time gap or no?

[7djengo7]

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 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: 17 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. 18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Just wanted to run some of my thinking on this passage by any of my fellow pretribbers who may be interested.

I used to assume a time gap of unknown duration between verse 16's rising of the dead in Christ and the being caught up together with them of the "we who are alive and remain" of verse 17. Paul's "first...then" construct I assumed to indicate a chronological succession. On these assumptions, I wondered about such a time period, however long it might be: what would that look like? Would these risen dead in Christ be visibly emerging from graves and observable by people living on earth who have never died, in this imagined interval I took to precede the Rapture? Maybe. I really don't know. And I don't know if I've ever heard any discussion focused on this aspect of the passage.

But, at some point, I began having a problem entertaining the idea that Paul could be positing such a time gap by his "first...then" wording. This is because it would seem to allow time for one or more of "we who are alive and remain" to still die -- to become fresh "dead in Christ" -- after the event of verse 16's rising of the dead in Christ has already come to pass. That, to me, would seem problematic.

 

[Derf]

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 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: 17 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. 18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Just wanted to run some of my thinking on this passage by any of my fellow pretribbers who may be interested.

I used to assume a time gap of unknown duration between verse 16's rising of the dead in Christ and the being caught up together with them of the "we who are alive and remain" of verse 17.

Interesting idea.

Paul's "first...then" construct I assumed to indicate a chronological succession. On these assumptions, I wondered about such a time period, however long it might be: what would that look like? Would these risen dead in Christ be visibly emerging from graves and observable by people living on earth who have never died, in this imagined interval I took to precede the Rapture?

Might it even be a testimony to those who are not participating? And if so, wouldn't there also be new believers because of it?

Maybe. I really don't know. And I don't know if I've ever heard any discussion focused on this aspect of the passage.

But, at some point, I began having a problem entertaining the idea that Paul could be positing such a time gap by his "first...then" wording. This is because it would seem to allow time for one or more of "we who are alive and remain" to still die -- to become fresh "dead in Christ" -- after the event of verse 16's rising of the dead in Christ has already come to pass. That, to me, would seem problematic.

I think that is unlikely to be a problem, because "we who are alive and remain" would likely already have been changed, as Paul mentions here:
1 Corinthians 15:52 KJV — In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

And if it is merely a moment, which starts at the last trump, when BOTH the dead are raised incorruptible and "we" (those alive at the time) are changed to also become incorruptible, then there aren't any fresh dead folks.

But after that, there might be some amount of time between the resurrection/changing to incorruptible and our ascension to be with Christ.

 

[7djengo7]

Might it even be a testimony to those who are not participating? And if so, wouldn't there also be new believers because of it?

But it would seem new believers in such a scenario would be too late for participation in the being-changed moment of 1 Corinthians 15:52.

But after that, there might be some amount of time between the resurrection/changing to incorruptible and our ascension to be with Christ.

Maybe. That's an idea I've never heard/considered. I've always taken the being changed as simultaneous and bound up with the Rapture. Your having drawn my attention to the simultaneity of the deads' being raised incorruptible and the being-changed of the "we" is valuable. I mean, it's not that it's a hidden subtlety of the text, or something, but, for me, it's nevertheless one of those things I don't know if I was ever quite fully cognizant of until now.

 

[Derf]

But it would seem new believers in such a scenario would be too late for participation in the being-changed moment of 1 Corinthians 15:52.

Agreed. They would have missed the "moment" and would be relegated to the next available resurrection, the one at the end of the Millennium. Although, depending on how you read Revelation, it seems like the "first" resurrection might be split into multiple episodes.

Maybe. That's an idea I've never heard/considered. I've always taken the being changed as simultaneous and bound up with the Rapture. Your having drawn my attention to the simultaneity of the deads' being raised incorruptible and the being-changed of the "we" is valuable. I mean, it's not that it's a hidden subtlety of the text, or something, but, for me, it's nevertheless one of those things I don't know if I was ever quite fully cognizant of until now.

I see a way for the rapture to be in the text, but I have a hard time fitting it into Revelation's two resurrections.

 

[JudgeRightly]

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 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: 17 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. 18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Just wanted to run some of my thinking on this passage by any of my fellow pretribbers who may be interested.

I used to assume a time gap of unknown duration between verse 16's rising of the dead in Christ and the being caught up together with them of the "we who are alive and remain" of verse 17. Paul's "first...then" construct I assumed to indicate a chronological succession. On these assumptions, I wondered about such a time period, however long it might be: what would that look like? Would these risen dead in Christ be visibly emerging from graves and observable by people living on earth who have never died, in this imagined interval I took to precede the Rapture? Maybe. I really don't know. And I don't know if I've ever heard any discussion focused on this aspect of the passage.

But, at some point, I began having a problem entertaining the idea that Paul could be positing such a time gap by his "first...then" wording. This is because it would seem to allow time for one or more of "we who are alive and remain" to still die -- to become fresh "dead in Christ" -- after the event of verse 16's rising of the dead in Christ has already come to pass. That, to me, would seem problematic.

Wait, so what are you trying to ask?

 

[Derf]

Agreed. They would have missed the "moment" and would be relegated to the next available resurrection, the one at the end of the Millennium. Although, depending on how you read Revelation, it seems like the "first" resurrection might be split into multiple episodes.


I see a way for the rapture to be in the text, but I have a hard time fitting it into Revelation's two resurrections.

@7djengo7
If Revelation 20 details the full gamut of resurrection events post-Christ's, and the BOC's resurrection must be the first of the two, then it seems like the church will go through the tribulation.

If instead, the BOC does not go through the tribulation, we must be looking at a third resurrection event that isn't described in Revelation as such, keeping in mind there are some such events, perhaps in Rev 13, but not clearly tied to a mass resurrection.

 

[Right Divider]

Those that can't rightly divide are those that remain confused.

 

[Derf]

Those that can't rightly divide are those that remain confused.

Those that are unable to explain and use the deficiency of the hearer as an excuse are not even useful in the discussion.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Wait, so what are you trying to ask?

Bump

 

[7djengo7]

Wait, so what are you trying to ask?

Basically, I'm not sure whether to take Paul's "first...then" construct in verses 16-17 as indicating 1) the event of the rising of the dead in Christ as taking place some time prior to the event of the catching-up into heaven with them of those "who are alive and remain", or 2) those two events as being simultaneous. In other words, must it be thought of as being used to indicate a temporal order in those two events such that the one occurs before the other occurs?

At a glance, I see the words "the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds," and my mind kind of defaults to thinking of it as something along the lines of "the dead in Christ shall rise first; [and after that] we...shall be caught up..." You know, like how, we, in ordinary, day-to-day speech, will say something like, "I'm going to stop for gas, first, and then I'm going to stop at the grocery store," where, by "then", we mean "next" or "afterwards", so that we're delineating a series of events that will occur, the one after the other.

And, if these two events (rising and being caught up into heaven) are temporally sequential, the question arises as to how much time goes by between them. And, does Paul elsewhere write of any such period of time -- a period of time bounded by (at its start) the rising of the dead in Christ, and by (at its end) the being caught up into heaven of those two, in-Christ parties? I do not know if I've ever heard any commentator mention such a period; I don't know that such a period has been reckoned into any scholar's "prophetic calendar". Yet, one would think such a period would stand out as being at least somewhat interesting and meriting comment, if only because during it (depending on its duration) individuals who were born and had died as many as nearly two thousand years ago would now be out of their graves, walking about on the earth once again after all these centuries, presumably visible to many living on the earth in that day.

I'm not much for entertaining the idea that the risen dead in Christ will be kept cooling their heels on the earth for a time immediately following their rising, waiting to be raptured. Not that I'd have a problem with it if I could believe that Scripture actually posits such, but I just don't know how it could be thought to jibe with other aspects of Paul's eschatology.

So, I am led to wonder if it could, instead, be legitimately thought that those two events will happen simultaneously, instead of in temporal sequence, so that the event of the rising of the dead in Christ occurs right alongside the catching-up with them of "we who are alive and remain". Perhaps it cannot. But, if those two events can't happen simultaneously, it would seem they must be sequential, and thus must together bookend a (as I see it, problematic)

Hopefully this post goes at least a little way toward clarifying what I meant, but by all means, if you're curious, please ask further questions if you need me to further try to clarify anything I'm trying to express.

 

[Derf]

Basically, I'm not sure whether to take Paul's "first...then" construct in verses 16-17 as indicating 1) the event of the rising of the dead in Christ as taking place some time prior to the event of the catching-up into heaven with them of those "who are alive and remain", or 2) those two events as being simultaneous. In other words, must it be thought of as being used to indicate a temporal order in those two events such that the one occurs before the other occurs?

At a glance, I see the words "the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds," and my mind kind of defaults to thinking of it as something along the lines of "the dead in Christ shall rise first; [and after that] we...shall be caught up..." You know, like how, we, in ordinary, day-to-day speech, will say something like, "I'm going to stop for gas, first, and then I'm going to stop at the grocery store," where, by "then", we mean "next" or "afterwards", so that we're delineating a series of events that will occur, the one after the other.

And, if these two events (rising and being caught up into heaven) are temporally sequential, the question arises as to how much time goes by between them. And, does Paul elsewhere write of any such period of time -- a period of time bounded by (at its start) the rising of the dead in Christ, and by (at its end) the being caught up into heaven of those two, in-Christ parties? I do not know if I've ever heard any commentator mention such a period; I don't know that such a period has been reckoned into any scholar's "prophetic calendar". Yet, one would think such a period would stand out as being at least somewhat interesting and meriting comment, if only because during it (depending on its duration) individuals who were born and had died as many as nearly two thousand years ago would now be out of their graves, walking about on the earth once again after all these centuries, presumably visible to many living on the earth in that day.

I'm not much for entertaining the idea that the risen dead in Christ will be kept cooling their heels on the earth for a time immediately following their rising, waiting to be raptured. Not that I'd have a problem with it if I could believe that Scripture actually posits such, but I just don't know how it could be thought to jibe with other aspects of Paul's eschatology.

So, I am led to wonder if it could, instead, be legitimately thought that those two events will happen simultaneously, instead of in temporal sequence, so that the event of the rising of the dead in Christ occurs right alongside the catching-up with them of "we who are alive and remain". Perhaps it cannot. But, if those two events can't happen simultaneously, it would seem they must be sequential, and thus must together bookend a (as I see it, problematic)

Hopefully this post goes at least a little way toward clarifying what I meant, but by all means, if you're curious, please ask further questions if you need me to further try to clarify anything I'm trying to express.

If you see death as an impediment to ascension into heaven (remember that Jesus first rose from the dead before He ascended into heaven), then you can see that all others need to first rise before ascending. But such doesn't help with your time gap question. I think it is probably still sequential, rather than simultaneous, but not much time between.
Vs 15 keeps the order as "rise from dead first, then ascend", by showing the alive folks don't precede the dead folks.

 

[7djengo7]

I should add that, if the prophesied event of the dead in Christ rising is to occur before the Rapture occurs, rather than simultaneously with the Rapture, then it would seem to mean that the Rapture could not be imminent. In such case, the rising of the dead in Christ would be the next prophesied event on the prophetic timeline, preceding the Rapture.

 

[Derf]

I should add that, if the prophesied event of the dead in Christ rising is to occur before the Rapture occurs, rather than simultaneously with the Rapture, then it would seem to mean that the Rapture could not be imminent. In such case, the rising of the dead in Christ would be the next prophesied event on the prophetic timeline, preceding the Rapture.

Here's a similar scenario:
Revelation 11:7-12 KJV — And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves. And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth. And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them. And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.

They died. They were dead for a time. They rose from the dead, where people could see them. THEN they ascended. Their resurrection was obvious and visible, and the ascension didn't happen simultaneously, but took at least long enough for the world to see them alive, and then to be able to watch them go into heaven. But it doesn't appear to be a very long time gap.

 

[Nick M]

Those that can't rightly divide are those that remain confused.

As you know he

Let the Bible speak for itself

He is also a KJB only, but I don't mind.