I know what God says in scripture. The sun rose today. Israel exists. Just as God promised. When the new heavens and new earth come, God's covenant with Israel will expire. It's in your Bible too.
Replacement theology? Yes or No.
- Thread starter Gideon300
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Yes, God is giving His timeline for what pertains to His prophetic calendar... so I am thinking once the temple was destroyed that would have been the main event from an eschatological point of view.
Saying “the millennial reign is eschatological” doesn’t actually answer the point I made.
Of course the Millennium belongs to eschatology — everything from resurrection to judgment to new creation belongs to eschatology. The issue is not whether the Millennium is eschatological; the issue is which eschatological event Scripture assigns to the fulfillment of the Abrahamic promise.
Hebrews 11 explicitly places that fulfillment in the resurrection unto the better country and the city God prepared, not in a temporary 1,000‑year phase.
Calling the Millennium “eschatological” does not move Abraham’s inheritance into it, does not relocate Matthew 8:11 onto earth, does not turn Daniel 12 into a pre‑millennial resurrection, and does not override the inspired interpretation Hebrews gives.
The question is not whether the Millennium is eschatological — the question is whether Scripture ever places Abraham’s land‑inheritance there. And the answer, from the only passage that interprets the promise directly, is no
"Revelation 19 never locates the marriage supper on earth"
Wrong, that is a ridiculous and biblically illiterate view.
Clearly this is the Second Coming TO THE EARTH to wage war upon the armies of the Beast who are threatening Israel with extinction.
[Rev 19:9, 11, 14-15 KJV]
9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed [are] they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God. ...
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him [was] called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. ...
14 And the armies [which were] in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
Nothing in my argument denied that Revelation 19 describes the Second Coming to earth for judgment; that is obvious from the text. What I rejected was your claim that Revelation 19 locates the marriage supper on earth or ties it to a millennial inauguration. Revelation 19:11–21 is the battle scene — not the banquet scene.
The supper is mentioned in v.9, but its location is never stated, and the text never says it occurs on earth after the descent.
You’re importing that detail from your system, not from the passage.
Likewise, the armies in heaven (v.14) are consistently identified in the NT as angels, not resurrected saints — cf. Matthew 25:31
and 2 Thessalonians 1:7. Revelation 19 shows Christ descending to judge and make war; it does not show Abraham attending an earthly banquet, nor does it place the marriage feast on millennial soil. The battle is earthly; the banquet’s geography is unstated. Your conclusion requires details the text never provides.
No. Abraham will be invited to the earthly WEDDING FEAST of the Bridegroom and His Bride.
This will occur very soon AFTER Christ's (effortless) victory over the Beast and his armies.
And YES, Daniel 12 strongly implies that the OT saints will be resurrected soon after the Second Coming.
Gutting out the millennial reign from latter day eschatology is both impossible and foolish. So don't try.
## Daniel 12:2 and the Resurrection of Old Testament Saints
Yes Daniel 12:1–3 is one of the strongest passages placing the resurrection of Old Testament saints **after the Tribulation, in connection with the Second Coming, and before the Millennial Kingdom is fully inaugurated**.
### 1. Daniel 12 itself establishes the chronology
Daniel 12:1 describes the unparalleled final **“time of trouble”**:
> “there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation…”
This is followed by Israel's deliverance:
> “and at that time thy people shall be delivered…”
Then immediately:
**Daniel 12:2**
> “And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life…”
The sequence is therefore:
**Great Tribulation → Israel's deliverance → resurrection → Kingdom blessing.**
Walvoord consequently places the resurrection of believing Old Testament saints **after the Great Tribulation and in association with Christ's Second Advent and the establishment of His kingdom**, rather than at the pretribulational resurrection of the Church.
Daniel himself receives the same promise:
**Daniel 12:13**
> “thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.”
Daniel will die—**“rest”**—and afterward personally **“stand”** in his allotted inheritance when this prophetic period reaches its conclusion. This naturally points to Daniel's bodily resurrection for participation in Messiah's earthly kingdom.
### 2. Fruchtenbaum places the resurrection in the post-Tribulation 75-day interval
Fruchtenbaum gives the chronology even greater precision.
Daniel 12 distinguishes:
* **1,260 days** — the final half of the Tribulation
* **1,290 days** — Daniel 12:11
* **1,335 days** — Daniel 12:12
This creates a **75-day transitional period following the Tribulation** before the Messianic Kingdom is completely established.
Fruchtenbaum places several events within this interval, including the resurrection of **Old Testament saints** and **Tribulation martyrs**.
Thus his order is essentially:
**Tribulation ends → Christ returns → post-Tribulation judgments and preparations → OT saints resurrected → Kingdom inaugurated.**
This explains how Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Daniel, and the other believing OT saints can bodily participate in the Millennial Kingdom.
### 3. Isaiah 26:19 supports the same timing
**Isaiah 26:19**
> “Thy dead men shall live… Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust…”
The surrounding context is eschatological. Immediately afterward:
**Isaiah 26:20–21**
> “the LORD cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth…”
Isaiah therefore also connects **resurrection, final divine judgment, and Israel's restoration**.
Fruchtenbaum identifies Isaiah 26:19 with the resurrection of OT saints connected with the establishment of the Messianic Kingdom.
### 4. Daniel 12:2 does not require righteous and wicked to rise simultaneously
Daniel says:
> “some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.”
This describes the ultimate destiny of both classes, but it does **not** require both resurrections to occur at the same moment.
Revelation 20 supplies the chronological separation.
**Revelation 20:4–6** describes the resurrection of the righteous who participate in Christ's kingdom:
> “they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”
But:
> “the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.”
Thus the righteous resurrection connected with the Kingdom and the resurrection of the wicked are separated by **1,000 years**.
This agrees with:
**1 Corinthians 15:23**
> “But every man in his own order…”
Biblical resurrection occurs in distinct companies and stages.
### 5. OT saints are therefore distinguished from the Church
The Church is resurrected at the Rapture:
**1 Thessalonians 4:16**
> “the dead in Christ shall rise first.”
But Daniel 12 concerns **Daniel's people—Israel**:
**Daniel 12:1**
> “Michael… which standeth for the children of thy people…”
Walvoord therefore distinguishes the resurrection of the Church from that of believing Israel.
The order becomes:
**Christ — Firstfruits**
→ **Church — Rapture before the Tribulation**
→ **OT saints and Tribulation saints — after the Tribulation / Second Coming**
→ **Millennial Kingdom**
→ **Unbelieving dead — after the Millennium at the Great White Throne.**
This is broadly the resurrection sequence found in Walvoord, Fruchtenbaum, and Thieme's dispensational systems.
### 6. David must likewise be resurrected before the Millennium
Consider:
**Jeremiah 30:9**
> “they shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them.”
**Ezekiel 34:23**
> “I will set up one shepherd over them… even my servant David.”
**Ezekiel 37:24**
> “David my servant shall be king over them.”
Fruchtenbaum interprets these passages as referring to **the historical David resurrected**, ruling under Messiah over restored Israel during the Millennium.
But if David exercises governmental authority in the Millennial Kingdom, he necessarily must be resurrected **before that administration begins**.
This perfectly agrees with Daniel 12.
### 7. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob must also be present bodily
Jesus says:
**Matthew 8:11**
> “many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.”
These patriarchs are portrayed as participating personally in the Messianic banquet.
They therefore cannot remain disembodied in the intermediate state throughout the Millennium.
Daniel 12:2 provides the solution: the OT saints are resurrected following the Tribulation so they can enter bodily into the earthly Messianic Kingdom.
Fruchtenbaum consequently associates Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the OT saints with the **friends of the Bridegroom**, distinct from the Church as the Bride, participating in the Kingdom wedding feast after Christ returns.
### 8. Thieme's resurrection order is substantially the same
R. B. Thieme Jr.'s dispensational resurrection framework likewise distinguishes separate resurrection companies.
In broad outline:
**Christ → Church at the Rapture → OT and Tribulation believers associated with the Second Advent → Millennial saints → unbelieving dead.**
Therefore Thieme does not collapse Daniel's resurrection of Israel's saints into the resurrection of the Church.
Fruchtenbaum, however, is especially useful because he explicitly places the resurrection of OT saints within the **75-day interval following the Tribulation**.
## Conclusion
The cumulative chronology is extremely strong:
**Daniel 12:1–2**
Tribulation → Israel delivered → resurrection.
**Daniel 12:13**
Daniel rests in death and afterward stands in his inheritance **“at the end of the days.”**
**Isaiah 26:19–21**
Resurrection occurs in association with climactic divine judgment.
**Jeremiah 30:9; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:24**
David is alive and governing restored Israel.
**Matthew 8:11**
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob participate personally in the Kingdom banquet.
**Revelation 20:4–6**
The righteous reign with Christ while the wicked dead remain dead until after the thousand years.
Therefore, **Daniel 12:2 does not merely promise that Old Testament saints will someday be resurrected. Its context places their resurrection at the conclusion of Israel's final Tribulation, immediately following Christ's Second Coming and preparatory to their bodily participation in the earthly Millennial Kingdom.**
Walvoord places it in connection with the **Second Advent and inauguration of the Millennium**; Fruchtenbaum narrows it to the **75-day transitional period following the Tribulation**; and Thieme's dispensational resurrection sequence is substantially consistent with the same distinction between the Church's resurrection at the Rapture and the later resurrection of OT saints associated with Christ's return.
“the inspired interpretation in Hebrews”
amen.
“For when I shall have brought them into the land which I sware unto their fathers, that floweth with milk and honey; and they shall have eaten and filled themselves, and waxen fat; then will they turn unto other gods, and serve them, and provoke me, and break my covenant. And it shall come to pass, when many evils and troubles are befallen them, that this song shall testify against them as a witness; for it shall not be forgotten out of the mouths of their seed: for I know their imagination which they go about, even now, before I have brought them into the land which I sware.”
Deuteronomy 31:20-21 KJV
“Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:”
Jeremiah 31:31-32
“For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, When I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers In the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; Because they continued not in my covenant, And I regarded them not, saith the Lord. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”
Hebrews 8:7-9, 13 KJV
I see ……I guess they didn’t brake it as the Bible repeatedly says and he didn’t make a new one when Jesus came to mediate it
Matthew 8:11 does not place Abraham at an earthly millennial banquet — it simply depicts the patriarchs present in the kingdom, which Jesus consistently identifies as the age to come, the resurrection order, not a temporary 1,000‑year phase.
Get a grip on actual Biblical reality.
The objection creates a false dichotomy. In Scripture, “the age to come” is the future resurrection/kingdom order inaugurated by Christ’s return, and the 1,000-year Messianic reign belongs inside that future age. The Millennium is not a rival to “the age to come”; it is its initial, earthly kingdom phase, preceding the final eternal state.
The basic biblical sequence is decisive:
1. Christ contrasts only two great ages: “this age” and “the age to come.”
Jesus says:
Likewise, Ephesians 1:21 places Christ’s supremacy “not only in this age but also in the one to come.” There is no third theological age inserted between the present age and the age to come. Therefore, when Christ returns and establishes His promised kingdom, that kingdom necessarily belongs to the age to come.
2. Revelation explicitly places the resurrection before the thousand-year reign.
Revelation 20:4–6 could hardly be clearer:
Thus resurrection life and the Millennium coexist. The claim that “resurrection order” somehow excludes the thousand-year kingdom is directly contradicted by Revelation 20. Resurrected saints reign during the thousand years.
Indeed:
resurrection → reign with Christ 1,000 years → final judgment → new heavens and new earth.
So the resurrection order begins before and during the Millennium, not only after it.
3. Jesus Himself connects resurrection/regeneration with an earthly Davidic kingdom.
Matthew 19:28 is especially devastating to the objection:
Here the renewed eschatological order includes:
- the Son of Man enthroned,
- the apostles exercising governmental authority,
- twelve tribes of Israel,
- and therefore an identifiable earthly kingdom administration.
That corresponds naturally to the Messianic kingdom described throughout the prophets and Revelation 20.
4. The kingdom inaugurated at Christ’s return precedes the final eternal state.
Matthew 25:31–34 says that when the Son of Man comes in His glory, He sits upon His throne and tells the righteous:
The kingdom is therefore entered at the Second Coming, not postponed until after the Millennium.
Revelation then supplies its duration:
Only after those thousand years come the final rebellion, Great White Throne judgment, and Revelation 21’s new heaven and new earth.
Therefore the kingdom entered at Christ’s return necessarily includes the Millennium.
5. Paul also distinguishes Christ's mediatorial kingdom from the final eternal order.
First Corinthians 15:23–28 gives the same sequence:
During the interval Christ:
Only afterward:
So Paul recognizes a period after Christ's coming and resurrection of His people but before “the end”, during which Christ actively reigns and subdues His enemies. Revelation 20 identifies that Messianic reign as one thousand years.
This produces a remarkably coherent chronology:
Present age → Second Coming/resurrection → Messianic kingdom/1,000-year reign → final defeat of all enemies → final judgment → eternal state.
Accordingly, the Millennium is part of the age to come without exhausting the age to come. The age to come begins with the resurrection and Messianic reign and extends ultimately into the eternal state.
And that bears directly upon Matthew 8:11:
Nothing about calling this the “age to come” removes Abraham from the Millennial kingdom. Quite the opposite: Revelation 20 explicitly shows resurrected saints living and reigning during the thousand years, while Matthew 19:28 places resurrection-era saints governing Israel in the regenerated kingdom. Matthew 8:11 therefore fits perfectly with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob resurrected and participating in the earthly Messianic banquet promised by the prophets.
The key logical error in the opposing statement is therefore:
“Age to come” ≠ “eternal state only.”
Rather:
The Millennium is the opening, historical kingdom phase of the age to come; the eternal state is its consummation.
Your entire argument depends on inserting a dispensational timeline into passages that do not supply one.
Daniel 12 does describe a time of distress, deliverance, and resurrection, but it never identifies that distress as a seven‑year Tribulation or places the resurrection “after” such a period.
The phrase “at that time” simply ties resurrection to the moment of divine intervention, not to a technical point in a prophetic countdown.
You are treating Daniel as if Daniel taught the dispensational Tribulation framework, but Daniel does not define it, name it, or structure his prophecy around it.
Daniel 12:13 likewise does not require a resurrection before a millennial kingdom.
Daniel is told he will “rest” and later “stand in his lot at the end of the days,” but Daniel never defines “the days” as the dispensational timeline.
The inspired interpretation of the patriarchal inheritance is found in Hebrews 11, where Abraham and the faithful look for the heavenly country and the city whose builder is God.
Daniel’s “lot” is not a millennial land allotment; it is the eschatological inheritance of resurrection life in the new creation.
That conclusion comes from Scripture, not from Walvoord or Fruchtenbaum.
Your use of the 1,260, 1,290, and 1,335 days is also system‑dependent.
Daniel never says resurrection occurs at day 1,290 or 1,335, nor does he place resurrection within a 75‑day interval.
That interval is a mathematical construction created by Fruchtenbaum, not an exegetical conclusion from Daniel’s text.
Isaiah 26:19 is indeed a resurrection passage, but Isaiah does not assign its timing to a millennial inauguration or a post‑Tribulation interval. Isaiah’s context is the day of the LORD, not a dispensational chart.
Matthew 8:11 does not place Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob at an earthly millennial banquet.
Jesus consistently describes the kingdom as the age to come, not a temporary thousand‑year phase.
The claim that the patriarchs must be resurrected before the Millennium is not drawn from Matthew; it is drawn from a system that assumes a millennial kingdom on earth and then forces Jesus’ words into that framework.
Likewise, Revelation 19 never locates the marriage supper on earth or ties it to Armageddon or the Millennium.
Those details come from dispensational harmonization, not from John’s text.
Revelation 20:4–6 does not identify Old Testament saints.
John explicitly mentions martyrs and those who refused the beast.
He does not mention Abraham, David, Daniel, or any OT saint as a class.
You are inserting them into the passage because your system requires them there.
The resurrection sequence you present — Christ, Church, OT saints, Tribulation saints, millennial saints, wicked — is not found in any biblical passage.
It is a harmonized system, not a textual chronology.
Paul’s inspired sequence is far simpler: Christ the firstfruits, those who are Christ’s at His coming, then the end.
In short, your argument is not text‑driven. It is system‑driven.
You repeatedly treat Walvoord, Fruchtenbaum, and Thieme as if they were exegetical authorities equal to Daniel, Isaiah, Jesus, and John.
But the biblical authors do not supply the dispensational timeline you assume.
Daniel promises resurrection.
Isaiah promises resurrection.
Jesus promises resurrection.
Paul promises resurrection.
None of them place Old Testament saints into a post‑Tribulation, pre‑Millennial resurrection window.
That timing is supplied by the system, not by Scripture.
You had better come to terms with the art rightly defining Biblical eschatology friend.
There are innumerable textual reasons to recognize a succinct timeline.
Some of which I laid out.
If you cannot put the puzzle together, then leave it alone.
The critique sounds forceful, but it largely succeeds by demanding that every element of prophetic chronology appear in a single verse. Scripture often works by progressive revelation and synthesis. The question is not whether Daniel 12 alone contains an entire dispensational chart, but whether Daniel, Isaiah, Zechariah, Jesus, Paul, and Revelation form a coherent chronology. They do.
Daniel 12 is not an isolated resurrection text. Daniel 11:40–45 describes the final persecuting ruler; Daniel 12:1 continues, “And at that time,” followed by an unparalleled “time of trouble,” Israel’s deliverance, and then resurrection in 12:2. Jesus directly identifies Daniel’s language with the future “great tribulation”: “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet…” followed by “then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world” (Matt. 24:15,21). Thus Daniel does provide a defined final period of persecution connected with the abomination, Israel’s deliverance, and resurrection.
Daniel also supplies the famous final-half chronology: “time, times, and an half” (Dan. 12:7), while Revelation expresses the same period as 1,260 days, 42 months, and time-times-half-a-time (Rev. 11:2–3; 12:6,14; 13:5). The precise 30/45/75-day administrative scheme proposed by some dispensationalists is admittedly inferential, but the 3½-year prophetic framework itself is plainly biblical.
Daniel 7 supplies the kingdom sequence. The final persecutor wars against the saints “until the Ancient of days came,” after which “the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom” (Dan. 7:21–22). His dominion is destroyed and “the kingdom and dominion… under the whole heaven” is given to the saints (7:26–27). Daniel therefore presents: final persecutor → divine judgment → saints receiving an earthly kingdom. Daniel 12 then adds resurrection beside the termination of that same final crisis.
Daniel 12:13 strengthens this: Daniel will “rest” and afterward “stand in thy lot at the end of the days.” The Hebrew *goral*, “lot,” regularly denotes an allotted inheritance. Daniel is promised resurrection and participation in the inheritance associated with the kingdom already described in Daniel 7. To redefine his “lot” exclusively as the eternal new creation is itself a theological inference, not something Daniel states.
Hebrews 11 does not cancel the Abrahamic land promise. Abraham “sojourned in the land of promise” (Heb. 11:9), yet died “not having received the promises” (11:13). Genesis 13:15 had said, “all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it.” Acts 7:5 confirms that during Abraham’s lifetime God “gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on.” Resurrection therefore provides the obvious means by which Abraham personally receives what God personally promised him. “Heavenly country” describes its divine origin and character; Revelation 21 itself depicts the heavenly city “coming down from God out of heaven.”
Jesus likewise places the resurrected patriarchs in the kingdom: “many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 8:11). Luke 13:28–29 parallels this with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the prophets in the kingdom of God. These men are dead; their participation requires resurrection.
Nor does “kingdom of heaven” mean an exclusively heavenly location. Jesus says, “the meek… shall inherit the earth” (Matt. 5:5), and Matthew 19:28 places the apostles on twelve thrones “judging the twelve tribes of Israel” in the regeneration. Matthew 25:31–34 explicitly places kingdom inheritance after the Second Coming: “When the Son of man shall come in his glory… then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory… Come… inherit the kingdom.”
Zechariah 14 makes the earthly character unmistakable. The LORD comes, His feet stand on the Mount of Olives (14:4), and “the LORD shall be king over all the earth” (14:9). Surviving nations then go annually to Jerusalem to worship the King and keep the Feast of Tabernacles (14:16). Nations can still disobey and be punished. This cannot naturally describe the final eternal state of Revelation 21–22; it describes an intermediate messianic kingdom after the Second Coming.
Isaiah gives the same pattern. Isaiah 26:19 promises resurrection: “Thy dead men shall live… awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust.” The following context describes divine judgment, Israel taking root, being regathered, and worshipping the LORD at Jerusalem (Isa. 26:20–27:13). Isaiah 24:23 likewise says the LORD will “reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem,” followed by the messianic banquet and the swallowing up of death in Isaiah 25:6–8.
Revelation 19–20 then supplies the clearest chronology: Christ returns, destroys the Beast, Satan is bound, saints are raised and reign with Christ for 1,000 years, Satan is released afterward, final rebellion occurs, then comes the Great White Throne and finally the new heaven and new earth. Revelation 20:4–6 explicitly places resurrection before the Millennium: “they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years… This is the first resurrection.”
The objection that Revelation 20 names only Tribulation martyrs proves too much. John first sees “thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them,” and then specifically mentions the martyrs. More importantly, earlier revelation has already placed Daniel, the patriarchs, and the prophets in the resurrection kingdom. Revelation need not repeat Abraham, David, and Daniel by name for them to belong to the righteous resurrection.
Nor does 1 Corinthians 15 contradict this. Paul says resurrection occurs “every man in his own order” (*tagma*, order/rank): Christ firstfruits, then those who are Christ’s at His coming, “then cometh the end” (1 Cor. 15:23–24). Significantly, Christ “must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet,” and death is the last enemy destroyed (vv. 25–26). Revelation 20 supplies the duration and details of that reign.
Thus the biblical sequence is coherent:
final persecution → Second Coming → destruction of the final ruler → Israel’s deliverance → resurrection of the righteous associated with the kingdom → Messiah reigns over Israel and the nations → 1,000 years → final rebellion and judgment → resurrection/judgment of the remaining dead → new creation.
Walvoord and Fruchtenbaum did not invent these elements; they systematized them. The detailed 75-day interval is inferential, but the broader claim that OT saints are resurrected in connection with the inauguration of the earthly messianic kingdom rests on strong textual grounds across Daniel, Isaiah, Zechariah, Matthew, 1 Corinthians, and Revelation.
Your "sun moon and stars" prophesy comes from Jeremiah 31, and is about a "new covenant" God will make with Israel.
This new covenant is described in Jeremiah 31:31-34.
I am not trying to "attack" you, but please take an interest in the fact that the exact same covenant is described in Hebrews 8:
Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
Did you recognize that the same wording is used here as in Jeremiah 31:31-34?
It is well worth taking the time to read the passages in the book of Hebrews that come after that.
In v.10 you will see that God puts His laws in their hearts.
Read ch.9 up to v.10, and you will see that this means that the Hebrews no longer have any need of a worldly sanctuary.
From 9:11-14 we see that they now have a more perfect tabernacle, not a third temple made with hands, but the high priest Jesus.
The mediator of this covenant (the New Testament) is Jesus (9:15-18), and in the rest of chapter 9 tells us about the significance of His blood to this covenant.
I would encourage you to keep reading through to the end of the book of Hebrews, as this new covenant continues to be discussed.
You will see that the Hebrews neither wanted nor expected an earthly nation under this covenant, but rather it made them free to pursue peace with all (12:14-17).
They did not desire or expect an earthly city, but the eternal city of the living God.
I hope that next time you hear me say that the sun moon and stars can continue after earthly modern Israel is gone,
you will understand where I am coming from.
Your reply assumes that “rightly defining Biblical eschatology” means assembling a harmonized timeline from Daniel, Isaiah, Zechariah, Jesus, Paul, and Revelation.
But harmonization is not the same thing as exegesis.
You are not deriving a timeline from the text; you are assembling a timeline from a system and then locating verses that appear to fit it.
That is not how Scripture establishes doctrine.
Scripture establishes doctrine by what the authors actually say, not by what later interpreters can synthesize.
You argue that Daniel 11–12 provides a defined final period of persecution connected with the abomination, Israel’s deliverance, and resurrection. But Daniel never identifies this period as a seven‑year Tribulation, never names it as such, and never ties it to a future dispensational framework.
Jesus does reference Daniel’s abomination, but He does not say Daniel’s “time of trouble” is the dispensational Great Tribulation.
You are importing Matthew 24 into Daniel and then importing a system into Matthew 24. That is not exegesis; it is theological layering.
You appeal to “time, times, and half a time,” 1,260 days, and 42 months as evidence of a unified 3½‑year framework. But Daniel never says this period is the final half of a seven‑year Tribulation. Revelation never says it is the same period Daniel describes.
You are assuming they are identical because your system requires them to be identical.
The text does not make that claim.
The 30/45/75‑day interval is even more revealing: you admit it is inferential.
But the entire dispensational timeline is inferential.
You are treating inference as revelation.
You argue that Daniel 7 supplies a kingdom sequence: final persecutor, divine judgment, saints receiving the kingdom. That is true. But Daniel never says this kingdom is a temporary earthly millennium.
Daniel never says it lasts 1,000 years.
Daniel never says it precedes the new creation.
You are importing Revelation 20 into Daniel and then importing a system into Revelation 20.
Daniel’s kingdom is the everlasting kingdom (Daniel 7:14, 27).
You are redefining “everlasting” to mean “1,000 years followed by something else.”
You insist Daniel’s “lot” in 12:13 must refer to a millennial land inheritance.
But Daniel never says this.
The Hebrew goral does refer to inheritance, but the inspired interpretation of the patriarchal inheritance is given in Hebrews 11, not in dispensational charts.
Abraham looked for the heavenly country and the city whose builder is God (Hebrews 11:10, 16).
You claim Hebrews does not cancel the land promise. But Hebrews explicitly relocates the promise to resurrection life in the new creation.
You are redefining “heavenly country” to mean “millennial land grant,” which Hebrews never suggests.
You appeal to Matthew 8:11 and Luke 13:28–29 to place Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the prophets in the kingdom. That is correct.
But Jesus never says this kingdom is a temporary earthly millennium.
Jesus consistently describes the kingdom as the age to come (Matthew 12:32; Mark 10:30).
You are importing a millennial framework into Jesus’ words.
Jesus says the meek will inherit the earth (Matthew 5:5).
You assume this means the millennial earth.
Jesus never says that.
You assume Matthew 19:28 refers to a millennial administration.
Jesus never says that.
You assume Matthew 25:31–34 refers to a millennial throne.
Jesus never says that. You are reading a system into the text.
You appeal to Zechariah 14 as proof of an earthly messianic kingdom.
But Zechariah’s prophetic imagery is apocalyptic, not architectural.
The nations coming to Jerusalem, the Feast of Tabernacles, and conditional rainfall are symbolic depictions of universal worship and divine sovereignty.
You treat apocalyptic imagery as literal geography because your system requires it.
Revelation 21–22 also uses geography and nations symbolically.
You cannot treat Zechariah literally and Revelation symbolically without admitting you are choosing the method that fits your system.
You appeal to Isaiah 24–27 as proof of an earthly kingdom after resurrection. But Isaiah’s vision blends resurrection, judgment, restoration, and worship in prophetic poetry.
Isaiah never says this is a temporary kingdom before the new creation.
You are inserting Revelation 20 into Isaiah and then claiming Isaiah teaches Revelation 20.
Isaiah does not.
You appeal to Revelation 19–20 as the clearest chronology. But Revelation 20 does not identify Old Testament saints.
It identifies martyrs and those who refused the beast.
You insert Abraham, David, Daniel, and the prophets into the passage because your system requires them there.
Revelation does not.
You claim “thrones” must include all saints.
Revelation does not say that.
You claim Revelation 20 must be the fulfillment of Daniel 7.
Revelation does not say that.
You claim the “first resurrection” must include all righteous.
Revelation does not say that. You are harmonizing texts to fit a system.
You appeal to 1 Corinthians 15:23–24 as supporting your timeline.
But Paul gives three stages: Christ, those who are His at His coming, then the end.
You insert multiple additional stages because your system requires them. Paul does not.
Your final “coherent sequence” is not a biblical sequence. It is a dispensational sequence.
You are not deriving it from Scripture; you are imposing it onto Scripture.
You accuse others of failing to “put the puzzle together,” but the puzzle you are assembling is one you brought with you.
The biblical authors do not supply the timeline you assert. You supply it, and then you treat it as revelation.
“Daniel 12 does describe a time of distress, deliverance, and resurrection,”
“When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
for then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.”Matthew 24:15, 21 KJV
“And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, ( 67 ad ) then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. ( 70 ad)
For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.”
Luke 21:20, 22 KJV
“Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”
Matthew 24:34 KJV
I see the passages you’re quoting, but I need to point out something very important: you’re mixing two different contexts and treating them as if Jesus and Luke were describing the same event, when the texts themselves do not say that.“Daniel 12 does describe a time of distress, deliverance, and resurrection,”
“When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
Matthew 24:15, 21 KJV
“And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, ( 67 ad ) then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. ( 70 ad)
For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.”
Luke 21:20, 22 KJV
“Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”
Matthew 24:34 KJV
Yes, Daniel 12 describes distress, deliverance, and resurrection.
Yes, Jesus in Matthew 24 refers to Daniel’s abomination of desolation and a future “great tribulation.”
But Luke 21 is not describing the same event Jesus describes in Matthew 24 — Luke explicitly ties his warning to Jerusalem surrounded by armies, which happened in 70 AD, and Jesus says in that context, “these be the days of vengeance.”
Matthew’s “abomination of desolation” is not “Jerusalem surrounded by armies,” and Jesus never equates the two.
You’re collapsing two different prophecies into one timeline.
And when Jesus says, “this generation shall not pass,” He is speaking to the generation that would see the signs He listed — not necessarily the final cosmic signs, because He also says in the same discourse that no one knows the day or hour.
So yes, Daniel 12 describes distress, deliverance, and resurrection — but neither Matthew 24 nor Luke 21 ever say that Daniel’s resurrection happened in 70 AD, nor do they say the abomination of desolation was fulfilled by Roman armies.
That conclusion comes from combining texts that Jesus Himself kept distinct.
I think John is referencing the gospel or “ truth “ being the invitation to the wedding supper . Like the parable Jesus taught him
“The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son, and sent forth his servants ( early prophets ) to call them that were bidden to the wedding: ( Israel ) and they would not come.
Again, he sent forth other servants, ( latter messianic prophets ) saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage. But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise: and the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.
But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.”
Matthew 22:2-10 KJV
See how it shifts from a certain limited guest list but they refuse to come and then everyone’s invited ? Israel rejected and crucified thier savior who came to restore them and then the gospel was sent to all humanity as an invite to the “marriage”
“And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.”
Revelation 19:9 KJV
Jesus invites all but some refuse to come
I see why you’re connecting Jesus’ parable in Matthew 22 with Revelation 19, but I need to be straightforward with you: Jesus’ parable is not the interpretive key to Revelation’s marriage supper, and John is not redefining the marriage supper as “the gospel invitation.” In Matthew 22, Jesus uses a parable to expose Israel’s rejection and the later inclusion of the nations — it’s an analogy, not a timeline. But Revelation 19 is not a parable; it’s a vision describing the consummation of redemption, and the “marriage supper of the Lamb” is not an invitation to believe the gospel but a celebration of the completed union between Christ and His redeemed people.
The guests in Revelation 19:9 are already redeemed, already victorious, already glorified — not people being invited to salvation.
So while Matthew 22 shows the widening of God’s call, Revelation 19 shows the final celebration of those who responded.
The shift you’re seeing in the parable is real, but it doesn’t mean Revelation 19 is about evangelism.
The parable illustrates the invitation; Revelation describes the fulfillment.
You do realize that those chapters in Hebrews are concerned with this PRESENT Church age? Right?
The post-rapture age to come is drastically different by every metric.
[Isa 65:20 KJV] 20 There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner [being] an hundred years old shall be accursed.