Just FYI for those who are unfamiliar with the above Dispensationalist (earthly millennium, rapture-at-any-moment) interpretation of Scripture regarding the End Times presented here: the majority of Christians today (and who have ever lived, for that matter) do not ascribe to it. It was not developed until the early 19th century. It originated in England but is mostly held by many (not all) American evangelicals.
I'm not saying there is no truth in it or that nobody should consider it, only that it is important to know that this is not the only interpretation or position. As the majority of Christians in the world are either Catholic, Orthodox and other Eastern Churches who do not ascribe to modern Dispensationalism vastly outnumber the American influenced Evangelical Protestants and Protestant Fundamentalists that are the ones who primarily embrace modern Dispensationalism, it is important to point out that it doesn't represent the views of most Christians.
Not here to argue or debate, just here to clear the air. God bless.
“Not here to argue or debate”
No, but you do love to spam my posts with falsities that Dispensationalism was initiated by John Darby and others in 19th Century England when in fact your own “church fathers” wrote much about Dispensationalism:
Justin Martyr
Dialogue with Trypho
“But if so great a power is shown to have followed and to be still following the dispensation of His suffering, how great shall that be which shall follow His glorious advent! For He shall come on the clouds as the Son of Man, so Daniel foretold, and His angels shall come with Him.”
Justin Martyr (d. 162): “But I and whoever are on all points right-minded Christians know that there will be resurrection of the dead and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged as the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and the others declare” (“Dialogue with Trypho,” in ANF, I, 239).
Eusebius commenting on Papias of Hierapolis
Eusebius, An Ecclesiastical History to the 20th Year of the Reign of Constantine
“In these he says there would be a certain millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very Earth; which things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the apostolic narrations, not understanding correctly those matters which they propounded mystically in their representations.”
Irenaeus
Against Heresies
The rule of faith taught the following three truths: 1) Jesus would come bodily to Earth. 2) The rule of faith affirms the bodily resurrection of believers, and 3) the rule of faith affirms a future judgment
Irenaeus: “But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire, but bringing in for the righteous the times of the kingdom, that is, the rest, the inheritance, in which kingdom the lord declared, that ‘many coming from the east and from the west should sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob . . . . The predicted blessing, therefore, belongs unquestionable to the times of the kingdom, when the righteous shall bear rule upon their rising from the dead.”
Tertullian
Tertullian: “But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after their resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem” (Against Marcion,” in ANF, 3, 343).
At least pretend to be honest when you post will you?
The Bible is pretty clear that there is a rapture.