1 Thessalonians 4:13-18
Introduction:
1. Of the many confusing elements of the premillennial system, perhaps none is more confusing than the issues this discussion considers.
2. The reason events in Israel cause such a stir of excitement (whether of joy or terror) is the notion of a rapture and tribulation before the alleged 1,000-year reign of Christ on earth.
3. Today we will ponder the premillennial doctrine of Christ’s second coming over against the biblical doctrine.
Discussion:
I. The Premillennial Doctrine of Christ’s Second Coming
A. There are several variations, but the basic position is like enough.
B. Christ will come secretly to raise the righteous dead and “rapture” the righteous living from the earth (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18).
C. Proponents differ as to when this happens, but all connect it to a seven-year period of tribulation (Daniel 9:24-27; Matthew 24:29).
D. After the seven-year period of tribulation several events transpire:
1. Christ returns with the saints, conquers the wicked, and initiates His 1,000-year reign in Jerusalem (Revelation 20:1-6).
2. All Israel is converted to Christ (Romans 11:26).
3. Circumcision and the law of Moses are reinstituted.
4. Satan is released, gathers Gog and Magog for Armageddon, but fire from heaven destroys them (Revelation 16:16; 20:7-10).
5. Final judgment is rendered with retribution and reward according to one’s deeds (Revelation 20:11-22:21).
6. The wicked dead are not raised until after the millennium.
II. An Interpretive Key to “End Times” Teachings
A. Two major flaws have prompted these premillennial conclusions:
1. Failure to honor the context of prophecy.
2. Literalizing the figurative, resulting in modifying plain statements to fit obscure statements.
B. We will deal with the issue of contextualization now, and the issue of modifying the plain through the obscure in the next section.
C. Contextualizing the primary passages above shows its weakness.
1. 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 offered comfort about deceased loved ones and corrected faulty ideas of when Christ would return.
2. Matthew 24:1-35, if not the entire chapter, addresses the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (esp. 24:34; cf. Matthew 23:37-24:4).
3. Daniel 9:24-27 in context covers the captives’ return, Christ’s enthronement, and Jerusalem’s destruction in A.D 70 (Matthew 24:15).
4. Revelation 20:1-10 addresses the same crisis as chapters 4-19, the persecution of emperor Domitian (Daniel 7:19-27; Revelation 131-8; 17:7-11).
D. More could be said here, but the context of the passages cited in support of the rapture and tribulation denies the doctrine.
III. The Biblical Doctrine of Christ’s Second Coming
A. This is where our second interpretive key is vital; obscure passages like Revelation 20:1-10 must fit the plain statements, not vice versa.
B. First, the word “rapture” never occurs in the Bible; it is pulled from the Latin Vulgate rendering of 1 Thessalonians 4:17.
C. Proponents claim it will be secret, millions just disappear, but the text itself shows it will be remarkably loud (1 Thessalonians 4:16; 2 Thessalonians 1:5-9).
D. The Bible plainly teaches one resurrection and judgment of the righteous and the wicked on one fixed day (John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; Acts 17:30-31; 24:14-15; Romans 2:5-11).
E. The Bible plainly teaches that, at the end, Christ will deliver the kingdom to the Father, not receive it from Him (1 Corinthians 15:20-26).
Conclusion:
1. The doctrines of the rapture, tribulation, and millennium rest on poor interpretive principles that fail to honor the context of the passages.
2. The only passage offered to argue for an earthly millennial reign is Revelation 20:1-10, an obscure, highly figurative text.
3. The many plain statements concerning Christ’s return militate against the premillennial interpretation of this one highly figurative text.
4. Should we really bend the plain teachings to fit the figurative?