The Olivet Discourse.

What is the Olivet Discourse?

Answer: The Olivet Discourse is the name given to the orderly and extended teaching given by Christ on the Mount of Olives. This discourse is recorded in Matthew 24:1 - 25:46. Parallel passages are found in Mark 13:1-37 and Luke 21:5-36.

Though the discourse itself begins at Matthew 24:3, Mark 13:3 and Luke 21:7, Christ's discourse is in response to questions from the disciples, questions based on what Jesus told them in Matthew 24:1-2, Mark 13:1-2, and Luke 21:5-6. The record in Matthew is most extensive, so reference here will be to Matthew's Gospel.

Before discussing the teaching found in this discourse, it is important to recognize that the interpretation of this discourse must be with reference to Israel and not the Church. Christ was speaking of God's program concerning Israel, and the content of this discourse in large part has direct reference to Daniel 9:24-27, as well as Revelation 6:1 - 19:21, passages that refer to the future 7-year period called the tribulation. The completion of God's program for the Church is the rapture, which is not found in the Olivet Discourse, but instead is found in John 14:1-4; 1 Corinthians 15:51-52; and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.

In Matthew 23, Jesus spoke to the Pharisees concerning judgment. This can be seen in the "woe" statements in that chapter. In chapter 24:1-2, Jesus is leaving the temple when the disciples ask Him about the temple buildings, seemingly so that Jesus could explain how the judgment of which He spoke related to the temple. Herod, who built the temple buildings that existed during the time of Christ's earthly ministry, built them to last. They were of limestone and would have lasted for thousands of years had the temple not been destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70. In Matthew 24:2, Jesus tells the disciples that not one stone of the temple would be left on top of another. This sets the stage for the Olivet Discourse.

Beginning in Matthew 24:3, we find Jesus and the disciples on the Mount of Olives. The disciples ask Jesus, "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" When the disciples asked, "When will these things be?" it was with reference to the destruction of the temple. The destruction of the temple occurred in A.D. 70 when Rome, led by Titus, destroyed Jerusalem. The temple was burned. The things made of gold that resided in the temple melted as the temple burned and the gold ran down into the cracks between the stones. Every stone was toppled from its place as people searched for the gold. The destruction of Jerusalem is referenced in Matthew 24:15-22 and more clearly spoken of in Luke 21:20-24 as Christ taught that those in Jerusalem should flee for their lives. This first destruction of Jerusalem is a foreshadowing of what is in store for Jerusalem. It also should be noted that there will be a double fulfillment of the destruction of Jerusalem. While Titus did destroy the city in A.D. 70, he did not fulfill all that Christ spoke in the Olivet Discourse concerning the destruction of Jerusalem. It will be fulfilled in its entirety when the Beast or Antichrist first takes authority and sets up an image of himself in the future temple that will be in Jerusalem (Daniel 9:27; Matthew 24:15; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4;Revelation 13:1-18). He will rule from Jerusalem for 42 months (3 1/2 years), which is the last half of the tribulation.

The content of what Jesus taught in Matthew 24-25 primarily refers to the future tribulation period and the second coming of Christ at the end of the tribulation. In Matthew 24:4-26, Christ is answering the disciples' question, "what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" As stated earlier, the tribulation is a future 7-year period. During this time, God will complete His punishment of Israel and will judge the world (Daniel 9:24-27; Revelation 6–19).

The teaching in Matthew 24:4-8 refers to the first half of the tribulation. Daniel 9:27 indicates that the tribulation will be divided into two equal parts. The birth pangs refer to the sufferings that Israel will experience during the first 3 1/2 years. The signs with reference to Christ's return and the end of the age are 1) false messiahs (v.5); 2) reports of wars (v.6-7); and 3) natural catastrophes (v.7). A parallel passage to this is Revelation 6 where the Apostle John writes of the seal judgments.Revelation 6:2 speaks of a rider on a white horse, which could refer to a false messiah. Revelation 6:4says that peace is taken from the earth (war). Revelation 6:6-8 speaks of famine and death. These are only the "beginning of birth pangs" (Matthew 24:8). With reference to Revelation, the last half of the tribulation does not seem to begin until Revelation 13 when the Beast sets up his rule for 42 months, the last half of the tribulation (Daniel 9:27; Matthew 24:15). There is a reference to 1,260 days (42 months or 3 1/2 years) in 11:3 and 12:6, which could also refer to the beginning of the last half of the tribulation. Therefore, at least Revelation 6-10 can be considered the first half of the tribulation.

The teaching in Matthew 24:9-14 refers to the signs of the second half of the tribulation. The persecution and death (v.9) will be the result of the Beast's rise to power and the persecution of those that refuse to follow him (Revelation 13:1-18). Though there will be many false prophets (Matthew 24:11), Revelation 13:11-18 presents the ultimate false prophet, the one who will demand the worship of the Beast. The salvation promised in Matthew 24:13 is salvation or deliverance from the persecution of the Beast. The one who endures until Christ returns will be saved from the Beast. The preaching of the gospel of the kingdom refers to the good news (gospel) that Christ will soon return in judgment, and then setup His earthly kingdom (Revelation 20:4-6). This will help people to realize their sinful state and receive the Savior during the tribulation.

The teaching in Matthew 24:15-26 gives further details concerning the tribulation. Matthew 24:15refers specifically to the Beast who will establish his power during the last half of the tribulation (Daniel 9:27; Revelation 13:1-18) and to the persecution of those who refuse to worship him and take his number (666), the mark of the beast. In verses 16-20, Christ instructs that those in Jerusalem should flee for their lives when they see that Beast has taken his seat of authority. Verses 21-22 tell us that there never has been nor shall be again a time like this on the earth and that if those days were not cut short (ended) by the return of Christ, every person would be destroyed. Verses 23-26 tell us of the prominence of false christs and false prophets in those days and how those on earth at that time can identify and avoid them.

The teaching in Matthew 24:27-31 addresses the second coming of Christ. His second coming will be 1) openly done, perhaps even seen by all (v.27); 2) announced by the sun, moon and stars (v.29); and 3) followed by the gathering of the elect from all over the earth (v.31).

What follows Matthew 24:31 are illustrations, some in the form of parables. Matthew 24:32 is the parable of the fig tree. Jesus says that by the signs already given you can recognize His coming is soon, just like you can recognize the nearing of summer. Matthew 24:36-41 is the illustration of the days of Noah. It should be noted that verses 40-41 do not refer to the rapture but rather to the people who are taken in judgment during the tribulation. Matthew 24:42-44 is the parable of the faithful householder, and 24:45-51 is the parable of the wise servant. All of these are given that those who are living during that time can recognize the time in which they are alive and be prepared for Christ's return.

Matthew 25:1-13 is the parable of the ten virgins, and 25:14-30 is the parable of the talents. These are given specifically as a warning to Israel that they may be prepared for Christ's return. The last section is that of Matthew 25:31-46. This concerns the judgment of the Gentiles after Christ's return. The Lord will separate the Gentiles as a shepherd separates sheep and goats. They will be separated based on how they treated Israel, "these brothers of mine." Those individuals who did not treat Israel well during the tribulation (which marks them as unbelievers) will go to eternal punishment. Those who did treat Israel well (indicating belief in Christ) will inherit eternal life and be allowed to go into the millennial kingdom (Revelation 20:4-6).

Recommended Resource: Understanding End Times Prophecy by Paul Benware.

Source: http://www.rbvincent.com/BibleStudies/matt24.htm

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

The Parables in the Olivet Discourse
(Matthew 25)

by
Hampton Keathley IV
hamptonk@bible.org

Introduction

You must be aware that these are probably the most debated parables in the Bible. Many of the books and journal articles and articles on the internet that I read said all the characters in these parables were believers. Instead of seeing that these are parables about salvation, they see them as parables about rewards or loss of rewards. It is the same argument that we dealt with a few weeks ago in our discussion of the marriage feast and the outer darkness.

Because of the context and because the punishment for the unfaithful is so severe, I see them as all dealing with salvation issues. But rewards are also taught.

These are extremely difficult parables to interpret. I'm tempted to just tell you what I think they mean and ignore all the other views, but I think it is good for you to hear the other interpretations and do your own wrestling with the details.

Context of Matthew 25

Olivet discourse – events of tribulation leading up to 2^nd coming.

In Matt 24:36 Jesus begins to answer the question of when He will be returning.

It will be just like in Noah's day when people didn't believe Noah and were surprised when it started raining. In the same way, even when people are in the tribulation, experiencing the wrath of God, many are still not going to believe.

So, the when it says "two will be in the field, and one will be taken…" the one taken will be taken to judgment. And the appearance of the thief in the next section is to judge the unbelieving. They didn't believe the thief was coming. They didn't believe that God was coming to hold them accountable.

I think that this theme of judging the unbelieving is continued in these next four parables. Although the text doesn't use the word believe, those that get judged all have actions that indicate they didn't believe. And their judgment is severe: they get cut to pieces, locked outside, sent to the outer darkness, etc.

And in each parable those who are judged are contrasted to others who not only believed, but were prepared, faithful, fruitful, etc. And those got rewarded for their faithfulness.

We talked about it a couple weeks ago, but this is what some call "Matthew's rejection imagery." He always mixes rewards for some with eternal damnation for others, like it all happens at the same event. It sort of makes you wonder if perhaps it does? But then that would make us amillennial or something like that.

Anyway,

I want to give you the plot up front. Because I'm going to be discussing other views mixed with my views (notice I didn't say "the correct view"), I think it might be helpful to have the "Big Idea" in your heads as we study the parables.

These parables are designed to teach the immanent return of Christ. It could be real soon, or it could be a long time away. But either way, we need to go ahead and live our lives  but stay prepared. We need to live and work like the master is going to be back any minute. Because we are going to be rewarded for how hard we worked while he was gone.

Wise and Evil Slaves contrasted

Matthew 24:45-51 also in Luke 12:41-48

Some say because these are slaves, they are both saved. And some say that there is only one slave in the parable. The slave starts off being faithful, but then changes later in life and becomes an unfaithful, evil slave. Dillow makes a big deal out of the word "that" in vs 48 saying that it proves that this is the same slave. And since the slave was once very faithful, he must now just be carnal. Since he was saved, he still is saved, but just carnal or unfaithful, he does not go to hell. He just loses rewards and is very sad.

But,

concerning the idea that "since they are both slaves, they are both saved" - In all of Jesus' parables he contrasts two or three people with the same social status. How else is he going to create tension and contrast? He always uses slaves and sons because God is the Master of all. Slaves and sons are the natural examples to represent this relationship between God and man. The idea behind all these parables is that humans have an equal opportunity to respond, believe, etc. Some do, and some don't. And here's what's going to happen to them.

Concerning the idea that this is one slave who changes. The phrase "if that slave" does refer back to this hypothetical slave. This is not a story about a slave who later in life started backsliding. Jesus is just giving an example.

Jesus is saying: Let’s take a slave… If that slave does this… he will be rewarded. However, if that slave does this… he will be cut into pieces.

He is a wise slave if he believes and anticipates master’s return and faithfully carries out the master's orders. If he does this, he will be rewarded.

He is an evil slave if he doesn’t believe his master will return.

If the slave takes no note of the coming return and deludes himself into thinking either it will never happen or that he will have time to reform, he will be severely punished. It says he will be cut to pieces.

I believe “cut off” may be a better translation because in Qumran literature this word is used for excommunication and being cut off from the rest of the group. And I think the idea of separation fits better with the context - the punishment that all the bad guys receive in this string of parables is separation from God. Either way, it is severe punishment. Perhaps too severe for a believer?

Application:

This represents a universal principle. If a person doesn’t really believe that there is a God who will hold them accountable when they die, they aren’t very likely to feel a need to “trust” in God or obey his commandments.

I've also heard of people who believed that there was a God and he would hold them accountable, but they didn't want to change their lifestyle and figured they would just "get religion" later. This parable speaks to them too. You never know when God will return or if you will die in a car wreck tomorrow.

We also see the result is a lifestyle that is abusive (beat his fellow slaves) and destructive (eat and drink with drunkards.)

Speaking of "beating his fellow slaves." Some say because he beat his fellow slaves then he must be saved because they were his fellow slaves. My question is "who else is a slave going to beat?" Free men? If he is going to be abusive to his fellow man, it has got to be another slave. We can't read into this "a salvation relationship with God" because of his association with other slaves. Just like we can't read into the passage that because we have two slaves, we have two saved people in view.

Ten Virgins

This is a much debated parable. No one can agree what anything means.

“Virgins” - Some say that they are called “virgins” to emphasize their purity and that this means all ten were Christians (Dillow). Most say they represent people in the tribulation.

“Lamps” People argue whether these were little bowl lamps or torches. Then they argue about what the lamps represent. Some think the lamps and their light represent knowledge. Stedman says the ladies each had light to start with. Which would equate to people having a certain degree of knowledge about the Lord's return. But for five of them, that knowledge was just academic. It really hadn’t gripped them.

Others think the lamps represents works which are the believer's "light" or testimony to the world.

The light was supplied by the oil, and therefore it was absolutely essential that they have an adequate supply of oil, otherwise their light would go out. So what does the oil represent.

“Oil” - Some say it is the Holy Spirit (Walvoord, Stedman), some say it is works, others say it is faith.

Here is an example of the type of reasoning you run across when reading the commentators.

In verse 3 we have one of the major interpretive problems of the parable. What does the olive-oil represent? There is a quick answer that suggest that the olive-oil is a symbol of the Holy Spirit. However that interpretation must be resisted because the Holy Spirit is a gift and cannot be bought. The instructions to go and buy some more would make no sense at all in the case of the Holy Spirit. I think the answer must be found in seeing that the oil is only important when it is set on fire. In other words when it is giving light. The symbol of light rather than oil helps us because then we realize that Jesus is talking about the good works of the believer which he/she does before men which constitutes them the light of the world. The foolish virgins had no oil therefore they had no works with which to greet the bride-groom.[1]

His argument against this being the Holy Spirit because you can't buy the Holy Spirit doesn't make any sense. You can't buy works or faith either. So that is no argument. It is a good example of one's conclusion driving his reasons. When I come across a paragraph like that, it makes me want to stop reading the rest of the paper because I question the validity of any of his arguments.

If you think the oil is works, then you have to decide if the five foolish ladies were saved or not. If they were not saved, then the lack of works proved that they were not saved (lordship view). And not getting into the banquet is the same as not getting into heaven.

If you think the ladies were saved, then you will say that the ladies didn’t get any rewards. And that the banquet represents rewards or reigning with Christ (Free Grace view).

Some say that the foolish virgins had oil to start with (Dillow) and so had faith and so were saved. But others argue that that is not necessarily so (Walvoord). It says they rose, trimmed their lamps and lit them. But since they did not have oil in them, they immediately went out. So, it is more probable that they didn’t have any oil to start with.

What do I think?

Because this parable starts off with “the kingdom of heaven is like…” I think it is a salvation parable. Matthew uses this phrase eleven times and in the other parables where this phrase is used, the parables are about salvation and getting into the kingdom of heaven. Maybe I should say that out of these eleven parables. They are clearly about salvation or debated. None are clearly not about salvation.

The term virgins is not significant. The idea is just that they were young unmarried ladies. The term “virgin” was often used that way. Perhaps bridesmaids would be a better term.

Five are prepared – have their own oil. Five are unprepared – couldn’t borrow oil. I think that the symbolism is that you can’t get into heaven with someone else’s faith.

Banquet imagery to an Israelite is a reference to kingdom with God and His bride, Israel. This is not the Bema and wedding feast with Christ and Church. Remember the context is judgment at the 2^nd coming, not the rapture.

The five were left outside (never made it in banquet hall as in Matt 22). So if you go to Matt 22 and make a big deal about the fact that the guy without wedding clothes made it into the banquet and was therefore saved, then those that argue that the virgins are saved (to be consistent with their interpretation of Matt 22) have to reconcile the fact that here they didn't get in.

The Lord didn’t know them – cf. Matt 7:21 which is the same statement and those clearly do not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Once the door was closed, it was too late to enter. Those who are shut out miss not simply a fine meal, but also the kingdom itself. Similar imagery to Luke 13:22–29 which talks about the narrow door, not being known by the Lord, banquet imagery and weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Application:

Where the last parable taught that the Lord could return sooner than expected, this one teaches that there may be quite a delay before the Lord returns. We know that in fact there has been. It’s been almost 2,000 years so far.

Both the wise and foolish virgins slept. But they are not condemned for it. Perhaps the point is that we need to go ahead and live our lives. Not sell everything and go wait on the mountain top for the Lord's return.

The main point of the parable is that even if it might be a long time before the Lord returns, don’t wait until the last minute to get prepared, because you never know when that last minute will be and you may miss out.

And I think preparation is faith.

Talents

Another Kingdom of heaven is like parable – “it is like” refers back to 25:1 – Some try to say this is different because 25:14 doesn’t say “kingdom,” but the “it” has to have an antecedent. What else are you going to link the “it” to?

Big debate is whether or not the slaves represent saved people or not. Some try to argue that since they were all slaves, they were all saved. We've already dealt with that assumption.

But, there is a big contrast going on between the first two slaves and the third slave. The third slave did not know the master. He thought he understood what was required of him, but he was wrong. Maybe it is like the person who thinks he will get into heaven for being mostly good.

When confronted by the master, this wicked slave argued beligerantly and attempted to make his laziness a necessity and a virtue. By defaming the master, portraying him as one who enriched himself by exploiting others, he attempted to excuse his own actions. When I read his response, my thought is this: There may be shame at the Bema seat when Christ reveals our deeds, but not defiance. Does this sound like a Christian at the Bema seat? Does it sound like he “knows” the Master? Therefore, I have difficulty thinking that this third slave is saved.

This man seems to have given in to some cunning reasoning. It is much like the thinking of Judas Iscariot when he sold his Lord. Judas reasoned, if He is really the Messiah, my betrayal will not hurt anything and I will get my money from the High Priest. If He is not the Messiah, then at least I get the money. This one-talent man reasoned somewhat the same way. His lord was going on a far journey. If the servant put the money in the bank, he would have to register it in his lord’s name. Then when his lord did not come back, his heirs could claim it. He reasoned, however, that if be buried it in the backyard, there would be no record. If his master did not come back, the servant would have it for himself. If he does come back, he could not accuse him of dishonesty because he could produce the talent. It was a cunning that was built upon uncertainty that the Lord was returning. He just did not believe that his lord was coming back. If he had, he would have handled the money differently. This is what the lord meant when be said that he was a wicked servant.[2]

The mixture of rewards and judgment - fits Matthew’s rejection imagery. He usually globs these together like an OT prophet did when looking at the 1^st and 2^nd advents of Christ. Also, the Bible talks about rewards and loss of rewards (1 Cor 3:15) at Bema, not rewards and judgment. So, I think we must be careful not to say that, because some got rewards, we are at the Bema and all were saved, and the third guy just lost rewards. I think his punishment is too severe.

The description of the servant’s attitude suggests something qualitatively different from the other two servants found faithful. There is a definite contrast going on here. The works are indicative of the relationship with the master. The third slave had no works which in the gospels is the same as having no faith.

Free grace people balk at this statement because Lordship people think the logical conclusion is that one has to have good works to prove that he is saved. In the gospels we do have statements like when Jesus says, “Why do you call me Lord and do not do what I say?” But when we read Paul we get in to issues such as carnality, getting to heaven as though through fire, etc. So we know that works don’t always follow. But when we are dealing with parables, we need to let them use their terminology.

Sheep and Goats

We see the Son of Man coming in glory with his angels. This is the second coming, not the rapture.

Judgment results in entrance to heaven or being sent to hell.

The rejection of the goats was not based on what they did, but on what they failed to do. It was a sin of omission toward “the least of these” (cf. the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19–31). God abhors not simply the performing of sinful acts but also the omission of deeds. Failure to do good is in fact to do evil. In addition the free gift of grace (as represented in Matt 20:1–16) has to be reconciled with the role of works (as here in 25:31–46 {Matt 25}). The works are the fruit that demonstrates the reality of the conversion of one’s heart. The love shown by these deeds of mercy springs from true faith. As Walvoord affirms, “What is presented here is not the basis or ground of salvation but the evidence of it…. Accordingly, while works are not the ground of justification for salvation, they can be the fruit or evidence of it.”

Since our section started off with judgment resulting in hell and Since it is clear from this parable that they are judged by their works and sent to hell for not having the works - which represent faith - why do people have such a difficult time believing that the parables in between say the same basic thing?

Summary

In summary several points are worth highlighting.

First, in each parable the judgment occurs at the consummation of this age. While the timing of that event is unknown, each follower is to be ready for and anticipate the coming kingdom.

Second, the essential nature of the judgment is soteriological. The judgment will render decisions that are eternal in nature, reflecting the status of each human being with regard to his or her eternal relationship to the kingdom. Phrases such as “the darkness outside,” the “fiery furnace,” and “weeping and gnashing of teeth” describe eternal separation from the kingdom. They are not simply expressions of grief over a Christian life that did not count for much in the kingdom, for they are figures and phrases representing an eternal exclusion from the presence of God. With this in view, it has been suggested that salvation in these parables is viewed as a “whole,” not simply as a point of entry. The “sons of the kingdom” and the “sons of the evil one” (Matt 13:38) are on opposite sides of the soteriological divide. There is no room for purgatory, universalism, or a view that some may miss the heavenly “banquet” while yet retaining a right to entry into the kingdom (i.e. “salvation,” in Pauline terms). Those who are rejected are permanently excluded.

Third, the basis for this eternal judgment is the individual’s works. In some cases the emphasis is on faithfulness to a job assigned: perhaps in a picture of preparation for an event, or a picture of the fruit of the believer. But however it was pictured, works were the key to the judgment.

What complicates the problem is that the decision for rejection or acceptance is presented as a soteriological decision based on these works. Such a judgment is highlighted by the parables of the Wheat and the Tares (perhaps along with the Narrow Door and the Virgins) in which those who appear to fit into the proper categories do not do so (even when they think they do) since they were not properly prepared for the kingdom. Perhaps the clearest example is the parable of the Sheep and the Goats, in which eternal life and eternal perdition are the options meted out based on how people treated the followers of the Son of Man.

Works are not separated from the faith one exercises for entrance to the kingdom for works are evidence of that faith. A true change of heart will be reflected in a person’s life. A lack of that change is apparently enough to prevent entrance into the eschatological kingdom (the goats are prohibited from entrance because of their actions while the sheep are given entrance because of their works); but works are never ultimately separated from the faith of the individual, for it was also shown that works are not in themselves enough to impress the Son of Man positively in His role as judge (cf. Matt 7:21–23).

Paul wrote with different emphases in mind, focusing clearly on the entrance requirements into salvation, namely, justification by faith. While the Synoptics support the role of faith in establishing one’s relationship with God (usually in phrases such as “repent and believe the gospel”), they tend to emphasize the whole life of faith for the believer. In other words the life of a follower of Jesus is to be a constant exercise of faith in order to obey and please God. Paul clearly recognized this same truth, for he knew that something started by faith cannot be perfected by works (the burden of Galatians).[3]

Conclusion

These parables are designed to teach the immanent return of Christ. It could be real soon, or it could be a long time away. But either way, we need to be go ahead and live our lives (sleep like the virgins did) but stay prepared. We need to live and work like the master is going to be back any minute (like the faithful servant did), because we are going to be rewarded for how hard we worked while he was gone (parable of talents).

Hampton Keathley IV, Th.M. is a 1995 graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary. Hampton serves as the web master for the Biblical Studies Foundation and has contributed many studies for use on the web site.

---

[1] The Olivet Discourse, John Sweigert. p. 3.

[2] Walvoord, “Christ's Olivet Discourse on End of Age-Part VI: Parable of Talents,” BibSac V129  #515, Jul 72, 209.

[3] Rejection Imagery in the Synoptic Parables—BibSac—V153 #611—Jul 96—331

4 Common Mistakes When Studying End Time Prophecy Written by Eli Brayley    There seems to be a growing interest in the study of end time prophecy (eschatology) these days within the Body of Christ, or perhaps I should say a growing emphasis upon the subject, as a reaction to the recent developments in the Middle East, in North America and in the rest of the world. This is certainly nothing new. In the past, many have predicted the return of Jesus Christ and have worked up their followers into a kind of frenzy of anticipation, embracing charts and commentaries on ancient Bible prophecy, convinced they know the hidden answers. Unfortunately, many end up deceived, disappointed and often disillusioned. Jesus said: "Take heed that no man deceive you." (Matthew 24:4) The problem lies with men teaching the ideas of men and others falling for it. We need to be led by the Spirit of God which is the Spirit of truth. Today I am seeing various false teachings arise within the Church, some terribly influential, others gaining strength, taking captive many by their subtle suggestions. Much of this is the direct result of unintentional deception, where members are ignorantly teaching something they have only been fooled into believing; but the uglier side of this points to the schemes and lies of the devil trying to lead astray precious souls from God. We also find ourselves dealing with false prophets and false teachers or worse. It is important to remember the warning and exhortation of Christ Jesus our Lord: "Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation." (Mark 14:38) If ever there was a time to watch, it is now. End time prophecy is a fascinating and relevant part of the Word of God, constituting nearly 40 percent of the entire Bible, and oh how we need as Christians to begin to rightly divide the word of truth in this area of study. Eschatology is incredibly practical, utterly fundamental and desperately needful; I wholeheartedly encourage people to dig the mines of this valuable treasury, but let us make sure we do so correctly so we avoid dangerous errors. THE 4 COMMON MISTAKES OF END TIME STUDY When studying end time prophecy, I have observed four very common mistakes that Christians make which opens the gate for false teachings. This article is written as an introductory overview in the hope of raising the awareness of these errors and curbing future misconceptions that corrupt the intended meaning of Biblical prophecies. I can only pray that the reader will remember these as he/she continues to study or be taught the subject. 1. Starting from the Wrong Place One very common mistake people make when studying the end times is that they immediately jump into the book of Revelation, or the book of Daniel, or any of the expressly difficult apocalyptic books that contain much imagery and symbolism, and there attempt to paint a picture of what will take place at the close of the age. In doing this they break one of the most elementary rules of Biblical hermeneutics, which is: that unplain Scripture is to be intpreted by plain Scripture and not the other way around. This means that difficult apocalyptic Scripture is to be interpreted by simple literal Scripture and not the other way around. Error occurs when people create a scenario from the book of Revelation and then try and fit the words of Jesus or the words of Paul into their own conceived notions. Where students of end time prophecy should start when they begin to study eschatology is with the very words of our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and solidly understand what He has to say about the subject before proceeding further into the abstract content. Our Lord spoke very plainly and clearly about His own return; what better place to start than with the One to whom these things concern? In essence, it is like building a house. The first thing to do before assembling the frame is to lay down a solid foundation where the rest of the house will be aligned and set. If the foundation is straight, the house will be straight. It is also like constructing a human skeleton from a pile of bones. It is very difficult to know which bone is which and where each fits, but if you establish first the spine, then the rest of the bones fall into place one by one from that starting point. It is exactly the same when studying Biblical prophecy. Make sure you begin at the right place to avoid future error. The right place to start is with Jesus and His plain teaching. Then after Jesus, read and understand that writings of the apostle Paul, who also wrote simply and plainly about the end times, and builds naturally on Jesus. Once the foundation has been solidly laid, then you will find that Book of Revelation and the Book of Daniel falls easily into place - easier than you thought! 2. Reading Beyond the Text: Imposing a Presupposition This fallacy applies not only to Bible prophecy but to any study of the Word of God. It is the error of reading the Scriptures with a preconceived idea and imposing it into a text what is not actually there. Simply put: it is pressing "truth" into the text instead of drawing truth from the text. Unfortunately, this happens with shocking regularity by many who study end time prophecy. Our understanding of Scripture must be so pure that if someone else across the world were to read the same thing we would both come out with the same conclusion. I am not negating the fact that some passages of Scripture are more difficult than others, but regardless of difficulty, we must intentionally refrain from any and every speculation of interpretation that is not plainly drawn from the Scriptures. I believe it is for this reason that there is so much division within the Church regarding doctrine. We must remember 2 Peter 1:20 and hold to it dogmatically, which states: "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." If you do not know the meaning, do not guess! Simply take what is plain and wait until God makes the rest clear. Interpreting the Bible is a matter of patience. Let me illustrate this using a straightforward Scripture that has been repeatedly abused in this way. 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 reads: "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." Now from this very plain Scripture has amazing speculation been strongly asserted. It is said by many this verseteaches: 1) this is not the coming of the Lord Jesus 2) this is a secret snatching away of the Church 3) this will not be seen, heard or felt by anyone but the Christians 4) this happens before "the Great Tribulation" Now where in this Scripture did they read this? Try going back and reading the Scripture again to find these suggestions - they cannot be found! How could a person without any previous suppositions gather these points from these words of the apostle Paul? The answer is simple: they have imposed their speculation into the text. These ideas could not have been deduced by the plain reading of the passage. The important key to remember in all this, in order to avoid error, is to only desire the pure milk of God's Word and not the modified "chocolate" milk delivered from a man-ufacturer (1 Peter 2:2). We must be ever so alert to this most common practice. 3. Misunderstanding the Israel and the Church One of the greatest misunderstandings that exists within the Christian Church today, which leads to a whole plethora of doctrinal error, is that there are essentially only two views one can take regarding Israel and the Church: Supercessionism or Dispensationalism. Supercessionism is the belief that the Church has replaced Israel as the people of God (also known as Replacement Theology) and that God has nothing more to do with the Jewish people in any distinct sense. Dispensationalism is the belief that Israel and the Church are two totally separate entities; that neither have replaced the other, and that there exists simultaneously two distinct peoples of God. What one believes about the Israel and the Church will effect their interpretation of prophecy on every level, therefore, to get it wrong here is fail before you even begin. Both of these views represent two extreme ends of a spectrum. Both of these views actually hold a truth, but they have held that truth too tightly so as not to see how their truths fit together. On the one hand, Supercessionists are correct to notice that in Scripture there is only one people of God, and that the idea of two distinct peoples of God is grossly unBiblical. They are correct to identity that the Church is Israel, but they are wrong in the way they think about it. Nowhere does the Bible teach that the Church has replaced Israel, for the Church is Israel, the same Israel as Israel has always been. What the Bible tells us is that "some of the natural branches (Jews) have been broken off, so many wild branches (Gentiles) could be grafted in" (Rom. 11:17); so Israel hasn't gone anywhere... the branches have just been rearranged. And the Bible also tells us that "those natural branches that God has broken off He is able to graft in again" (Rom. 11:24). This is what the Dispensationalists have right: they maintain that the Jewish people still have a significance and a future with God. The Bible is very clear in this regard. The Dispensationalists, like the Supercessionists, have simply offered an unBiblical explanation of how these truths fit together. There is only one people of God, Israel, but Israel has had a major renovation of her branches. The Church is made up of Jews (natural branches who belong there) and Gentiles (who are enjoying a rather odd situation!) who have believed on Jesus Christ the Messiah and His atoning sacrifice. But the Bible tells us that there is still a future for those unbelieving branches who have been cut off. God is well able to graft them back into "their own tree", and one day He will indeed (Rom. 11:25). So it is vital that we have a correct understanding of Israel and the Church, for Biblical prophecy has everything to do with her; we must rightly understand who it is we're reading about! 4. Handling Prophecy Chronologically The fourth common mistake people make when studying Biblical prophecy is that they mishandle prophecy by assuming a neat and tidy chronological order of prophetic revelation. It is interesting to note that not one prophetic book of the Bible is perfectly chronological: Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Joel, Zechariah, for example, are all highly discursive (jumping from one subject to another, from one time to another) in their order of vision. If you were to read these books supposing an orderly sequence the final outcome would be confusing and incoherent. Is it not characteristically the pattern of God to reveal unto His people discursive dreams and visions? This may not seem logical to us, who would reason putting everything in a nice neat order, but the fact is, our ways are not His ways (Isaiah 55:8-9). However, though most Christians acknowledge Biblical prophecy is to be understood discursively rather than chronologically, many people fail to apply that same rule to the Book of Revelation, and rush forward, handling it as if it were a chronologically received vision. In this way they fall into two large dilemmas: first, if you read the Book of Revelation in this way, you will find that the chronology is at odds with what Jesus, Paul and the prophets have disclosed about the time of the end. Secondly, you will find innumerable discrepancies within the Book of Revelation itself (for example, baby Jesus being born in the end times? The second coming happening multiple times?) The Book of Revelation is not one long grandiose vision that John received in perfect chronological order, but a variety of short discursive visions which he received back-to-back, the junction of these scenes being seen his repeated phrase, "After this I saw". It was not the content of the visions that was chronological, but the visions themselves - the next vision following the previous vision, and so on. The book cannot be treated differently than the other prophetic books of the Bible. Doing so creates all sorts of problems (as mentioned above) and would be hermeneutically unrealistic. THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH I hope that by these brief points your study of eschatology and Biblical prophecy will be rooted and grounded in a proper understanding of Scripture after a sincere love of the truth. The Lord did not set out to confuse His people in this area, but rather desires for us to know and apprehend these matters, even more so as the great Day approaches. May we always seek to be filled with the precious Holy Spirit of promise, that He may give light and understanding to our dark and feeble minds; light we so desperately need in this rapidly approaching midnight hour. "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." (John 16:13)

Tribulation or Rapture - Which? Written by Oswald J. Smith    Why did the Lord Jesus conceal the Secret Rapture in Matthew twenty-four? How are we to explain the silence of the Church for centuries concerning it? What about the passages that have been used to support it? Have we been lulling the Church into a false security? Are there any outstanding Christian leaders who believe that the Church will go through the Great Tribulation? In my first book on Prophecy I asked the questions: "Will the Church pass through the Tribulation or be raptured out of it?" In answering I made this statement: "I have always held the view that the Rapture precedes the Revelation by some seven years, and that the Church, therefore, will not go through the Tribulation, but I do not want to be dogmatic about it and, if God should reveal the contrary to me, I will gladly accept it". Hence, you see, I did not approach the subject with my mind closed to new light and my heart already prejudiced. I was open to whatever God might reveal. Now, after years of study and prayer, I am absolutely convinced that there will be no rapture before the Tribulation, but that the Church will undoubtedly be called upon to face the Antichrist, and that Christ will come at the close and not at the beginning of that awful period. I believed the other theory simply because I was taught it by W. E. Blackstone in his book "Jesus is Coming," the Scofield Reference Bible and Prophetic Conferences and Bible Schools; but when I began to search the Scriptures for myself I discovered that there is not a single verse in the Bible that upholds the pre-tribulation theory, but that the uniform teaching of the Word of God is of a post-tribulation Rapture: pre-millennial always. Everywhere pre-millennial, but post-tribulation.

Tribulation or Rapture - Which?

Written by Oswald J. Smith

Why did the Lord Jesus conceal the Secret Rapture in Matthew twenty-four? How are we to explain the silence of the Church for centuries concerning it? What about the passages that have been used to support it? Have we been lulling the Church into a false security? Are there any outstanding Christian leaders who believe that the Church will go through the Great Tribulation? In my first book on Prophecy I asked the questions: "Will the Church pass through the Tribulation or be raptured out of it?" In answering I made this statement: "I have always held the view that the Rapture precedes the Revelation by some seven years, and that the Church, therefore, will not go through the Tribulation, but I do not want to be dogmatic about it and, if God should reveal the contrary to me, I will gladly accept it". Hence, you see, I did not approach the subject with my mind closed to new light and my heart already prejudiced. I was open to whatever God might reveal. Now, after years of study and prayer, I am absolutely convinced that there will be no rapture before the Tribulation, but that the Church will undoubtedly be called upon to face the Antichrist, and that Christ will come at the close and not at the beginning of that awful period. I believed the other theory simply because I was taught it by W. E. Blackstone in his book "Jesus is Coming," the Scofield Reference Bible and Prophetic Conferences and Bible Schools; but when I began to search the Scriptures for myself I discovered that there is not a single verse in the Bible that upholds the pre-tribulation theory, but that the uniform teaching of the Word of God is of a post-tribulation Rapture: pre-millennial always. Everywhere pre-millennial, but post-tribulation.  MY FIRST AWAKENING My first awakening to this important truth came one day in 1925, when I was spending a few days in a cottage at Stoney Lake, Ontario. One of my neighbors, Frank Edmonds by name, simply made the suggestion to me. I opposed it at once. "Why," I exclaimed, "however could that be? What about the Scriptures? The teaching of a pre-tribulation Rapture is clear and indisputable." But he quietly affirmed that I was wrong and emphasized the truth concerning the Last Trump. Of course, I was not convinced. I almost ridiculed the very idea of such a possibility. And there the matter rested. One day, in the early twenties, I began preaching on Prophecy. I had taken my people through Daniel without difficulty. Then came Mark 13. Luke 21, and Matthew 24 and 25. But. lo and behold, no sooner had I started on Matthew 24 than I got into trouble. I had announced that I would deal with Matthew 24 at the next service. Hundreds had gathered. I was in a maze, for I was perplexed. So I took a verse here and there through the chapter and thus satisfied the people for that hour at least. But now the next meeting was coming. What was I to say? I need not point out that there is no pretribulation Rapture in Matthew 24. The Second Coming is unmistakably placed "immediately after the Tribulation" (verse 29), and I was forced to the conclusion that if the Rapture was to be ‘before" the Tribulation, the Lord Jesus Christ would certainly have given some hint of it at least. He was dealing with the End-Time of the Age. It is unthinkable that He would have spoken so minutely of the Tribulation without stating that the Church would escape. Instead, He purposely led His hearers to the belief that His followers would be in it. Hence, I was staggered, nor could I honestly defend my previous position. So, when I again faced the people, I said sufficient to let them know that I questioned my former stand and saw evidence of a post-tribulation Rapture. For, as I read Matthew 24 and 25, I saw that many things, as prophesied by the Lord Jesus Christ, simply had to take place before Jesus could come, namely: "All these things" (verse 33), especially the prediction regarding the preaching of the Gospel. See Mark 13:10, and note the significance of the word "first". Thus, since God’s future program could not be set aside, there could be no "any moment expectation" of Christ’s Return. We are to watch, watch as prophecy after prophecy is fulfilled, ever looking forward to His Appearing; and, in the End-Time, to watch as never before, and to always be ready, for none can ever know how quickly the events predicted might come to pass and Christ return. MY "ANY MOMENT" THEORY Then followed the next step. There came into my hands a copy of a book by Dr. Henry W. Frost, then the Home Director of the China Inland Mission. It was entitled "Matthew 24 and the Revelation," a volume of over 300 pages. I fairly devoured it. Portions of it I read through twice. It was most conclusive in its arguments for a post-tribulation Rapture. About the same time I got hold of a book by James H. McConkey, called "The Book of Revelation," and another—perhaps the best of all—by Edmund Shackleton (England), entitled "Will the Church Escape the Great Tribulation?" Before I had read them through I was firmly convinced that there would be no Rapture before the Tribulation, and that I had done wrong in promising the Church an escape instead of preparing her for the terrible ordeal that must most surely be awaited. My "any moment" theory could not be sustained. In fact, the very first statement in the latter book, which was written about 1890, amazed me beyond measure and I was fairly staggered as I grasped its significance. Let me quote it verbatim: All who held the pre-millennial Coming of Christ were, till about sixty years ago, of one mind on the subject. About that time a new view was promulgated that the Coming of Christ was not one event, but that it was divided into stages, in fact, that Christ comes twice from heaven to earth, but the first time only as far as the air. This first descent, it is said, will be for the purpose of removing the Church from the world, and will occur before the Great Tribulation under Antichrist. This they call "The coming for His saints" or "Secret Rapture." The second part of the Coming is said to take place when Christ appears in glory and destroys the Antichrist. This they call "The coming with His saints." Apart from the test of the Word, which is the only final one, there are certain reasons why this doctrine should be viewed with suspicion. It appears to be little more than sixty years old; and it seems highly improbable that. if scriptural it could have escaped the scrutiny of the many devoted Bible students whose writings have been preserved to us from the past. More especially in the writings of the early Christian fathers would we expect to find some notice of this doctrine, if it had been taught by the Apostles; but those who have their works declare that they betray no knowledge of a theory that the Church would escape the Tribulation under Antichrist, or that there would be any "coming" except that spoken of in Matthew 24, as occurring in manifest glory "after the Tribulation." This is all the more significant, because these writers bestowed much attention upon the subject of the Antichrist and the Great Tribulation. Augustine, referring to Daniel 7, wrote: "But he who reads this passage even half asleep cannot fail to see that the kingdom of Antichrist shall fiercely, though for a short time, assail the Church." Then when I remembered that the death of Peter, his prediction of corruption and apostasy after his decease, the death of Paul, and many other events had to occur before the Rapture—especially the evangelization of the world (Mark 13:10 and Matt. 24:14)—my "any moment" theory took wings and fled. Last of all, I ran across "The Great Tribulation—The Church’s Supreme Test" by John B. Scruby, the most convincing; the most unanswerable of all. It deals with every point minutely and proves conclusively that the Tribulation precedes the Rapture. Recently I got hold of that remarkable book "Tribulation to Glory" by H. A. Baker. in which he wrote: "For eighteen centuries the fundamental principle of tribulation to glory was the universal belief of the truly born-again members of the Church", and then he goes on to show that the new pre-tribulation rapture teaching was first proclaimed as a direct revelation by a woman in Edward Irving’s church, and then taken up by John Nelson Darby (and the Scofield Reference Bible) in direct contradiction to the teaching of the Church for eighteen hundred years. "Beginning with the Irvingite woman, then propagated by John N. Darby about 1830, this new ‘spirit-inspired’ doctrine during the last century has come down to us until it has become popular. George Muller opposed it; so did Benjamin Wills Newton; so did Dr. S. P. Tregelles and other Brethren, but all in vain." But now, thank God, large numbers of our leading Bible Teachers are coming back to the original position. GOD’S WORD I discovered that no time element is ever mentioned so far as the Rapture is concerned, except as it is related to the Resurrection. And that the Resurrection is always placed at the time of the sounding of the Last Trump (1 Cor. 15:51-54). This Trump, without doubt, closes the Tribulation. There is no eighth. The saints are rewarded (Rev. 11:18). The "mystery of God", is then finished, there is time (delay) no longer (Rev. 10:6 and 7), and the Resurrection, of course, immediately precedes the Rapture (1 Thess. 4:16). Naturally, I thought of 2 Thessalonians 2:7: "he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way". But then I learned from the Greek that the second "he" is the Antichrist, and that the Greek does not say "taken out of the way," but "revealed in the midst," or, "born out of the midst." In other words, lawlessness will be restrained until the appointed time for the lawless one, the Antichrist, to appear. There is no mention of the Holy Spirit at all. That is a Scofield Bible assumption. The Holy Spirit and the Church remain to the end of the Age. Then, too. I thought of Luke 21:36 and of Revelation 3:10. But Noah, I remembered, "escaped" by preservation. Daniel "was kept" and protected in the lion’s den. The three Hebrew children were "kept" though in a burning fiery furnace. None of them were taken out. Rather they were kept, preserved, protected while in, and thus they escaped. Why not the Church? Note that 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 finds the saints in trouble, in tribulation, and resting only at the close. In fact the first two chapters of 2 Thessalonians cannot be interpreted in any other way. Chapter two, verse one, is most explicit. "Now we beseech you, brethren", writes Paul, "by the coming (Revelation) of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together (the Rapture) unto Him". There is here no separation between the Rapture and the Revelation. The Coming is the one and only Coming spoken of throughout the two chapters, the Coming described in chapter one, verses seven and eight. I learned, too, that the word for "meet" in 1 Thessalonians 4: was only used in two other places, and, in both cases, it meant "returning with" and not "remaining at" the place of meeting. When the brethren from Rome met Paul, they immediately returned to the city with him. When the Virgins met the Bridegroom they accompanied Him back to the wedding. When the saints meet Christ in the Air, as He comes to judge the nations and establish His Kingdom on earth, they will return with Him. There is no Scripture that says they will remain for some seven years in the Air. In 1 Thessalonians each chapter closes with a reference to the Second Coming, but no distinction is made. As Christ descends with His angels after the Tribulation, the saints ascend, and, meeting Him in the Air, turn and continue with Him back to the earth. How long He remains in the Air, following the meeting with the Church is nowhere revealed. "The Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all His saints" (1 Thess. 3:13), is unquestionably the Revelation, after the Tribulation, simply because the words, "with all His saints" are added. But why infer another, a previous Coming, in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and 1:10, or 5:23? It is all one and the same. There is no Secret Rapture. That theory must be deliberately read into the passage. There is no Rapture in Revelation until chapter nineteen is reached. I had been taught that the Greek word "parousia" always referred to the Rapture and that other words were used for the Coming of Christ in glory after the Tribulation. But I found that this is not true. Parousia is used for the latter, too. See 2 Thessalonians 2:1. While it is clear that the Church must endure the wrath of the Antichrist, it is certain that the Church will not have to endure the wrath of God. When His judgments are poured out on the Antichrist and his followers, the Church will be divinely protected by God even as the Israelites were protected when His wrath was poured upon the Egyptians—not by being raptured, but by being kept. We might go through all the writers of the New Testament, and we would fail to discover any indication of the so-called "two-stages" of our Lord’s Coming. Peter, James and John tell the same story. There is no Scripture for a pre-tribulation rapture. That theory had to be invented by man. Search and see. There is no verse in the Bible that even mentions it. I discovered that nearly all evangelical missionary leaders believe that there must be representatives in the Church of Christ from every tribe, kindred, tongue and nation, and not just from the so-called civilized world, and that, therefore, the only way to hasten the Coming of Christ is by evangelizing the remaining unreached peoples of earth. Jesus made it perfectly clear when He said, "the gospel must first be published among all nations" (Mark 13:10) "and then shall the end come" (Matt. 24:14). Hence, the greatest incentive to missionary work is the Second Coming of Christ. SPIRITUAL PREPAREDNESS I am sure that with the true child of God it is not a question of preference but of truth. Does God’s Word say so? Why then rebel? Is not His plan best? Besides, what difference does it make so long as we are ready? "Spiritual Preparedness" is the only important factor after all. I wonder if we have been lulling the Church into a false security? Can it be that we have been preaching an easy escape? Ought we to prepare the Church for the greatest of all ordeals? Should not our teaching harden her for the fires of the Tribulation? What kind of soldiers are we training? I am afraid that we have been very guilty and that God will certainly hold us responsible for the type of Christian our preaching is producing. We need men and women today of the martyr spirit. The test of the Inquisition is coming again and woe betide the pre-millennialists who are not ready. The Church must be purified in the fires of persecution. VOICES OF OTHERS Now if I were to go into the subject in detail and attempt to deal with the numerous passages, both for and against, I would simply be overlapping. Others have already done this most ably, far better than I can, and so, if you are really interested, I would suggest that you secure the books that have been written on the subject and study them prayerfully and with an open mind before taking sides. A great many have been written by men on both sides of the Atlantic. The following are among the best that have been published in Great Britain and you may procure most of them from THE SOVEREIGN GRACE ADVENT TESTIMONY, I DONALD WAY, CHELMSFORD, ESSEX, CM2 9JB, the organization that publishes the Post-Tribulation magazineWatching and Waiting, edited by James Payne. Here are the books: Will the Church Escape the Great Tribulation? (by Edmund Shackleton); Christ’s Second Coming (by S. P. Tregelles) [these two are scarce]; Our Lord Cometh (by W. J. Rowlands); The Coming of the Son of Man (by Rev. E. J. Poole-Connor); The Second Advent of our Lord, Not Secret, but in Manifested Glory(by B. W. Newton); One Second Coming of Christ (by W. J. Rowlands); The First Resurrection (by S. P. Tregelles); Touching the Coming of the Lord (by Dan Crawford); The Saints’ Rest and Rapture (by Frank H. White); The Second Coming of Christ (by George Muller). Send for their catalogue. The following have been published in North America: The Blessed Hope (by Professor George E. Ladd). Dr. Ladd teaches in Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena. It is a masterly volume and it goes into both the history and doctrine of both the Pre-Tribulation and the Post-Tribulation Advent. "Will Christ’s Coming he in two stages?" (by Norman F. Douty). I have a list of nearly seventy Bible Teachers who have proclaimed this view of the Return of Christ. Among them, in addition to those who have written the above books, there are such names as W. J. Erdman, Charles R. Erdman. Dr. Campbell Morgan, Bishop Frank Houghton, Dr. A. B. Simpson, Dr. J. W. Thirtle, Dr. Charles T. Cook, Alexander Reese, Dr. Horatius Bonar, Dr. Adolph Saphir, Henry Varley, Dr. Nathaniel West, David Baron, H. W. Soltau, Dr. Bergin, Dr. Harold J. Ockenga, and many others. To ignore the convictions of such spiritual leaders is impossible. Deference must be given to their views. These views I would sum up by quoting from Watching and Waiting—"We believe that this was the teaching of our Lord and His Apostles. We believe it was held by the Early Church and by all in the Middle Ages who had any light on the Second Advent. We believe, too, that it was the teaching of the Early Brethren and that no other view was generally accepted among them until the Any Moment. Secret Rapture, Pre-Tribulation, or Two-Stage Coming theory was taught by Edward Irving, as a result of a vision received by a woman in his church. Thus Any Moment teaching is a ‘novel’ doctrine". MY FINAL APPEAL Beloved, the shadows are darkening. The day is drawing to a close. It is now Saturday night in the history of the Church. The times of the Gentiles have almost run their course. Events are fast shaping for the end. The Antichrist will soon be here. One fact and one only is important—Christ is coming. Of that there can be no doubt. One question and one only is vital—Are we ready? We may differ on minor details of prophecy. We may disagree as to the time of His Appearing. We may not see eye to eye regarding the order of prophetic events. But one thing is certain—He is coming. We will be with Him. The Millennium is at hand and soon now we shall know all. Therefore, let us love one another sincerely and labour together "till He Come". If I am mistaken I will know it then. Hence, let us agree to disagree agreeably. God knows our hearts. He knows that we love Him and that is all that really matters. If I love Him and you love Him, we will love each other. Soon the day will break and all the shadows flee away. Meanwhile I am "looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ" (Titus 2 :13).

Source: www.olivetdiscourse.com.