Actscelerate.com

Link

Second Coming Question on the Declaration of Faith

Acts-perienced Poster Posts: 11849 **1/30/23 10:55 am**

"We believe:

In the premillennial second coming of Jesus. First, to resurrect the righteous dead and to catch away the living saints to Him in the air. Second, to reign on the earth a thousand years."

Does this mean that the COG teaches two second comings one 'first', and the other 'second'? Does it teach two more comings which it both labels the 'second coming? Doesn't typical pre-trib consider the rapture to be a separate event from the second coming?

Or does it mean that there is one second coming, and that the resurrection of the righteous dead and catching away of the living saints is 'first' in that it is more important and that the thousand year reign is of secondary importance.

Is it saying that at the second coming, first the dead are raised and the Lord catches away the living saints into the air, and after that reigns 1000 years? That seems kind of post-trib.

Is it possible that this statement was intentionally ambiguously (or rather unclearly) worded?

Where is scripture for this two-step view of the second coming if that is indeed the intent, or for the idea that the resurrection and rapture of the living is more important than the thousand year reign?"

I also notice that the catching up of the righteous dead along with the living saints is omitted from the statement. It does not specify that the raised righteous dead are the 'dead in Christ'.

Nature Boy Florida

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 16630 **1/30/23 1:18 pm**

It was ambiguous on purpose. So there can be some disagreement on pre, mid, post trib.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today!

Quiet Wyatt

Quiet Wyatt · [Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12802 **1/30/23 3:02 pm**

I find the statement to be most consistent with Historic Premillenialism (posttrib).

However, it does leave room for those who may prefer to believe in pretrib, mid trib or even prewrath.

The CoG has no official doctrine regarding the tribulation period or the specific timing of the rapture other than that it will be at the premillennial second coming.

The resurrected saints will of course be quite fully living saints once resurrected, so it is not clear what the problem or ambiguity is on that point.

Quiet Wyatt

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12802 **1/30/23 3:06 pm**

In my experience as a CoG minister now for nearly 25 years, it seems most CoG ministers hold to the pretrib view basically by default, but most also are quite ignorant (whether willfully or not depends on the individual) concerning the glorious APPEARING of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, which Paul specifically refers to as our blessed hope.

Quiet Wyatt

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12802 **1/30/23 6:33 pm**

On the posttrib view, the resurrection/rapture to meet the Lord in the air occurs first, just prior to Christ’s physical descent to earth to establish His Millenial reign.

Link

Acts-perienced Poster Posts: 11849 **2/1/23 3:22 pm**

Quiet Wyatt

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12802 **2/1/23 5:32 pm**

Mat

Is the catching away ...

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1986 **2/1/23 6:48 pm**

Is the catching away of the resurrected saints for the marriage supper of the Lamb a "second coming" or the dead in Christ and those still alive going? When Christ returns will all the saints be with him to begin the 1000 year reign?

Mat

Link

Acts-perienced Poster Posts: 11849 **2/1/23 9:49 pm**

Quiet Wyatt

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12802 **2/1/23 10:46 pm**

It isn’t that hard to understand. First the rapture/resurrection, second/then (immediately followed by, in my view) the descent of Christ to the earth to reign.

Since the statement begins by stating we believe in the premillenial second coming of the Lord Jesus, it is not clear where you are getting the idea from that the statement downplays Christ’s millennial reign on earth.

Quiet Wyatt

Re: Is the catching away ...

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12802 **2/2/23 12:03 am**

Link

Acts-perienced Poster Posts: 11849 **2/2/23 8:33 am**

The Bible does not say that the marriage supper of the Lamb happens in heaven. The passage about it is right before the passage which we premillennials interpret as being about the Second Coming, then the beast and false prophet being cast into the lake of fire, then the first resurrection, then the thousand years, there in Revelation 19 and 20.

Mat

Re: Is the catching away ...

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1986 **2/2/23 2:31 pm**

Quiet Wyatt

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12802 **2/2/23 5:26 pm**

I am unaware of any Scripture that places the marriage supper of the Lamb prior to the second coming of Christ to earth at the beginning of His millennial reign. I also know of no scriptures which say the marriage supper will last seven years.

In Revelation 19, the marriage supper of the Lamb is placed in context of the return of Christ to earth in judgment. Indeed, the destruction of the wicked is described in that same chapter also as “the great supper of God.”

There is nothing I know of in Scripture which would preclude the marriage supper of the Lamb as occurring at the beginning of the millennial reign of Christ on earth.

I realize dispensationalism says the marriage supper of the Lamb occurs in Heaven following the pretrib rapture, but I have found zero evidence for the pretrib/dispensationalist scheme in Scripture. I would of course be absolutely thrilled to rise to meet Him whenever He comes, but the pretrib theory just has no support at all in Scripture.

There is only one second coming, not two.

Aaron Scott

I think the meaning is simpler...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6036 **2/2/23 10:19 pm**

When the Bible verse say "First to resurrect...Second to reign," I don't think it is at all speaking of another second coming. I believe its meaning is more akin to something like "there's two things Jesus is going to do when He returns...."

Mat

F. J. Lee and Dispensationalism

Acts Enthusiast Posts: 1986 **2/4/23 9:39 am**

If you read old issues of the Evangel, you will note that F. J. Lee was very much into Dispensationalism. He wrote articles on the subject with illustrations of the dispensations, traveled to teach on the subject with one of those dispensation time charts and most likely included it in BTS curriculum. I think I remember seeing an ad in the Evangel where people could buy one of those charts for their own ministry.

Like his belief in "Signs Following," as far has I have read he never changed his position on Dispensationalism. That could be why it runs deep in COG teaching/belief even to this day.

Mat

PS There may have been a booklet or tract Lee wrote on Dispensationalism as well.

Quiet Wyatt

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12802 **2/4/23 2:39 pm**

Yes, dispensationalism was widely held amongst early Pentecostals, which was broadly popular in late 19th century and early 20th century evangelicalism as a result of the “Bible conference” movement of the late 1800s. The Scofield Reference Bible was very popular and influential, even though it was cessationist and antinomian, in keeping with Darby’s original dispensationalism.

Perhaps the most influential Pentecostal dispensationalist teacher from the mid 20th century (2nd generation of the movement), Finis Dake, was a widely popular teacher in both the AoG and later in the CoG. His study Bible was the first and only Pentecostal study Bible until the 1990s. He had some good insights, in my opinion. Thankfully, Dake differed from most dispensationalists regarding cessationism and antinomianism.