Was asked a question on Lutheran views of....

[Eikon]

What is the Lutheran views on the book of Revelation and the end times? With all this pre post mid yada yada trib type stuff its all confusing. I was asked what the Lutheran view on it is.

[filosofer]

Technically, we are amillennial (meaning "no millennium"), which is misleading. We believe in the millennium (Christ's reign), but we don't believe that it refers to a 1,000 year earthly reign of Christ. Pre and Post positions describe whether the church is raptured out prior to the millennium (pre-) or after the millennium (post-). Both positions acknowledge a second (to secretly take the church out) and third coming of Christ. How the church can be taken out secretly,...hmmmm.

We believe the church will be raptured at the same moment as Christ's return, which is the end. Christ's reign began with his ascension into heaven (1 Cor. 15:26), and the Gospels mention only one return of Christ - so also Hebrews 9:28. The end times was inaugurated with Acts 2, the pouring out of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:16-17).

[DaRev]

A more accurate description for the Lutheran view of the end times is "realized millenium" since were are currently in that "1000 year" reign of Christ.

[Eikon]

So then where does the 1000 years come into play, since it has been much longer?

[DaRev]

The "1000 years" is a metaphorical expression for a "long period of time." No where in Scripture is the term "1000 years" taken literally.

[filosofer]

The "1000 years" is a metaphorical expression for a "long period of time." No where in Scripture is the term "1000 years" taken literally.

We read it "literally" not literalistically. Might be better to state that the context determines whether it is to be understood as a literalistic 1,000 years or as a figure of speech referring to something else. In the contexts of the end times, it refers to an indeterminate length of time.

[Aibrean]

The "tribulation" is current. We have war now, we have murder now, we have false prophets now, we have false churches now.

From Revelation 1:

3Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

If the time is at hand, how does that justify a term of exactly 1000 years?

9I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

If John is a companion in the tribulation (or otherwise known as suffering) then how can it be at a future time?

Mark 13:24-27
24"But in those days, after that tribulation, THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, 25 AND THE STARS WILL BE FALLING from heaven, and the powers that are in the heavens will be shaken.
26"Then they will see THE SON OF MAN COMING IN CLOUDS with great power and glory.
27"And then He will send forth the angels, and will gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest end of the earth to the farthest end of heaven.

Notice this is after the tribulation that the Second Coming happens.

Revelation 7:1-14
After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth, that no wind might blow on earth or sea or against any tree. 2Then I saw another angel ascending from the rising of the sun, with the seal of the living God, and he called with a loud voice to the four angels who had been given power to harm earth and sea, 3saying,"Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads." 4And I heard the number of the sealed, 144,000, sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel:
512,000 from the tribe of Judah were sealed,12,000 from the tribe of Reuben,12,000 from the tribe of Gad, 612,000 from the tribe of Asher,12,000 from the tribe of Naphtali,12,000 from the tribe of Manasseh, 712,000 from the tribe of Simeon,12,000 from the tribe of Levi,12,000 from the tribe of Issachar, 812,000 from the tribe of Zebulun,12,000 from the tribe of Joseph,12,000 from the tribe of Benjamin were sealed. 9 After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb,( clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, 10and crying out with a loud voice, "Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!" 11And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, 12 saying, "Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever! Amen." 13Then one of the elders addressed me, saying, "Who are these, clothed in white robes, and from where have they come?" 14I said to him, "Sir, you know." And he said to me, "These are the ones coming out of the great tribulation. They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Note the same reference to the four winds as in Mark. After the 144,000 is mentioned you see at the end that there are people from all over and they are coming out of the great tribulation.

[Eikon]

Thanks for the scripture that backs up the view!

[Edial]

An "apostate" Lutheran here. :)

My understanding of the amillenialist theology is that it came from our Catholic background. It is traditional. Not Scriptural.

I also believe that there is no Scriptural support for a pre-trib rapture, so the rapture will happen at the time of Christ's 2nd Coming.

Concerning amillenianism (millenium started at the resurrection of Christ).
I think there is plain Scriptural support for a millenium as a future event.

In Rev.19 we see Christ's 2nd Coming. It is plainly defined. He came to earth.

Then we see Rev.20 (there were no chapter and verse definitions then, so it is a continual text).

Concerning 1000 years.
We have NO REASON to state that 1000 years is not 1000 years. We are adapting the Scripture to our theology.

The Revelation was written so we know for certain concerning the future events.
REV 1:19 "Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.
When Christ said the above in Chapter 1, he was already resurrected.
Millenium is in Chapter 20.

And starting from Chapter 4 it is what "will take place later".
REV 4:1 After this I looked, and there before me was a door standing open in heaven. And the voice I had first heard speaking to me like a trumpet said, "Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this."

I think we have somehow dismissed the whole book of the Revelation.
End-times interpretation does not appear to be our strenght.

Thanks,
Ed

[Edial]

The "tribulation" is current. We have war now, we have murder now, we have false prophets now, we have false churches now.

... If John is a companion in the tribulation (or otherwise known as suffering) then how can it be at a future time?

...
Notice this is after the tribulation that the Second Coming happens.
...
Note the same reference to the four winds as in Mark. After the 144,000 is mentioned you see at the end that there are people from all over and they are coming out of the great tribulation
All the word "tribulation" means is trouble.
There is also however, the great tribulation, which as the Bible describes was never seen before.
Today we certainly do not have any more problems than we had throughout the history of the mankind.

Here is something I am not clear on.
Are we equating tribulation with millenium?

But otherwise, yes, the 2nd Coming is coming after the great tribulation.

Thanks,
Ed

[Aibrean]

Yes but those who aren't amillenial attribute tribulation with a specific 1000 year period (aka...the "great" tribulation).

Anyway...my point was not that specific term...but connecting the passage in Revelation ("great tribulation") with the passage in Mark....the end will come after the tribulation...and the "rapture" IS the second coming.

[filosofer]

Yes but those who aren't amillenial attribute tribulation with a specific 1000 year period (aka...the "great" tribulation).

Anyway...my point was not that specific term...but connecting the passage in Revelation ("great tribulation") with the passage in Mark....the end will come after the tribulation...and the "rapture" IS the second coming.

Those who are not amillennial associate tribulation with the seven year (or in some cases, 3 1/2 years) period that follows the 1000 year millennial reign.

[Aibrean]

I grew up the opposite so now that my brain has tried to block out all the false doctrine I don't remember it all correctly :) Like those Left Behind books. I thought they thought rapture, tribulation, and then the 1000 year reign...

[BigNorsk]

I would point out that beyond the specifics Lutherans see the book of Revelation quite differently than many. For Lutherans the book is a comfort, an assurance that God is in control, that God does not desert us and so on. It's really a story of the final victory in a war won before it ever started.

Many others see it as frightening. A horrible thing. Many groups going so far as to deny what it says and think that somehow they can avoid things if they just prepare worldly fortresses, and store up provisions.

Marv

[Aibrean]

I think people try to interpret it too much...think too much about one thing that really might be something completely opposite.

[Edial]

I grew up the opposite so now that my brain has tried to block out all the false doctrine I don't remember it all correctly :) Like those Left Behind books. I thought they thought rapture, tribulation, and then the 1000 year reign...
The Left Behind books were also taught in my environment.
But they are fiction.
The ficticious (is there such a word?) part is that the rapture takes place before or right at the beginning of the great tribulation.

When I finally studied this claim despite of the strong teachings from the teachers in my previous circles, I was amazed to find there is not one verse supporting this view.

Then I began openly challenging that view.
I was further amazed that no one could come up with clear verses supporting their view.
The 2 verses that they usually show are plainly refuted to present it is not supporting pre-trib rapture.

The Left Behind books sell well.
They use peoples' fears.
Such books and their authors bother me very much.
They openly claim to know this theory is the truth. But they do not have Scriptures to prove what they preach. And the ones they use are flatly misapplied.

On the other hand some of us tend to throw the baby with bathwater, since we do have plain Scriptural evidence that millenium is a future event and it is 1000 years.

Yet I do realize that the mainline Lutheranism does not teach that.

Thanks, :)
Ed

[Edial]

Those who are not amillennial associate tribulation with the seven year (or in some cases, 3 1/2 years) period that follows the 1000 year millennial reign.


(You probably meant the 1000 years follows tribulation ...).

That is correct

There are few of us also that question the lenght of the great tribulation being specifically 7 years, since it is also not clear in the Bible.

Thanks,
Ed

[Edial]

I would point out that beyond the specifics Lutherans see the book of Revelation quite differently than many. For Lutherans the book is a comfort, an assurance that God is in control, that God does not desert us and so on. It's really a story of the final victory in a war won before it ever started.

Many others see it as frightening. A horrible thing. Many groups going so far as to deny what it says and think that somehow they can avoid things if they just prepare worldly fortresses, and store up provisions.

Marv
And also to some of us the purpose of the Revelation is to have a clear and precise roadmap of the future events that are plainly defined.

And some of us also have an encouragement that when we or our children do go through these horrible times in the future, the Lord God will be intensely with us even while the persecution of the church would be unbearable.

Thanks,
Ed

[Edial]

I think people try to interpret it too much...think too much about one thing that really might be something completely opposite.
This is an excellent point.

I noticed an interesting pattern concerning interpretations of parts of the Bible throughout history that cause great confusion, divisions and infighting within the Church.

These problems are usually there in order to hide, cover up the plain message of that specific part on the text.

That is one of the reasons I plainly believe when Christ said: "This is my body", he meant it.
Not symbolic, not transubtatiating, since these were plainly bread and wine, but His true body while it is bread and wine.

Thanks, :)
Ed

[DaRev]

Revelation is problematic in a couple of ways. One is that it is not a narrative and therefore cannot be used to define a chronological description of future events. It is actually cyclical in its writing. The second is that it is part of the antilegomena and thus it is difficult to derive doctrine from it. It does, however, support the other Scriptural doctrines of the realized millenium.

[Edial]

Revelation is problematic in a couple of ways. One is that it is not a narrative and therefore cannot be used to define a chronological description of future events. It is actually cyclical in its writing.
The only cyclical debate I am aware of is concerning the seals, bowls and trumpets, the middle part of the Revelation.
Some say it is talking about the same event, others say it is chronological.
I remember studying this and found that there are clear differences between these. My strong belief is that the chronological answer is the most reasonable.

However, regardless of what I think, the point is that the millenium (Chapet 20) and Lord's 2nd Coming (Chapter 19) and many other relevant texts are not a part of the cyclical debate.
Plain reading of the Scriptures do not provide for it.

Oh, I'm aware that some would claim that everything is cyclical in the Revelation, :) but Christ's plain words that he is to show us what is now and what is to take place later simply do not allow for it.

The second is that it is part of the antilegomena and thus it is difficult to derive doctrine from it. It does, however, support the other Scriptural doctrines of the realized millenium.
(I had to look up what antilegomena means). :)

This is an argument that I would expect from some of my own synod. (Nothing personal).

If we believe that All Scriptures (or Canon) are inspired by God, the Revelation of John is Scriptures.
Revelation of John is as inspired by God as the Gospel of John.

The reason some had doubts about including it into the canon was not because it was conflicting to the rest of the books in doctrine, but because it was so unlike any other books, ... yet the same doctrine.

Also, the Revelation was written so we see it as the clarifying answer to other doctrines of the rest of the Scriptures.
It speaks clearly of the judgement of God, elements and specific purpose of the items in the Garden, the incredible amount of details about heaven and specifics about hell, unbelievable closeup of the works of the evil, tremendous amount of activities among the angels, on and on.

John's meticulous recording of exactly what he sees in the spiritual world as well as the command that he should not record some things are telling us that we are given this information not for a general edification, but for a specific knowledge.

And the details, they are so clear, so close, so mindboggling, so ... hard to believe.
That magnificent creature with eyes all over it, even under the wings.

And this constant and unyielding presence of eternity, angels and God.
It is an awesome reality of heaven.

I think we greatly underestimate the Revelation of John.
The real edification of a believer is not to interpret it somehow in the context of our understanding, but to accept it's plain words in all of their magnificent and foreign to us reality.

Our new home.

Thanks, :)
Ed

[DaRev]

Revelation is an apocalyptic writing and MUST be interpreted as such. It contains much symbolic language.

[rockytrails]

What is the Lutheran views on the book of Revelation and the end times? With all this pre post mid yada yada trib type stuff its all confusing. I was asked what the Lutheran view on it is.

our view on revelations is revelations view of revelations. no more no less.
simply said Jesus who set aside his Godly crown and came down to live and die in our stead has taken his Godly crown back again. never to set it aside again.
some may call it A millianial .

God simply call it his word.

I would also like to say Lutherans take the book of revelations just as literly as we take every other book of the bible . that means when God talks to us in plain language or picture languaage or symbolicly we recognize it as such and dont subscribe our own interpetations to such talk. but totaly trust what God says in the way he said it as the best way to relate what he has to say to us.

If because of our sin nature we dont understand a passaage We trust God other passages on the same subject to shed its light on those passages we don't fully grasp.

Dont be fooled into thinking Lutherans dont take the bible completly litterly we do . what we do not do is take the bible literlisticly as the others do.

for example when God in plain language says this is my Body do we not believe him ? and when God in his picture language tells us how it is in heaven do we not believe him there to .
And when God tells us in his symbolic language he is king over all for ever ever do we not believe Him there to
yes we do.
what we do not do is take these word given to us in plain or picture or symbolic language literlisticly; meaning taking them to say what we would like them to say by assigning them our own interpetations.