Search Results

One question that occasionally arises in discussions about dispensational theology is when the Church Age actually began. Classical dispensationalists have historically believed that the Church began on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2. However, a smaller group known as Mid-Acts Dispensationalists argues that the Church did not begin until later in the book of Acts, usually around Acts 9 with Paul’s conversion, Acts 13 with Paul’s missionary commissioning, or sometimes even Acts 28. According to this view, the early chapters of Acts still belong entirely to Israel’s prophetic kingdom program, and the Church – the Body of Christ – does not begin until God raises up the Apostle Paul and reveals a new dispensation through him. This raises an important question: Is that claim supported by Scripture? To answer that, we need to examine the biblical evidence. First we will consider why the normative conclusion is that the Church began at Pentecost, and then we will evaluate several arguments commonly used by proponents of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism. Biblical Reasons the Church Began in Acts 2 on the Day of Pentecost Point #1 – The Church Begins with the Baptism of the Holy Spirit The New Testament defines the Church as a body formed by the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Paul explains this in 1 Corinthians 12:13: “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” Spirit baptism is what places believers into the Body of Christ, and Jesus predicted when this event would occur shortly before His ascension. In Acts 1:5 He said, “For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” Only a few days later, the Holy Spirit descended on the Day of Pentecost in Acts chapter 2. This event fulfills Jesus’ prediction and marks the beginning of the Spirit’s baptizing ministry that forms the Church. Point #2 – Jesus Spoke of the Church as Future During His earthly ministry, Jesus spoke of the Church as something that would begin later. In Matthew 16:18 Jesus said, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The wording is important. Jesus did not say the Church already existed. He said “I will build my church.” This clearly indicates that the Church was still future during Christ’s earthly ministry and had not yet begun. Point #3 – Early Acts Already Refers to Believers as “The Church” In the early chapters of Acts – long before Paul’s conversion – believers are already described as the Church. Acts 5:11 says, “And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.” This occurs well before Acts chapter 9 when Paul is converted. If the Church did not begin until Paul’s ministry, it becomes difficult to explain why Luke already refers to these believers as the Church. Point #4 – People Were Added to the Church Beginning at Pentecost The Day of Pentecost marks the point when people first began to be added to the Church. Acts 2:47 says, “Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.” This verse shows that from the very beginning of the Pentecost event, believers were being added to a newly formed body called the Church. Point #5 – Peter Identified Pentecost as “The Beginning” Years later, Peter looked back on Pentecost and referred to it as the beginning of the Spirit’s work. In Acts 11:15-16 Peter recounts what happened when the Holy Spirit came upon the Gentiles in the house of Cornelius: “And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.” Peter clearly connects the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost with “the beginning.” Since Spirit baptism forms the Body of Christ, Pentecost marks the beginning of the Church. Point #6 – Paul Persecuted the Church Before His Conversion One of the strongest arguments against the Mid-Acts position comes from Paul’s own testimony. In Galatians 1:13 Paul writes, “For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it.” The persecutions Paul describes occurred before his conversion in Acts 9, during the events recorded in Acts chapters 7 and 8. If Paul persecuted the Church before he was saved, then the Church must have already existed prior to his conversion. Point #7 – The Apostles Are Part of the Church’s Foundation The Church is also described as being built upon the foundation of the apostles. Ephesians 2:20 says the Church is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.” The twelve apostles were ministering long before Paul’s conversion, yet they are described as part of the foundation of the Church. This fits naturally with the idea that the Church began at Pentecost, but it becomes difficult to reconcile if the Church did not begin until Paul’s ministry. Point #8 – The Church Is the Union of Jews and Gentiles in One Body Paul later explains that the Church consists of Jews and Gentiles united together in one body. Ephesians 2:14–16 says, “For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby.” The full theological explanation of this unity is given later through Paul, but the historical formation of this body begins in the early chapters of Acts. Point #9 – The Book of Acts Shows a Gradual Transition The book of Acts demonstrates a gradual transition in God’s program rather than the sudden appearance of a new entity beginning in Acts 9. The early chapters of Acts still focus heavily on Israel, and the apostles preach primarily to Jews. After this, the gospel is extended to the Samaritans in Acts 8, a half-Jew, half-Gentile ethnic group. Following this, the gospel is then extended to the Gentiles beginning with Peter's trip to the household of Cornelius in Acts 10. Nevertheless, during this same period, believers of all these ethnic variations gather together, worship, share resources, and are repeatedly called the Church. This suggests that the Church already existed even while God was still dealing specifically with Israel. Point #10 – The Doctrine of the Church Is Progressively Revealed The New Testament often reveals doctrine progressively. The Church begins historically at Pentecost, but its full theological significance is later explained through Paul. Progressive revelation does not mean something did not exist earlier; it simply means its meaning was not fully understood until later. In the same way that many doctrines become clearer as Scripture unfolds, the nature of the Church becomes clearer in Paul’s writings. Evaluating the Arguments of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism Up to this point we have looked at the biblical reasons why classical dispensational scholars have always arrived at the obvious conclusion that the Church began at Pentecost. The evidence from Acts, the testimony of Peter, and even Paul’s own statements strongly indicate that the Church already existed before Paul’s conversion. When you read the Bible naturally, this seems to be the only sensible conclusion. However, Mid-Acts dispensationalists interpret these passages differently and present several arguments for why they believe the Church actually began later with Paul’s ministry. In order to fairly evaluate this view, it is important to examine those arguments directly and compare them carefully with the broader testimony of Scripture, and especially with the evidence already presented for an Acts 2 beginning. With that in mind, let’s now turn to the most common arguments used to support Mid-Acts Dispensationalism and consider whether they hold up biblically. Claim #1 – The Apostles Preached a Different Gospel than Paul One argument often made by Mid-Acts dispensationalists is that the twelve apostles preached the “gospel of the kingdom,” while Paul preached a different gospel of grace. However, Paul himself rejects the idea of two different gospels. One example is in 1 Corinthians 15:11 where he writes, “Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.” Paul is referring to the other apostles and affirming that the message they proclaimed was the same gospel. Claim #2 – Water Baptism Belongs Only to Israel Some Mid-Acts teachers argue that water baptism belonged only to Israel’s Kingdom program and is not intended for the Church today. They often cite 1 Corinthians 1:17 where Paul says, “For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.” However, Paul clearly practiced and taught baptism during his ministry. For instance when Paul evangelized the Philippian jailer, Acts 16:33 says “And [he] was baptized, he and all his, straightway.” Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians simply emphasizes that preaching the gospel was his primary calling, not that he believed baptism was invalid. Claim #3 – The Term “Body of Christ” Appears Only in Paul’s Letters Another argument is that since the phrase “Body of Christ” appears primarily in Paul’s letters, the Church must not have existed before Paul. However, the absence of a specific term does not mean the reality did not exist earlier. The book of Acts repeatedly refers to believers as "the Church" long before Paul’s conversion. For instance, Acts 8:3 says, “As for Saul, he made havoc of the church.” The Church clearly existed before Paul began writing about it. Claim #4 – Early Acts Was Only Israel’s Kingdom Program Mid-Acts proponents also argue that the early chapters of Acts belong entirely to "Israel’s Kingdom program." They often point to Acts 3:19-21 where Peter says, “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.” While it is true that the apostles were calling Israel to repentance, this does not mean the Church did not exist at the same time. Passages such as Acts 5:11 clearly refer to believers during this period as the Church. Claim #5 – The Church Was a Mystery Revealed Only to Paul Another argument is that the Church was a mystery revealed only to Paul. Ephesians 3:3-5 speaks of the Church as being a mystery revealed through him. However, in scripture a mystery does not mean something that did not previously exist. It refers to something that was previously hidden but later revealed more clearly. The Church began historically at Pentecost, while Paul later revealed its theological significance in greater fullness. Claim #6 – Paul’s Conversion Began a New Dispensation Mid-Acts proponents argue that Paul’s conversion in Acts 9 marks the beginning of an entirely new dispensation. Yet Paul himself states that he persecuted the Church of God before he was saved (Galatians 1:13). Since those persecutions occurred before Acts 9, the Church must have already existed. Conclusion When the full testimony of Scripture is considered, the evidence consistently points to Pentecost in Acts 2 as the historical beginning of the Church. The Holy Spirit descended, believers were baptized into one body, the apostles were already ministering within that body, and Paul himself later acknowledged that he persecuted the Church before his own conversion. These facts make it extremely difficult to sustain the claim that the Church did not begin until Acts 9 or later. What ultimately undercuts the Mid-Acts position is that it routinely depends on an inconsistent interpretive approach to Scripture. In order to maintain the theory, clear statements – such as believers being called “the church” in Acts 5:11 or Paul persecuting the Church before his conversion in Galatians 1:13 – must be redefined or explained away. At the same time, other passages are pressed beyond their natural meaning in order to support the idea of a later beginning for the Church. This selective handling of the text leads to a system where the narrative of Acts is repeatedly overridden by theological assumptions rather than being allowed to speak plainly. A consistent grammatical-historical reading of the New Testament shows a much simpler and more coherent picture. The Church begins historically at Pentecost, grows through the ministry of the apostles, and is later theologically explained and expanded through the ministry of Paul. Paul did not start the Church; he was called by Christ to proclaim the gospel to the Gentiles and to reveal the fuller mystery of the Body of Christ. When the biblical text is allowed to stand without forcing it into a predetermined framework, the conclusion remains clear: the Church began at Pentecost, and the Mid-Acts proposal ultimately rests on an interpretive method that cannot consistently account for the plain statements of Scripture.

(From the book The Missing Key in Dispensational Eschatology) The Day of the Lord is a Biblical term that, within Bible prophecy discussion, is often either not defined at all, or is defined in a way that limits its scope in a way inconsistent with its actual usage in scripture. What is the basic definition of the Day of the Lord, according to its scriptural usage? Put simply, the Day of the Lord denotes God’s times of intervention in human history. As the Creator of the universe, God had specific purposes in mind for its creation – and as a result, when the sinful tendencies of mankind interfere with the sovereign plan of God, there is a point at which He intervenes in order to accomplish these purposes. Old Testament scholar and theologian J. Barton Payne described the Day of the Lord as follows. The comprehensive phase, by which the Old Testament describes God’s intervention in human history for the accomplishment of His testament is yom Yahwe, “the day of Yahweh.” … The “day” is thus characterized by an observable accomplishment of the general aims of divine providence. It refers to that point in history at which the sovereign God lays bare His arm on the behalf of His testament and of its heirs… [1] Similarly, theologian Renald Showers defined the Day of the Lord in the following way. In the Scriptures the expression “the Day of the Lord” (together with other synonymous expressions, such as “that day,” “the day of God,” etc.) is strongly related to God’s rule of the earth and, therefore, to His sovereign purpose for world history and specific events within that history. The Day of the Lord refers to God’s special interventions into the course of world events to judge His enemies, accomplish His purpose for history, and thereby demonstrate who He is – the sovereign God of the universe. [2] The scriptures clearly indicate that its mentions of the Day of the Lord (like much of the Bible’s prophetic content) often focus on a near-term or local application, as well as a future ultimate eschatological sense. In an article on the Day of the Lord in The Popular Encyclopedia Of Bible Prophecy, Richard L. Mayhue writes: A survey of the prophets indicates the term [Day of the Lord] was used in reference to both near historical fulfillments and far future eschatological events. [3] We can take note of these usages in the Old Testament books of the prophets where the term “Day of the Lord” appears – including Obadiah, Joel, Amos, Isaiah, Zephaniah, Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Malachi – showing how these authors spoke of the Day of the Lord in both a near-term historical sense but also a far-term future eschatological sense that clearly transcended any immediate local application. In the past “Days of the Lord,” God typically used foreign nations to execute His sovereign interventions against His enemies – in the form of war and military invasions. For instance, He raised up Assyria to invade, conquer, and exile the apostate Northern Kingdom of Israel in the 700s BC, as we see in, for example, Amos 5:18-20. God also similarly raised up Babylon to bring His judgment against the Southern Kingdom of Judah in the centuries to follow – as we see in passages such as Lamentations 1-2, Ezekiel 7:19, 13:5, and Zephaniah 2:2-3. He also used Babylon to bring judgment against Egypt and its allies in the 500s BC, as shown in Jeremiah 46:10 and Ezekiel 30:2. In similar fashion, Medo-Persia was later used to judge Babylon for its wickedness, as we see in Isaiah 13:6 and 9. But these past historical interventions are just foreshadows of the future ultimate Day of the Lord – in which God will intervene not only by using human instruments to execute His divine wrath, but He Himself as the risen Messiah, Jesus Christ, will actually arrive on the scene and fight against His enemies, bringing about His earthly reign – the Millennial Kingdom. George Ladd wrote: The prophets viewed the immediate historical future against the background of the final eschatological consummation, for the same God who was acting in history would finally establish his Kingdom in the future. [4] When we get to the New Testament, we then see that the New Testament writers consistently interpreted these Old Testament prophetic “Day of the Lord” texts in light of this ultimate eschatological fulfillment to take place in the future, and connected them with the noteworthy end-time events that Christians today refer to as the Tribulation and the Millennial Kingdom. These both are major eschatological events that consummate the age of human rule over the earth and usher in the judgments and blessings of God as He brings about His sovereign purposes for the earth. Showers provides a number of scriptural indicators that require the Day of the Lord to apply most ultimately to this future culminating time period where God brings about one final intervention in human history. First, Isaiah 2:10-22 describes a Day of the Lord that will involve the sixth seal described by the Apostle John in Revelation 6:12-17. Because this sixth seal will take place during the [future] 70th Week of Daniel 9, the Day of the Lord that will involve that seal must also take place during that future time period. Second, Isaiah 34:1-8 and Obadiah 15 describe a Day of the Lord when God will judge all nations or Gentiles of the world. None of the past Days of the Lord involved divine judgment of all the nations. Up to this point in history, there has not been a judgment of all nations during the same time period. In light of this, we must conclude that the Day of the Lord of Isaiah 34 and Obadiah must be future. Third, Joel 3:1-16 and Zechariah 14:1-3, 12-15 refer to a Day of the Lord that will involve God’s judgment of the armies of all the nations of the world, when those armies gather in Israel to wage war against that nation and the city of Jerusalem and when the Messiah comes to war against them. According to Revelation 16:12-16, those armies will not begin to gather until the sixth bowl is poured out during the [future] 70th Week of Daniel 9. In addition, Revelation 19:11-21 indicates that Christ will wage war against them when He comes from heaven to earth. This, too, forces the conclusion that the Day of the Lord of Joel 3 and Zechariah 14 is future. Fourth, in 1 Thessalonians 5:1-11, the Apostle Paul referred to a Day of the Lord that was future beyond the time when he wrote his epistle and that would bring sudden, inescapable destruction upon the unsaved of the world. That Day of the Lord had not taken place before Paul wrote his Thessalonian epistle, and it seems evident that nothing of its nature has transpired since. Thus, the Day of the Lord of 1 Thessalonians 5 is also future. [5] It is also crucial for us to recognize that just as the historically-fulfilled “Days of the Lord” were not necessarily literal, twenty-four-hour days (but rather periods of judgment), our interpretation of the future ultimate eschatological Day of the Lord also cannot be limited to a twenty-four-hour day. Rather, scripture clearly describes it in its broadest sense as a prolonged period of time. John Walvoord, one of the most prominent Dispensational scholars of the twentieth century wrote: According to the Bible, the day of the Lord is a time when God deals in direct judgment of the world in contrast to a time of grace when he does not. There were frequent days of the Lord in the Old Testament when God dealt with Israel because of their straying and would bring in an invader or would introduce drought or famine or some other catastrophe. These periods had a beginning and an ending, but obviously were more than a twenty-four-hour day. It was an extended period of time, long or short, depending on the circumstances. [6] And so, we can readily understand the ultimate eschatological nature of the Day of the Lord in scripture. It has both past historical and ultimate future applications – but always refers to the periods of time when God Himself intervenes in history in order to bring about His sovereign plan for the world. In the next several articles on this topic, as we uncover deeper nuances of how this concept is expressed in the Bible, our concern will not involve the past historical applications, but instead will look deeper into the future, ultimate, eschatological Day of the Lord. [1] J. Barton Payne, The Theology of the Older Testament, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1962, pp. 464-465. [2] Renald Showers, Maranatha: Our Lord Come! Bellmawr, NJ: Friends of Israel, 1995, p. 30. [3] Richard L. Mayhue, “The Day of the Lord,” in The Popular Encyclopedia Of Bible Prophecy, eds. Tim Lahaye and Ed Hindson, Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2004, p. 73. [4] George Ladd, The Presence of the Future, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974, p. 68. [5] Showers, pp. 31-32. [6] John Walvoord, “The Day of the Lord,” in Journal of Ministry and Theology, 4:2, Fall, 2000, p. 10.

(From the book The Missing Key in Dispensational Eschatology) One of the most controversial issues related to the Rapture has to do with its timing. Within Christian circles, there is great disagreement over when the Rapture will take place in relation to the eschatological events the Bible foretells. Most of this discussion is related the timing of the Rapture in relation to the Tribulation (the final seven-year period of God's wrath), resulting in three main views: the pretribulational view, the midtribulational view, and the posttribulational view. The pretribulational view advocates that the Church will be raptured sometime prior to the seven-year Tribulation period, also called the seventieth week of the Daniel 9:24-27 prophecy (the future, remaining, final week of Israel’s seventy prophetic weeks that were revealed to Daniel). The midtribulational view holds that the Church will be raptured around the midpoint of the Tribulation period. The posttribulational view teaches that the Church will be raptured immediately after the ending of the Tribulation period when Christ returns at the Second Coming. There have also arisen other variations, such as the prewrath view, which, like pretribulationists, teach that the Rapture takes place prior to the wrath of God. However, the pre-wrath view differs by maintaining that the wrath doesn’t begin (and therefore the Rapture doesn’t take place) until sometime between the middle and end of the Tribulation (in other words, around three quarters of the way through). It is important to understand that one’s view of the timing of the Rapture is generally an outworking of the method of interpretation they use to understand the Bible – or, as the well-known Bible teacher Chuck Missler used to say, your hermeneutics will determine your eschatology. [1] Dispensationalism and the Timing of the Rapture At this point, we need to define another key term that, if embraced, is of great influence on one's view of the Rapture's timing. This term is dispensationalism, or premillennial dispensationalism. Premillennial dispensationalism is the name given to the belief system that results from a consistent literal-grammatical-historical-contextual, or plain interpretation of the Bible. The label “premillennial” derives from the fact that when one interprets the Bible in this way (without trying to allegorize the meaning of the text), the end-result is the recognition of a future literal Millennium of time in which Christ will physically rule the earth from Jerusalem, as the scriptures plainly foretell. The name “dispensationalism” comes from the scriptural recognition that God has dealt with mankind in a number of different ways throughout history. We call these different periods “dispensations,” meaning different ages or economies, characterized by, among other things, the different covenants God has made with man throughout history. In other words, dispensationalism is the understanding that God administers His plan for mankind in various stages, or dispensations. It recognizes how God has done so as He brings His ultimate plan for the redemption of mankind and the earth to completion. Two of the essentials of dispensationalism, as noted by scholar Charles Ryrie, [2] are as follows: Consistent Literal Interpretation This means consistently interpreting the Bible using the normal or plain meanings that the text is communicating, instead of spiritualizing or allegorizing the meanings. Israel and the Church are Distinct Dispensationalists recognize that the Bible teaches that God’s single program for human history includes a distinct plan for national Israel and a distinct plan for the Church. The Church is not Israel, and Israel is not the Church. The Church Age is an intercalation in Israel’s seventy-week prophetic timeline. Why is all of this relevant to our examination of the Rapture? It’s relevant because this fundamental recognition of the correct method of interpreting scripture has a direct impact on one’s understanding of the timing of the Rapture. We believe that a consistent application of a careful, sound, and literal exposition of the scriptures will always ultimately result in a pretribulational view of the timing of the Rapture. When one views the scriptures through a lens of consistent, literal interpretation, it results in the understanding that Israel and the Church are two distinct entities in God’s plan. It brings to light the recognition that the seventy prophetic “weeks” (or heptads of years) in Daniel 9:24-27 were specifically prophesied for the Jews (or Israel) and Jerusalem, and have nothing at all to do with the Church. Therefore, if the Tribulation is the seventieth week, it is completely antithetical to the Church. Just as the Church was not present on the earth for the first sixty-nine weeks of this prophetic calendar, it also cannot be on the earth for the seventieth. The Church must then be removed prior to this final week (pretribulationalism). Premillennial dispensationalists recognize that when Israel as a nation rejected their promised King Messiah, Jesus Christ, their promised Messianic Kingdom then had to be postponed. You cannot have the Kingdom without the King. At that time, the seventy-week prophetic timeline for Israel was paused. When this took place, God then introduced His interim plan for humanity: the Church. If this is true, then the Tribulation, which is the seventieth week – the future, remaining, final week of this prophetic timeline – clearly has nothing to do with the Church. In fact, the Tribulation and the Church are mutually exclusive. They are scripturally antithetical concepts. Many Christians are dispensationalists without even knowing it. Put simply, if you consistently interpret the Bible literally and believe Israel has a future, you view the Bible dispensationally. But for those who are unfamiliar with all of this, we will undertake a brief jog through the premillennial/dispensational understanding of eschatology (the study of the end times). A Dispensational Overview of Eschatology Correctly understanding the timeline for eschatology goes hand-in-hand with understanding God’s future program for Israel, as well as understanding how God has operated within the theater of humanity for the past four thousand years of human history. As we’ve already mentioned, our basic outline for this understanding is given in Daniel 9. This chapter records how in the mid-500s BC, the prophet Daniel was given the seventy-weeks prophecy, which declared seventy weeks of years that would take place for Israel and Jerusalem. This refers to a total of four hundred ninety years (seventy times seven). A beginning point and ending point are provided for marking the first through the sixty-ninth weeks of years (which was a prophetic countdown to the Messiah's First Coming). The sixty-ninth week ended with the Triumphal Entry of Jesus into Jerusalem in 33 AD, just days prior to His crucifixion. According to the prophecy, it is clear that the time-clock stopped with the completion of the sixty-ninth week, leaving one future week – the seventieth week – to still be completed. After Israel killed her Messiah, rejecting His offer of the Messianic Kingdom (which had been prophesied of throughout the Old Testament), this prophetic program for Israel was postponed (Matthew 23:37-39), and God instead introduced an interim program called the Church, as the Holy Spirit would be poured out around fifty days later on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2). So, at the Triumphal Entry, the time-clock for Israel’s seventy-week countdown was paused and a gap period we call the Church Age was inserted. Subsequently, the gospel was to be spread to all nations, and God’s focus temporarily shifted from that of national Israel to His new work called the Church, which focused mainly on the Gentile nations. In 70 AD, the final harbinger of this shift took place as Jerusalem was destroyed, and the Jews, over the next century, were scattered to the uttermost parts of the earth in what is termed the Diaspora. Dispensationalists understand that God’s time clock for the Church will stop with the Rapture, and either immediately or soon after, His time clock for Israel will again restart, as there remains one final week of years – the seventieth week – to be completed (as prophesied in Daniel 9:26-27 and expounded upon throughout the Old and New Testaments). During this time, Israel will once again become the primary focus of God’s plan during their final seven-year “week.” In this way, God’s programs for Israel and the Church are operating similar to a chess clock. In formal chess matches, there is a clock for each of the two players. When one player’s clock is running, the other’s is automatically stopped – and vice versa. This is exactly what scripture implies is happening with Israel and the Church (Romans 11:25-29, et al.). This final week for Israel, the Tribulation, will be a time of unprecedented trouble for the world as a whole, as God’s wrath is poured out. Scripture says that the Tribulation begins with the Antichrist enforcing a covenant. Around midway through the seven years, he perpetrates an event known as the abomination of desolation (Daniel 9:27; Matthew 24:15). After this midpoint abomination, the latter three and a half years of the Tribulation will be a time of unparalleled distress in human history, particularly for the Jews (Jeremiah 30:7; Zechariah 13:8). In fact, Jesus calls it the Great Tribulation in Matthew 24:21-22. One of the primary purposes of the Tribulation is to drive the nation of Israel to repentance through great affliction. Sometimes God has to knock us down in order to get us to look up at Him – and that’s exactly what happens to Israel during the Tribulation. Through this experience of unimaginable distress, a remnant of Israel will finally be brought to faith (Zechariah 12:10; Romans 11:25). Scripture informs us that Israel turning toward her true Messiah – Jesus Christ – acknowledging Him as such, and petitioning His return, is actually a precondition for the next event – the Second Coming of Christ, which will end the Tribulation, or the seventieth week (Hosea 5:15; Matthew 23:39). When Christ does return to the earth at the end of the Tribulation, Israel will finally be ready to receive Him as their Messiah (Zechariah 12:10). This now-righteous remnant of Israel will be rescued from the nations that have gathered to destroy her, and Christ will set up His Millennial or Messianic Kingdom on earth (Zechariah 12:2-3; 14). The Church will have returned with Christ at the Second Coming (Revelation 19:14) and will then rule and reign with Him as His bride for a literal thousand years, along with the other First Resurrection believers (Revelation 1:5-6; 20:6; et al.). Strong support for a future literal Millennium is found in the clear teaching of Revelation 20:1-7, where it says six times that Christ’s Kingdom will last for one thousand years. Scripture tells us that during this thousand-year period, the Lord will establish His physical Kingdom on this earth with Jerusalem as its capital. With Christ reigning as King, Israel will be the prominent nation on earth, after being restored spiritually and physically. Representatives from all nations will come to Jerusalem to honor and worship the King – Jesus Christ – who will reign on the throne of David, fulfilling a multitude of Old Testament “Kingdom prophecies” (Isaiah 60; Zechariah 8; Micah 4:2; et al.). Then, following the Millennium will come the Eternal State, as God’s dispensational plan for the redemption of mankind will have been realized (Revelation 21-22). Both the Old Testament and the New Testament support a premillennial/dispensational understanding of God’s plan for Israel. It is essential to understand that the Church has not replaced Israel in God’s plan. The two entities are distinct. The Church’s role is to be the beloved bride of Christ! Believing Jews who are saved between Pentecost and the Rapture are of course part of the Church, in which there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile (Romans 10:9-13; Ephesians 3:1-6) While God’s time clock has temporarily shifted to focus on the Church for the past two thousand years (the Church Age), He has not forgotten Israel and will one day restore them to His intended role as the nation He has chosen (Romans 11). God’s attention will turn back to Israel for their final week, but only after He removes His Church from the earth at the pretribulational Rapture! Maranatha! [1] Chuck Missler, “The Seven Myths of Eschatology,” Koinonia House. (https://www.khouse.org/articles/2012/1072/print/ - Retrieved 4/02/22) [2] Charles Ryrie, Dispensationalism, rev. and exp. ed., Chicago: Moody, 2007, pp. 46-48.