The Rapture

[Paidion]

The reason I asked the question is that sometimes when having discussions like this there is some disagreement (especially with dispensationalists) about when the resurrection happens in relation to the rapture.

Really! I wasn't aware of that. I am not a dispensationalist, but I always thought their disagreements were the timing of the rapture in relation to the tribulation period. Most of them seem to be "pre-tribbers" while others are "mid-tribbers". As far as I know, they all think the first resurrection occurs when Jesus returns, whether "pre" or "mid". Post-tribbers such as myself are usually not dispensationalists.

Please tell me about "five or six" different resurrections. I've never heard of them.

Since the second resurrection of Rev. 20:5a is associated with a textual variant...

Yes, the Westcott-Hort edition, Tischendorf, and the Byzantine majority text has οὐκ ἐζησαν (did not live) while Textus Receptus has οὐκ ἀνεζησαν (did not live again).
I can understand how amillenialists could interpret the former as there being only a single, final resurrection, if the "rest of the dead" are thought to be annihilated until they are raised in "the general resurrection".
But what do they do with verse 6:

Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

Doesn't the phrase "first resurrection" imply that there is at least one other resurrection to follow?

Jesus said:

But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you; for you shall be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous." (Luke 14:13,14)

If there is only one resurrection, why wouldn't Jesus have said, "...you shall be repaid at the resurrection"? Why specify "the resurrection of the righteous" if there is not also a separated "the resurrection of the unrighteous"?

[Paidion]

Jesus returns in the clouds for his people, destroys the earth, and ushers in eternity. At this point everyone’s eternal fate is sealed, either you are with God in heaven or dead upon the earth. The righteous: those resurrected, and those caught up, will reign with Christ a thousand years. The living wicked will be slain by the very presence of Christ at the second coming. No one will have an opportunity to repent after the second coming of Christ because everyone will be in one or two places: with Christ in heaven or dead upon the earth. If you wait until after the return of Christ to repent, you would have waited to late. Revelation 22:11, 12 make it clear that the case of every person is closed before Jesus returns.

Focusedman, how old are you?

[dwilkins]

Dispensationalists have the unenviable task of trying to fit the resurrections of the Christians of the church age, the Israelites of the age of Israel and the Great Tribulation, the Tribulation Saints (who are never described as such in scripture, but must exist if all Christians are raptured before the Great Tribulation), the unbelieving dead for judgment at the 2nd Coming, the regular humans who die during the Millennium as believers and unbelievers for judgment at the Great White Throne, and the two witneeses. I have seen in their writings (I, unfortunately, don't have references handy right now), and radio sermons (generally various Baptists and Calvary Chapel) that them describe the above as either various raptures or various resurrections. Since scripture only refers to one climatic resurrection outside of Rev. 20:5a, where a second one is proposed, I have always thought that these events were kind of tough to define.

The point on the implied second resurrection in Rev. 20:5a (it's not labelled as such in the passage) is that in the passage,

Revelation 20:5 (ESV)
5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection.

the first sentence is not found in some earlier texts. If, as the theory goes, the first sentence was an interpretive marginal note that got sucked into the text, then there is actually only one resurrection in scripture (which would bring Revelation 20 in line with all other Christian and Jewish writing before the writing of Revelation).

Doug

[robbyyoung]

Bold & Underline emphasis are mine.

I had read some of this Preterist rapture thinking before, but I have to admit I do not recall hearing this argument put this way. I have to congratulate you on the argument, because I like the question. It is really interesting because it is almost the reverse of my reason for 'not' believing in the 70ad application of the prophecies. I hadn’t thought of what happened to Timothy or Titus much; I don’t know where did they go? I presumed they went out into the world to make disciples, instead of sitting around posting on the internet (like me). Is it your belief the whole Church was taken at that time?

Hi JR, Timothy & Titus are just two of the over 80 other Believers mentioned by the NT Writers who apparently "vanished" from the scene after 70AD. Know one knows definitively what happened to the multitude of 1st Century Believers, where is their testimony, legacy, ANYTHING!?

Therefore, what Paul taught, concerning "The Rapture", if you will, that was promise to the Thessalonians, in their lifetime did indeed happen - wouldn't this 70 years of silence IMMEDIATELY following the destruction of the Old Covenant System NOT CONTRADICT what is to be expected? SILENCE. Therefore, did the Thessalonians and every other True Believer or The Church, indeed - In a Blink of an Eye, transition into glory!?

And all thus all they had left were nominal believers and their writings?

Remember, "The Land" was filled with deception and false prophets and teachers, the same people and dangers Yeshua warned His Disciples about in "The Discourse" to take note of. Many Believers "fell away", Jews and Gentile alike. The warnings where real and serious to stay the course or else salvation and even possibly "The Rapture" would be lost. This is echoed throughout the 40 year transition period, 30-70AD. Have you ever noticed the NT Writers sense of urgency regarding these things when writing to their audience? Furthermore, a tremendous amount of Believers were Killed during this time, there probably wasn't that many left to partake in "The Rapture" experience to begin with.

On another note, I don’t believe the ‘Apostles’ office was meant to grow beyond the 12 (13) Apostles.
I don’t believe in the 70ad application, because from my grazing through the beginnings of Church history, I never came across much of anything from any writers that would say: ‘Look, Christs prophecy of His return, and the end of the age was fulfilled! Look it’s the same with Revelation, see how this all came to past!” I would expect the fulfillments would have been as plain as day, just as the beginning of the end would be clear and discernable: at least like the lesson from the fig tree, that you ‘know’ summer is near. I would think the fulfillment of all this would have been as ‘clear’ to the Christians then and talked about as much as the incarnation and first coming, yet we have volumes of church history who seem to be completely unaware that Jesus already came back and all was fulfilled. Even the Eusebius quote and Josephus argument sound more like saying look dinosaurs evolved from birds! Such an event would have to be clearly, well known, recognized, and proclaimed by the historic Church of that time.

JR, "The Silence" is the viable proof. If The Church was taken there would be NO writings or testimonies concerning what happened and what was fulfilled. What we have is, 70 years later, are sleepers who came to faith trying to piece everything back together again. Confusion, rebuilding, etc... These next generation of Believers had not ONE original Believer converted from the Apostolic Ministry to goto for clarification on ANYTHING! Why? Because THEY WERE NOT AROUND.

JR, this is "The Elephant in the room" and what we have is historical data proving The Silence, which is absolutely impossible to take place if The Church was still on planet Earth! NO WAY in a MILLION years would The Church have been SILENT for 70 years after everything THEY went through and more importantly, seeing their persecutors, The Jews, destroyed. The language for a literal, physical Rapture is too strong to avoid and spiritualize away. For example, look what John told his audience:

Now, little children, abide in Him, so that when He appears, we may have confidence and not shrink away from Him in shame at His coming.

Powerful, is it not? You can't shrink away from someone you can't see! Of course, this will all happen in the unseen realm, the unsaved will notice nothing unusual and continue about their business and this is why you can't look to them for clarification.

Anyway, I can't be emphatic about all of this, but as of this moment I see no other viable alternative for the silence.

God Bless.