cities of Sodom and Babylon had already been overthrown, and (in our opinion) the battle of Ezekiel 38 and 39 (if a literal battle) had already met its fulfillment within an Old Testament setting."

[Jac3510]

EDIT

The tone of the previous post was too strong. I will say that it was not "reactive" in that I wrote in a flash of anger, but my choice in the way to handle the situation was a wrong one.

PL: I have no interest in debating these issues with you. If you look to my signature, you will see the phrase "Clarity, not concensus." We've talked enough that I know you will not change your views no matter what I say. However, list of questions you offered could have left the reader that has not deeply studied these issues with the impression that there are not, nor have the ever been, answers to them. These are not "trump card" arguments, as I attempted to show in my reply.
I have provided the necessary answers. People are intelligent enough to decide which of our arguments are right. In the meantime, I simply ask you to refrain from presenting straw men.

I also ask you to start taking these discussions more seriously. I have learned a great deal in our debates, but it is only due to the research I went through to provide adequate replies. Discussion works better and is more productive if you interact with opponent's logic rather than simply asserting your own theological position.

By way of example, a much, much better approach (I believe) in this discussion would have been if you listed the five major interpretations of Ezekiel's Temple prophecy, and then explain why the idea that this is a genuine prophecy of a future temple is wrong. However, you make the claim "There is no Scriptural support." That is simply not true. You make the claim "no pretribber has ever tried to answer these," and yet you and I have discussed the "generation" question at length. And I'm pretty sure we have discussed the 2000 year gap issue as well . . .

Anyway, just watch your tone, and I will be more careful to watch mine. I still believe every word from the original entry here, but it has been well pointed out to me that it was the wrong approach. I do pray for you, and consider the warning passages I previously posted . . . one of us are subject to them.

God bless

[puritan lad]

I do need to clarify one statement.

When I said "no pre-tribber has even attempted to answer yet", I was referring to the posters on these boards. However, I applaud your attempt (citing Pentecost and others), as flawed as they may be.

As for my statement "There is no Scripture to back up a Third Jewish Temple", I'll stand by that.

God Bless.

PL

[bluesman]

Okay let me try this a different way .
Lets see if maybe we can find some common ground.

What to you believe is yet to happen? What prophesy in the bible is yet
to occur?

Has God totally forgotten about "his people" the Israel/Jewish people, the 12 tribes of Israel?

Are we still waiting for the second coming of Christ as in Jesus coming to earth in human form?

Why would an event as big as Israel becoming a nation in 1948 not be in Bible prophesy?

Do you not believe in the concept that Bible prophesy can have a double fulfillment? The first time not being a total fulfillment in all requirements?

http://www.daveandangel.com/CRN/Iraq_Ir ... hecy.shtml

The Lord Jesus Christ teaches that the "literalist" is right. Notice how Jesus clearly teaches the principle of "double-fulfillment":

Matthew 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?

11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.

12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him
whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

John the Baptist came in the "spirit" of Elijah. Jesus plainly speaks of John as a fulfillment of the Old Testament Elijah prophecy. However, right in the same context, Jesus states that "Elijah truly shall
first come". This cannot refer to John the Baptist since John is said to be already martyred (vs.12). Therefore, Christ has demonstrated the principle of "double fulfillment". Many prophecies contain a partial fulfillment not too far removed in time from the prophet who predicts them; nevertheless all
prophecies will be fulfilled absolutely in every detail in the final future.

Michael
Thomas

I will not be absolutely dogmatic in regard to some parts of Bible prophecy. The more I study, the more I learn and grow. However, my heart grieves for those who are caught in a narrow box, teaching nothing but the tradition of men.

[puritan lad]

Okay let me try this a different way .
Lets see if maybe we can find some common ground.

What to you believe is yet to happen? What prophesy in the bible is yet to occur?

I believe that the Second Advent, the Resurrection (only one), and the Final Judgement are all future. I do not believe them to be imminent. Too much has yet to happen. I believe in the future conversion of the Jewish people, which will result in a greater blessing for the Gentile. (Romans 11:24-26). I believe that the Great Commission will be a success, not a failure (Psalm 22:27-28, Hab. 2:14)

Has God totally forgotten about "his people" the Israel/Jewish people, the 12 tribes of Israel?

This question is loaded, although you may not have meant it. The whole substance of my posts in this thread is to show that the Church are "His People". (This was true in the OT as well). Again, they will be converted to Christianity, but until they do, they are not "His People".

Are we still waiting for the second coming of Christ as in Jesus coming to earth in human form?

Absolutely, although as I stated earlier, I do not beleive this to be an imminent event. (Those who push this idea continually make fools out of themselves). Since you watch a lot of Christian TV, I would encourage you to make a note of some of the predictions that our "prophecy experts" make. Then wait to see how many of them come true.

Why would an event as big as Israel becoming a nation in 1948 not be in Bible prophesy?

I guess that depends on what you mean by a "big" event. From a political standpoint among Judaists, it was a huge event. But there have been bigger events, such as the discovery of America, etc. These aren't mentioned in the Bible either.

Do you not believe in the concept that Bible prophesy can have a double fulfillment? The first time not being a total fulfillment in all requirements?

This is a common question as some events have seen double fulfillment, ie. The Abomination of Desolation (First under Antiochus Epiphanes, then under Titus). However, we should not jump to the conclusion that first Century Prophecies have to be fulfilled again. How many "great tribulations" are there in Scripture? How many "holy cities...trampled underfoot by Gentiles"? Jesus held the First Century Judaists responsible for "all the righteous blood shed upon the earth", and they would "fill of the measure" of His wrath. All those things were to come upon that generation. Jesus never hinted that there would have to be a repeat of this, at least before the Second Advent (and the Bible teaches a Second Coming, not a third as required by those who hold to a pre-tribulation rapture.)

Of course, I do see 70 AD as a picture of the Final Judgment, but no reason to believe in a future tribulation period or Antichrist.

http://www.daveandangel.com/CRN/Iraq_Ir ... hecy.shtml

The Lord Jesus Christ teaches that the "literalist" is right. Notice how Jesus clearly teaches the principle of "double-fulfillment":

Matthew 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?

11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.

12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him
whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

John the Baptist came in the "spirit" of Elijah. Jesus plainly speaks of John as a fulfillment of the Old Testament Elijah prophecy. However, right in the same context, Jesus states that "Elijah truly shall
first come". This cannot refer to John the Baptist since John is said to be already martyred (vs.12). Therefore, Christ has demonstrated the principle of "double fulfillment". Many prophecies contain a partial fulfillment not too far removed in time from the prophet who predicts them; nevertheless all prophecies will be fulfilled absolutely in every detail in the final future.

I would disagree with a future coming of Elijah. Jesus said, "But I say unto you, That Elias is come already". That referred to John the Baptist. In reality, John was the Second Elijah. There in no reason to believe in a third.

I will not be absolutely dogmatic in regard to some parts of Bible prophecy. The more I study, the more I learn and grow. However, my heart grieves for those who are caught in a narrow box, teaching nothing but the tradition of men.

I'm glad to hear this. I would encourage you to study "the other side" of Bible Prophecy, postmillennial preterism. I think you'll find it makes more sense then the popular version. Here is some stuff to browse over...

The Beast of Revelation Identified

A short introduction to Preterism

The Meaning of the "Millennium"

That'll give you a lot to chew on for a little while. Also check out some free books here, especially the works of Gentry and Chilton.

God Bless,

PL