From: topcat!tom@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com (Tom Albrecht)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Imminency doctrine
Date: 12 Oct 92 06:22:18 GMT
Organization: Applied Presuppositionalism, Ltd.

baresson@cbnewsi.att.com writes:

>>Could you please define this doctrine of imminency from the Scriptures?  How
>>is it that the folks who hold to this "imminency" doctrine are many of the
>>same folks who have been telling us all the signs point to the fact that
>>we're the "terminal generation?"  If Christ's return is "imminent", how can
>>there be signs prior to the rapture?
>
>Certainly. We have to admit that there is a dynamic tension
>between the FACT and TIMING of our Lord's return, with those things
>we are told of which will precede it serving to focus our minds
>on the fact that it is soon. It is a call to a holy life.

One can be called to a holy life without the so-called imminency doctrine.
After all, Abraham and Moses and the children of Israel were also called to
holiness of living.  Jesus' second coming certainly was "imminient" as far
as they were concerned.

>The doctrine of imminency attests to this: we are
>told to look for his appearing and at the same time to WATCH
>"when you see these things beginning to take place ..."

No, "come to pass" as in:

    Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When its branch is yet
    tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
    So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to
    pass, know that it is near, [even] at the doors.
    Verily I say to you, that THIS GENERATION shall not pass,
    till all these things shall be done.
    Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not
    pass away.  (Mark 13:28-31)

Note the words "this generation."  The passage in question is speaking to
the generation of Jews living at the time of Christ.   It's quite
impossible that Jesus was speaking of the time just prior to His second
coming -- unless you don't take Jesus' words at face value.

>Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:51-2 talks of "we who are left": I believe
>that he fully expected the Lord to return in his lifetime - or
>at least he lived with the strong possibility. So must we.

This reads like speculation rather than hard and fast biblical evidence for
the doctrine.  I still fail to see a doctrine of "imminency" from the
scriptures, esp. I Cor. 15.

>The relationship between the signs and the rapture is never made
>clear, as to say what will happen BEFORE the departure of the
>church and what will happen after, so for instance we see
>that there are some things pointed to which could occur
>beforehand or maybe afterward.

Scripture references, please?  I think part of your problem is incorrectly
theorizing a timing difference between the "rapture" and the second coming
in glory and judgment.

>Because we are told to look for His appearing, there are no
>signs that are specific to the church - with the arguable
>exception of the great commission. We are told to watch, as
>servants for their master, to live sober lives waiting for His
>appearing. The Lord is at hand. The night is far off.
>
>It is the church's relationship with Israel which is a major
>factor in the pointing to our generation as being the last. ...

Dispensational speculation.  You posit a theorical relationship between
Israel and the Church during the new covenant, and then build up an
elaborate set of theories based on it.  It's like a house of cards.  If the
basic theory is in error, then what flows from it is most likely in error
as well.

I would still like to see specific scriptural references to support this
"imminency" theory, rather than long drawn out hypotheses.

>Now, here is something you can take me up on. I personally
>believe that the battles of Ezek 38-9 refer to an invasion
>of contemporary Israel by Russia. ...

With swords, spears, shields and horses?  How else would a "literalist"
interpret Ezekiel 38&39?

That's

>See Tim la Haye's book 'The Coming Peace in the Middle East' for
>instance, where he postulates a rapture well before Daniel's 70th
>week.

More theory?

Just one more question.  According to your definitions, was the return of
Jesus "imminent" to Christians 1000 years ago?

--
Tom Albrecht