Rapture Not Ready

Rapture Ready lists 10 alleged signs that the end time is happening now or soon to occur.

None of these signs remotely identify with the signs of the Bible.

However, we know that when it comes to prophesying the future, Rapture theorists are sincere and serious.

The problem for Bible students who are reading the scriptures is that these signs cannot be found in the Bible.

The New Testament gives clear signs of the end time. It describes events which were imminent within the days of the apostles.

The New Testament writers spoke of events which were at hand in their day. That means they could not be at hand in our day.

One or the other must be true. Since at hand means near, then if those events were near in the apostles' times, (Romans 13:11, 12; 1 Corinthians 10:11; Phil. 4:5; James 5:7,8; 1 Peter 4:7, 17; 2 John 2:18, 19; Revelation 1:1-3; 22:6, 10, 12), they could not be near in the 21st century.

If they are near for us today, they could not have been near when the apostles wrote centuries ago saying that they were near.

Someone is deceived and has been misled.

It is not the apostles or any of the inspired writers. Let God be true and every man a liar. (Romans 3:4)

One can search the entire volume of the New Testament and not find a single word about a single one of these "new" signs offered by the Rapture Ready theorists. Note the following signs offered as proof of an imminent end time.

End time Signs According to Rapture Ready

1. Iran's nuclear program

2. Putin's grab for power in Russia

3. The supply of oil

4. Subprime loan crisis

5. The dec[l]ining value of the dollar

6. China's growing economic and military might

7. Global terrorism

8. Nation ID initiatives

9. Global weather changes

10. Tension between Israel and Syria

Rapture Ready's list lacks solid Biblical support. Compare the end time signs according to the Bible.

End time Signs According to the Scriptures.

(1)The Coming of Elijah, in the first century;
Malachi 4:5, 6 fulfilled in John, the Baptist, Luke 1:16, 17; Matthew 11:13, 14; 17: 10-12)

(2)The Coming of the Holy Spirit per Joel 2:28-32; fulfilled according to Apostles, from Pentecost to A.D. 70, per Acts 2:16-20; 1 Corinthians 1:7, 8).

(3)The Coming of the Great Apostasy, Matthew 24:12; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; fulfilled per Matthew 24:34; Galatians 1:6-9, 1 Tim. 4:1; Hebrews 10:25; 2 Peter 2:2; Jude 4, in the first century.

(4)The Worldwide proclamation of the Gospel, Matthew 24:14; fulfilled according to Paul, Romans 1:8; 10:18; 16:26; Colossians 1:5-6, 23, in the mid 50's and 60's, i.e. in the first century.

(5)The Coming of the Abomination of Desolation, Matthew 24:15, fulfilled in the first century in connection with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, Matthew 24:34, Luke 21;20-22.

(6)The Coming of the Man of Sin; 2 Thessalonians 2:3, fulfilled in the first century, per 2 Thessalonians 2:4-7 (mystery of iniquity was already at work.)

(7)The Coming of the Antichrists, 2 John 2:18 fulfilled in the first century according to 1 John 2:18, 19; 4:3, 4, as already in the world when John wrote. John said it was the last hour. Compare Paul, Romans 13:11,12.

(8)The Coming of the New Testament Church, Isaiah 2:2, established the first Pentecost following the resurrection and ascension of Christ, in the first century, Acts 2:47.

The Rapture Ready list appears to lack solid biblical support.

Does this headline grab you as being far-fetched? Does it seem incredulous? Well on the surface it might, but when the current views of the modern Rapture doctrine are examined along side the Bible, that is precisely the conclusion to which they lead! Can you believe that people are alive on earth who are about 2000 years old?

Here's the basis for the statement. Jesus spoke of his return in Matthew 16:27, 28. "For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works. Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom."

Now there is not much question over the first text, i.e. verse 27, that it refers to Jesus' coming in judgment. He comes to reward each man according to his works.

However, the problem occurs when modern day interpreters of which many are Rapture advocates who believe that there is a 2000 year gap between the event of verses 27 and 28.

In that verse Jesus promised that some who were standing with him on the day he delivered that message would yet be alive when he returned. He says that they would not die until they saw him return.

For those who believe that a Rapture must occur with a 1000-year gap for a millennium, whether Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, or Post-Trib or whether they reject the literal millennium altogether as in Amillennialism which subscribes to a yet future return of Christ, they must insert the 2000-year interim of time between Jesus' death and ascension and his alleged future return.

That would mean there is a 2000-year gap (too long for a 1000 year millennium even with the partial (Mid) or full (Pre) tribulation period tacked on to it.

The dilemma is how are the people living with Christ in his day going to survive for 2000 years to fulfill the terms of the passage? This problem has lead many to reject Jesus and his apostles words as false and discredit the inspiration of Scripture, which we feel is a wholly unreasonable position.

Further, the word assuredly, used in the phrase, "amen lego amen" is never used to introduce a new subject, but in all places where it occurs in the New Testament, it serves to reinforce what has already been said. Thus, it does not introduce a new or different coming than that mentioned in verse 27.

Rapture theorists and non-Rapture futurists have a serious problem. They must acknowledge that there are people living today who were eye-witnesses of Christ when he was on earth. Or they must acknowledge that Jesus was a liar when he stated they would live until he returned.

There is another solution to the problem. How about the one which says Christ was truthful and that some of the disciples standing with him did in fact live until his return. Only, he promised to return within their generation, in the first century, not one far removed from it as in ours or one yet future.

That is precisely the meaning of the text. It harmonizes well with his statement in Matthew 24:34. "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away, till all these things take place.

Generation, from genea, means "a contemporary group of people all living at the same time." The following are a couple examples of its use.

Matthew 1:17, says that from Abraham to David are 14 generations, from David until the captivity in Babylon are 14 generations, and from the captivity in Babylon to Christ are 14 generations. That would be 42 in all.

Some, in an attempt to escape the obvious meaning of Jesus' words in Matthew 24:34, have concluded that genea (generation), confusing it with "genos" means race. How could there be 42 races of people in the genealogy of Christ from Abraham? Wouldn't that make an interesting family reunion?

Moreover, Jesus used generation to speak of the time and people who crucified him. "But first the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected of "this generation." (Luke 17:25).

The "generation" who crucified Christ demanded a sign of his proof of power. He responded with the following:

"An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonas was three day and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:38-40; 16:4).

Thus, the generation which rejected Christ, is the same generation in which he promised to return. We can no more assign the terminal generation to the 21st century as we could assign the crucifixion of Christ. It is that generation to which his coming belongs and in which it occurred.

Of that generation, Jesus promised to avenge all the righteous blood shed upon the earth in retribution for murdering him and his apostles.

"Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, ans scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city,

That on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.

Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted together your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! See! Your house is left to you desolate. (Matthew 23:34-28)

In conclusion, there is no room for a Rapture in Matthew 16:27, 28. The time refers to the first century generation who would live to see Christ's return. If that return is future, then those people are yet alive on earth.

Perhaps they will be interviewed on Oprah, CNN or Larry King Live. If that is an impossibility, then Christ return and the Rapture doctrine is myth.

Today there is mounting conflict over the Jerusalem temple. The Israeli and Arab worlds are at odds over the possession and destiny of the temple mount.

Israel remains divided, with some desiring the temple to be rebuilt, others willing to abandon it entirely to the Arabs. The secular Israeli government feels that religious control of the temple would render it obsolete, thus in time dismantling the secular government.

The temple has been a center of Jewish activities since the time of Moses (Exodus 25) when he was instructed to build the temple according to the pattern shown in the mount. Perhaps the battle for the Jerusalem temple by Jews, Arabs and Christians could learn from the original plans given to Moses.

The pattern for the tabernacle was a heavenly one, not an earthly, (Hebrews 9:11, 23-24). However, a few years removed from the wilderness of Sinai, men have reversed God's pattern and opted for the shadow versus the pattern as a guide for the temple.

One thing is certain, the pattern shown to Moses in the Mount was not of a previously existing earthly structure of any kind.

While David sought to build God a permanent house (temple) which Solomon fulfilled, Isaiah made it clear that the Most High does not dwell in temples made by man's hands.

"Heaven is My throne, and earth is My footstool. What house will you build for Me? says the Lord, Or what is the place of My rest? Has My hand not made all these things? (Isaiah 66:1, 2; Acts 7:49)

Yet, in spite of these things men write volumes on the temple simply because their end time clocks have a broken hour hand and clogged internal gears.

Jerusalem temple history records the first temple [permanent building] (for Moses' tabernacle was truly the first), was desecrated by idolatrous worship and practices (Ezekiel 8) and suffered destruction by Nebuchadnezzar's Babylonian army in 586 B.C.

Lying in ruins following the return to Jerusalem after 70 years of captivity, Zerubbabel, the governor of Judah, and Joshua, the high priest begin the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem. This is called the "second temple" and accords with Herod's temple of the New Testament,in which the latter had engaged in a 46 year renovation project to embellish it.

Nevertheless, in the days of Ezra and the prophet Haggai, the Jerusalem temple construction project met with mixed emotions. The old men wept because it paled in comparison to Solomon's temple, while the young men in total bliss of the former, extolled its virtues.

Moreover, Haggai prophesied that "in a little while" God would shake all nations and destroy heaven and earth, --covenantal terms for yet another destruction of Jerusalem. He wrote this while they were in the very midst of rebuilding the "second temple," (Haggai 2:6-8). Paul records this shaking was occurring at the writing of the Hebrews epistle, (12:26-28)

Haggai asks who had seen the glory of the former temple, i.e. Solomon's? Then he stated that the glory of the latter temple would exceed that of the former's glory.

In other words, the new temple which the Lord (not man)would build would far exceed the glory of Solomon's unlike Zerubabbel's temple. This presents a huge dilemma for the advocates of a third temple in Jerusalem.

For example, Dr. Randall Price, author of "The Coming Last Days Temple" acknowledges the "Trouble in the Temple" syndrome involving man-made structures. He draws a pattern of desecration from Solomon's temple, through the Zerubabbel-Herodian temple to the newly proposed third Jerusalem temple. Neither, according to his views escapes the desecration.

How then could the glory of the so-called third Jerusalem temple (if built) excel the glory of Solomon's. It's impossible. Thus, we search for a more consistent view of Scripture.

Perhaps we should look more carefully upon the words of Christ who said, "Destroy this temple (meaning that of his own body) and in three days I will raise it up. (John 2:26).

John tells us that Jesus as the Word was made flesh and tabernacled among us (first century disciples) who beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of grace and truth. (John 1:14) Any study of the temple/tabernacle typology must take into consideration the words spoken of Jesus.

As in the type of Moses' temporary, transient and transportable structure, Jesus' dwelling in the flesh, tabernacling among the people of God was temporary, foreshadowing a greater presence yet to come.

Further, his death (described as an exodus, Luke 9:26), was a cutting off of his relationship to Israel in the flesh, to take up a new relationship with them in the Spirit, (Romans 1:3, 4).

God did not cut Israel off entirely but redirected Israel through Christ, her destiny, to the realm of the Spirit where he would consummate the promises made to Israel in the prophets.

"In Christ" becomes the new promised land for the new Israel of God in the Spirit. Ezekiel 36:24-26 and John 3:3-8), addresses the "new birth" of Israel in the Spirit, saying it is the time when they enter the land, under the new king David (Christ, the Messiah). At that time God would set his tabernacle in their midst.

Thus, following Jesus' death, Israel could no longer know Jesus according to the flesh, meaning his Old Covenant Torah existence (2 Corinthians 5:16, Galatians 4:4). That Jesus had in mind all along the rebuilding of a more glorious temple not made with hands is evidenced in his conversation with the woman at the well in Samaria.

In their debate over which place was the divinely mandated place of worship, the woman being of Samaritan descent offered Mt. Gerizim. In so doing, she challenged the Jews claim to worship in the temple in Jerusalem.

Jesus responded by saying 'woman the time is coming and now is when the true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and truth for the Father seeks such worshipers to worship him.' Thus he told her neither in this mountain (Gerizim) nor yet in Jerusalem would men worship God." The new place of worship is in the Father himself!

The solemn warning of and fate of the Jerusalem temple met with destruction by the Roman General Titus in A.D. 70. (Matthew 24:3, 34, Luke 21:20-22) This temple is confused with a so-called third temple for an imagined last days battle. Physical Jerusalem is not the sought out place to worship God any more than Harlem or the ghettos of South America.

We see throughout the epistles that a transition has occurred. The church is the new Jerusalem temple of God. God dwells in the church. Jesus Christ is the chief corner stone. But it all comes clear in the book of Revelation. Speaking of the new temple mount in Jerusalem, the holy city which comes down out of heaven from God, the angel says the tabernacle of God is with men. (Revelation 21:3).

As John surveys the city, he saw no temple within it for God and the Lamb are its temple. (Revelation 21:22). This temple has the glory of God. Question, can the glory of Moses, Solomon or the Zerubbabel-Herodian temples exceed and surpass the glory of God? That's an emphatic no. Then none can exceed this glory of the temple made without hands. God wants each of us to know that He is our temple.

Jesus raised up his body to establish Himself as the new spiritual temple of God which cannot be desecrated by man. He shares this role with the Father.

When the gray matter between our temples are in alignment with this temple, we will cease to be troubled by the temples of man. The real issue is not the trouble of the future Jerusalem temple if built, but trouble between the temples, that is, of man's thinking when it is misaligned with the words of Scripture.

The millennial view holds that the kingdom of heaven gets grounded. By this we mean that it is believed that Christ will occupy a literal throne on earth.

Millennialism has a strong aversion to a present reign of God from heaven. So, let's examine the evidence and see if we should bring the kingdom down in the dust.

It is a fact that God administered kingdom rule over Israel from heaven. This was the norm from time beginning. Beginning with Adam, God had never ruled man from earth

However, Israel challenged God's throne in heaven by demanding a king like all the nations. In other words, they wanted a king on earth, like the Philistines, the Edomites, Moabites, Egyptians and Babylonians.

Speaking to the elderly Samuel, they said, "Look, you are old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now make us a king to judge us like all the nations." (1 Kings 8:5)

In displeasure, Samuel went to God in prayer. God, up to that point having delegated authority through judges, acquiesced to Israel's demand. He assured Samuel, their word should not be taken personally. Rather, God said it was He whom they rejected.

How did God view this rejection? He said it meant that he should not reign over them. Thus, the kingdom rule of the heaven was grounded and allowed to be placed into the hands of fallible men, but not without consequences. The sins of the kings are well documented in Scripture.

Hosea further expresses God's feelings about the matter as Israel slides deeper into apostasy with these words. "I gave you a king in my anger, and took him away in My wrath." (Hosea 13:11).

Thus, we learn that a "kingdom on the ground" is a rejection of God's heavenly reign, an incitement of God's anger and the occasion of God's wrath. Not a pretty picture for the eschatological hopes of dispensational millennialists.

Prophecies of the Messianic Reign

The Psalmist records the heavenly reign of the Messiah, a disappointment to "kingdom on the ground" theories. "The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at My right hand, till I make your enemies your footstool." (Psalm 110:1).

In the above prophecy, the reign of Christ is exercised at the right hand of God. That means it is an heavenly, not an earthly reign.

Further, this messianic reign is co-existent with and prior to the destruction of his enemies. "For Messiah is to "rule in the midst of your enemies." (Psalm 110:2).

Thirdly, the exercise and nature of this reign is according to that of Melchizedek who was both king and priest. (Genesis 14:18; Hebrews 7:1). "The Lord has sworn and will not relent, you are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek." (Psalm 110:4)

A Priest and King After the Order of Melchizedek

Here we encounter more serious problems for the kingdom on the ground theories. First, as stated above, Christ would be king and priest on his throne. "Yes, he shall build the temple of the Lord. He shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule on His throne; So he shall be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace shall be between them both." (Zechariah 6:13)

However, Christ is of the tribe of Judah, a tribe of which Moses spoke nothing concerning the priesthood. That means none in the tribe of Judah was authorized by God to exercise priestly authority under the Levitical priesthood.

For this reason, the priesthood of Christ had to be exercised from heaven, God's original place of rule, rather than on earth. "For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law." (Hebrews 8:4)

Now the importance of the above statement is that when Hebrews was written, (before 70 A.D. and the destruction of the temple) the Levitical priesthood according to the house of Aaron was yet operable, (Hebrews 10:11).

While it is no longer in tact today, the "kingdom on the ground" advocates argue for Christ's literal reign on the throne in literal Jerusalem among the modern state of Israel. Equally, they advocate a reinstatement of the temple services, priesthood and practices.

This would recreate the conflicting Levite-Judaic tension of the priesthood, for the Lord sprang out of the tribe of Judah, not out of Levi. Hence, there would be two conflicting priesthoods. This contradicts the scriptures which say that Christ could not be a priest, hence not a king on earth while the Levitical system is operational.

The Route to the Throne of God

What route does Christ take to the throne of God? It is not the commonly traveled road to the literal city of Jerusalem. Rather, upon his resurrection, he begins the fulfillment of the 110th Psalm, being raised to sit at God's right hand.

"Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne,%u2026Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God%u2026For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself; The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool." (Acts 2:30-35)

This is path is in stark contrast to that offered earlier by both the Satan and later the Jews. In his temptation, Satan offered Jesus all the kingdoms of the world, i.e. every kingdom on the ground he could possibly want. Christ refused him. We could then reasonably conclude that a "grounded kingdom" is of the devil.

Later in his ministry, at Galilee, the Jews offered to take Jesus by force and make his a "king on the ground." "Therefore when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take Him by force to make Him king, he departed again to the mountain by Himself alone." (John 6:14) Once again, he refused. Not even the dirt in Jerusalem was worthy of his throne.

The Rejection of the Jews and Their Grounded Kingdom

It is important to note that Jesus rejected the Jewish offer to rule on earth before they rejected him. Contrary to dispensationalists, it was not the rejection of Christ which led to a rejection of the kingdom. Rather, it was Jesus' rejection of the kingdom on earth that led to His subsequent rejection by the Jews.

As long as they thought He came to fulfill their national hopes of a kingdom on earth, they loved him. When he rejected their ideas of a national kingdom on earth, they crucified him.

This means that the rejection of Christ was not an accident nor afterthought. As was the kingdom, it was prophesied. (Genesis 3:15; Psalms 22; Isaiah 53, Daniel 9:26). So the reasoning for the "grounded kingdom theory" fails once again.

The Kingdom is in Hand

Thus, the announcements of John the Baptist, (Matthew 3:2) and Christ, (Mark 1:14, 15) that the kingdom of heaven was at hand and the time was fulfilled stands as written. It means the kingdom was imminent in the first century.

Likewise, Jesus emphatically declared that his kingdom would arrive before some who were then living died.

"For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works. Assuredly, I say to you , there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the son of Man coming in His kingdom. (Matthew 16:27, 28). Compare Matthew 25:31)

That imminent kingdom arrived in full consummation at the destruction of the Jewish state in 70 A.D, before that generation passed away. (Luke 21:31, 32)

It was the time when the kingdom of God was taken from the Jews (Matthew 21:33-43; 1 Peter 2:5, 9), and given to a new nation, i.e. that of Christians, i.e. Jews and Gentiles in the one body of Christ, (Galatians 3:27-29).

The saints share this reign with Christ, not on a literal throne in the state of Israel, but as citizens who reign with him, having been raised up to sit in the heavenly places, (Ephesians 2:6; 2 Timothy 2:11, 12; Revelation 3:21).

Thus, the kingdom announced as "at hand" imminent in the first century, is now, since A.D. 70, in hand, meaning a fulfilled reality. In Christ, God's rule has been restored to the heavenly realm, (1 Corinthians 15:24), his enemies are defeated and he sits eternal reigning gloriously in the presence of God, Matthew 25:31.

Some advocates of the end time appear to take pleasure in scaring people with dramatic portrayals of the end.

They use humanly devised "signs" more accurately "fabrications" to create a frenzy of
events designed to scare the living daylights out of innocent victims who truly want to know their destiny.

One of the views which is commonly held and used to this end is that of a future Rapture of the saints out of this world, and the subsequent leaving behind of the wicked to for a thousand years (the millennium) before the final return of Christ.

Two primary views of the Rapture is the Pre-tribulation Rapture theory which teaches that the Rapture occurs before the 7 year great tribulation, an assumption based on Matthew 24:21, popularized by the fictional "Left Behind Series."

The other view is the mid-tribulation Rapture which allegedly occurs three and a half years before the millennium and midway of the great tribulation.

There is a third view, though not as popular which is the post-tribulation Rapture. It alleges that the Rapture occurs after the 7 year great tribulation.

These theories are fatally flawed especially in light of the Biblical text. Note above under separate title, the many deviations of the Rapture theory relative to Biblical signs.

However, in light of exegesis or interpretations of Biblical text, the Rapture theory is untenable. Compare it's tenets with the parable of the tares.

In that text, Matthew 13:24-43, the Lord speaks of a man who sowed or planted good seed in his field. However, while men slept, an enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat. So, when the grain sprouted, not only did the wheat appear, but the tares appeared also.

The servants wanted to know how the tares appeared knowing their owner had sowed good seed in his field. The reply was that an enemy had done it.

Next, they ask a critical question that all future Rapture theorists should ponder. They ask, "Do you want us then to go and gather them up, meaning the tares." In other words, should there be a separation of the wheat and tares prior to the time of the harvest.

The reply is an emphatic, no! However, the reason is given. "But he said, 'No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them. 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 13:28-30).

There are several important points in the text above. The danger in removing the tares (representing the wicked), from the wheat (the righteous), at any time before the harvest could result in destroying part of the good crop.

Secondly, both were to grow together until the time of the harvest. In other words, there is no pre-removal of either wicked or righteous prior to the harvest. This rules out a Rapture of any stripe be it pre, mid or post-trib.

Thirdly, when the time of the harvest arrives, it is the wicked (tares) which are removed versus the righteous who are left behind. This diametrically opposes the popular Rapture theory, which teaches the righteous are swooped out of the world and the wicked are left behind.

Fourthly, this accords with all other judgment language in eschatological (end time ) texts. When the flood came in Noah's day, the people (wicked) were eating, drinking and giving in marriage until the flood came and took them away.

Thus the wicked were taken first and the righteous were left behind. Christ confirms the same would be true at this coming in the end of the age. (See Matthew 24:37-39).

Likewise, the events followed the same order in the days of Lot. The fire and brimstone rained down upon the wicked, destroying them all while leaving Lot and his family behind. Again, Jesus said, so it would be in the day when the Son of Man was revealed. (Luke 17:28-30).

Fifthly, according to Jesus' explanation of the parable, (Matthew 13. 37-43), the harvest is the end of the age, (v. 39). Again he reiterates that as the tares were gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age, (v. 40). Here is where the Rapture doctrine really takes a turn for the worst.

The age to which Jesus assigns the harvest is not the present Christian age. Rather it was the Jewish age of his day. That age is referred to in Scripture as "this age," Never is the Christian age referred to as "this age." Rather, it is always spoken of as "that age" or the "age to come in the New Testament." It doesn't matter whether it was before Jesus death or after, it was always this {Jewish] age versus the [Christian] age to come.

To make this point very clear, consider that Jesus was crucified by Roman and Jewish rulers of the first century.

In 1 Corinthians 2, these rulers are said to have crucified Christ out of ignorance. They are called the rulers of "this [Jewish] age. "Which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. It is a fact that first century Roman and Jewish rulers put Jesus to death.

Thus the "rulers of 'this age'" belonged to the Jewish age in that they murdered the Christ.

Now the harvest is said to be the "end of this age," meaning the end of the Jewish age. Thus, the Rapture is chronologically out of sync. The Bible never affirms the end of the Christian age, which is endless, (Ephesians 3:21).

Only the Jewish age would be destroyed. Yet Rapture Theorists advocate the reestablishment and eternal nature of the Jewish state! They contradict the Bible on every turn.

Thus contrary to a Rapture of the righteous at the end of our age, Jesus said, "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.

The only gathering out of the world or kingdom was of the wicked leaving the righteous behind. This was not through a Rapture before, during or after the great tribulation. It occurred at the time of the harvest where both remained until Jesus' end of the age parousia that destroyed the Jewish state and temple in A.D. 70.

This forever established and vindicated Christianity as divinely revealed, providentially preserved, and superceding Judaism and the Old Covenant system for all eternity.

To listen to the audio Teleconference study and share some infectious laughter with us as we engage in serious study, visit: click here!

Here is another list by Beth Jones, a premillennial dispensationalist of the alleged coming Rapture. There are ten signs here. Note how they differ with the signs from the Rapture Ready site listed above! Google the list under her name and you'll find that she offered no scripture to support her opinions.

Sign # 1? Israel?

The first sign is Israel. The reason given is Israel makes the news. the logic is, what happens in Israel doesn't stay in Israel. But isn't that also true of Iraq, Iran and India. If it is newsworthy, it's going to be in the news. How is that a sign? It's what I call newspaper exegesis. If it weren't for the news, the Dispensationalist would not have any signs!

The assumption is made that the modern state of Israel established in 1948, has anything to do with the ancient covenant nation of the Bible. It doesn't. It's not even close. Israel as a covenant nation hasn't existed since 70 AD and will never exist again according to the Bible. It has been supplanted and replaced by New Covenant Israel which is the church.

Ancient Israel was a sign, but only when it fell as the remaining vestige of the nation in 70 AD. When the city of Jerusalem fell to the Roman General Titus' invasion in the first century, it became a sign that the Son of Man was in heaven. Immediately following that destruction was the coming of the Son of Man. All happened within the first century generation. But that's reported in Matthew 24:30-34. It's not very newsworthy.

Sign #2 The internet?

The second sign offered is the internet. What a stretch! The writer admits the internet is only a few thousand days old. First, she violates the chronological framework for the end of the age. We've shown above it was the first century generation. So, unless the internet was invented in the time of Christ, it is not even close as a sign.

Secondly, it's not mentioned as a sign either by Christ or the apostles.

Thirdly, the sign of "knowledge" that the Lord spoke about was the publishing of the gospel, i.e. the knowledge of salvation to all the inhabited world of the Roman empire. "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come." (Matt. 24:14.

The apostles affirm this was completed as early as 60-62 AD, Romans 1:8; 10:18;16:26, Col. 1:5, 6, 23.

Sign #3 Financial Shifts?

The endtime predictions of Christ did address economic difficulties, especially in the land of Judea with its famines, pestilences and earth quakes. A great famine affected the entire Roman empire during the days of Claudius Caesar. This was prophesied by prophets in Ancient Palestine.

And in these days prophets came from Jerusalem to Antioch. Then one of them named Agabus, stood up and showed by the Spirit that there was going to be a great famine throughout all the world, which also happened in the days of Claudius Caesar. (Acts 10:28)

They also had a "bail out" program directed to "main street" versus "wall street." "Then the disciples, each according to his ability, determined to send relief to the brethren dwelling in Judea. This they also did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul." (Acts 10:29, 30).

The severity of the financial crisis faced in the first century is further demonstrated in Revelation 13:16-17. These were events shortly to come to pass in those days, (Rev. 1:1,3, 22:6,10). John announced the time was then at hand.

Sign #4 Scoffers?

We're given reason number four as disagreeing with the politically correct media. This is really a far-fetched notion from no where in the Scripture. The scoffers mocked the divine promise of Jesus' imminent return. After about 35 years, they were asking "where is the promise of his coming."

They were well aware the apostles and N.T. teachers announced it's arrival within their generation. At the time Peter wrote, the temple in Jerusalem was yet standing. They thought it's massive stones were impregnable, in spite of Jesus' prediction to the contrary that not one stone would be left upon another that would not be throne down, (Matt. 24:2).

This gave them an over-confidence that led to mockery and scoffing. See 2 Peter 3:3; Jude 18. Peter reminded his readers of his first epistle wherein he taught that the time for the end of all things had drawn near, 1 Pet. 4:7, 17. These mockers were Jews of the first century who refused to believe their temple would be destroyed. See also Gal. 4:29, 30).

Sign #5 Natural Disasters?

The only natural disasters of significance with the end time are those associated with the pre-destruction of Jerusalem events, i.e. before 70 AD. Jesus predicted in Matthew 24:7 of famines, pestilences and earthquakes. See the comments above on the famine in the days of Claudius Caesar.

Sign #6 Nations?

The battle between the nations has nothing to do with Russia, Iran, Germany or any other modern nations. The nations described in Ezekiel 38-39, were all well known to the prophet and included the nations in Asia minor and northern Africa, all strategically bordering Israel in the first century.

Gog and Magog are figurative terms designating those who fought against the church in the last days. For a more extensive discussion of Gog and Magog.

Using these texts to support a preemptive strike against Iran is totally irresponsible.

Sign #7 Noah -- As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be. The most common error of Premillennial Dispensationalists and others who falsely predict an imminent end time for people living today is to ignore audience relevance. Christ spoke these words to a first century audience about a first century event. It came to pass as and when he predicted it would.

To use these verses to refer to an event past 70 AD, misses completely the era of their application. Further, if this coming was "as it was in the days of Noah," it means that there was no rapture of the righteous from the earth. The wicked were destroyed and the righteous remained. It contradicts their view of the Rapture which itself is biblically unfounded.

Christ uses the example of Noah to illustrate how the people would live prior to the siege and destruction of Jerusalem as he had just spoken of moments before in the context of Matthew 24.

Sign #8: Persecution?

Persecution was in fact a sign of the end. They to understanding it is to identify the persecution associated with the event in Matthew 24. Since that context is the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, the persecution must occur prior to that time.

Christ had warned before his discourse in Matthew 24, that he would send prophets, scribes and wise men to Jerusalem. Some would be killed, crucified, beaten and persecuted from city to city. In so doing they would bring the blood-guilt of all slain from Abel to Zechariah upon themselves.

Jesus identified those of whom he spoke as Jerusalem within his generation. No one doubts that he spoke of that wicked city and of that evil and adulterous generation, per Matthew 23:36. He adds, O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her!...See your house is left to you desolate." (Matt. 23:37, 38).

All the persecution found in the New Testament from that of Christ to the book of Revelation occurs before Jerusalem was destroyed.

Sign #9 A great revival?

As are all the arguments for signs listed, this one is also out of step with the first century time frame. This is not to say that people converting to Christianity today is not both important and significant. However, it does not mean it is prophetically significant. John recorded the great "restoration or regathering of the remnant in Israel and well as the number which no man could number who received salvation in the first century generation, (Rev. 7:1-10).

The time frame is noted in verse 14, in response to the question of where did they come from. The answer given is that they came out of the great tribulation. This takes us back to Matthew 24:21, 29, where the great tribulation is an event which occurred in the context of the destruction of Jerusalem in the first century and would never be repeated.

Why? Because this conversion was of the "first fruits saints, (Rev. 14:1-4). To be a part of the "firstfruits" you had to be the first Christians. Therefore, you had to be a part of those who heard the gospel in the first century, and who had the firstfruits of the Spirit. (James 1:18; Rom 8:23) All who come later are too late to be a sign of the end time.

Sign #10. Rapture?

Here's a word that does not appear in the Bible. The verses used for it all refer to Matthew 24:30 where Jesus comes in the clouds. This is a quotation from Daniel 7:13, 14. Those events are described as occurring within the Roman empire, within the days of Daniel's 4th beast, (Dan. 7:7)

Clouds, when used with the coming (presence) of God are Apocalyptic language. For example, God came riding upon a swift cloud in Egypt, per Isaiah 19:1. That was not a rapture. It was not a literal coming of the Lord on a cloud. If twas a figurative description of the Lord coming in judgment upon Egypt through the army of the Babylonians.

In like manner, when Rome comes against Jerusalem in the first century it was described as "coming in the clouds." Again, it is under girded and fenced in by the simple, emphatic time statement. "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away, till all these things are fulfilled." (Matt. 24:34).

The only way men or women can argue for a future return of Christ is to ignore, dismiss, or otherwise explain away plain language that points specifically to the first century generation. The second coming is past, not future, and will never occur again.