Unregistered

Answer:

I can see that you are not understanding about Israelology. The exercise of showing you the 83% is a very, very small part of the subject. You did not know where the 83% came from, so I showed you in a simple way. But that is only showing you how much (83%) of the “Biblical text” talks about Israel. Please understand that Israelology is not a “percentage”. Moving forward to the “real” subject. If you remember the “title” of my post is: “MAJOR” Errors of W. Lee’s Teaching. That means that Israelology is a “major” topic that W. Lee did not consider in his Life Studies. He spoke about Israel, but he applied to the church what is for Israel with the wrong interpretation. Pick up any Life Study of the Old Testament and you will see that he ends up sharing from the New Testament bringing the “church in”.

I already mentioned, I mention again: “All we have to do is to “honor and follow” what the Bible is showing to us. For this, we need to get very familiar with the text, context, structure, where different topics or words are mentioned, recognize what is a parable, a type, an allegory, a pun, a figure of speech (there are over 200 in the Bible), a simile, a metaphor, an analogy, an idiom (which there are many in the Jewish culture used in the Bible), a hypocatastasis, etc., etc., etc., …. There are over 200 in the Bible.”

This means if you are studying the Old Testament, you have to be very familiar with the Jewish culture, which W. Lee, was not familiar. Instead, he made up his own allegory, besides that, he put an allegory where there is no allegory. Here there are two specific examples: I already mentioned about this, I am going to mention again:

I would like to point out a few wrong allegories that W. Lee makes in his teaching:

*Boiling a young goat in the mother’s milk (Exo 23:19; 34:26; Deut 14:21) 19“You shall bring the choice first fruits of your soil into the house of the LORD your God. “You are not to boil a young goat in the milk of its mother”.

W. Lee’s explanation in his Life Study is: “Now we come to the last condition, a condition that may seem very strange: “You shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk” (v. 26b). You may be surprised at the significance of the requirement not to boil a kid in its mother’s milk. This requirement indicates or typifies that we should not seethe young believers with the milk of the word; that is, we should not “boil” them with the word of life that is for nourishment (1 Pet. 2:2).

In ancient times some people probably did have the practice of boiling a kid in its mother’s milk. This may have been regarded as a delicious dish. As we have indicated, we should not use the milk of the word to seethe young believers. This is to use the milk of the word, which is for life- nourishment, to kill the young ones. The point here is that the milk of the Word of God is for nourishment”(1Pet 2:2; Heb 5:12, 13; 1Cor 3:2).

W. Lee in his explanation above gives his “free allegory” made up by himself, additionally he gives references (1Pet 2:2; Heb 5:12, 13; 1Cor 3:2) that have NOTHING to do with the subject verses (Exo 23:19; 34:26; Deut 14:21), except ALL these verses have the word “milk” in common.

The “correct” Biblical way to understand “Boiling a young goat in the mother’s milk” is that it refers to the superstitious custom of the Canaanites at harvest time in which a young goat was boiled in its mother’s milk as a charm to increase the fruitfulness of their crops.

God didn’t want His people copying the pagan fertility rituals instead of trusting Him to bless their harvest. This commandment is the basis for the present Jewish custom of not mixing milk products with meat.

This is according to Israelology, Jewish culture, because the Bible is a Judeo-Christian book.

Another example:

*Eating poisonous gourds (2King 4:38-41)

38When Elisha returned to Gilgal, there was a famine in the land. As the sons of the prophets were sitting before him, he said to his servant, “Put on the large pot and boil stew for the sons of the prophets.” 39Then one went out into the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine and gathered from it his lap full of wild gourds, and came and sliced them into the pot of stew, for they did not know what they were. 40So they poured it out for the men to eat. And as they were eating of the stew, they cried out and said, “O man of God, there is death in the pot.” And they were unable to eat. 41But he said, “Now bring meal.” He threw it into the pot and said, “Pour it out for the people that they may eat.” Then there was no harm in the pot.

Do you think this portion of the Word says that many of today's Christian writings are "poisonous gourds"?

The following is what Witness Lee says in his Life Study about this:

Many of the teachings in today's Christianity are "poisonous gourds." Some Christian books are good, but many are not pure. We have recommended certain writings by Andrew Murray, Madame Guyon, Brother Lawrence, and others. We have especially recommended Andrew Murray's masterpiece The Spirit of Christ, as well as God's Plan of Redemption by Mary E. McDonough and Life on the Highest Plane by Ruth Paxton. Among us we also have the ministry of Brother Nee. Brother Nee's ministry was rejected by the Western missionaries in his youth, but today his ministry is known by seeking Christians throughout the world. By the Lord's mercy and grace, in the last seventy years nearly all the crucial, important revelations of the Bible have been covered in Watchman Nee's ministry and my ministry. I would urge you to pay attention to these pure and healthy things and not waste your time collecting "poisonous gourds".

Again, W. Lee in his explanation above gives his “free allegory” made up by himself, and he recommends himself by saying that “in the last seventy years nearly ALL the crucial, important revelations of the Bible have been covered in Watchman Nee's ministry and my ministry”.

The “correct” Biblical way to understand this section (2King 4:38-41), is to realize that the Bible says what it means and means what it says. At this point I would like to share with you a “golden rule of interpretation” a dear brother said: “When plain sense makes good sense, seek no other sense, lest you end up in nonsense”.

Probably you don’t notice, but we are going in vicious circles, and I can understand, because the topics that we are talking about are not big topics in the Bible, but “huge”; Israelology, Eschatology and Ecclesiology. In my case after studying for several years, I realized these big topics and I compared to what I was taught by W. Lee and I could see the “Major Errors of his teaching”. Here so far, we are “trying to start” talking about Israelology. Actually, you brought up this point. You said that you read some of Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum. I would suggest to slow down and if you could take your time to read about Israelology since it is such a big topic and fundamental. Because so far, mainly what I have been doing is to point out the topics, and saying: “do your homework”. I wish I could, but I don’t have the time to write everything, already very good respected theologians have done this. Because of the absence of Israelology in W. Lee’s teaching I said: “the Bible has 66 Books”, because he emphasizes the New Testament, even his “great book” is called: “God’s New Testament Economy”. Why? Because W. Lee follows the “Dispensationalists” who mainly focus in the age or dispensation where they are at. For W. Lee, he mainly focused in the “church age”, and he made the church the main thing. Emphasizing too much in only in the church age. The Bible shows the dispensation of: the law, grace, after the church is raptured to the air (1 Thes 4:17) comes the last week of Dan 9:27 which are 7 years to deal ONLY with Israel on the earth, then comes the dispensation of the Millennium. But W. Lee makes the main thing the church age. Even there are some hyper-dispensationalist saying that we, the believers of the church age, have to read only Paul’s epistles, because only Paul’s epistles are written to the church and the rest of the Bible is for Israel. W. Lee’s teaching is not as severe as hyper-dispensationalism, but it has some tendency and he follows dispensationalism.

Probably this is the way to go, you read by yourself about Israelology, first hand, and get the whole picture. For now, I would like to show you some bits and pieces of Israelology by the author you mentioned (Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum).

ISRAELOLOGY

Part 1 of 6
by

Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum

INTRODUCTION

The issue of Israel is one of the major points of division in evangelical

theology today. This is true both among Arminians and

Calvinists. An evangelical theologian's view of Israel will determine

whether he is a Covenant Theologian or a Dispensationalist. It will also

determine what kind of Covenant Theologian he is: postmillennial,

amillennial, or premillennial.

The question of Israel is central for a proper Systematic Theology.

Paul, in his epistle to the Romans, which contains the first

Systematic Theology in Church history, expounds on Israel in the center

of his epistle devoting three full chapters (9-11) out of sixteen to

this topic. Yet, while there are many Systematic Theologies today that

have systematized all areas of biblical truth, none thus far has developed

an Israelology as part of their system. These articles will survey

what the concerns of an Israelology would be.1

THE PLACE OF ISRAELOLOGY

IN SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY

In every work of Systematic Theology, Israelology is found

missing as a major division. In all Systematic Theologies, what exists

of Israelology will only be partially developed. In Covenant Theology,

the development will be minimal. In Dispensationalism, Israelology is

only fully developed in its future aspect, not in its past and present aspects.

Logically, Israelology must come just before Ecclesiology [the

study the Church] and follow the same development. Both are a people

of God but, historically, Israel precedes the Church. As Ecclesiology

has been developed in its past, present, and future aspects, so must Israelology

be. Only then will Systematic Theology be truly complete.

Israel and the Tribulation

The Purposes of the Tribulation

Two of the purposes for the Tribulation relate to Israelology.

The first purpose is to bring about a worldwide preaching of the

Gospel (Matthew 24:14; Revelation 7:1–17). Revelation 7:1–8

gives God’s means for accomplishing the Tribulation’s second

purpose. Verses 1–3, commands the four angels commissioned to

bring judgment on the earth to wait until a specific number of

servants are sealed. It protects them so that they cannot be harmed,

either by the judgments poured out by God or by the persecutions

of believers. They are also sealed for service, for they are the ones

who will proclaim the message of the Gospel in the Tribulation.


Verse 4 clearly identifies those sealed as 144,000 Jews.3 Their

preaching the Gospel fulfills Matthew 24:14’s prophecy:

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole

world for a testimony unto all the nations; and then shall the

end come.4

Revelation 7:9–17 gives the results of their ministry. In verses 9–

10, John saw a multitude of Gentiles from every nationality and

language group standing before God’s throne. Verse 9 says that

the salvation of these myriads of Gentiles comes after these

things (the sealing of the 144,000 Jews). Their salvation is the



3 Revelation 7:5–8 clearly identifies the 144,000 as Jews. It lists twelve tribes

and specifies that 12,000 are chosen from each listed tribe. Such careful

delineation indicates that none are Gentiles. Despite much speculation to the

contrary, no exegetical or theological basis exists to support Covenant

Theology’s view that they symbolize the Church.

4 Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture citations are taken from the American

Standard Version (ASV), 1901.



effect of the 144,000’s ministry. After describing the worship of

the One on the throne (vv. 11–12), the text proceeds to identify

these Gentiles who are around the throne (vv. 13–14) as those

who have come out of the Great Tribulation. They are saved

Gentiles, for they have washed their robes in the blood of the

Lamb. Due to the massive persecution that these Tribulation

saints have suffered, this passage concludes with a description of

the comfort they now enjoy in the presence of God (vv. 15–17).

The Tribulation’s second purpose is to break the power or the

will of the Jewish nation. Daniel 11:36–12:4 envisions the

conditions that will face the prophet’s people (Israel) during the

Tribulation. Daniel 12:5–7 asks how long it will continue. It will

last for three-and-a-half years. This passage then states a goal of

the Tribulation: to break the power or the will of the Jewish

nation. The Tribulation will not end until God brings about a

national regeneration by breaking the will of the holy people.

Ezekiel 20:33–38 reveals (through a simile with the Exodus from

Egypt) how God will bring about regeneration. After God gathers

the Jews from around the world, He will initiate a period of

judgment (i.e., the Tribulation). This judgment will purge the

rebels from among the Jewish people; the remainder will turn to

the Messiah. Only then will He allow the whole nation, a

regenerate nation, to enter millennial Israel under King Messiah.


In Mt 24:14, says: “this gospel of the kingdom” W. Lee teaches in his footnote 14’one, “that includes the gospel of grace (Act 20:24)”. Verse 14, is NOT saying anything about the “gospel of grace”, plus he adds Act 20:24, which has nothing to do with Mt 24:14. Also in his chart in Mt 5 with the circles: “Chart showing the difference between the kingdom of the heavens and the kingdom of God”, W. Lee, makes the church, part of the kingdom of the heavens, which is wrong. The kingdom of the heavens is the Millennium or the Davidic kingdom (Lk 1:32, 33; Mt 19:28). Please read these verses because the throne of David is ONLY during the Millennium and NOT during the church age. The same situation in Mt 16:18, 19. In verse 19 says: “the kingdom of the heavens” W. Lee’s footnote says: 19’two; “kingdom of the heavens is used here interchangeably for church”, which again, is wrong. Then W. Lee connects these verses with Rom 14:7 saying: “the genuine church is the kingdom of the heavens in this age”. Rom 14:17, is NOT talking about the “kingdom of the heavens” (which by the way is the Millennium), the whole chapter Rom 14, is talking about how we should receive other believers, please read the CONTEXT.

All the confusion that W. Lee has in his teaching, is because he does NOT properly differentiate Israel from the church according to the Bible, text and context. Israelology is absent of his teaching.



You asked: which customs, habits, culture, practices of Israel we need to understand to correctly understand the New Testament at the appropriate moments? Remember, if you don’t understand the Old Testament properly, your understanding of the New Testament will be incorrect. The Bible is skillfully “designed by God” as a UNIT, meaning what comes “later” depends on what is “before”.



I’ll let the experts with ALL the verses answer that question. As I mentioned, I would like to write these things, but practically I don’t have the time to re-write all the homework I did in these last few years.



The Marriage and Marriage Supper of the Lamb Dr. Renald Showers

Introduction

Where will the Church be during the 70th week of Daniel 9 (the last seven years prior to the Second Coming of Christ, which has been popularly called the Tribulation period)? Several things presented in the Book of the Revelation indicate that the Church will be in Heaven with Christ during that time period. One of those things is the marriage and marriage supper of the Lamb.

The Reference to the Marriage and Marriage Supper of the Lamb
In Revelation 19:7 John recorded part of the loud proclamation of a great multitude in Heaven (vv. 1, 6): "Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honor to him; for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready." Concerning the wife of the Lamb, John continued to write, "And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white; for the fine linen is the righteousnesses of saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they who are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb" (vv. 8-9).

A study of Revelation 5-7; 12-15; 17; 19; 21-22 clearly indicates that the Lamb is Jesus Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords who shed His blood to cleanse sinners. Romans 7:4, 2 Corinthians 11:2; and Ephesians 5:22-23 indicates that the wife of the Lamb is the Church. In light of these identifications, it is evident that Revelation 19:7-9 is referring to the marriage of Jesus Christ to the Church and the subsequent marriage supper.

Questions and Views Related to the Marriage and Marriage Supper of the Lamb

Revelation 19:7-9 prompts two major questions: When and where will the marriage and marriage supper of the Lamb take place? At least three answers to these questions have been proposed. First, the marriage will occur when the Church is raptured to meet Christ in the air at His Second Coming, and the marriage supper will take place on earth during the Millennium. Second, the marriage will occur in Heaven when the Church is raptured before the 70th week (Tribulation period), and the marriage supper will take place on earth during the Millennium. Third, the marriage will occur in Heaven when the Church is raptured before the 70th week (Tribulation period), and the marriage supper will take place in Heaven during the seven years of the 70th week.

The Relationship of Revelation 19:7-9 to Jewish Marriage Customs

There are good reasons for being convinced of the third view; but before those reasons are examined, two things should be noted. First, the terms "marriage" and "marriage supper" in Revelation 19 are related to Jewish marriage customs in Bible times.

Second, Jewish marriage customs in Bible times involved three major steps.


The first step was betrothal, the establishment of the marriage covenant that bound the man and woman together as husband and wife (Mal. 2:14; Mt. 1:18-19).

The second step was the taking of the bride or wife by the groom from her house to his father's house (Mt. 25:1-8). "The essence of the marriage ceremony or festivities was the taking of the bride from her father's house and bringing her to the house of the bridegroom or his father." This taking of the bride was usually done at night approximately one year after the betrothal. It involved the consummation of the marriage through physical union of the bride and groom on the first night at the groom's father's house. Since this second step was the essence of the marriage ceremony, it was regarded as the wedding or marriage (Mt. 22:2-13; 25:10). Thus, it is this second step that corresponds to the expression "marriage of the Lamb" in Revelation 19:7.

The third step was the marriage supper or feast to which guests had already been called and assembled. Once the marriage had been consummated by the bride and groom, the wedding guests would feast and make merry for seven days. Thus, the marriage supper lasted for one week (Gen. 29:21-23, 27-28; Jud. 14:1-2, 10-12, 17), and it corresponds to the expression "marriage supper of the Lamb" in Revelation 19:9.

In light of what has been seen, the following conclusions can be drawn concerning the relationship of the three steps of Jewish marriage customs to the marriage of Christ and the Church. First, the betrothal of Christ and the Church is taking place during the present Church age as people trust Jesus Christ to be their Savior (2 Cor. 11:2). Second, in the future Christ will take His bride, the Church, from this world to His Father's house in Heaven when He comes to rapture it (Jn. 14:2-3; 1 Th. 4:13-18). This will be the "marriage of the Lamb." Third, after the Rapture of the Church, the "marriage supper of the Lamb" will take place with the wedding guests who will have already been called and assembled.

Evidences for the Third View

Earlier it was stated that there are good reasons for believing that the marriage of the Lamb will occur in Heaven when the Church is raptured before the 70th week (Tribulation period) and that the marriage supper of the Lamb will take place in Heaven during the seven years of the 70th week. Those reasons will now be examined.

First, normally the wedding or marriage (the second step) did not take place at the home of the bride. "One must remember that the established custom was to hold the wedding in the house of the bridegroom or his parents. The bridegroom fetches the bride and brings her to his house, where the bridal table and chamber are ready. In harmony with this custom, Christ indicated that after preparing living accommodations for His bride in His Father's house in Heaven, He would come from there again and receive His bride unto Himself so that His bride could be where He is (in His Father's house in Heaven) [Jn. 14:2-3]. Christ did not say that He would come and join His bride so that He could be where she is (on the earth). This established marriage custom and Christ's teaching in harmony with it indicate that the Rapture of the Church and marriage of the Lamb will not take place at the Second Coming of Christ, because at His Second Coming Christ will not return to His Father's house in Heaven. Instead, He will come to the earth. Thus, the Rapture of the Church and marriage of the Lamb must take place sometime before the Second Coming of Christ, and the Rapture of the Church and marriage of the Lamb must be separate events from the Second Coming.

Second, in Bible times the marriage was a joyous, festive occasion. The taking of the bride by the groom was characterized by mirth and gladness (Jer. 7:34; 16:9; 25:10; 33:11). Jesus indicated the same thing when He emphasized that it is impossible to mix the joy of a wedding with the mourning of a funeral (Mt.9:15; Mk. 2:19; Lk. 5:34).

It should be noted that the mood at the Second Coming will be just the opposite of the joyous, festive mood of the marriage. The description of the Second Coming in Revelation 19 portrays Christ, not as a happy groom coming with joyful companions to take His bride to His Father's house, but as a terrifying warrior-king coming with armies from Heaven to administer judgment and death upon rebellious humanity. The marriage customs of Bible times provided a festive marriage supper for wedding guests, but the Second Coming will provide a radically different kind of supper-a funeral supper of dead flesh for the fowl of the earth (Rev. 19:17-18, 21).

Since Jesus taught that it is impossible to mix the joy of a wedding with the mourning of a funeral, and since the Second Coming will produce death for a great mass of humanity, it must be concluded that the marriage of the Lamb will not occur at the Second Coming of Christ. The Rapture of the Church and marriage of the Lamb must take place sometime before the Second Coming and must be events separate from the Second Coming.

Third, it was customary for the marriage supper to be held at the home of the groom or his parents, not at the home of the bride. One writer declares, "The bridegroom escorted the whole wedding party, now including the bride and her companions (Ps. 45:14b), to his own or his father's house for the 'marriage supper' (Rev. 19:9)....The wedding feast ...was normally given by the father of the groom." Matthew 22:1-4 indicates the same thing. Concerning the location of the marriage supper, another writer states, "The older tradition points to the house of the groom's parents as the proper place." In harmony with this custom, the marriage supper of the Lamb should take place at Christ's Father's house in Heaven, not at His bride's dwelling place on earth. This militates against an earthly marriage supper of the Lamb.

Fourth, the marriage supper began on the same night that the groom took his bride to his father's house and consummated their marriage through physical union. After the marriage was consummated, the groom announced the consummation to his friend standing outside the bridal chamber (Ps. 19:5; Jn. 3:29), and the announcement was then delivered to the wedding guests who had already assembled at the groom's father's house. Upon receiving this news, the guests began to feast and make merry. Thus, the marriage supper began very shortly after the groom brought his bride to his father's house. In harmony with this custom, the marriage supper of the Lamb must begin very shortly after Christ takes His bride, the Church, to His Father's house in Heaven at the time of the Rapture.

Since, as noted earlier, the Rapture of the Church and the marriage of the Lamb will take place sometime before the Second Coming, and since the Millennium will begin after the Second Coming (Rev. 19-20), it appears that the Millennium will not begin very shortly after Christ takes His bride, the Church, to His Father's house in Heaven at the time of the Rapture, and the marriage supper of the Lamb will not, therefore, take place during the Millennium.
Fifth, the Old Testament teaches that during the Millennium there will be another marriage supper, different from the marriage supper of the Lamb. This millennial marriage supper will be associated with the second marriage of God and the nation of Israel. At the beginning of Isaiah 25:6ff, a passage describing the blessings of the future Millennium, Isaiah declared, "And in this mountain shall the LORD of hosts make unto all people a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees." The word for "feast" in verse 6 is the same as that used for the wedding feast in Judges 14:10, 12, 17. Isaiah's statement indicates that the wedding guests at this millennial marriage supper for God and Israel will be all the other people living in the world at that time. "Isaiah was speaking of a future time when (after God's worldwide judgment) His people in Israel and other nations will feast together in peace and prosperity. This is the 1,000 year reign of Christ." The background behind this millennial marriage feast is as follows: The Old Testament teaches that God betrothed Israel (bound the nation to Himself as His wife) through the Mosaic Covenant at Mount Sinai (Jer. 2:2; Ezek. 16:8), but Israel repeatedly broke the covenant through spiritual adultery (Jer. 3:1-3, 6-9, 20; Ezek. 16:32, 59; Hos. 1:2; 2:2, 5; 3:1; 4:12, 18; 5:3-4; 6:7, 10; 7:4; 8:1; 9:1). God divorced Israel, but not permanently (Isa. 50:1; 54:7-8; Jer. 3:12). He did not regard the divorce as a termination of His marriage with the nation (Jer. 3:14; cp. v. 8).

God has been judging the nation for its adultery (Ezek. 16:38). Through this judgment He will stop Israel's unfaithfulness, calm His fury, and lose His jealousy and anger (Ezek. 16:41-42). When Israel repents in the future at the Second Coming of Christ (Hos. 3:5; 5:15-6:1; Zech. 12:10-14), God will cleanse the nation (Zech. 13:1), love it freely (Hos. 14:1-4), and betroth it to Himself forever (Hos. 2:19-20) through the establishment of an everlasting covenant (Isa. 55:3; 61:8; Jer. 32:40; 50:4-5; Ezek. 16:60-62; 37:21-28). Israel will be adorned like a bride (Isa. 61:10); God will delight in and rejoice over Jerusalem as a groom rejoices over his bride; and the land of Israel will be married to God (Isa. 62:1-5). Thus, at the Second Coming God and Israel will go through betrothal and marriage a second time, and then their marriage supper will take place during the Millennium after the Second Coming.

The following quotation relates the rabbinical view of this Old Testament teaching.

But the final renewal of the covenant between God and the people, intimated by the prophet, was expected by the Rabbis in the days of the Messiah. Thus we often find the view that in these days there will take place the true marriage feast. In this connection the present age is that of engagement, the seven years of Gog will be the period immediately prior to the marriage, the marriage itself will dawn with the resurrection and the great marriage feast will be eaten in the future world.

This future marriage of God and the marriage of the Lamb have two different brides. The marriage of God has the nation of Israel as its bride. As noted earlier, the marriage of the Lamb has the Church as its bride. It appears that these marriages also have two different grooms. As noted earlier, the marriage of the Lamb has Christ (the Messiah) as its groom. By contrast, one scholar asserts, "But nowhere in the OT is the Messiah presented as a bridegroom." This means, then, that the future marriage of God to Israel presented in the Old Testament has God the Father, not the Messiah, as its groom.

Since these marriages have two different brides and grooms, it must be concluded that the future marriage of God to Israel and the marriage of the Lamb are two different marriages. Since these marriages are different, the marriage suppers associated with them must also be different, and it is very probable that these different suppers will take place at different times. Thus, since the marriage supper associated with the future marriage of God to Israel will take place during the Millennium, the marriage supper of the Lamb probably will not occur during the Millennium.

Sixth, as noted earlier, it was customary for the wedding supper of Bible times to last for one week, or seven days. It is the conviction of this writer that, in relationship to the marriage supper of the Lamb, the seven years of the 70th week of Daniel 9 will correlate to that time period. According to this view, then, the Rapture of the Church and marriage of the Lamb will occur before the 70th week (Tribulation period), and the marriage supper of the Lamb will take place in Heaven during the 70th week.

Concluding Considerations

The conclusion drawn from all that has been seen concerning the marriage and marriage supper of the Lamb is that the Church will be in Heaven with Christ, not on the earth, throughout the entire 70th week.

If the marriage and marriage supper of the Lamb are not to take place at the Second Coming and during the Millennium, why are they mentioned in Revelation 19 between the judgment of the great whore and the Second Coming of Christ? Two possible reasons are as follows: First, to draw a contrast between the great whore, with all her impure unions, and the bride of Christ, with her pure union with Christ; and second, to draw a contrast between the blessing of those called to the marriage supper of the Lamb and the judgment of rebels at the Second Coming of Christ.

One side issue should be noted. According to Revelation 19:9, wedding guests will be called to the marriage supper of the Lamb, and those who are called will be blessed. Since wedding guests are not the bride, it must be concluded that the guests at the marriage supper of the Lamb will not be part of Christ's bride, the Church. But since the guests at the marriage supper of the Lamb will be blessed and will be in Heaven (since that is where the marriage supper of the Lamb will take place), they must be believers (cp. Rev. 20:6). The fact that the guests will be believers, but not part of the Church, forces one to conclude that not all believers of all ages of history belong to the Church. God has groups of believers distinct from the Church. The souls of Old Testament saints will already be assembled in Heaven when the Church arrives there at the time of the Rapture and marriage of the Lamb. Those Old Testament saints will be guests at the marriage supper of the Lamb.

This article first appeared in June/July 1991 Israel My Glory. Used with permission.

Dr. Showers presently is on the staff of the Church Ministries Division of the Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, Inc, and teaches in the Institute of Biblical Studies of that ministry.

You can reach him via fax: 717-464-0333 -- or you may write 111 Susan Avenue Willow Street, PA 17584


Related to Rom 9:4, you said: “I looked at the verses you cited above in Romans and Ephesians and Witness Lee addresses the points about Israel in their proper context”. I don’t know where you looked at, because W. Lee practically says nothing about the real meaning of the verse. W. Lee says: “sonship, right of inheritance. And service, instituted according to the law of Moses”. We need to understand here that Paul is saying:” who are Israelites, to whom belongs the sonship” meaning, the sonship belongs to the Israelites. Then Eph. 2:11, 12. Again W. Lee in verse 11: explains the word circumcision and in verse 12: explains the word citizenship. Without explaining why Paul is saying that? What Paul is saying in Rom 9:4 and Eph 2:11,12; is that the sonship and the citizenship belong to Israel, not to the church. Then Paul continues (I already mention the need to study Rom 9-11) in Rom 11:20, 21; saying : 20Quite right, they (Israel) were broken off for their unbelief, but you (gentiles, church) stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21for if God did not spare the natural branches (Israel), He will not spare you (gentiles, church), either. Paul is saying that everything “originally” was given to Israel as God’s chosen people, but because of Israel’s unbelief, the church is getting the benefit of God’s blessings of sonship, citizenship for NOW, etc., etc.,… (please study the whole chapter Rom 11). Here Paul is showing us the difference and connection between Israel and the church. How the church is getting the benefit that it was originally for Israel, BUT only UNTILL the fullness of the gentiles (the church) comes in. See Rom 11:25. Meaning until the church is raptured, then God will deal with Israel (not the church) for the last week of Dan 9:27, especially the last 3.5 years (great tribulation). The church has a special position and function in God’s plan, even it is called the “hidden mystery” (Eph 3:9, Rom 16:25, 26). But not because the church has a special position and function in God’s plan, you will make the church the center of everything. These verses of Rom 16:25, 26 are connected to the parenthesis or gap of Dan 9:26. Again, see God’s plan in the “whole Bible” (66 books), not only in 27 books or 14 books; but 66 books. The WHOLE Bible is God’s plan.


If you want to find out the errors of W. Lee’s teaching or anybody’s teaching, you have to compare them AGAINST OTHER’S sound teaching, otherwise you remain in the same vicious circle of comparing W. Lee’s teaching against W. Lee’s teaching. I guess this is Einstein’s quotation:” insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.



Please study Dan 9:24-27, the 70 weeks is related ONLY to Israel and Jerusalem. The church has nothing to do in those 70 weeks (please read those verses). W. Lee’s teaching says that the church goes through the great tribulation, except the overcomers. That interpretation, again, is wrong. Due to not knowing Israelology.



I think for now it is a good stopping point, and as I mentioned earlier, please read and study what the experts say about Israelology, do your homework (it is a huge topic), and come to your own conclusions. There is much more… sometimes I don’t know where to start!!; but they say you can eat an elephant, one bite at the time. The Lord bless you, and remember, the point here is to see what the Bible is telling us.