How Have Christians Missed This?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 лип 2024
- Dr. Matthew Halsted is a professor at Eternity Bible College and he's the author of a new book, The End of the World As We Know It: What the Bible Really Says About The End Times.
Link to Book:
www.amazon.com/End-World-You-...
Please consider supporting my ministry by becoming a member here on UA-cam, or becoming a monthly patron. The link to become a patron is below.
/ theanalyticchristian
If you have questions or suggestions for a future video, please email me.
theanalytichchristian@gmail.com - Розваги
Recently my wife and I have questioned rapture ideology. My mother in law is a die hard “rapture is coming” person and can’t even fathom how we could question it because she’s been told about the rapture since early childhood.
At the same time, she’s unable to directly point to scripture that supports her point of view.
I’m thankful for these videos and these perspectives,
Thank you for watching! I would highly encourage to read Dr. Halsted’s book
Man these comments are a tire fire. People are so trigger by the denial of a doctrine that literally no one believed until the 19th century.
I see that you are also rejecting tHe word of God and choosing man's opinion over God's TRUTH!!
I am joking.
@@andrewmoon1917you almost had me😜
@@andrewmoon1917😂
Jesus makes a false prediction in Mark 9:1. He was referring to some seeing the literal return of the Son of Man at the end of the world - the Parousia, and we can tell this by reading the surrounding context and ruling out other interpretations that conservatives like to offer.
First of all, there are two major indicators that Mark 9:1 was not referring to the Transfiguration or the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.
1. Mk. 9:1 is connected to the previous passage (Mk. 8:38) which explicitly refers to the Parousia like it does in Mt. 16:27-28.
---
For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done.
“Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”
---
Obviously, the "Son of Man coming" in v. 28 can only refer to the previous passage where he comes "with angels and rewards each person according to what they have done."
Since this did not happen during the Transfiguration or the destruction of the Temple then that demonstrates these interpretations must be incorrect. Moreover, coming with "power" (δυνάμει) in Mk. 9:1 refers to the Parousia - Mk. 13:26, a phrase which Luke 9:27 omits. This is consistent with Luke's pattern elsewhere of redacting/removing the Markan Jesus' imminent eschatology. He does this because he's writing much later at a time when it had become embarrassing that the original imminent predictions never came true - see 2 Thess 2, 2 Peter 3, and John 21:22-23 for how other authors dealt with this embarrassment.
2. It does not make sense to warn "some will die" before seeing an event if the event in question was to take place a mere six days later as Mk. 9:2 says. Obviously, the warning necessitates a length of time long enough for some of those standing there to die.
"With respect to Transfiguration interpretation of the prophecy, here are a few comments: (1) Jesus gives the promise in a very solemn form ("Amen amen I say unto you") which is inappropriate by this reading, as it is hardly surprising that the disciples would be alive six days later. The reference to tasting death does not imply immediacy but the passage of time. (2) The Matthean form adds to the saying the statement that the Son of Man "shall reward every man according to his works" when he comes. This has universal scope and cannot pertain to the Transfiguration but rather Judgment Day (Matthew 10:15, 11:22-24, 12:36) which brings with it punishment and rewards (ch. 25). This cannot pertain to the Transfiguration but rather a future event at the "close of the age" (24:3), when the Son of Man comes in glory (24:30). The Markan form, which refers to the Son of Man as being ashamed of those ashamed of him, also has in view judgment. (3) The preterist interpretation that assigns fulfillment of all of the Olivet discourse to the Jewish War, again, needs to explain the universal scope ("all tribes of the earth shall mourn" - Mt. 24:30, "which took them all away" - Mt. 24:39, "before him shall be gathered all the nations" - Mt. 25:32) and the expectation (particularly explicit in Matthew) that this occurs at the "close of the age". - zanillamilla
Good interview. Halsted is a good thinker.
@@rocketmanshawn this is one of the few positive comments about the interview. Thanks!
@@TheAnalyticChristian It amazes me that your timing of the rapture makes the great crowd IN HEAVEN ( Rev 19;1-3 ) rejoicing at the destruction of the Babylon harlot is not the church . How absurd it is to believe that NONE of the holy apostles and the entire church will not be rejoicing at the destruction of the harlot. You cannot say that the great crowd is the church in Rev 19:1-3 because it makes your timing of the church AFTER Rev 19:15 and Matt 24: 29-31 IMPOSSIBLE . I bet you missed that !
He should totally debate Pastor Stephen Davey from The Shepherd's Church in Cary, NC.
The Text of Rev 3:10: "Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth."
An event will "come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth." The promise is to be taken out from the time of this global trial, not to be kept safe in the time of trial. These will be kept out of the the time of the trial.
Or preserved while on the earth during
@@rocketmanshawn Rev 3:10, "Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth." The Greek word ek is definitely "from" in Greek. And seeing that this trial will cover the Earth, we must be taken out "from" the Earth before the time of the trial begins. But that is how I read it, thank you for responding.
You have tribulation confused with Gods wrath. Pretribulation rapture is not biblical
If the tribulation is the pouring out of the wrath of God on the World, and we are saved from the wrath of God...
I reject...i reject...I reject...who and what is this guy speaking on his own authority?
@@smigadrum I agree with you. This is pretty routine though. Some new self-proclaimed "Biblical Scholar" always trots out and tries to debunk sound theology in the name of promoting their particular brand of heresy.
False starting premise
If the tribulation
Assumes the existence of a specific tribulation that is supposed to happen sometime in the future
@@miketatreau2347explain the hermeneutical and exegetical basis for the dispensational theory.
What are your thoughts about Psalm 2 verse 4-6, It sounds like God laugh
Sspeaking on 1 Thes, the author seems to beleive in the rapture, he only disagrees on the timing of it and the purpose.
The word "rapiemur" (we will be caught up) in the Latin Vulgate is the key term that has been translated and interpreted in various ways, leading to the concept of the Rapture in Christian eschatology.
@@williambillycraig1057 when you say, “the author seems to believe in the rapture” we have to be careful. If all you mean by rapture is “caught up in the air with Christ” then yes the author says that. But if by “rapture” you mean “caught up in the air with Christ and taken back to heaven to stay for seven years then return to earth” then no the author does not say that. And if Matthew’s interpretation is correct, then the author and his readers would have understood that we would be caught up in the air to immediately return with King Jesus to earth.
@@TheAnalyticChristian The definition is to be caught up, so I believe we all believe in the rapture. There are pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib, and pre-wrath raptures. I think the author should have defined his view better. I did get the takeaway that he believed in the post-trib, but I do not think he came out and said it.
John 14:1-4 “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. And where I go you know, and the way you know.”
Where does Jesus say He is going, what is He building and when He comes back, where will we go? The plain reading seems to be that where He is going, He will come to take us there, not to bring there to us. This will happen, but it does not happen in the passages, you have to read that into the text.
@@williambillycraig1057 at worst, this text is ambiguous. It could be compatible with the rapture interpretation or it could be compatible with Matthew’s view. If that’s the case we will have to look to other texts to determine which view we should adopt.
However, Matthew’s point is that this text seems to be teaching about a *final* dwelling place for us, not a temporary one. If that is right, then it makes better sense to interpret Jesus as teaching that he will bring the home he makes here at the final even when heaven and earth become one.
@@TheAnalyticChristian You said, "Matthew’s point is that this text seems to be teaching about a final dwelling place for us, not a temporary one." I agree, in Revelation 21:1-4 it reads,
Now I saw a new heaven and earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also, there was no more sea. Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.”
At the end of the millennium, our home in heaven will be brought to earth.
Speaking on 1 Cor, the author states that this is not the rapture; that is true, it is the changing of our bodies, which is only part of the whole.
It seems to me that the author only partially states our ideas about the rapture, attacks that part of the argument as a whole, and then believes he defeated the whole idea.
@@williambillycraig1057 all Matthew is aiming to show when discussing the passage from 1 Corinthians 15 is that that passage is not teaching the rapture. It is teaching the resurrection at the second coming of Christ though. There is nothing in that passage about the rapture.
I agree; that is why I said, "The author states that this is not the rapture; that is true; it is the changing of our bodies, which is only part of the whole." The author who was interviewed stated that someone wrote in some book that this is one of the top three rapture verses. I do not know anyone who claims this passage is about timing; as others point out, this passage shows what will happen to our bodies before the rapture. The author should have quoted the authors directly where they say this passage proves the rapture's timing, but I do not believe that he can, so I believe this is why he paraphrased; it seems dishonest to me.
6:10 the ones who died in Christ according to 1 Thessalonians 4:13,14 the ones who died knew they would all change in the twinkling prior to the ones who got caught up in the rapture. It covers both groups
just because the word rapture is not in the Bible does not mean scripture does point to us being taken out it is spiritually discern by those with the Holy spirit not intellectuals looking at it from a carnal mind you cant get there from here as they say 7 year tribulation is judgment on the lost not the saved
@@justonfletcher9508 Matthew Halsted and I are both Christians honestly searching for the truth in God’s word. That is very uncharitable of you to imply that he and I are looking at it from a “carnal mind”
The author asks that we take off our glasses; he assumes he has no glasses.
@@williambillycraig1057 he asks that you set aside your assumption about what the tribulation is and try your best to look at the texts that use the Greek word “thlipsis”, see how that is used throughout the New Testament, and let that inform your view of what the tribulation is. He is not claiming that he has no interpretive lens.
@@TheAnalyticChristian, it would have been better if he had acknowledged that. Instead, he said we should take ours off. To me, this implies that he believes that he does not wear them.
@@williambillycraig1057 listen again to what he said at that point in the interview. Immediately after saying to take off our interpretive lens he clarified and said he meant setting aside our assumptions and looking at the way “thlipsis” is used.
@@TheAnalyticChristian OK, I hate to ask, but do you know what time stamp he said that at?
I wear glasses
It amazes me that your timing of the rapture makes the great crowd IN HEAVEN ( Rev 19;1-3 ) rejoicing at the destruction of the Babylon harlot is not the church . How absurd it is to believe that NONE of the holy apostles and the entire church will not be rejoicing at the destruction of the harlot. You cannot say that the great crowd is the church in Rev 19:1-3 because it makes your timing of the church AFTER Rev 19:15 and Matt 24: 29-31 IMPOSSIBLE . I bet you missed that !
You could pass away peacefully to escape the tribulation. BTW We are already in tribulation it started with covid
@@TheCrawfojo Dr. Halsted makes a biblical case in this interview that the tribulation is the time between the ascension and the second coming of Christ. Why do you think it started with Covid?
@@TheAnalyticChristian That was the most obvious sign google the term gang stalkers (locus) and the term targeted individuals and understand it These people are victims of the locus in rev 9
That Generation in context, Matthew 24 If Jesus meant the the generation of His time, then all these things must have happened, when did these things occur?
Matthew 24:27-44.
#########################
For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.
For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.
“Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
“Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near.
So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near-at the doors!
Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.
“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only.
But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.
For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.
Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left.
Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left. Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming.
But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into.
Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.
#########################
Does it make more sense that these things did happen to that generation, or that these events are still yet to come, but when it does, that gen"generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place?"
@@williambillycraig1057 if you haven’t watched the video I suggest at the end titled “Solving the problem of the delay of the Parousia” then go and watch it for an answer to your question here.
@@TheAnalyticChristian ok, I will. Thank you
It is an hour long. 😞
I hope it is good. 🙂
Hey, I watched it, and my takeaway was that this judgment was delayed, but it will happen. Is this right? If so, the generation that sees these events "will by no means pass away till all these things take place " will be the one that sees all these things come to pass in some yet-to-be-determined event.
If this is right, then I think it supports my original statement. If my takeaway is wrong, then please let me know.
Thank you
@williambillycraig1057 There's a change in Matthew 24 at verse 35. Everything did happen in that generation except for the "2nd coming".
God is perfect pre-trib rapture nothing more nothing less God is perfect 💙🤔🔥☝️🤍🙏
I too believe God is perfect. But in what sense is a pre-trip rapture is perfect? I’m confused. And is a post-trib rapture any more or less perfect than a pre-trip one?
@@TheAnalyticChristian okay let me add this in John 14 Jesus said he goes to prepare a place for us so that he can come back himself and receive us to him self in his father's house are many mansions and he goes to prepare a place for us so if we are post tribulation when will we ever to be able to enjoy our mansions in heaven if we don't go there first before he comes to Earth for the second time..... Remember he only comes to the clouds to receive us later at the end of the tribulation he puts his foot on earth that is the second coming
thilipsis(tribilation) refers to the suffering of the christians. orge(wrath) and thymos(fury) refers to the suffering of none christians. no christians no tribulation.
I haven’t done a word study of each, but it seems like thlipsis includes more than just Christians because in Acts 7:11 uses thlipsis to describe the suffering of all of Egypt and Canaan, which included no Christians at the time and many who were not Jews.
@@TheAnalyticChristian thilipsis comes after Egypt and canan when the focus returns to the fathers which are the Jews not having food and drink. why you say no Jews when is talks about the Jews?
Since the Bible is not univocal, it says nothing about anything until you impose your own reading onto the texts and interpret
🤓🤓🤓
Why is that true?
What do you mean by univocal?
@@TheAnalyticChristian Having one overall meaning. Unambiguous
😅😮😢😢😮😅
The church is the body of Christ…meaning us.
How exactly does this connect with what was discussed in this interview?
People like this author create an either/or dilemma. Either the letters addressed specific issues faced by the seven literal churches in Asia Minor, or the letters symbolically represent different phases in the history of the Christian church over the past 2000 years. Are these the only two options? Consider this statement: Either this author beats his wife, or he has stopped beating his wife; which statement is true?
Could it be that the letters meant what they meant to the 7 Churches at that time and also represent the Church ages to come? I believe so, and this is what most of us in our camp hold to, but this was not addressed here. The author even stated that only some people think this. Shouldn't he address what most believe? It would have been a better dialogue.
@@williambillycraig1057 the Bible was written *for* us but it was not *to* us. John was not writing a letter to 21st century Christians. We need to understand what his words meant *to* the original audience and then based on that, we see what those words mean *for* us today.
@@TheAnalyticChristian Could I say the same: "We need to understand what his words meant to the original audience, and then, based on that, we see what those words mean for us today." So, as I said, "the letters meant what they meant to the 7 Churches at that time and also represent the Church ages."
So I could say I do "understand what his words meant to the original audience, and then, based on that, I see what those words mean for us today." That is, "the letters meant what they meant to the 7 Churches at that time and also represents the Church ages." Speaking on the book of Revelation, it has been pointed out that "There is partial fulfillment (the past) as well as final realization (the future) regarding those things in history. Thus the symbolism of Revelation attests to dual fulfillment." (1)
I believe that is what is going on here.
(1) Four Views on the Book of Revelation, ed. Stanley N. Gundry and C. Marvin Pate, Zondervan Counterpoints Collection (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998), 173.
@@williambillycraig1057when you are determining eschatology the first application is best. When you are considering conduct of believers and the culture within churches across time, I could see an application then. But not an eschatological application.
I reject this.... I reject that...what authority does he think he has over the word of God? absolutely nothing and no respect.
@@smigadrum He deeply respects the word of God. He’s devoted his life to studying it and teaching others about it. What he is rejecting is not the word of God, but an *interpretation* of the word of God.
Anybody can interpret including him, but you have to use scripture WITH scripture to interpret itself and not your own private interpretation.
@@smigadrum scripture with scripture is exactly what he did in this video.
Where did you get the idea that he thinks he has authority over the word of God? Can you give an example?
You are assuming your reading is that of authority. On whose authority do you base your interpretation?
And if you say God’s authority, you are being hypocritical and arrogant.