When reality isn’t good enough — or not convincing enough — realistic fiction is often used to convince people of a situation. This trend has done wonders for those who advocate premillennialism with the Left Behind series written by LaHaye and Jenkins. The former certainly seemed to obtain greater success with those books during these years, and although they profess to be vain speculations, not a few have followed them because of the authority of these books. Even those who are not convinced ask many questions because of the contents of these books, and often these people receive answers that are completely inappropriate and therefore they emerge to the earlier view of Revelation and other texts.
In this climate it is good to see provocative responses to this premillennialist trend, and Barbara Rossing’s The Rapture Exposed: A Message of Hope in the in many ways it works a great service in the expansion of premillennialism.
Since I have many disagreements with some of the author’s statements, and such will be said later, I would like to report how well he has done many refutations of premillennialists and has done well to explain premillennialism. It is of recent interest. She spends the first two chapters talking about the dangerous consequences of premillennialism and its origins. She clearly demonstrates how premillennialism is not two millennia old, but two centuries originating in the thought patterns of John Darby and the Plymouth brothers and the popular Scofield Bible. Far from being a harmless oddity, premillennialism is also exposed as how American foreign policy has managed a highly partisan area. Israel, has brought a lazy attitude to the maintenance of things, and especially put the return of Christ completely inconsistent and inconsistent with the presentation of Jesus Christ in the rest of the New Testament.
He spends that chapter and the next two chapters analyzing the biblical claims of the pre-eminent position. He rightly shows how the idea of the rapture, the time gap in Daniel’s prophecies, and the seven-year tribulation are not present in the Scriptures, and also shows how the MISCELLANEOUS premillennial interpretive method is inherently flawed.
While those refutations are all well and good, perhaps the best thing about Barbara Rossing’s work is how she not only shows why premillennialism is false, but also in the second sentence of Revelation, which is more consistent with the rest of the New Testament. The testament, which rule he brings before him, as he does in the rest of the book. As opposed to twisting the book of Revelation into the context of the first century Asia Minor in which it was written, as the ancients were wont to do, Rossing firmly keeps the context and shows how John presents a message of hope to persecuted Christians. Asia Minor in the first century In addition, Rossing points out a specific aspect of prophecy, as believed by the premillennialists – prophecy is not a certain decision of the future, but a warning to repent, so that what is prophesied does not come to the people. He uses the persuasive example of Jonah, who prophesied a message that did not come true because of the repentance of the Assyrians; I will also add Paul’s prophecies in Acts 27. When considering the purpose of the book of Revelation – to raise up the Saints of Asia Minor in the last century – and the understanding of the nature and purpose of John’s vision, as just stated. which are put together, it becomes clear why the fallacy of premillennialism is dangerous.
Rossing also uses unique images with parallels in the Old Testament Prophets to convey some thoughts about what John is talking about. John constantly uses ancient language and images from the prophets, and his message against Rome is expressed in many words, as Isaiah against the Assyrians and Babylon. Rossing was particularly interested in John’s conversion to the idea of victory. The idea of victory and conquest through Roman military prowess has been deified, and Rossing explains how John uses the idea of victory to show how God’s victory will truly be in the end. As long as Rome boasts of victory, Rome’s conqueror will be God. Likewise, Rossing posits a change in the speed of John 5 in Revelation 5 to refer to Jesus as a Lion to Jesus as a Lamb, and how Jesus is then expressed not as a lion but as a lamb. The image of the Lamb, as the powerful ruler of the universe, subverts normal notions of power, just as the teaching of Jesus as the last of the first subverts the normative notions of power in the Gospels (cf. Matthew 19:30). Overall, Rossing presents many views of Revelation that are more consistent with the New Testament and the first-century Mediterranean world than those he posits.
It is unfortunate, however, that Rossing’s great disagreement with the premillennialist view led her to a dead end. Rossing stands in the liberal Protestant tradition, which is made clear by many of his positions. In the first chapter, he destroys any idea of the destruction of the world, which God’s promise to Noah emphasizes in Genesis 8:21, rejecting any harmony of the two opinions of God, promising first not to destroy the world and then simply saying it “not that the water destroy it”, Gen. The destruction of the earth and the transformation of men are witnessed in 2 Pet. 3, 9-10 and 1 Cor. 15, and Rossingus does not provide suitable evidence, so that we leave it to the conclusion that God tightens the promise in Gen. Furthermore, while he emphasizes and demonstrates that Revelation is a vision, emphasizing chapters 4 to 20, his approach suddenly becomes much more literal when ch. 21 and 22. He speaks, “The Faith of the New Jerusalem” in
