why imminence is regarded important

8/11/2019 Why Imminence is Regarded Important

1/42

Eight blows to Imminence

By R.g.Wallace

Blow #1

Peter must grow old and die.

John 21:18-19

"Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to gird yourself, and walk

wherever you wished; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, andsomeone else will gird you, and bring you where you do not wish to {go."} Now this Hesaid, signifying by what kind of death he would glorify God. And when He had spoken this,He said to him, "Follow Me!"

How imminent could the Lord's return be for Peter who was told by Jesus Himself that hewould "grow old" and die a martyr's death?

Would Peter be expecting an "any moment" return of Jesus next year, the year after, in fiveyears?

Did Jesus teach that He could come back at any moment and tell Peter at the same time,that he would grow old? I think not.

How can one justify the act of the Holy Spirit, communicating through the apostle John thefact of this "prophecy" that Peter would grow old, and at the same time communicate

through others that Jesus could come back "at any moment?"

2 Peter 1:13-15

And I consider it right, as long as I am in this {earthly} dwelling, to stir you up by way of

reminder, knowing that the laying aside of my {earthly} dwelling is imminent, as also our

Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me. And I will also be diligent that at any time after mydeparture you may be able to call these things to mind.

Here is some imminence for us. Peter had grown old. The year is approximately 67 AD andPeter knows that any day now, he could be captured and led forth to die. What Peter also

knows is that Jesus would NOT come back before that happens.

In fact, Peter even mentions the coming of the Lord as he remembers being an eyewitness

to His "Majesty" that will be manifested at the Day of the Lord return of Jesus, when He

comes "in power and great glory."

But He does not mention imminence. Instead he tells them to keep in mind the basic truthsof Christianity that they have learned so that AFTER he dies, they will be able to use them

for their own comfort and encouragement as the expectantly look for the "future" coming ofJesus.

No, Peter does not teach imminence in chapter one.


2/42

In chapter two, Peter makes it clear that as the church age continues, there WILL ARISEfalse teachers who will introduce destructive heresies.

Yes, there will continue to be an advance of evil just as Paul said, "evil men and impostors

will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived," (2 Tim. 3:13). And through

it all, Peter reminds them that God knows how to deliver the godly from temptation and

encourages them to remember the words spoken previously by the holy prophets and thecommandment of the Lord and Savior spoken by your apostles," (2 Pet. 3:2).

Peter does not teach imminence in chapter two. How could he? He was never taught

imminence by Jesus.

In chapter three, Peter says an astonishing thing. He says that there will come a time that

can be designated as "the last days." Days considerably distant from the initial promisegiven by Jesus and repeated by the apostles, that Jesus was coming back. Thus, as "time"

has gone by, the mockers will be motivated to say, "where is the promise of His coming?"

Yes, so much time will have gone by that the mockers will have a "hay day" of ridiculeconcerning the promise of Christ's return. So Peter reminds them that God's time table is

not based on man's perceptions of days and years. He says that God is not "slow" as manviews slowness, but that He is actually "patient," waiting so that mankind might have amaximum amount of time to come to a change of mind.

And then he repeats the well known warning, "the day of the Lord will come like a thief" toindicate that many will be unprepared for its arrival and the return of Jesus.

The phrase, "come like a thief," occurs only 5 times and always refers to the return of Jesusat the arrival of the Day of the Lord (1Thes. 5:2, 4; 2Pet. 3:10; Rev. 3:3; Rev. 16:15). Theuse of this term originated based on the parable Jesus taught at Matt. 24:43-44

"But be sure of this, that if the head of the house had known at what time of the night the

thief was coming, he would have been on the alert and would not have allowed his house tobe broken into. "For this reason you be ready too; for the Son of Man is coming at an hourwhen you do not expect it."

This exhortation and warning follows upon His teaching that when you see the "signs" of thegreat tribulation, you will know that His coming is right at the door, just like we know that

summer is near when we see leaves on the trees (Luke 21:29).

But He immediately tells us that no one knows the day or hour of His coming. In other

words, we can know the "season" of His coming, when He will be "right at the door," but wecannot know the exact day of His coming. Thus the exhortation for watchfulness so wemight be prepared when God brings that arrival of Jesus "in His own timing" (1 Tim. 6:15).

Jesus did not teach imminence here. He taught that the events of the tribulation would

precede His coming and that once those events transpire, we should know that He is right

at the door and we should "be on the alert, for you do not know which day your Lord iscoming," (Mat. 24:42).

But our watchfulness should not be out of fear or sorrow, but out of great joy andexpectation, knowing that at His arrival He will take us to Himself so that then we shall ever


3/42

be with the Lord. That is why Paul calls this "the blessed hope" (Lit: the HAPPY confidence,Titus 2:13)).

He will come like a thief, only to those who are unprepared. But for the believer, walking in

fellowship with God (walking in the light) they "are not in darkness that the day should

overtake you like a thief," (1 Thes. 5:5). Accordingly, Paul immediately follows that up with

an exhortation to all believers including himself, to "not sleep as others do, but let us bealert and balanced," (2 Thes. 5:6).

The exhortation then is to watchfulness and preparedness, not in view of an "any moment"

coming of Jesus, but in view of the DANGER of not being ready when "the signs" come onthe scene.

All the words used to encourage our watchfulness communicate the attitude of"expectation" and the strong emotion of longing, in view of His promised arrival, not in viewof an "any moment" arrival.

No, Jesus did not teach imminence at Matthew 24. Instead, He taught that specific events

had to occur first. Peter knew and understood this. And he even knew that the Lord wouldnot come during his lifetime.

Thus, he exhorts the recipients of his letter, to be diligent to maintain holy conduct andgodliness (2 Pet. 3:11) and to be found in Him, in peace, spotless and blameless," (v.14) sothat just like John warns, "we may have confidence and not shrink away from Him in shame

at His coming," (1 John 2:28).

2Pet. 3:17-18

You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard lest, being carried away

by the error of unprincipled men, you fall from your own steadfastness, but grow in the

grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him {be} the glory, both nowand to the day of eternity. Amen.

Peter did not teach imminence in chapter three. He taught the need for growth, preparationand watchfulness,

"looking for and promoting the coming of the day of God,"(2Peter 3:12, BFT).

Blow #2Paul must witness in Rome.

Acts 23:11

But on the night {immediately} following, the Lord stood at his side and said, "Takecourage; for as you have solemnly witnessed to My cause at Jerusalem, so you mustwitness at Rome also."

Unless, He adds, I decide to come back FIRST - then, of course, you won't get to Rome - - -


4/42

Such a little idea packed into this verse. Paul is told that he IS going to witness at Rome.That means it is BEFORE the Lord returns.

Jesus did not say when this would come about, but the promise stands on its own merits

and for any one who was looking for an "any moment" rapture, the promise would certainlydestroy that idea.

Now while Paul is "waiting" to get to Rome, what does he teach others about the "imminent"return of Jesus? Maybe he will have to keep it "hush-hush" since now, he cannot depend onit himself. Maybe he never had that idea in the first place. After all, he is the one who wrote

2 Thes. 2:3, which says that the day of the Lord cannot come until the man of lawlessnessis revealed.

The same basic promise is repeated at Acts 27:24 where we find -

Acts 27:23-26

"For this very night an angel of the God to whom I belong and whom I serve stood before

me, saying, 'Do not be afraid, Paul; you must stand before Caesar; and behold, God hasgranted you all those who are sailing with you.' "Therefore, keep up your courage, men, forI believe God, that it will turn out exactly as I have been told. But we must run aground on

a certain island."

But of course, the rapture might occur while they are stuck on the island and make the

"promise" of God a lie. And how long were they on the island? Acts 26:11, "And at the endof 3 months, we set sail on an Alexandrian ship."

Three months for Paul to be expecting an "any moment" rapture. Well, no, because God hadtold Paul that he had to go to Rome. What then of all the believers throughout the rest of

the world? Where is the reality of their hope in an "any moment" rapture? Were they to still

look for such a thing? Indeed, would God the Holy Spirit be communicating to others thatthey should be looking for an "any moment" rapture, while at the same time havingrevealed to Paul that there would not be one?

Of course not. God does not give conflicting information to His people.

Blow #3

John will have additional public ministry beyond writing the book of the Revelation.

Revelation 10:8-11,

And the voice which I heard from heaven, {I heard} again speaking with me, and saying,"Go, take the book which is open in the hand of the angel who stands on the sea and on theland."And I went to the angel, telling him to give me the little book. And he said to me, "Take it,

and eat it; and it will make your stomach bitter, but in your mouth it will be sweet as

honey."And I took the little book out of the angel's hand and ate it, and it was in my mouth sweet

as honey; and when I had eaten it, my stomach was made bitter.


5/42

And they said to me, "You must prophesy again concerning many peoples and nations andtongues and kings."

Revelation chapter 10 is a parenthetical chapter that deals personally with John andspecifically with His ministry beyond the writing of the book of The Revelation.

This is a personal promise to John that he will prophesy "again" which suggests a ministrybeyond the scope of the present vision he is seeing.

Accordingly, the Lord's return could not be imminent to John, nor would the Holy Spiritteach Imminency through him.

He may not know exactly when and where his future ministry is, but he should know thatthe Lord will not be coming back first.

Blow #4

A specific departure from the faith and the revealing of the man of Lawlessness must

precede the return of Jesus.

2Thes. 2:1-3

Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and ourgathering together to Him, that you may not be quickly shaken from your composure or be

disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the dayof the Lord has come. Let no one in any way deceive you, for {it will not come} unless theapostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction."

This blow connects only if one will recognize the proper correlation of terms establishedwithin the context.

The subject is "the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him."

It should be clear that Paul views these two events as taking place at the same time. He

makes the same connection at 1 Thes. 4:15-17, where we find in v. 15, "we who remainuntil the COMING OF THE LORD" and at v. 17, "we shall be caught up together in the cloudsfor a MEETING with the Lord in the air."

In chapter 5, Paul then makes the connection of this "coming" and "meeting" (gathering)with the term "Day of the Lord" at verse 2.

In verses 3-11, Paul then clearly indicates that the believer who is "awake," "alert" and

"sober" (balanced) will NOT be surprised by the arrival of the Day of the Lord which willcatch others totally off guard.

But in so doing, he also makes it perfectly clear that the church will be present on the earthwhen the Day of the Lord arrives. In fact, he clearly makes this arrival of the Day of theLord refer to the same event mentioned just a few verses before as "the coming of the

Lord" and "a meeting with the Lord in the air."

At 2 Thes. 2:1-3, he makes the exact same correlation.


6/42

Here, he addresses the concern of the believers that they Day of the Lord has already

arrived. Accordingly, they have been given the impression by false teachings, that not only

has "the coming" arrived, but the "gathering" taught to them in Paul's first letter, has alsooccurred.

So, CONCERNING this "coming" and "gathering," Paul says that they should not be

disturbed about the idea that the Day of the Lord has come and pay no attention to thefalse teachings they have heard. He then very clearly tells them that this "coming of the

Lord" and "our gathering together to Him," known AS the Day of the Lord, WILL NOT comeuntil the apostasy and the man of lawlessness is revealed. That means that the man oflawlessness, the "beast" of Revelation and the one so often designated as the antichrist,

WILL come on the scene of human history and be revealed as the great rebel against GodBEFORE the rapture of the church.

And since there is usually little dispute that the man of lawlessness is revealed as theoppressive beast of The Revelation, AT the midpoint of Daniel's 70th week and not before it,it should be clear that such a revealing will precede the "coming of the Lord."

This issue revolves around whether or not one has the personal honesty and objectivity tomake the proper identification of the three terms involved as referring to the same event.

Blow #5

The Great Commission:Jesus said that he church would accomplish a world-wide gospel proclamation before Hecomes back.

Matthew 28:18-20,

And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me inheaven and on earth. "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in

the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that Icommanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

This is the general mandate for worldwide evangelism and probably in itself, does not reallymitigate against imminence. However, in association with Acts 1:8, there appears to beanother one of those "things" which MUST be carried out before Jesus can or will come

back.

"but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My

witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part ofthe earth."

Now we know that the "church" was scattered away from Judea as a result of thepersecution that arose in connection with Stephen (Acts 8:1) and began ministering

throughout the regions of Samaria. This took place about 36 AD and certainly fulfills thewords of Jesus at Acts 1:8.

But the question needs to be asked. Could Jesus have returned BEFORE that migration ofthe church to Samaria? And if so, what then is the purpose and reliability of the words ofJesus at Acts 1:8?


7/42

Furthermore, Jesus said, "and to the uttermost parts of the earth," which did not take place

for several years later. Paul informs us that it did indeed, happen as he writes in about 59

AD concerning the Romans, "your faith is being proclaimed throughout the whole world,"(Rom. 1:8).

And in about 63 AD, "the hope of the gospel . . which has been proclaimed in all creation

under heaven," (Col. 1:23). And at Col. 1:6, "the gospel, which has come to you, just as inall the world also."

And let us remember what was said of the apostles by the Jews of Thessalonica in about 54

AD, "these men who have upset the world, have come here also," (Acts 17:6).

But BEFORE these men took the gospel to the uttermost parts of the earth,

(say, between 30 and 50 AD) if indeed the above passages indicate that to be the case,

could Jesus have come back? And if those passages do not indicate such a spread of thegospel, has Acts 1:8 then, not been fulfilled till later, if indeed, at all? And if that be thecase, could Jesus have come back "anytime" since His very own words would still be

unfulfilled?

Then we have Matthew 10:16-23 with special focus on Verse 23,

"But whenever they persecute in this city, flee to the next; for truly I say to you, you shall

not finish with the cities of Israel UNTIL the Son of Man comes."

This is similar to Acts 1:8 in that it indicates a certain accomplishment BEFORE the return of

Jesus. If at a certain point in time, they are only part way through reaching "the cities ofIsrael," are they to be looking for an "any moment" return of Jesus? I think not.

Let's back up to Verse 18,

"And you shall even be brought before governors and kings for my Name's sake, as atestimony to them and to the Gentiles."

In view of this, can they have been looking for an "any moment" return of Jesus during the6+ years when they were ministering in Judea?

No, there needs to be a "worldwide" ministry of the church BEFORE Jesus will come back.

Indeed, Jesus again tells us at Matthew 24:14,

"and this gospel of the kingdom shall be proclaimed in the whole world for a witness to all

the nations, and then the end shall come."

Of course, once again, this requires having a certain understanding of the context.

The understanding that "the end" correlates with Matthew 10:23 where Jesus relates it to

"the Son of Man comes," and with Matthew 24:29, "immediately after the tribulation ofthose days."


8/42

And the understanding that the "coming" of Jesus that is in view here is the ONLY coming of

Jesus that He Himself taught about. But that is another subject. However, I suggest that all

the passages in the New Testament refer to the one and only coming of Jesus when He willcome in the clouds of the sky and gather His elect from the earth and NOT his "later"descent to the earth at Armageddon which is only referenced at Rev. 19:11.

Anyway, I trust that it can be seen to be unlikely, in view of the promises and commandsfor a worldwide evangelistic outreach, that the Christians of the early church did not believein an "any moment" return of Jesus. Expectancy does not require imminence.

Blow #6

The predicted progress of historical trends which must take place, as the "beginning" ofbirth pains, militates against the idea of Imminency.

Mankind has always been preoccupied with the future, and of course, the disciples of Jesuswere no exception. During the week prior to the crucifixion in 30 AD, Jesus frequented thetemple in Jerusalem every day. And it was on one of these days, the 12th of the month

Nisan, that it appears as though He actually baited the curiosity of the disciples by speakingof a future destruction of the temple with very strong language.

The occasion, according to Mt. 24:1 and Luke 21:5, was the disciple's enamorment with thetemple structure. The "bait" then, appears to be recorded at Mt.24:2 and Luke 21:6.

Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, there shall surely not be left one stoneupon another, which will not be torn down.

The disciples respond with several questions, one of which was, "when shall these thingsbe." Ie, when will this destruction of the temple occur? Matthew chooses not to record

Christ's answer to this question, but simply deals with the time period from the cross until

that destruction in 70 AD, via verses 5-6.

Luke, on the other hand, records the answer that Jesus gave and also gives us a generaltime-frame for understanding it.

In addition, they asked what would be the sign of His coming, the very coming He had beenteaching them about for 3 1/2 years.

The answers of Jesus, recorded for us in Mt. 24 and Luke 21, give us an outline for the

history of the church up until the gathering of the elect (church age believers) out from thisworld at the arrival of the Day of the LORD which is the event that triggers the end of theage.

Matthew 24:4

The possibility of deception requires specific information so that the church might beoriented to the progress of history and not be distracted from her evangelistic purpose.

If the church, or more specifically, individual believers, get too distracted and discouraged

at the progress of evil in the world, they will lose sight of the true objective for theircontinued sojourn here on the earth (1 Peter 2:9).


9/42

Thus, we have the Olivet Discourse, wherein Jesus orients us to the historical trends thatwill occur during the church age, leading up to His return at the Day of the LORD.

As this is studied, it is imperative to properly harmonize the three accounts that we have in

the synoptic gospels. And as they unfold it will be clear that the progress is viewed from 30

AD, as an uninterrupted history of the church, until Matthew 24:29-31, when Jesus returns

in association with the Day of the LORD signs and gathers His elect from the world.

Jesus breaks down the historical trends into three periods.

1. Those before 70 AD.2. Those between 70 AD and the great tribulation.3. And those during the great tribulation.

The very fact that He so presents this information indicates the intent to communicate

watchfulness for the "signs" of His coming and not to advocate an "any moment" return. Infact, His wording DEMANDS a delay of that return until at least the fall of Jerusalem.CHURCH AGE TRENDS - General trends both before and after 70 AD:

Mt. 24:5, For many will come in My name, saying, I am the Christ,(Lk. 21:8, I am He, and, The time is at hand) and will deceive many.

(do not go after them. LK)(For the mystery of lawlessness is already working - 2 Th.2:7)

Verse 6

And you will be hearing of wars and rumors of wars; see that you are not disturbed, for itmust happen, but it is not yet the end.

(Lk. 21:9 And when you hear of wars and disturbances, do not be alarmed; for these things

must happen first, but the end is not immediate.)

These "wars and rumors" have been occurring since 30 AD, and are to be viewed as generaltrends without placing any specific significance upon them. In fact, Jesus calls them "the

beginning of birth pains at verse 8. "Beginning birth pains" are those intermittent pushesand shoves which indicate that a pregnancy is moving toward its "end." However, before

that "end" can occur, there must be the "breaking of the water" and the final birth painswhich are the body's actions to bring that baby into the world and "end" the pregnancy.

Imminency is excluded by the fact that Jesus says these things MUST happen and yet that

is not the end. Now, once the beginning birth pains occur, the idea of Imminency would in

that regard be present. But that is the whole idea. There is no Imminency UNTIL the birthprocess begins with beginning birth pains.

The "pregnancy" is God's plan to establish the Messiah's reign on the earth via His return atthe Day of the Lord.

The beginning birth pains are those historical trends which progress from Messiah's first

advent until the revelation of the beast, the man of lawlessness at the midpoint of Daniel's70th week.


10/42

The final birth pains take place during the oppressive reign of the beast which is called thetribulation, the great one.

The end of the "pregnancy" is when Jesus returns at the Day of the Lord and administratesdivine wrath upon the world in preparation for establishing His 1000 year earthly kingdom.

At verse 6, Jesus said, "the end is not yet." This clarifies that when the "wars and rumors"occur, the oriented Christian should not be deceived into thinking that it portends the end ofthe age. To explain why it is not yet the end, Jesus amplifies at Mat. 24:7 and Luke 21:10-11. Here, He describes trends that take place on a much larger scale than the ones just

mentioned - -

For nation shall rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom - - .

There are two things in this passage which tell us that these "larger scale" trends are thosewhich will occur after AD 70.

1. The idea of "kingdom against kingdom" conflicts does not describe the conflicts that took

place within the Roman Empire prior to 70 AD.

2. At Luke 21:12, the phrase, "but before all these things."Here Jesus backs up in His discourse in order to describe the events leading up to andculminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.

By saying, "before all these things," Jesus is placing the following information before the

"larger scale" trends just described.And so, chronologically, these events should be viewed first.

As we approach this study, a very important point needs to be recognized in order to

properly correlate the language Jesus uses as He tells of the events that will take place.

Jesus taught about two different times of persecution and two different times of crisis forJerusalem. He uses similarity of language to describe both, and we must be careful to make

the separation between the two situations or else we will miss the true intent of Histeaching.

When Jesus talks about the persecution between 30-70 AD, he uses language that is verysimilar to what He uses to describe the persecution of the great tribulation. But by careful

analysis, the distinction between the two periods can be preserved. The same principle

applies to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the oppression by the beast in thegreat tribulation.

SPECIFIC PERSECUTION BETWEEN 30-70 AD

(based on Luke 21:12, "But before all these things")

Verses 12-19,

"they will lay their hands on you and will persecute you, delivering you to the synagogues

and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors because of My name. It will provideyou occasion for a testimony. Therefore establish in your hearts, not to practice to defend

yourselves; for I will give you speech and wisdom which all of your opponents will be unable

to resist or refute. But you will be delivered up even by parents and brothers and relatives


11/42

and friends, and they will kill some from among you, and you will be hated by all because of

My name. Yet a hair from your head will not perish. By your endurance you will possessyour lives."

Mark also records this information at Mark 13:9-13 and it is best to take that passage as

paralleling Luke 21:12-19. It should further be recognized that Matthew records this same

teaching much earlier than the Olivet discourse at Mat. 10:16-23.

But at Mat. 10:23, Jesus takes the persecution and the gospel proclamation beyond theimmediate time frame of the apostolic era and applies it to the church age in general

without making any reference to the fall of Jerusalem 40 years after His resurrection.

"You shall not finish with the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes."

This simply confirms the idea that there is no "interruption" of the historical progress of thechurch until Jesus returns at the Day of the LORD.

It also confirms that Jesus did not teach an "any moment" return, but expected there to be

a "complete" ministry within Israel first.

Mark 13:9-10

Now keep yourselves alert; for they will deliver you to courts and you will be flogged in

synagogues, and you will stand before governors and kings because of me, as a testimonyto them. And the gospel must first be proclaimed to all the nations.

The world-wide proclamation of the gospel was fulfilled by the apostles (at least in the

context of the Roman Empire) prior to 70 AD according to language that we find atColossians 1:6, 23. But it also has great significance for the period of time prior to the Day

of the LORD. For there shall be, indeed, needs to be a blanket of gospel truth announced to

Israel both locally, in Palestine, as well as world-wide, in order to sow the seed that willsprout in the 144,000 Jews who are converted just after the Day of the LORD arrives, (Rev.7:1-8).

There also needs to be a maximum gospel proclamation to the world as a whole, "before"

the return of Jesus to provide a "final warning" as it were, to all peoples so that, whetherbefore or after the Day of the Lord, "whoever calls upon the name of the LORD, shall besaved." Joel 2:32

Matthew 24:14,

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be proclaimed

in the whole world for a witness to all the nations,and then the end shall come.

Indeed, the ministry of "the church" will never be complete either to the world or to Israeluntil Jesus returns. Mat. 10:16-23

Verse 23,

". . . you shall not finish with the cities of Israel, until the Son of Man comes."


12/42

Blow #7

The prediction of a future destruction of Jerusalem denies the doctrine of imminence (Luke21:8-24).

DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM - 70 AD

Having recognized the 30-70 AD time context of Luke 21:12-19, it should be clear thatJesus picks up at verses 20-24 with the siege of Jerusalem by the armies of Rome. Thisevent actually becomes the point of contact and overlap between AD 70 and the futureoppression of the beast during the great tribulation. However, that point of contact and

overlap is NOT chronological

And once again, we must be very careful in recognizing the precision in the words of Jesus

to distinguish between these two events, and at the same time realize that He usedsimilarity of language to describe both. Luke 21:20-22,

Now when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation isnear. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are in the

midst of the city depart, and those who are in the country, do not enter it; because theseare days of vengeance, in order that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

All things fulfilled does not refer to the "entire" plan of God for Jerusalem, but specifically,that which involves a world-wide dispersion. A world-wide dispersion is not what happens inthe yet future oppression by the beast, nor what happens when the nations surround

Jerusalem during the Armageddon campaign (Zechariah 12:1-5).

This prophecy of Jesus specifically fulfills OT passages that deal with the destruction of thecity and the dispersion of the people. Leviticus 26:27; Deuteronomy 28:49-68

It deals with the national discipline that God will administer upon the Jewish people because

of the rejection of their Messiah. Matthew 21:33-46; 23:37-39

That is why the term "days of vengeance" is used at Luke 21:22.

Luke 21:23-24,

Woe to those who are with child and to those who nurse babies in those days; for there willbe great calamity upon the land, and wrath to THIS people, and they will fall by the edge of

the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

This is exactly what Gabriel communicated to Daniel in the famous "70 weeks" prophecy.

Daniel 9:26,

(And after the 62 weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing,) And the people of theprince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with aflood; and to the end there will be war; (it is) a decree of desolations.

The Roman army under Titus besieged the city in 70 AD on the 14th of the month Nisan

until its fall, 134 days later on the 8th of Elul. This was prophesied by Daniel as taking place


13/42

after the cutting off of Messiah. The cutting off of Messiah must be understood from thecontext of Isaiah 53:8 -

He was cut off from the land of the living,for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due.

This of course refers to the provision of salvation through the sin sacrifice of the Messiah,the details of which do not come under the scope of this work.

The "prince who is to come" is the little horn of Daniel 7:7-22 and refers to the futuredictator of a ten-nation confederacy with its political roots in ancient Rome. This man willmake a 7 year covenant of peace and religious toleration (M.E.P.T.A.) with the peoples of

Palestine (the many) and will then break it 3 1/2 years later (Daniel 9:27). But the people

of that "end times" prince refers to the Romans, who in 70 AD destroyed the city and thesanctuary; the people from whom this prince descended, not to those who are associatedwith him when he comes on the scene.

Then after 70 AD, until the end (end times) there will be war, just as Jesus said at Matthew

24:6, and a decree of desolations which includes the famines and earthquakes of Matthew24:7.

And the plagues mentioned at Luke 21:11.

It should be clear that there could not be any "any moment" rapture because this prophecy

about the fall of Jerusalem had to take place first. And although the disciples did not knowthe year of that destruction, they certainly could understand that Jesus was not coming

back first. However, we should understand that they were probably unaware of the details

of His coming, even though He taught so extensively on it, simply because it neededclarification and the ministry of the Spirit to "bring to remembrance" what they had beentaught (John 16:12). And although Jesus gave them the "empowering" of the Spirit before

His ascension (20:22; Luke 24:45), it still did not provide them with the orientation theyneeded, for the ask the question of Acts 1:6,

"Lord, is it as this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?"

Still disoriented, Jesus told them again (John 17:18) that they were to minister throughout

the world and not be concerned about the times and the seasons (Acts 1:7-8). The time ofthe end would come according to the Father's own authority and they should concentratenow on servicing the "remotest part of the earth."

The expectation of the early church, prior to the fall of Jerusalem, concerned the events

surrounding that fall and the events that would follow it. The events that Jesus described at

Luke 21:12-24 had to occur before the fall of Jerusalem, and they could and indeed, wouldtake place from the very beginning after the formal arrival of the Spirit at the Day of

Pentecost. Accordingly, the fall of Jerusalem, which would be portended by the city being

surrounded by armies, could happen any time after the persecution activity began.Furthermore, there is no specific time period allotted to the time after the fall of Jerusalem,

so that technically, the Lord could return during that time. In other words, the "signs of

summer," which are the events of the tribulation, could happen at any time after the fall ofJerusalem, but NOT prior to that fall. The Day of the Lord arrival of Jesus then, was NOTimminent before the fall of Jerusalem.


14/42

And as we have seen, His return could not be imminent after the fall of Jerusalem UNTIL the

birth process characterized by BOTH the beginning birth pains and the final birth pains(tribulation) begins.

Blow #8:Israel must be restored as a nation for Daniel 9:27 to be fulfilled.

Of course, this is predicated on the view that accepts Daniel 9:27 as referring to a covenantof peace with the nation of Israel that allows her to engage in her ancient sacrifices andtabernacle worship.

Based on Daniel 9:27 and the prophet's words, "He shall confirm the covenant with many

for one week," pretribulationists have historically and continuously insisted that the

Antichrist will make a covenant with Israel to protect her for seven years (the seventiethweek of the Book of Daniel). It is that event which triggers what is commonly referred to as

the Tribulation Period. But from the defeat of the Jewish nation in A.D. 70 until the

emergence of the modern State on May 14, 1948, no Jewish nation or representativegovernment existed. Hal Lindsey has written:

"The events leading up to the coming of the Messiah Jesus are strewn throughout the Oldand New Testament prophets like pieces of a great jigsaw puzzle. The key piece of thepuzzle which was missing until our time was that Israel had to be back in her ancient

homeland, reestablished as a nation.

When this occurred in May 1948, the whole prophetic scenario began to fall together withdizzying speed." 11

It would have been impossible for the Antichrist to sign a covenant of protection with a non-existent nation. An any-moment Rapture, therefore, was not possible before the modernState of Israel was resurrected out of the ashes of the Second World War. Israel could have

become a nation during any generation -- but the Rapture could not have preceded thatevent.

Thus, I conclude these eight blows to imminence (unless and until I find some additionalfactors to apply) and suggest that in the same way that the 2nd coming was not and couldnot be imminent before 70 AD, it is not and can not be imminent after 70 AD UNTIL we see

"the signs of summer;" the abomination of desolation standing in the Holy Place inJerusalem.


15/42

Vlach: Introductory matters concerning the Rapture.

In his introduction, he makes a good Biblical case for the FACT of the rapture

including the validity of the term rapture based on the Latin. There is nothing to

disagree with in this first section.

Vlach: A Biblical defense of Pretr ibulationismOf these five views why is

Pretribulationism to be preferred? The following are biblical evidences for a

Pretribulational Rapture:

The pillars of PretribulationismThe foundation of Pretribulationism has four

elements:

Consistent literal interpretation The literal method of interpretation attempts to explain

the original sense of the writer according to the normal usages of words and language.

The literal method interprets all of the Bible in a normal and plain way, all the time

understanding that the Bible, at times, uses symbols, figures of speech and types.

It is true that the literal method of interpretation needs to be followed. But it is not true

that the literal method lead to a pretribulational rapture position. In fact, holding to a

pretrib position actually violates the literal method of interpretation in many ways.

These will all be discussed as this analysis progresses.

1. The pretrib position fails to follow the entire context of Matthew 24 and keep the

ONE second coming of Christ in view.

2. The pretrib position fails to compare scripture with scripture concerning many of its

claims.3. The pretrib position fails to follow a literal hermeneutic by interpreting Rev. 4:1 as

a rapture passage.

4. The pretrib position fails to follow a literal hermeneutic by disallowing specific

rapture promises as referring to the rapture, but to Christs descent at Armageddon

instead.

5. The pretrib position fails to follow a literal hermeneutic by defining terms by

supposition rather than by direct statements of Scripture.

Vlach: Distinction between Israel and the Church

According to Thomas Ice, ((Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy, The Truth About The

Rapture, pp. 25-26) ) "If Israel and the church are not distinguished, then there is no

basis for seeing a future for Israel or for the church as a new and unique people of

God. If Israel and the church are merged into a single program, then the Old

Testament promises for Israel will never be fulfilled and are usually seen by


16/42

replacement theologians as spiritually fulfilled by the church. The merging of Israel's

destiny into the church not only makes into one what the Scriptures understand as

two, but it also removes a need for future restoration of God's original elect people in

order to fulfill literally His promise that they will one day be the head and not the tail

(Deuteronomy 28:13).

The more that believers see a distinct plan for Israel and a distinct plan for the church,the more they realize that when the New Testament speaks to the church it is

describing a separate destiny and hope for her.

Prewrath does not violate dispensations. It does not merge Israel and the church. But it

does recognize that -

1. There are transitional periods between the dispensations.

2. That the 70thweek of Daniel is NOT a time of Israels national favor with God. The

nation was under discipline from God for the first 69 weeks, and continues that way

until the end of the 70thweek.

3. Accordingly, it is the church that remains on the earth at the beginning of the

70thweek in order to be used by God to bring the gospel not only to Israel but to the

entire world (Matthew 10:21-23; 24:14).

4. Gods plan forIsrael does NOT begin until the end of the 70thweek.

5. SeePreWrath and Dispensations

Vlach - via Ice: The church becomes more distinct in the plan of God. Israel's future

includes the seven-year tribulation, and then shortly before Christ's return to

Jerusalem she will be converted to Jesus as her Messiah. . . . On the other hand, the

distinct hope for the church is Christ's any-moment return.

why imminence is regarded important

Documents