What do you believe about the rapture and why?

You made a mistake here.. The classic dispy view is held by Scofield (I think Pentacost but I'm not sure) - this view is held by a large minority of dispensationalists.

Ryrie, MacArthur, Walvord hold to "Revised Dispensationalism which held in the majority and maintains not God does not 'do something else' as in having to create some new plan, regarding salvation and his dealing with man.

There are some large distinguishable differences between the two views.. Such as the classical view basically presents the church as a parenthesis in the history of redemption (not true with Revised Dispensationalism nor Progressive which is very new on the scene) as well as stating the Church and Israel have 2 separate eternal destinies.

Not true and even Covenant Theologians agree they do in fact spiritualize the passages regarding futuristic prophesies. It is not that they do this with ALL scripture nor is that the argument made by Dispy's, but rather specifically the scriptures pertaining to future events. It is and has been noted these passages are not taken in their normal interpretive pattern that is consistent with study of the scriptures. In fact.. Coventant Theology uses the literal hermeneutic up to that point, and then drops it to use something different for futuristic prophesies, spiritualizing the passages where the literal contradicts the theology.

They misunderstand what the term 'literal' actually means. Here is a paper on what "The Grammatico - Historical Method" is by Andy Woods. But I will also cite his intro here:

Most often I find those who claim to have taught a certain view that changed later on, seldom actually taught the view correctly. I'm not saying this necessarily of you but it in fact has been most often my experience. Other times, they were teaching a 'variation' of that view and presumed it was the predominantly held view, when in fact it was not. Thus the above is not so much for you Icon, but those who wish to see 'both' sides and compare them properly.

While I understand the above is your personal experience, it is noted this is the exact same stuff those coming from Covenant Theology to Dipsy state. And it aught to be if one is moving from one view to another. We should be convinced in our own minds.

And the above proves my point, that the understanding of the term 'literal' is misapplied with intentionally or not. The literal interpretation encompasses the idea of assigning to every word the same meaning it would have in its normal usage, whether employed in speaking, writing, or thinking. Additionally it ALSO takes into account and allows for types, symbols, figures of speech, and genre distinctions. The difference here between proper Hermeneutic and Coventant or Amill is that the text itself must identify them as being such.
This is the normal or plain interpretation, what is also call - the literal interpretation.

The prophesy regarding Satan and Christ in Gen. is not proof the literal is incorrect.. but proof it is the PROPER hermeneutic approach as the very rendering of the passage shows it is not to be understood in the 'wooden' literal sense which is Outside the normal or plain meaning of the text and is fulfilled to the letter which the imagery conveys. IOW - it is a poor strawman argument.

Refer to the above.
It is a silly argument used on those who don't understand proper hermeneutics. It is in fact a dishonest and slanderous attempt to demean a view, while knowing the above description of the hermeneutic is a fallacious declaration of how it is used. The normal sense shows it is metaphorical in nature while rooted in reality of what is to be, of which the NT writers clearly establish the very meaning of passages.

You bet but they were fulfilled in every detail. You are trying to apply a FALSE definition to the hermeneutic in question. It is so far off base/truth that I give you the benefit of the doubt, and presume you are parroting what you read and didn't actually study it out. If you taught this, you 'should' have known this but it is apparent you did not, and it is the very core of the interpretive method.

It is! However when the bible does not give things in a figuritive nor symbolic way, we do not have the right to make it something than the normal or plain interpretation conveys. It is for this very reason that promises to the ethnic people of Israel, are in fact to the NATION of Israel and not the church. The land promised is not figurative, the King promised to sit on David Throne IN Jerusalem from the lineage of David himself, was not figurative. The rapture of the body of Christ (the snatching away, whether pre, mid, or post) was not figurative.. nor did the early church for nearly 450 years think these and other futuristic prophetic items figurative either.

 

Excellent post Icon.

As Henry Hammond said, ”The Jews were a typical people, the whole divine economy toward them is doctrinal and instructive to us, not immediately or literally, but by way of Anagogy".

 

Very good points, hard to understand how one must take the word and make it fit there view. When you let scripture come together to prove scripture. Revelation 4 shows the beauty of the Holy Spirt revealing the plan of God with the sntching of the Chuch and the term Come up Hither and seeing the elders enthroned, showing the church in Heaven as the events of the Tribulation begin. One chapter shows God plan for the Chruch during the Tribulation.

 

Think important to remember in all of this is that God has His earthly peoples, those under the Millinual Kingdom, where isreal will be fully restored back to her place in Plans of God, and His heavenly peoples, Church, will be set up at same time in their new jerusalem!

So God will have both his earthly and new jerusalem going on in the Future!

 

UNTRUE!

.... Let there be no fruit from thee henceforward for ever....Mt 21:19

21 And a strong angel took up a stone as it were a great millstone and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with a mighty fall shall Babylon, the great city, be cast down, and shall be found no more at all.
22 And the voice of harpers and minstrels and flute-players and trumpeters shall be heard no more at all in thee; and no craftsman, of whatsoever craft, shall be found any more at all in thee; and the voice of a mill shall be heard no more at all in thee;
23 and the light of a lamp shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the princes of the earth; for with thy sorcery were all the nations deceived.
24 And in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints, and of all that have been slain upon the earth. Rev 18

 

Why not Rome or actual Babylon ?
Why would God destroy/cut off forever Isreal as He had made promises FOREVER based upon Him , not their behaviour!

 

Allan,
thanks for your response....I will give a better response later on,still have to go 600 miles today to get to the delivery area,lol

two things quickly;
I date myself a bit, in that I have not kept up with the newer revisions of dispy brethren. I am sure there could be more solid defense of the position, than what I was exposed to when I had my scofield bible.
on hermenutics;
what i posted from boettner was not my best...i type so slow that it will take some time to offer better description.. i was just trying to provoke thought....but

what some say is spiritalizing happens both ways.
to understand some of the figures that are spiritual descriptions, they do have a literal meaning ,but have been given in spiritual language;

the trees shall clap their hands

the mountains melt like wax

heaven is rolled up like a scroll

the sun,moon and stars......speak of human governments...not the literal sun, moon, or stars

Allan, It can go both ways...but it has gone this way for me.
I still will listen to Johnny Mac....like I say... I think it is wise to be able to descibe each view as accurately as possible

Actually......what is most important is what I would call
Individual eschatology......our appointed time of death.We are to serve God as witnesses now, in holiness.All of the saints who have gone before us.....have left their bodies already...no matter what they saw theologically....they are with the Lord now!

So we are to live each day unto Him, submitted to His Lordship in every realm of life.
What if we are still the early church, and Jesus does not return for 1.4 million years?

I will offer better sources later on.
etc

 

Matthew 21:19 God was taking the responsibility of Propagating the Gospel away from Israel and bringing in the Church. Israel as nation has not produced fruit since the rejection of the Saviour. But you forget the parable of the fig tree Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh

Here is that parable, Luke 13:6 He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.
7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?
8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it:
9 And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.

Looks from the Parable God is saying Israel will have more time, as nation God will give her yet another chance to bear fruit. From the 144,000 of the tribulation and the two witnesses we see Israel time (7 years) to bear fruit. We see in the end that a False Prophet will arise in her and that the remenant will flee from him. In the End we see Jesus returning as conquering King and stteing up His Kingdom in Israel as prophesied by the prophets.

She would not produce fruit for that time and the time of the church but is given another chance to produce during the Tribulation as John shows in Revelation.

Paul also said God was not through with Isarel in
Romans 11:1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying,
3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.
4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.
8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear) unto this day.
9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?

 

Might want to check into what new Dispy theology is, as the progressive Dispy try to find a mediating balance between 'classic: dispy/Covenant theologies!

 

Micah 5:1Now gather thyself in troops, O daughter of troops: he hath laid siege against us: they shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek.
2But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
3Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel.
4And he shall stand and feed in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God; and they shall abide: for now shall he be great unto the ends of the earth.

Chrsit was to be born in Bethlehem Ephratah, and He will rule in Israel Micah tells us yet more proof God is not through with Israel. Further into this passage we see a clue too of the city destroyed by God, notice this verse 6And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he cometh into our land, and when he treadeth within our borders.

Why Nimrod? Nimrod is mentioned 4 times in God's word Twice in Genesis 10 one in 1 Chronicles and here in Micah.
Genesis 10:8 And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.
9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD.
10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.
11 Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah,
12 And Resen between Nineveh and Calah: the same is a great city.
13 And Mizraim begat Ludim, and Anamim, and Lehabim, and Naphtuhim,
14 And Pathrusim, and Casluhim, (out of whom came Philistim,) and Caphtorim.

Notice where Nimrods Kingdom began, in Babel or Babylon notice Micah says Christ will destroy Babylon the land of Nimrod with a sword. That is modern day Iraq and look at it's prominence right now. So why is the Revelation passage not the prophecy of God destroying "Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he cometh into our land, and when he treadeth within our borders." As they come upon the land of Israel in the book of revelation?

 

LOL! Please provide us a link to the new and improved sensationalism! Is there a 'revised' manual or chart or diagram available online? LOL!

 

Not that I am aware of, those having it are DR of theology on staff at DTS, so would match their "theological" insights with about anyone!

 

So how are the rest of us supposed to follow along without a Dispy guideline, manual, chart, diagram, to go by? Surely the new & improved version is available to us somewhere online.

 

Well scripture will guide you right through it.

 

If you find one let me know I'd like to see one might help me see something scripture doesn't guide me through.

 

They just might be able to 'assist" you in the learning process!

 

Some day I'll find a chart and maybe will become proficient with that, of course I'd rather continue to search scripture as it guides me through.

 

I rest my case.

 

It becomes false doctrine when men form a theological system around these "divisions" & claim them to be Biblical doctrine. It then skews & taints the understanding of Scripture. The grammatical context of Scripture must be turned upside-down to make it fit this unScriptural theological system. For example, Scripture NEVER refers to the letters to the churches in the book of Revelation as being periods of time. They are LETTERS written to specific churches and must be understood in that context. I laugh when someone says we are living in whatever church age they think we're living in. I demand evidence clearly written within the text which states this doctrine as fact. Of course, they never can. That is an absurd form of eisegesis and a product of dispensationalism.

 

You case shows how we follow scripture and not charts since mine says maybe it would help me understand (tongue in cheek) the dispensational view. I need no such charts since God's word guides us through them.