I like this channel, because the pastor doesn’t bash people who believe differently. That is *extremely* refreshing - and it’s all too rare. Courtesy and graciousness to others go a long way.
While the debate is fascinating, this definitely should not be something that divides Christians or labels them as heretics if they believe in either of the schools of thought. None of us will fully understand the End of Times until it finally happens. What's more important is spreading the Gospel and keeping the Faith.
It absolutely is a hearsay, as dispensaries teach people to live their lives based off their beliefs. Not to mention they belittle the resurrection by saying it was some plan b and was never intended for Israel.
@@Ajsirb24The end has not already come. 2Thessalonians 2:2-3 “Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,”
@nemoexnuqual3643 1 Thessalonians 3:4: Indeed, when we were with you, we were telling you beforehand that we are about to suffer affliction, as also it came to pass, and you know. 1 Timothy 1:16: Because of this, I was shown mercy, that in me, the foremost, Christ Jesus might display perfect patience, as a pattern for those being about to believe on Him to eternal life. 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7: For indeed, it is righteous with God to repay those afflicting you with tribulation and to you being afflicted, repose with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven, with His mighty angels. 2 Timothy 4:1: I earnestly declare before God and Christ Jesus, the One being about to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom.
I have been a Lutheran my whole life, gone through catechism, sunday service, sinday school, bible studys... why didnt i know any of this. I think i need to have a word with my Pastor.
I find that even unto this very day it is "the thing" for the majority of American Arminian churches to be Pre-Millennial, and it is also the thing for them to hold Contemporary "Worship" services -- and when I searched UA-cam for the premillennial Church of the Lutheran Brethren, I noticed that a lot of their services and culture is Contemporary... Hmm, connection?
Hi Gabriel, I grew up in the Lutheran Brethren and have over 100 years of heritage in it. The CLB was pre-mill WAAAAYYYY before there was any what we call "contemporary" worship. It was a "low church" form of worship, with a pared back liturgy, much less than the Missouri Synod or others. Three or four hymns, someone singing for "special music" (often another hymn type song), scripture reading by lay people, and a law/gospel sermon. I'm in a town without a CLB church so attend an AFLC (Free Lutheran) congregation, which is similar in function to the CLB as far as services go. There is always a push to go more "contemporary" but we've managed to keep it under control in my current congregation. Both the CLB and AFLC have autonomous congregations, getting together to do things that a local congregation can't do on it's own, like maintain a seminary, do world missions and so on, so each congregation would decide how traditional or contemporary their service would be. The CLB was formed in Minnesota in 1900, and as far as I know was pre-mill from the start.
Historic Reformed view is also Amillenial, but there are definitely a lot of dispies/premills in the Reformed Baptist and YRR groups. I appreciate the video.
@@johnking9161Brother, the “reformed” churches are all over the map. You can go to three “reformed” churches and hear all three “millennial” preached. Without a standard liturgy Protestant churches are all over the map.
3:51 I’m not post mil so I’m not defending them, but they don’t say there will be some kind of “mass conversion”at the end. It’s more of a gradual climb, like the stock market with ups and downs but overall upward trajectory
The Augsburg confession is really short (and vague!) and is not directly saying what you say it says. It says Jesus will return on the final "day", which is not contradictory to a milennium 2 Pet 3:8. It condems the thought of non-everlasting punishment (without saying if the souls will live forever to receive it or not). And it seems to condemn saducee teachings, that says that only those who are still alive when Messiah returns will rule with him. I see no clear a-millenialism in that section, and please do not forget what our Lord Jesus taught us to pray. God bless you Cooper, and keep up the good work - I love listening to you!
The amillennialism is more heavily implied in the part of Article XVII which states, “…They condemn also others who are now spreading certain Jewish opinions, that before the resurrection of the dead the godly shall take possession of the kingdom of the world, the ungodly being everywhere suppressed.” The premillennial view is that the godly will rule with Christ, although there are some loopholes to the article as Dr. Cooper explained.
In the “City of God”, Book 20, chapters 8 to 16. Hope that helps. He probably deals with Rev 20 elsewhere as well, but that is all I know of. (He wrote and preached a *huge* amount.)
Good video, thanks! Can you lead me to a resource(s) where the Lutheran (LCMS) understanding of Rev. 20:1-6 is thoroughly discussed at the layperson level?
I've never heard of anyone being excommunicated from lutheranism. We aren't like the catholic church, where there is a centralized conglomerate. You may be kicked out of one lutheran church, but that doesn't mean you're kicked out of them all. And, not all Lutheran churches adhere to the same practices and even set of beliefs. But, we all study the Bible and believe that belief in Jesus is the only way to salvation.
Lutherans don't excommunicate people. If you don't agree with the teachings, you can probably find a church that fits your view better. If it were straight up heretical, like denying the deity of Jesus, you might be asked to leave.
As far as I understand, several statements from his last sermons on Genesis seem to refute the assumptions in conditional immortality. So, he may have dabbled with it and kicked the idea around a bit. But, he was never dogmatic about it and, again, seemed to retreat from the idea near the end of his life.
“The Apostolic Brethren, an unofficial and persecuted monastic order in late thirteenth- and early fourteenth-century northern Italy.” According to Watson, they “believed in a doctrine of the rapture that was recorded in 1316 by a notary in Vercelli”.(16) Here Watson may be nearer the mark. The Apostolic Brethren were led in their later years by Fra Dolcino. But while Fra Dolcino is said to have believed that the Apostolic Brethren (a small group) would be removed to “Paradise” before the attack of Antichrist, it comes second hand, apparently via torture under the inquisition.(17) 4/ According to Watson, “Denys van Leeuwen, a fifteenth-century Dutch Carthusian monk, believed in a ‘pre- or mid-tribulational rapture, a resurrection of lyf’ that took place ‘sodenly’ and by surprise, yet in the midst of ‘dangers to come’ and ‘greet tribulation’”.(18) 17 Bennett, “Raptured”, 155-61. 18 Watson, Dispensationalism, 9.
I grew up in the Church of the Lutheran Brethren, which is still pre-mill. I love my 100 year CLB heritage (don't live close to a CLB church now so part of an AFLC congregation), but no longer hold to pre-mill views. A CLB pastor once was asked by a Bible college student about the CLB and pietism and he described it as a "warm" pietism. I did not become a member of the congregation just by being baptized and confirmed there. When I turned 18, a couple of the elders asked to speak to me after church and just asked me to tell them about my faith. The CLB has been condemned in the past for requiring a profession of faith to become a member. Thanks for not hating on the CLB and the AFLC in your comments. I no longer agree with the pre-mill stance. I wondered where it came from, and assumed it was due to people from many church denominations listening to Christian radio, most of which has a Baptist leaning (KTIS for me growing up in the Twin Cities, started by Billy Graham, I believe.) I did not realize there was a stream of American Lutheranism that was pre-mill back a hundred years or so. The Lutheran Free Church (that the AFLC sprang from after the ALC formed by merger) and the CLB were formed in 1897 and 1900 respectively, so would have been hearing those arguments for pre-mill. Once again, as always, I enjoy your explanations and thanks for this one.
I am Baptist thinking about joining LCMS, but I might also be pre-millenial. I don't believe in the rapture (which Baptists usually teach), but I also don't believe in the amillenial eschatology. I'm wondering if they let me in or they say I have to agree with the end times eschatology in order to join the church.
Covenant Theology Covenant Theology is typical of reformed theologians. This includes the Reformed and Christian Reformed, the Presbyterian, the Anglican (or Episcopal), and to some extent, the Lutheran. The Catholics also recognize the same approximate divisions of Scriptural history, while differing on the question of man's responsibility in the covenant of grace. Many Messianic Jews, the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Reformed, Anglicans, Methodists, and Lutherans, all subscribe to the "No Millennialism (Amillennialism)" hermeneutics of Christian Eschatology. The Christian church denominations just named, fall either into the "Confessional" or "Rivival" mainstream varieties of Evangelicalism. Confessionalism is the emphasis on historic Protestant orthodoxy represented by conservative Presbyterian churches, certain Baptist churches, and some confessional Lutheran churches. Revivalism (Emphasis on religious experience) is represented by some quarters of Methodism, Wesleyan Holiness, Pentecostal/Charismatic, Anabaptist, Baptist, and Presbyterian. When modern Dispensational Theology, subscribed too by the Plymouth Brethren (JN Darby), in coherence with Dispensational Premillennialism, became popular within Fundamentalism - a strain of Evangelicalism that was adopted within Baptist, Pentecostal, and Charismatic circles, Amillennial Eschatology declined in many Protestant circles. Fundamentalism (Early 20th century), though it is a variety of Evangelicalism, is not with the two mainstream varieties of Evangelicalism. The difference between the two before named theologies, in relation to the two named eschatologies, can be understood and now explained. Covenant Theology is eschatology as it was understood by John Calvin, which was a component to John Calvin's acceptance of Historic Premillennialism. Covenant Theology was not only a component of Historic Premillennialism, but it also has been a component of Amillennial eschatology, and Postmillennialism. Covenant Theology, then, is a Calvinistic conceptual overview for understanding the overall flow of the Bible through the covenants, beginning with the Adamic Covenant of works (Life/obedience), which represents all of mankind as the federal head (Romans 12: 21); this includes Adam's failure (Genesis 3: 15), God's grace of faith in Jesus Christ (Genesis 3: 15/Romans 16: 20), and eternal life (Psalm 2 and 110/Isaiah 53/Philippians 2: 5-11/Revelation 5: 9-11). The Noahic Covenant (Genesis 8: 20-9: 17) has redemption motifs (Saved from the flood), and creation motifs (De-creation to creation). The Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 12, 15, 17) is for Abraham and his descendants (Genesi 17: 17); it is everlasting in that it cannot be replaced by any other covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant is accepted by faith, not by works (Genesis 15: 16), and it involves the external sign of circumcision (Genesis 17: 10) matched with circumcision of the heart (Jeremiah 4: 4). The followers of Christ are children of Abraham (Galatians 3: 7), with Baptism as the external sign inherited also by Gentiles (Galatians 3: 6). The Mosaic Covenant (Exodus Chapters 19-24) found in Deuteronomy is God's dwelling in the people's midst (Exodus 6: 7/Leviticus 26: 12), which is a gracious covenant (Redemptive-Exodus 20: 1-2) and mostly viewed as referring too the Old Covenant; it is a re-enactment of the works covenant (Condemnation and death), National (Blessings for obedience-purely legal), which is a sacrificial system that points to the Gospel of salvation through a mediator. The New Covenant is alluded too by Jesus at the Last Supper, as well as Jeremiah 31: 31-33, and Isaiah 49: 8. The New Covenant is spoken of again in Hebrews chapters 7-10. Covenant signs and seals occurr in Matthew 5: 17-18, 12: 41-42/ Luke 1: 32/Hebrews 3: 5-6, 9: 12, and Protestants hold that the Covenant signs and seals are the Lord's Supper and Baptism. John Calvin adopted the position called Historic Premillennialism followed by Justin Martyr. Justin Martyr's eschatological view did have leanings on chiliasm (Literal 1,000). Covenant Theology, along with Historical Premillennialism, is the view which Calvin held, as he rejected the basic tenets of Dispensational Premillennialism, such as pretribulation rapture. Progressive Revelation, otherwise called Dispensational Premillennial Theology, teaches that Biblical eschatology follows the Biblical dispensational periods: Innocence (Genesis 1: 1 to 3: 7), conscience (Genesis 3: 8 to 8: 22), government (Genesis 9: 1 to 11: 32), patriarchal (Genesis 21: 1 to Exodus 19: 25), Mosaic (Exodus 20: 1 to Acts 2: 4), grace (Acts 2: 4 to Revelation 20: 3), and the thousand years yet to come (Revelation 20: 4 to 20: 6). Progressive Revelation is a component of Futurism (Premillennialism). Progressive Revelation holds that Revelation 4-5 are future events, which overlapp with this Messianic Age, Revelation having seven sections: 1: 1-3 to 3: 22/4: 1 to 7: 17/8: 1 to 11: 19/ 12: 1 to 14: 20/15: 1 to 16: 21/17: 1 to 19: 2/20: 1 to 22: 21. Covenant Theology stands in contrast to Dispensationalism, in regard to the relationship between the Old Covenant with National Israel, and the New Covenant with the house of Israel (Jeremiah 31: 31). Covenant Theology is often referred too, by it's detractors, as Supersessionism or Replacement Theology, because, of a mistaken perception, that it teaches the abandonment of God's promises made to the Jews, by replacing Jews with Christians. To the contrary, in fact Covenant Theology holds that God has not abandoned His promises to Israel in the personal work of the Messiah (Jesus of Nazareth) who established the church in organic continuity with Israel. Again, the augsburg Confession (Article XVII) rejects chiliasm. Division should never be an option, within the framework of Historism, which views prophecy as being fulfilled in the past, present, and future, and was the belief held by Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, John Knox, John Thomas, and Idealism found in Postmilleniallism, which holds that eschatological materials are symbolic (Spiritual), especially if division is ignited by educated degree possessing pastors. These minor views are not grounds for any Christian Church to practice Closed Communion. All of the Biblical eschatological views - Amillennialism, Historic Premillennialism, Dispensational Premillennialism, covered in this thesis, are problematic in some way, and they cannot be fully conclusive.
I get more and more the feeling that there are no normal people who really are Lutheran, Roman, or eastern. There are all these condemned and/or required things that pretty much excludes you in some way or another if you are even going to think your own thoughts, in your own concepts, rather than simply regurgitating something that doesn't really mean anything to you. I don't even know what the terms in this video mean, and now find that some of them, should I hold them, the church condemns me for? I think the solution for most people is to simply not look into things and simply go to their church and participate in their community. This last thing IS what Christian's do I feel, while quarriling over every detail is not. Why don't we rather agree that some things are really not possible to know, and be careful before condemning left and right?
"This last thing IS what Christian's do I feel, while quarriling over every detail is not." No - it's what Christ has DONE. "Why don't we rather agree that some things are really not possible to know," So... "what is truth"?
I don't understand how you think people who believe in pre millennialism was a crazy thing for a Lutheran. All the Ante-Nicene fathers were pre-millenialists. Ignatius, Iranaeus, Polycarp, Justin Martyr. And many others. It's not a crazy thought. Now I don't go with dispensationalism, but I do believe pre millinialism is more biblical than amillennialism. And I do not believe it's something that should destroy the communion of fellow Christians. We can have doctrinal differences as long as they do not interfere with the Gospel and Salvation. I mean if you look at the early church they all had major differences. And yet they communed with one another.
Friends in the comment section. Your local church could be just as wrong as this one, only different. It's not a church just because it says so. A church is described at John 14:23.
Why do you ignore what the early Patristic fathers taught regarding pre-millenial and pre-trib views? I teach theology and document the early church records and what Sola Scriptura actually says regarding this most important issue. Visit "Nugget of Truth" to see what the early church actually believed in and taught.
Dear Dr. Cooper, How are we reformed people ever going to consider Lutheranism when you use thumbnails we see as idolatrous and violations of the second commandment on the videos that get to the differences? I understand you don't hold our position, even collapsing the first and second commandment, but as someone who used to be reformed you should know about this conviction of ours, no?
This isn't Christian at all. It's a bunch of he said, she said. That's not Christian. Not doing anybody any good spiritually. I actually started out in a church like this, and was said to have been baptized before I could have known what baptism is. Then you go through this thing when you are 12 called confirmation, where you basically memorize the apostle's creed in order to get into heaven. It's pure garbage. I'm sure it's worse now.
I don't agree with any of those positions. Jesus himself said He would lose nothing but raise them up on the last day, the second coming of Christ is the last day, how can there be a 1000 years reign of Christ after the second coming since the second coming is the last day? The absurdity is obvious. John Nelson Darby invented rapture theology along with the so called earthly reign of Christ for a 1000 years, and the false teaching that unsaved Jews are still God's chosen covenant people.
To all the teachers who subscribe to the Small Catechism and the Augsburg Confession and yet are still calling themselves "Lutheran": I hereby congratulate you on the great success you're currently enjoying. Your goal of confusing everyone is achieved. You can stop now. I suggest you switch to calling yourself "non-denominational," since that is what you are. To clarify: True Lutherans subscribe to all the Lutheran confessions which are contained in the Book of Concord of 1580, including the Formula of Concord. This means (among other things) that, to be a true Lutheran teacher, you must preach God's Law in such a way as to demand obedience from everyone. And you must continue to do so until you condemn everyone, most especially including yourself. As it is written, "Let God be true but every man a liar" (Ro. 3:4).
None of the Scandinavian churches subscribed to the Book of Concord, they saw the Formula as an inter-German debate unrelated to the churches of Sweden, Denmark and Norway. I suppose you can call them 'non-denominational' but History doesn't agree, especially regarding King Gustav Adolf. Yet then again history isn't a friend to modern definitions.
@@j.g.4942 Thanks for the reply. I don't care to call them non-denominational. My point is that the spiritual reality of the situation would be better reflected if they would begin using that adjective to describe themselves. For example, the doctrine and practice of the state Lutheran Church in Norway is currently non-denominational. If I went to a Lutheran Church in Norway, I would not expect to hear Christian doctrine preached (e.g. Jesus' resurrection from the dead). Rather, I would expect to hear about communal values such as tolerance, diversity and inclusion. Again, I'm not trying to stop churches from preaching tolerance, diversity and inclusion. That's fine. Go ahead. I ask that they would please stop calling themselves Lutheran. It's confusing.
@@danielfinn9460 fair enough, my point was just a corrective regarding the Lutheran churches of northern Europe before the 'age of enlightenment'. Their Concord with central and eastern European Lutherans shows that church bodies holding faithfully to the catechisms and the CA can/have and possibly are considered Lutheran, just without some distinctions developed in Germany. It's like saying those Ukrainian Lutherans aren't Lutheran because they have eastern orthodox practises and sensibilities as well. Or like saying Lutherans who consider Ecclesiasticus and Maccabees canonical aren't Lutheran, despite the fact the BoC doesn't speak against them, nor enumerates a list of canonical books.
@@j.g.4942 Well, you seem to be asking me to be in fellowship with a hypothetical person. The question "Should Maccabees be included in the canon of Scripture?" is a specific and debatable question. I'd be happy to discuss it. I'd be happy to write a paper for a conference on that topic. And I expect there would be some interesting debate. But the point remains that Lutherans who haven't subscribed to the Formula of Concord should do so. It addresses and resolves questions that came up after the AC and the Catechisms were written. In the years between 1530 and 1580, Calvinism and the RC counter-reformation were finding new ways to attack and confound the truth of Scripture. Chemnitz and the other Concordists succeeded in re-establishing and defending Christian doctrine. For example, article VI "Third Use of the Law" refuted the false teaching of Antinomianism, which is the teaching that regenerated Christians no longer need to hear the Law. This false teaching plagued Lutheranism from the start. It's a problem that has only gotten worse over the centuries. "Lutherans" who fall into this false doctrine need to be corrected before that can be considered Lutheran or Christian. Jesus says "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word" (Jn.14:23).
@wc8048 No, it's not. I also left because there was a lot of liberalism and apostasy being let into the doors. Catholicism was even taught as Christian.
Jesus is very clear. Everything happens when Jesus comes back at the “last day.” “For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.” John 6:40 “There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day.” John 12:48 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out-those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned!” John 5:28-29 Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, and Reformed all believe this. The non-denomination denominations (who “go by the Bible”- LOL) are deceived into believing their pre trib rapture heresy.
emanuel kournianos you do realize that the term “heresy” refers to a doctrine that is essential to salvation, right? Someone’s difference in interpretation regarding pre, mid or post rapture is hardly a salvation issue. By the way, many of the early church fathers were clearly pretrib rapture believers. You may want to research that. There are many hard core Christ followers (myself included) who believe in a pretrib position-that does not make me a “heretic”. I would suggest you consider changing your language towards your fellow Christian brothers and sisters.
All verses in scripture concerning the "last days" and "end of days" are within the context of the Apostles and their generation of people. Jesus Christ prophesied that His generation will not pass away until He returns. There's no way around it. Our Lord returned within that generation as was foretold.
I don't understand the terms and references you're making. I feel like this is only for the already initiated. I was hoping you would mention the Rapture, who was or might be the anti-Christ, the mark of the beast, etc. Gonna' have to give you a thumbs down for this. Not sorry.
@@dimitri1225 Read up on Oadre Pio and see what a holy man he was. Then read up on Martin Kuther and find out how truly evil he was. "By their fruits ye shall know them."
@Dale Camden Padre Pio is often misquoted on that. What Padre Pio said was that it is possible that Hod forgave Mussolini and John Kennedy their sins, and that they are now both in Heaven. God will forgive the worst sinner of the worst sins if they will repent.
Jordan Cooper. You quoted what the Lutherans and men have said about the end time, So why don't you say what the Bible says about it?? The Bible is our only sauce of truth. The Bible teaches a Pre-tribulation rapture, [Jesus coming to take His people to Heaven]. Then the great tribulation period, Then Jesus coming from Heaven with His people, Then the 1000 year reign, Then the devil will be let loose and deceive people, Then the Great white throne judgment.
Shalom and blessings Alan. Could you give me one scripture which teaches, in context, a pre-trib rapture please?John Walvoord, the pre-trib pope couldn't, neither can John MaCarthur, neither can Tommy Ice, neither could Tim LeHaye. So, Alan, what do you know that they don't know? Every blessing.
@@DTH1661 The Epistle to the Thessalonians tells us about the pre-tribulation rapture. 1 Thess 1: 10. Jesus has delivered us from the coming wrath. 1 Thess 5: 9 says we aren't appointed to wrath, This is in relation to the coming wrath, [The great tribulation period], Also In relation to the coming great tribulation period, Jesus said we won't go through it, if we watch and pray, Lk 21: 36. 1 Thess 4: 13--18 talks about the pre-tribulation rapture. There's no comfort in thinking we go through the great tribulation period. [V18]. So does 2 Thess 2: 1--7. V3 doesn't not mean apostasy as people believe, The Greek meaning is taken from two Greek words which put together mean, "A Departing". Please note, 2 Thess 2: 3 doesn't say a departing from the faith, Does it. NO. Whereas 1 Tim 4: 1 does 2 Thess 2: 3 &Vs 6--7 says the Church has to go before the man of sin can come, as we are holding him up from coming. 1 Thess 2: 19. 1 Thess 3: 13 says we come back with Jesus, As does Zech 14: 5. Rev 19: 14.. Matt 24: 29--31 Talks about events after the tribulation period and v 31 say Jesus sends His Angels to gather the elect Jews, as well as does who get saved during the great tribulation period. Whereas Before the great tribulation period, Jesus comes personally for His people. Jn 14: 1--3, 1 Thess 4: 14--17. These two scriptures are a different event to that in Matt 24: 31. Nowhere does the Bible say the Church goes through the great tribulation period. The Jews and those who get saved during the great tribulation period will go through it. So No One can tell people that the Church goes through the tribulation period, Because there are no scriptures. BUT there are scriptures that prove the pre-trib rapture, as have already been shown.
I like this channel, because the pastor doesn’t bash people who believe differently. That is *extremely* refreshing - and it’s all too rare. Courtesy and graciousness to others go a long way.
In these times so very tragically dominated by dispensationalism, this assessment is like a wonderful breath of fresh air. ✔️
While the debate is fascinating, this definitely should not be something that divides Christians or labels them as heretics if they believe in either of the schools of thought. None of us will fully understand the End of Times until it finally happens. What's more important is spreading the Gospel and keeping the Faith.
If the "end times" haven't already occurred...
As long as people don't deny Jesus is messiah and accept that he fulfilled Daniel 9:27, I am lenient on eschatology
It absolutely is a hearsay, as dispensaries teach people to live their lives based off their beliefs. Not to mention they belittle the resurrection by saying it was some plan b and was never intended for Israel.
@@Ajsirb24The end has not already come.
2Thessalonians 2:2-3 “Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,”
@nemoexnuqual3643 1 Thessalonians 3:4: Indeed, when we were with you, we were telling you beforehand that we are about to suffer affliction, as also it came to pass, and you know.
1 Timothy 1:16: Because of this, I was shown mercy, that in me, the foremost, Christ Jesus might display perfect patience, as a pattern for those being about to believe on Him to eternal life.
2 Thessalonians 1:6-7: For indeed, it is righteous with God to repay those afflicting you with tribulation and to you being afflicted, repose with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven, with His mighty angels.
2 Timothy 4:1: I earnestly declare before God and Christ Jesus, the One being about to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom.
I have been a Lutheran my whole life, gone through catechism, sunday service, sinday school, bible studys... why didnt i know any of this. I think i need to have a word with my Pastor.
Thank you Pastor Cooper.
Thanks Dr Cooper enjoyed your presentation and will listen again in the future!!
Thanks for the shorter instructional videos. As a lay person, I have attention difficulty with the longer videos.
Great overview of eschatology!
Great stuff!
Great analysis of a tough topic
Still amazing and sad to me on what Christians will divide over and refuse the right arm of fellowship over...😰
I find that even unto this very day it is "the thing" for the majority of American Arminian churches to be Pre-Millennial, and it is also the thing for them to hold Contemporary "Worship" services -- and when I searched UA-cam for the premillennial Church of the Lutheran Brethren, I noticed that a lot of their services and culture is Contemporary... Hmm, connection?
Hi Gabriel, I grew up in the Lutheran Brethren and have over 100 years of heritage in it. The CLB was pre-mill WAAAAYYYY before there was any what we call "contemporary" worship. It was a "low church" form of worship, with a pared back liturgy, much less than the Missouri Synod or others. Three or four hymns, someone singing for "special music" (often another hymn type song), scripture reading by lay people, and a law/gospel sermon. I'm in a town without a CLB church so attend an AFLC (Free Lutheran) congregation, which is similar in function to the CLB as far as services go. There is always a push to go more "contemporary" but we've managed to keep it under control in my current congregation. Both the CLB and AFLC have autonomous congregations, getting together to do things that a local congregation can't do on it's own, like maintain a seminary, do world missions and so on, so each congregation would decide how traditional or contemporary their service would be. The CLB was formed in Minnesota in 1900, and as far as I know was pre-mill from the start.
Great video
Historic Reformed view is also Amillenial, but there are definitely a lot of dispies/premills in the Reformed Baptist and YRR groups. I appreciate the video.
Wrong! It is postmil!
@@johnking9161Brother, the “reformed” churches are all over the map. You can go to three “reformed” churches and hear all three “millennial” preached.
Without a standard liturgy Protestant churches are all over the map.
3:51 I’m not post mil so I’m not defending them, but they don’t say there will be some kind of “mass conversion”at the end. It’s more of a gradual climb, like the stock market with ups and downs but overall upward trajectory
The Augsburg confession is really short (and vague!) and is not directly saying what you say it says. It says Jesus will return on the final "day", which is not contradictory to a milennium 2 Pet 3:8. It condems the thought of non-everlasting punishment (without saying if the souls will live forever to receive it or not). And it seems to condemn saducee teachings, that says that only those who are still alive when Messiah returns will rule with him.
I see no clear a-millenialism in that section, and please do not forget what our Lord Jesus taught us to pray.
God bless you Cooper, and keep up the good work - I love listening to you!
The amillennialism is more heavily implied in the part of Article XVII which states, “…They condemn also others who are now spreading certain Jewish opinions, that before the resurrection of the dead the godly shall take possession of the kingdom of the world, the ungodly being everywhere suppressed.”
The premillennial view is that the godly will rule with Christ, although there are some loopholes to the article as Dr. Cooper explained.
More on Lutherans and eschatology: ua-cam.com/video/QuLr2tbaPic/v-deo.html
Have you done an episode on preterism?
Thank you
hi! Is eschatology (i.e- rapture, millenialism) secondary matters in protestantism or primary matters that divide or are heresy?
Personally I would say the rapture is heresy because that word or idea did not exist until the 1830s.
What about preterism vs idealism vs futurism?
Where can I find Augustine’s writing on Revelation 20?
In the “City of God”, Book 20, chapters 8 to 16. Hope that helps.
He probably deals with Rev 20 elsewhere as well, but that is all I know of. (He wrote and preached a *huge* amount.)
Good video, thanks! Can you lead me to a resource(s) where the Lutheran (LCMS) understanding of Rev. 20:1-6 is thoroughly discussed at the layperson level?
ua-cam.com/video/z6HeNmA0PXE/v-deo.html
Doctor cooper- is a Lutheran free to lean either amillenial or premillenial? Would a pre millennial view make them excommunicated from the church?
I've never heard of anyone being excommunicated from lutheranism. We aren't like the catholic church, where there is a centralized conglomerate.
You may be kicked out of one lutheran church, but that doesn't mean you're kicked out of them all.
And, not all Lutheran churches adhere to the same practices and even set of beliefs.
But, we all study the Bible and believe that belief in Jesus is the only way to salvation.
Lutherans don't excommunicate people. If you don't agree with the teachings, you can probably find a church that fits your view better. If it were straight up heretical, like denying the deity of Jesus, you might be asked to leave.
Did Luther come to believe in Conditional immortality, and if so why was this view later rejected or not upheld within Lutheranism?
No, I do not believe that Luther held to such a view.
As far as I understand, several statements from his last sermons on Genesis seem to refute the assumptions in conditional immortality. So, he may have dabbled with it and kicked the idea around a bit. But, he was never dogmatic about it and, again, seemed to retreat from the idea near the end of his life.
🙏
It would be very interesting to hear your exegesis of Romans 11 from an amillennial perspective.
Easy
What works are the dispinsational franciscans written about?
William C. Watson
Dispensationalism Before Darby
This books maybe helps
“The Apostolic Brethren, an unofficial and persecuted monastic order in late thirteenth- and early fourteenth-century northern Italy.” According to Watson, they “believed in a doctrine of the rapture that was recorded in 1316 by a notary in Vercelli”.(16) Here Watson may be nearer the mark. The Apostolic Brethren were led in their later years by Fra Dolcino. But while Fra Dolcino is said to have believed that the Apostolic Brethren (a small group) would be removed to “Paradise” before the attack of Antichrist, it comes second hand, apparently via torture under the inquisition.(17)
4/ According to Watson, “Denys van Leeuwen, a fifteenth-century Dutch Carthusian monk, believed in a ‘pre- or mid-tribulational rapture, a resurrection of lyf’ that took place ‘sodenly’ and by surprise, yet in the midst of ‘dangers to come’ and ‘greet tribulation’”.(18)
17 Bennett, “Raptured”, 155-61.
18 Watson, Dispensationalism, 9.
What about preterism? The book of revelation is based on things that happened from 66-70AD??
I grew up in the Church of the Lutheran Brethren, which is still pre-mill. I love my 100 year CLB heritage (don't live close to a CLB church now so part of an AFLC congregation), but no longer hold to pre-mill views. A CLB pastor once was asked by a Bible college student about the CLB and pietism and he described it as a "warm" pietism. I did not become a member of the congregation just by being baptized and confirmed there. When I turned 18, a couple of the elders asked to speak to me after church and just asked me to tell them about my faith. The CLB has been condemned in the past for requiring a profession of faith to become a member. Thanks for not hating on the CLB and the AFLC in your comments. I no longer agree with the pre-mill stance. I wondered where it came from, and assumed it was due to people from many church denominations listening to Christian radio, most of which has a Baptist leaning (KTIS for me growing up in the Twin Cities, started by Billy Graham, I believe.) I did not realize there was a stream of American Lutheranism that was pre-mill back a hundred years or so. The Lutheran Free Church (that the AFLC sprang from after the ALC formed by merger) and the CLB were formed in 1897 and 1900 respectively, so would have been hearing those arguments for pre-mill. Once again, as always, I enjoy your explanations and thanks for this one.
ua-cam.com/video/YK_xqBxXDBU/v-deo.html
Cool
Can I subscribe to Partial Preterism and subscribe to the Book of Concord? I accept both Amillennialism and Partial Preterism
I came to preterism because of the very Lutheran belief of Sola Scriptora
I am LCMS however I believe the pre-millenial view
I am Baptist thinking about joining LCMS, but I might also be pre-millenial. I don't believe in the rapture (which Baptists usually teach), but I also don't believe in the amillenial eschatology. I'm wondering if they let me in or they say I have to agree with the end times eschatology in order to join the church.
Looking into LCMS good question I'm pre mill and will not change mind.
Covenant Theology
Covenant Theology is typical of reformed theologians. This includes the Reformed and Christian Reformed, the Presbyterian, the Anglican (or Episcopal), and to some extent, the Lutheran. The Catholics also recognize the same approximate divisions of Scriptural history, while differing on the question of man's responsibility in the covenant of grace. Many Messianic Jews, the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Reformed, Anglicans, Methodists, and Lutherans, all subscribe to the "No Millennialism (Amillennialism)" hermeneutics of Christian Eschatology. The Christian church denominations just named, fall either into the "Confessional" or "Rivival" mainstream varieties of Evangelicalism. Confessionalism is the emphasis on historic Protestant orthodoxy represented by conservative Presbyterian churches, certain Baptist churches, and some confessional Lutheran churches. Revivalism
(Emphasis on religious experience) is represented by some quarters of Methodism, Wesleyan Holiness, Pentecostal/Charismatic, Anabaptist, Baptist, and Presbyterian. When modern Dispensational Theology, subscribed too by the Plymouth Brethren (JN Darby), in coherence with Dispensational Premillennialism, became popular within Fundamentalism - a strain of Evangelicalism that was adopted within Baptist, Pentecostal, and Charismatic circles, Amillennial Eschatology declined in many Protestant circles. Fundamentalism (Early 20th century), though it is a variety of Evangelicalism, is not with the two mainstream varieties of Evangelicalism. The difference between the two before named theologies, in relation to the two named eschatologies, can be understood and now explained.
Covenant Theology is eschatology as it was understood by John Calvin, which was a component to John Calvin's acceptance of Historic Premillennialism. Covenant Theology was not only a component of Historic Premillennialism, but it also has been a component of Amillennial eschatology, and Postmillennialism. Covenant Theology, then, is a Calvinistic conceptual overview for understanding the overall flow of the Bible through the covenants, beginning with the Adamic Covenant of works (Life/obedience), which represents all of mankind as the federal head (Romans 12: 21); this includes Adam's failure (Genesis 3: 15), God's grace of faith in Jesus Christ (Genesis 3: 15/Romans 16: 20), and eternal life
(Psalm 2 and 110/Isaiah 53/Philippians 2: 5-11/Revelation 5: 9-11). The Noahic Covenant (Genesis 8: 20-9: 17) has redemption motifs
(Saved from the flood), and creation motifs (De-creation to creation). The Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 12, 15, 17) is for Abraham and his descendants
(Genesi 17: 17); it is everlasting in that it cannot be replaced by any other covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant is accepted by faith, not by works
(Genesis 15: 16), and it involves the external sign of circumcision
(Genesis 17: 10) matched with circumcision of the heart (Jeremiah 4: 4). The followers of Christ are children of Abraham (Galatians 3: 7), with Baptism as the external sign inherited also by Gentiles (Galatians 3: 6). The Mosaic Covenant (Exodus Chapters 19-24) found in Deuteronomy is God's dwelling in the people's midst (Exodus 6: 7/Leviticus 26: 12), which is a gracious covenant (Redemptive-Exodus 20: 1-2) and mostly viewed as referring too the Old Covenant; it is a re-enactment of the works covenant (Condemnation and death), National (Blessings for obedience-purely legal), which is a sacrificial system that points to the Gospel of salvation through a mediator. The New Covenant is alluded too by Jesus at the Last Supper, as well as Jeremiah 31: 31-33, and Isaiah 49: 8. The New Covenant is spoken of again in Hebrews chapters 7-10. Covenant signs and seals occurr in Matthew 5: 17-18, 12: 41-42/
Luke 1: 32/Hebrews 3: 5-6, 9: 12, and Protestants hold that the Covenant signs and seals are the Lord's Supper and Baptism. John Calvin adopted the position called Historic Premillennialism followed by Justin Martyr. Justin Martyr's eschatological view did have leanings on chiliasm (Literal 1,000). Covenant Theology, along with Historical Premillennialism, is the view which Calvin held, as he rejected the basic tenets of Dispensational Premillennialism, such as pretribulation rapture.
Progressive Revelation, otherwise called Dispensational Premillennial Theology, teaches that Biblical eschatology follows the Biblical dispensational periods: Innocence (Genesis 1: 1 to 3: 7), conscience (Genesis 3: 8 to 8: 22), government (Genesis 9: 1 to 11: 32), patriarchal
(Genesis 21: 1 to Exodus 19: 25), Mosaic (Exodus 20: 1 to Acts 2: 4), grace (Acts 2: 4 to Revelation 20: 3), and the thousand years yet to come (Revelation 20: 4 to 20: 6). Progressive Revelation is a component of Futurism (Premillennialism). Progressive Revelation holds that Revelation 4-5 are future events, which overlapp with this Messianic Age, Revelation having seven sections: 1: 1-3 to 3: 22/4: 1 to 7: 17/8: 1 to 11: 19/
12: 1 to 14: 20/15: 1 to 16: 21/17: 1 to 19: 2/20: 1 to 22: 21.
Covenant Theology stands in contrast to Dispensationalism, in regard to the relationship between the Old Covenant with National Israel, and the New Covenant with the house of Israel (Jeremiah 31: 31). Covenant Theology is often referred too, by it's detractors, as Supersessionism or Replacement Theology, because, of a mistaken perception, that it teaches the abandonment of God's promises made to the Jews, by replacing Jews with Christians. To the contrary, in fact Covenant Theology holds that God has not abandoned His promises to Israel in the personal work of the Messiah (Jesus of Nazareth) who established the church in organic continuity with Israel. Again, the augsburg Confession (Article XVII) rejects chiliasm.
Division should never be an option, within the framework of Historism, which views prophecy as being fulfilled in the past, present, and future, and was the belief held by Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, John Knox, John Thomas, and Idealism found in Postmilleniallism, which holds that eschatological materials are symbolic (Spiritual), especially if division is ignited by educated degree possessing pastors. These minor views are not grounds for any Christian Church to practice Closed Communion. All of the Biblical eschatological views - Amillennialism, Historic Premillennialism, Dispensational Premillennialism, covered in this thesis, are problematic in some way, and they cannot be fully conclusive.
I get more and more the feeling that there are no normal people who really are Lutheran, Roman, or eastern. There are all these condemned and/or required things that pretty much excludes you in some way or another if you are even going to think your own thoughts, in your own concepts, rather than simply regurgitating something that doesn't really mean anything to you. I don't even know what the terms in this video mean, and now find that some of them, should I hold them, the church condemns me for? I think the solution for most people is to simply not look into things and simply go to their church and participate in their community. This last thing IS what Christian's do I feel, while quarriling over every detail is not. Why don't we rather agree that some things are really not possible to know, and be careful before condemning left and right?
"This last thing IS what Christian's do I feel, while quarriling over every detail is not."
No - it's what Christ has DONE.
"Why don't we rather agree that some things are really not possible to know,"
So... "what is truth"?
@@jeffhein7275 You are right. It is what Christ has done, He did it first, since the beginning, now and for ever. Amen.
I don't understand how you think people who believe in pre millennialism was a crazy thing for a Lutheran. All the Ante-Nicene fathers were pre-millenialists. Ignatius, Iranaeus, Polycarp, Justin Martyr. And many others. It's not a crazy thought. Now I don't go with dispensationalism, but I do believe pre millinialism is more biblical than amillennialism. And I do not believe it's something that should destroy the communion of fellow Christians. We can have doctrinal differences as long as they do not interfere with the Gospel and Salvation. I mean if you look at the early church they all had major differences. And yet they communed with one another.
I don't know what you just said.
I think you are down playing how dominate premill was for the first four centuries of the Church.
But it wasn't...
It was almost as divided back then as it is now
St. Athanasius was postmillennial and maybe Ignatius
Very intellectual-soooo
I guess I really like 19th century Lutheran water. 7:21
Okay you should just tell us to go to the August Berg confession if we want to find out what Lutheran
august berg
They kept catholic eschatology as they were busy reforming soteriology.
Soteirology matters Eschatology can be settled later.
If the early Church had different views on Eschatology. Then they would be
Friends in the comment section. Your local church could be just as wrong as this one, only different. It's not a church just because it says so. A church is described at John 14:23.
Joseph Seiss
Why do you ignore what the early Patristic fathers taught regarding pre-millenial and pre-trib views? I teach theology and document the early church records and what Sola Scriptura actually says regarding this most important issue. Visit "Nugget of Truth" to see what the early church actually believed in and taught.
You're skipping around the bush just come out and say what we believe so I can test it with what other things I've heard
Im not Lutheran but i am Amil.
Dear Dr. Cooper,
How are we reformed people ever going to consider Lutheranism when you use thumbnails we see as idolatrous and violations of the second commandment on the videos that get to the differences?
I understand you don't hold our position, even collapsing the first and second commandment, but as someone who used to be reformed you should know about this conviction of ours, no?
Don’t get it???? Very confusing. Very university theologyish.
He's president of a theological seminary, so that's how he sometimes presents more specific topics.
Amill makes no sense. This is what happens when you allegorize the text and don't read it properly
"Debbie Downer"
What about Jesus message and not Lutheran message . The whole Bible. Leave and guide by Holy Spirt.
This isn't Christian at all. It's a bunch of he said, she said. That's not Christian. Not doing anybody any good spiritually. I actually started out in a church like this, and was said to have been baptized before I could have known what baptism is. Then you go through this thing when you are 12 called confirmation, where you basically memorize the apostle's creed in order to get into heaven. It's pure garbage. I'm sure it's worse now.
Okay you should just tell us to go to the
I don't agree with any of those positions. Jesus himself said He would lose nothing but raise them up on the last day, the second coming of Christ is the last day, how can there be a 1000 years reign of Christ after the second coming since the second coming is the last day? The absurdity is obvious.
John Nelson Darby invented rapture theology along with the so called earthly reign of Christ for a 1000 years, and the false teaching that unsaved Jews are still God's chosen covenant people.
Augustine is more postmillenial than amill.
To all the teachers who subscribe to the Small Catechism and the Augsburg Confession and yet are still calling themselves "Lutheran":
I hereby congratulate you on the great success you're currently enjoying. Your goal of confusing everyone is achieved. You can stop now. I suggest you switch to calling yourself "non-denominational," since that is what you are.
To clarify:
True Lutherans subscribe to all the Lutheran confessions which are contained in the Book of Concord of 1580, including the Formula of Concord. This means (among other things) that, to be a true Lutheran teacher, you must preach God's Law in such a way as to demand obedience from everyone. And you must continue to do so until you condemn everyone, most especially including yourself. As it is written, "Let God be true but every man a liar" (Ro. 3:4).
None of the Scandinavian churches subscribed to the Book of Concord, they saw the Formula as an inter-German debate unrelated to the churches of Sweden, Denmark and Norway.
I suppose you can call them 'non-denominational' but History doesn't agree, especially regarding King Gustav Adolf. Yet then again history isn't a friend to modern definitions.
@@j.g.4942
Thanks for the reply.
I don't care to call them non-denominational. My point is that the spiritual reality of the situation would be better reflected if they would begin using that adjective to describe themselves. For example, the doctrine and practice of the state Lutheran Church in Norway is currently non-denominational. If I went to a Lutheran Church in Norway, I would not expect to hear Christian doctrine preached (e.g. Jesus' resurrection from the dead). Rather, I would expect to hear about communal values such as tolerance, diversity and inclusion.
Again, I'm not trying to stop churches from preaching tolerance, diversity and inclusion. That's fine. Go ahead. I ask that they would please stop calling themselves Lutheran. It's confusing.
@@danielfinn9460 fair enough, my point was just a corrective regarding the Lutheran churches of northern Europe before the 'age of enlightenment'.
Their Concord with central and eastern European Lutherans shows that church bodies holding faithfully to the catechisms and the CA can/have and possibly are considered Lutheran, just without some distinctions developed in Germany.
It's like saying those Ukrainian Lutherans aren't Lutheran because they have eastern orthodox practises and sensibilities as well. Or like saying Lutherans who consider Ecclesiasticus and Maccabees canonical aren't Lutheran, despite the fact the BoC doesn't speak against them, nor enumerates a list of canonical books.
@@j.g.4942 Well, you seem to be asking me to be in fellowship with a hypothetical person.
The question "Should Maccabees be included in the canon of Scripture?" is a specific and debatable question. I'd be happy to discuss it. I'd be happy to write a paper for a conference on that topic. And I expect there would be some interesting debate.
But the point remains that Lutherans who haven't subscribed to the Formula of Concord should do so. It addresses and resolves questions that came up after the AC and the Catechisms were written. In the years between 1530 and 1580, Calvinism and the RC counter-reformation were finding new ways to attack and confound the truth of Scripture. Chemnitz and the other Concordists succeeded in re-establishing and defending Christian doctrine. For example, article VI "Third Use of the Law" refuted the false teaching of Antinomianism, which is the teaching that regenerated Christians no longer need to hear the Law. This false teaching plagued Lutheranism from the start. It's a problem that has only gotten worse over the centuries. "Lutherans" who fall into this false doctrine need to be corrected before that can be considered Lutheran or Christian. Jesus says "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word" (Jn.14:23).
@@danielfinn9460Does the Formula of Concord address Chiliasm?
I attended three different Lutheran Churches. None of them ever discussed any of these things, which is why I'm glad I left.
That's short sighted.
@wc8048 No, it's not. I also left because there was a lot of liberalism and apostasy being let into the doors. Catholicism was even taught as Christian.
Jesus is very clear.
Everything happens when Jesus comes back at the “last day.”
“For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
John 6:40
“There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day.”
John 12:48
“Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out-those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned!”
John 5:28-29
Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, and Reformed all believe this.
The non-denomination denominations (who “go by the Bible”- LOL) are deceived into believing their pre trib rapture heresy.
All from the same author of Revelation too :)
emanuel kournianos you do realize that the term “heresy” refers to a doctrine that is essential to salvation, right? Someone’s difference in interpretation regarding pre, mid or post rapture is hardly a salvation issue. By the way, many of the early church fathers were clearly pretrib rapture believers. You may want to research that. There are many hard core Christ followers (myself included) who believe in a pretrib position-that does not make me a “heretic”. I would suggest you consider changing your language towards your fellow Christian brothers and sisters.
It's kind of unnecessary to call it heresy
All verses in scripture concerning the "last days" and "end of days" are within the context of the Apostles and their generation of people. Jesus Christ prophesied that His generation will not pass away until He returns. There's no way around it. Our Lord returned within that generation as was foretold.
The Day of the Lord is the last day. It didn't happen in that generation, but I am hopeful we might see it soon!
I don't understand the terms and references you're making. I feel like this is only for the already initiated. I was hoping you would mention the Rapture, who was or might be the anti-Christ, the mark of the beast, etc. Gonna' have to give you a thumbs down for this. Not sorry.
Too much talk,get to the point. Im so tired of heady conversations lol reformers seem to go on and on and on
"Martin Luther is in Hell and all who follow him will surely join him there."
--St. Padre Pio
''Padre Pio is in hell and those who follow him will surely join him there.'' -Me
@@dimitri1225 Read up on Oadre Pio and see what a holy man he was. Then read up on Martin Kuther and find out how truly evil he was.
"By their fruits ye shall know them."
@Dale Camden Padre Pio is often misquoted on that. What Padre Pio said was that it is possible that Hod forgave Mussolini and John Kennedy their sins, and that they are now both in Heaven.
God will forgive the worst sinner of the worst sins if they will repent.
Who?
@@GeorgePenton-np9rhBoth are holy men who are sinners like the rest of us
Jordan Cooper. You quoted what the Lutherans and men have said about the end time, So why don't you say what the Bible says about it??
The Bible is our only sauce of truth.
The Bible teaches a Pre-tribulation rapture, [Jesus coming to take His people to Heaven]. Then the great tribulation period, Then Jesus coming from Heaven with His people, Then the 1000 year reign, Then the devil will be let loose and deceive people, Then the Great white throne judgment.
Not even close Alan...
The whole point is that people disagree with qhat the Scripture says. Every human is not their own Pope to see qhatever they want in ecery verse.
@@thesipesisrandom4534 You can call Jesus a liar, but I will believe Him.
Shalom and blessings Alan. Could you give me one scripture which teaches, in context, a pre-trib rapture please?John Walvoord, the pre-trib pope couldn't, neither can John MaCarthur, neither can Tommy Ice, neither could Tim LeHaye. So, Alan, what do you know that they don't know? Every blessing.
@@DTH1661 The Epistle to the Thessalonians tells us about the pre-tribulation rapture.
1 Thess 1: 10. Jesus has delivered us from the coming wrath. 1 Thess 5: 9 says we aren't appointed to wrath, This is in relation to the coming wrath, [The great tribulation period], Also In relation to the coming great tribulation period, Jesus said we won't go through it, if we watch and pray, Lk 21: 36.
1 Thess 4: 13--18 talks about the
pre-tribulation rapture.
There's no comfort in thinking we go through the great tribulation period. [V18].
So does 2 Thess 2: 1--7.
V3 doesn't not mean apostasy as people believe, The Greek meaning is taken from two Greek words which put together mean,
"A Departing". Please note, 2 Thess 2: 3 doesn't say a departing from the faith, Does it. NO. Whereas 1 Tim 4: 1 does
2 Thess 2: 3 &Vs 6--7 says the Church has to go before the man of sin can come, as we are holding him up from coming.
1 Thess 2: 19. 1 Thess 3: 13 says we come back with Jesus, As does Zech 14: 5.
Rev 19: 14..
Matt 24: 29--31 Talks about events after the tribulation period and v 31 say Jesus sends His Angels to gather the elect Jews, as well as does who get saved during the great tribulation period.
Whereas Before the great tribulation period, Jesus comes personally for His people.
Jn 14: 1--3, 1 Thess 4: 14--17.
These two scriptures are a different event to that in Matt 24: 31.
Nowhere does the Bible say the Church goes through the great tribulation period.
The Jews and those who get saved during the great tribulation period will go through it.
So No One can tell people that the Church goes through the tribulation period, Because there are no scriptures. BUT there are scriptures that prove the pre-trib rapture, as have already been shown.