Who goes first?

[KyleB]

This question is specifically regarding Steve's perspective on the timing of the events mentioned in Mt 24:37-42, but anyone who can shed light is welcome to answer.

I was listening to the radio archives from 2010, and a caller asked about this passage (http://media.theos.org/Steve%20Gregg/Ra ... 100329.mp3 , from 3:55-9:39). The answer was that this falls in the section of the Olivet discourse that covers the 2nd coming, not AD 70. It is describing the unbelievers being "taken" in judgment. Using the parable of the wheat and tares (Mt 13:24-30) as a cross-reference, the view is that unbelievers will be removed from the earth first, before the saints.

But it seems I've also heard the view (maybe from Steve, maybe not) that the saints will be raptured, the earth and those left in it judged with fire (2 Thes 1:7-8), and then the saints and Jesus together return to earth immediately after.

Now, are the saints taken out of the world first, so that then the unbelievers face the "flaming fire" while the church is in the air with the Lord, and then we all come down after the flames have subsided?

Or are the unbelievers taken out first, with the current generation of saints supernaturally spared from this judgment, followed then by the rapture and the meeting together with the Lord in the air?

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about a 2-stage coming or 7-year trib or any of that. I am asking this question under the assumption of a very busy "last day" where a whole bunch of stuff happens. And no, I don't think it is very important to know the answer, but I'd like to figure it out if possible.

[Paidion]

In the parable of the wheat and the tares (darnell, a plant that resembles wheat at the earlier stages), and the workers asked whether they should remove the tares, the owner of the wheat field replied:

Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, "First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn. (Matthew 13:30)

Jesus explained the parable at the request of His disciples:

The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one. The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels.

Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. The son of man will send out his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their father. He who has ears to hear, let him hear! (Matthew 13:38-43)

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about a 2-stage coming or 7-year trib or any of that.

How about a tribulation period followed by the thousand-year reign of Christ right here on earth? If you don't accept that, then that might be the reason you have difficulty fitting in the rapture of I Thess 4:1-18 into your understanding. The word translated "meet" was often used when the people of a city went out to welcome a returning, conquering king and ushered him back into the city. The rapture may be like that. "Those overcomers who are alive and remain" may be caught up to welcome our returning King at the end of the tribulation period (however long it is) and then set up His earthly reign. That seems to be the time when the overcomers will rule and reign with Christ. The rest of the dead will come alive at the end of the millenium, and that will be the final judgment day. "The end of the age" (Matthew 13, quoted above) may be referring to the end of the next age, the 1000 y reign of Christ.

This understanding seems to have been the one prevalent among second century Christians. Modern theologians call it "post-tribulation premillenialism" or "historic premillenialism."

[KyleB]

Thank you Paidion. I do accept the usage of "meet" that you speak of. And it's not so much that I accept or reject your particular view (although I do lean towards a certain view). I am just wanting to flesh out my understanding of the amillennial viewpoint on these passages. I assume they would place both of these events on the same, final day (but maybe not). I am looking for what sequence they would place them in and the reasons for doing that.

[Othniel]

Using the parable of the wheat and tares (Mt 13:24-30) as a cross-reference, the view is that unbelievers will be removed from the earth first, before the saints.

But it seems I've also heard the view (maybe from Steve, maybe not) that the saints will be raptured, the earth and those left in it judged with fire (2 Thes 1:7-8), and then the saints and Jesus together return to earth immediately after.

Now, are the saints taken out of the world first, so that then the unbelievers face the "flaming fire" while the church is in the air with the Lord, and then we all come down after the flames have subsided?

Or are the unbelievers taken out first, with the current generation of saints supernaturally spared from this judgment, followed then by the rapture and the meeting together with the Lord in the air?

Hey Kyle

I tend to agree with Steve's interpretation of this matter, and I think my current view is similar to his (correct me if I'm wrong).

I place the final grand resurrection of the just and the unjust (saved and unsaved) on the same day and time as the final judgment against death and the wicked, the parousia or second coming, the last trumpet of God, and the rapture when not all will sleep, but all shall be changed and the Christians will meet the Lord in the air. I believe that all these occur "on the last day."

I came to this conclusion by creating a chart where I have the verse section on the leftmost vertical column, and the description of the event on the upper horizontal column. Using this chart I found that the Resurrection, the Judgment, the Second Coming (Parousia), the Trumpet of God, the Last Day (followed by eternity), and the Catching Up (or Rapture) all happen at the same time.

See John 5:28-29, Acts 24:15, Mat 25:31-46, 1 Thes 4:13-18, 1 Cor 15:50-55, 2 Thes 1:6-9, Rev 20:11-15, John 6:39, 40, 44, 54, John 12:48, and Mat 16:27.

Among these, I find the rapture could only be seen in 1 Cor 15:50-55 and 1 Thes 4:13-18. The other verses people think are talking about the rapture don't seem to speak of such a thing in my opinion, but check them for yourself.

The idea that Christians will be taken up, then the earth burned, then they return is a premillennial Idea. When I read the verses about the resurrection of the wicked and just, they always seem to be happening at the same time. It's the time when good and evil, just and unjust, sheep and goats, and wheat and chaff all stand before God and are separated. The just are raised to eternal life while the unjust are raised unto condemnation, and death is swallowed up in victory.


Check out these verses and see what you can put together

Peace bro!

[KyleB]

The idea that Christians will be taken up, then the earth burned, then they return is a premillennial Idea.

This is the key, thank you. I do agree that all these events will take place on one day at the end. My confusion was that I was fairly sure I had heard the "take up/burn/return" view from one of Steve's older verse-by-verse lectures. But I could be mistaken about that. I was seeing a disparity in the timing issue between the verses that I mentioned originally (who is present where/when?). But if one of those interpretations belongs to another view, there is no problem.

Thanks,
-Kyle

[look2jesus]

KyleB,

Remember that when Jesus was speaking about one being taken (in judgment, I assume) and another left, he is using a parable which shouldn't neccessarily be taken literally at every point. In the story he tells it sounds like there could be quite a gap of time between when the one is taken and the one who is left reaches his end. I don't believe the focus in the story is the chronology, but the importance of "watching" as we await the Lord's return.

I agree with Othniel, as far as the various events go. I believe that, generally, all these events happen simultaneously. One of the major problems for premillennialism, in my view, is the unbiblical view they take, vis-a-vis, the resurrection--placing a thousand year gap between the resurrection of the righteous and that of the wicked. The bible teaches quite plainly, it seems to me, that there is one resurrection event that includes both the righteous and the wicked. Jesus speaks of "an hour" when all who are in the graves will hear his voice and come forth in John 5; Jesus says of believers that he will raise them up on the last day in John 6; Jesus says of those who finally reject him that they will be judged "on the last day" in John 12; as Paidion quoted above, the parable of the tares has both the wicked and the righteous "growing together" until harvest time, which is said to be the end of the age in Mt. 13; Paul speaks of a resurrection of the just and the unjust in Acts 24. It is because of the plain teaching that we find in these passages that it becomes clear that the Revelation 20 passage concerning the first resurrection (which implies a second one) must be seen as a reference to a "spiritual" resurrection, and not a reference to two different 'material' resurrections--one for the righteous and one for the wicked--a thousand years apart. (My two cents worth)

l2j

[KyleB]

l2j,

I'm sorry, judging by your response and Othniel's, I haven't stated clearly enough what I'm really asking about. I, like the two of you, already agree with the view that the last day/hour will have all the great eschatological events happening together. I, like you, already agree that the first resurrection refers to a spiritual "conversion/rebirth". I'm specifically looking at two events which I think will happen on the same day (wheat/tares being gathered, and the flaming fire of 2 Thes 1), and how they relate chronologically to each other WITHIN that single day. Perhaps only Steve would be able to answer this question since I'm asking about things I've heard him say, but I assume there are others here of the same persuasion who could shed some light.

(Disclaimer: I know there are MANY different views on these passages. But in this thread, I'm just looking to understand how this view is self-consistent regarding this issue, not what alternate interpretations may exist.)

I'll try to restate the chronological tension that I'm seeing.

In the wheat/tares parable, the tares (the wicked) are removed first (Mt 13:30), then the righteous are dealt with.

In 2 Thes 1 (in Steve's take at least), this is Christ's return and judgment on the wicked, saving the church from a final assault at the last minute. (More recently than my original post, I have been listening to Steve's Ezekiel lectures and was able to verify that I heard him rightly previously. There he identifies Ezk 38-39 as the same battle as Rev 20:7-9. Also, he identifies 2 Thes 1 with the fire of Rev 20:9.)

What problem am I seeing? Here are my thoughts:

1) If we say that the current, living saints are raptured to meet Jesus in the air, and then all the saints (living and dead) return with Jesus in flaming fire moments later, that is in conflict with Mt 13, because then the righteous are removed first, but Mt 13 says the wicked are removed first.

2) If we say the current, living saints remain on earth but are supernaturally spared from harm from the flaming fire (which is identified by Steve as the 2nd coming of Christ), this matches Mt 13, but then we have Christ returning without his saints rising to meet him as a welcoming party (referencing the interpretation of "meet" (1 Thes 4:17) which Paidion mentioned, which Steve and I both agree with).

Hence my question: "who goes first?"

One possible solution I'm thinking of would be:
-Christ begins his descent
-The flaming fire precedes Christ's "touchdown" and destroys the wicked
-The current living saints (who were supernaturally spared from the fire) then rise to meet Christ who is still on His way down
-All saints and Christ then return to earth together

This seems possible, but some "interlacing" of the passages is necessary. Does that make sense what I'm saying in #1 and #2? Any thoughts on this?

I'm not biting my nails over this, it will work out however it works out. I'm just trying to look at this interpretation from the viewpoint of someone who would wish to attack it, and then address those weaknesses if possible, or abandon the view if not possible.

-Kyle

P.S. I'm assuming that when you wrote

Remember that when Jesus was speaking about one being taken (in judgment, I assume) and another left, he is using a parable which shouldn't neccessarily be taken literally at every point. In the story he tells it sounds like there could be quite a gap of time between when the one is taken and the one who is left reaches his end. I don't believe the focus in the story is the chronology, but the importance of "watching" as we await the Lord's return.

you were referencing Mt 24:37-42? I'm not sure what your view is of that passage, but I connect it with AD 70, and so I wasn't bringing that into this discussion at all. But I do agree with you that the point is to be ready and watching for His return.