John Rich on Dispensational Eschatology

ALAYMAN

ALAYMAN

Well-known member
Doctor
Elect
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
10,347
Reaction score
3,600
Points
113
Go to the end of the video for the part about Dispensationalism (4:14:30 mark)


Here's another from him with Tucker Carlson about a year ago(20 minute mark)...


A pushback video from the DTS folk...


Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
I never heard of John Rich until this interview - he appears to be a famous country-western performer. I agree with Rich that God has not promised that Christians will never go through any serious times of tribulation. He appears to hold to traditional futurist interpretations of Matthew 24 and Revelation - the main reason for this tiff is that Rich is Post-Trib, which of course will attract the ire (and the opposing fire) of the doctrinaire Pre-Trib followers of Darby and Scofield.

Matthew 24:44 says, "Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh." This and many other Bible statements, about the unexpected nature of the timing of Christ's return, would militate against the pop dispenSENsationalist emphasis on date-setting and watching for signs of the Rapture. But it could also be seen as a problem for Rich's approach that Christians during the Tribulation should be watching current events, such as restrictions on buying and selling, to see where they fit in the course of the narrative of Revelation. "Historicists" and post-tribbers over the centuries have been seeing themselves and their times as fitting into Revelation somewhere. David Koresh (nee Vernon Howell) of the Branch Davidians was a recent example of such interpretation.

I am basically one of those folks Rich complains about who want to take Matthew 24 back to 70 AD. The disciples asked about the course of events leading up to the prophesied destruction of the Temple (Matthew 24:2) and that is what Christ was instructing them about, not about things that would not happen until at least 2000 years later. His words were directed to people living in Judea (24:16), to people living in that generation or period of time prior to the Temple's destruction (24:34), and involved issues such as coming down from housetops and not traveling during the Sabbath (24:17, 20) which would not apply to 21st Century society. Based on Christ's words of warning, the Christians living in Jerusalem in 66 AD fled the city to Pella - this is recorded in the histories of Josephus, Eusebius and Epiphanius. They fled when they saw the approach of the Roman armies, which would soon carry out the "abomination of desolation" or destruction of the Temple as predicted by Daniel (24:15).

en.wikipedia.org

Flight to Pella - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Well, that's my 2 cents worth.
 
Illinoisguy is right in that John Rich holds a traditional futurist view of Matthew 24 and Revelation and he also holds to a Post-Trib view which many in the Scofield camp don’t adhere to. However, John Rich is also right in stating that these views of eschatology don’t affect salvation and this showcases the fact that there are various shades of interpretation in all systems of theology when it comes to future events. There is one thing that should be corrected and that is I don’t know of any Pre-Trib teachers who believe that “Christians will never go through any serious times of trouble." The apostle Paul says we are comforted in our tribulation (afflictions) so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God (2 Cor 1:5). However, in 2 Thess 1:4-9 Paul distinguishes between the tribulations which all saints in all ages must endure, not just the last generation (cf. Acts 14:22; 2 Tim 3:12) that come from men and the future tribulation visited upon rebellious men that will be from God.

2 Thess 1:4 Therefore we ourselves boast about you in the churches of God for your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions and in the afflictions that you are enduring. ​

2 Thess 1:6 since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction (tribulation) those who afflict you,
2 Thess 1:7 and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels
2 Thess 1:8 in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.
2 Thess 1:9 They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might,

Jesus isn’t coming back to punish the Church but those who do not know God and who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. This period of time is called the “time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jer 30:7), not the time of the Church’s trouble. There can be disagreements on different aspects of the Second Coming without one being some kind of apostate or enemy of Christ.

Here are the four main approaches to the Book of Revelation explained in the MacArthur Study Bible.

The preterist approach interprets Revelation as a description of first-century events in the Roman Empire. This view conflicts with the book’s own often repeated claim to be prophecy (Rev; 1:3; 22:7, 10, 18-19). It is impossible to see all the events in Revelation as already fulfilled. The second coming of Christ, for example, obviously did not take place in the first century.

The Historist approach views Revelation as a panoramic view of church history from apostolic times to the present – seeing in the symbolism such events as the barbarian invasions of Rome, the rise of the Roman Catholic Church (as well as various individual popes), the emergence of Islam, and the French Revolution. This interpretive method robs Revelation of any meaning for those to whom it was written. It also ignores the time limitations the book itself places on the unfolding events (cf. 11:2; 12:6, 14; 13:5). Historicism has produced many different – and often conflicting – interpretations of the actual historical events contained in Revelation.

The idealist approach interprets Revelation as a timeless depiction of the cosmic struggle between the forces of good and evil. In this view, the book contains neither historical allusions nor predictive prophecy. This view also ignores Revelation’s prophetic character and, if carried to its logical conclusion, severs the book from any connection with actual historical events. Revelation then becomes merely a collection of stories designed to teach spiritual truth.

The futurist approach insists that the events of chs. 6-22 are yet future, and that those chapters literally and symbolically depict actual people and events yet to appear on the world scene. It describes the events surrounding the second coming of Jesus Christ (chs. 6-19), the Millennium and the final judgment (ch. 20), and the eternal state (chs 21-22). Only this view does justice to Revelation’s claim to be prophecy and interprets the book by the same grammatical-historical method as chs. 1-3 and the rest of Scripture.
 
Last edited:
Appreciate the civil contributions.

I am currently teaching in my adult S.S. class through Eschatology. We have been here since the beginning of the year. I taught all of last year on prophecy.

I happened on this John Rich video and the thing that caught my attention right away was that he prefaced what he was about to say with the idea that we can agree sometimes to disagree and that doesn't mean one of us isn't going to heaven. My church is premillennialist and pre-trib, but most of our folk haven't been exposed to anything other than that kind of eschatological teaching.

I found it intriguing that Rich was a mainstream country music star, yet clearly had a fairly solid grounding in doctrine, even if I probably am one of those Darby-ites (sort of) that he is warning about. But I suppose what I like the most about what he was getting at is, whatever your beliefs are going to be, you ought to take the Bible seriously as to how it is germane and relevant to the events of the world around us.
 
Last edited:
Jesus is coming back bodily and visibly. It will be a surprise when it happens.

My eschatology.
 
Why can't country singers be like they used to be? Johnny Cash never did this.
 
ALAYMAN said:
Appreciate the civil contributions.

I am currently teaching in my adult S.S. class through Eschatology. We have been here since the beginning of the year. I taught all of last year on prophecy.

I happened on this John Rich video and the thing that caught my attention right away was that he prefaced what he was about to say with the idea that we can agree sometimes to disagree and that doesn't mean one of us isn't going to heaven. My church is premillennialist and pre-trib, but most of our folk haven't been exposed to anything other than that kind of eschatological teaching.

I found it intriguing that Rich was a mainstream country music star, yet clearly had a fairly solid grounding in doctrine, even if I probably am one of those Darby-ites (sort of) that he is warning about. But I suppose what I like the most about what he was getting at is, whatever your beliefs are going to be, you ought to take the Bible seriously as to how it is germane and relevant to the events of the world around us.
Click to expand...
We don't even mention Darby in our pretrib church. We even have ex-Mennonites who at least in Canada would have been in a church that is amillennial - they had a disagreement or questions with what our pastor taught at first but eventually they accepted our teaching and are the most active members of the church. Also out pastor has criticize hyperdispensational teaching at times. Some of the best critics of hyperdispensationalism are dispensationalists.
 
brianb said:
We don't even mention Darby in our pretrib church. We even have ex-Mennonites who at least in Canada would have been in a church that is amillennial - they had a disagreement or questions with what our pastor taught at first but eventually they accepted our teaching and are the most active members of the church. Also out pastor has criticize hyperdispensational teaching at times. Some of the best critics of hyperdispensationalism are dispensationalists.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just like I said in my church that people would not know alternative views to pre-millennial dispensational teaching, they would have no clue who John Nelson Darby is.
 
I listen to Shawn Ryan podcast daily. John Rich was a long one so I had to cut it in half. Great interview and Loves America .....
 
I am finding myself drawn more and more towards the historic premillennialist view. John Rich expresses the same contempt towards the pre-trib "Left Behind" eschatology as I have come around to. My position on the "Rapture" is that when our Lord Jesus Christ descends upon Olivet (returning the same way in which he left), all of his ELECT will be looking at him from his backside and woe to anyone who sees him otherwise!

Where he and I may have some disagreement (and perhaps not even that) is that I do not believe that God's Elect will be so deceived as he is thinking. The conditions upon which one is compelled to receive the "mark" will be so repulsive towards true believers that anyone who IS his elect will absolutely refuse the mark!

Consider the following:
And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. - Rev 13:15-17
Click to expand...
Would a true believer actually be tricked into "worshiping the beast?" What about all of the Early Christians who chose death rather than "worshipping" Caesar?
Revelation 14:9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
Revelation 14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
Click to expand...
I believe the scriptures are clear that receiving the mark will be contingent upon giving unconditional allegiance (worship) to the beast.

I believe the technology exists and the Covid "Plan-demic" was the perfect "Dress Rehearsal" in how such was to be implemented.

One of the things they accomplished was in making cash just about worthless because no one would accept it.

The second (and perhaps the most alarming) thing to happen was the "De-Banking" where banks would literally close accounts and refuse to do business with companies or individuals who refused to go along with their agenda. Both the Obama and Biden Administrations systematically pressured America’s financial institutions to engage in debanking – encouraging them to freeze or close accounts, deny loans, or refuse services to lawful businesses and individuals as a form of political retribution. This is why such companies as Chik-Fil-A supposedly went "woke" and implemented DEI measures and so forth. President Trump made this go away - for now.

This is where the "Mark of the Beast" becomes deadly. In order to participate in this "New Economy" you had better be on-board with the "New-World Agenda" and swear unconditional allegiance to the great benevolent leader who graciously allows you to live!

I absolutely believe that the Church could go through such a time every bit as much as the early Church went through similar persecution for refusing to bow to Rome!
 

Baptist Renegade - I believe the scriptures are clear that receiving the mark will be contingent upon giving unconditional allegiance (worship) to the beast.​

I have a different understanding concerning the Mark of the Beast. The angel preaching the “everlasting gospel” in Rev 14:6 takes place after Rev 13:16-18 and after receiving the Mark of the Beast. The angel preaching the gospel is urging the people of the world to change their allegiance from the beast to the Lamb. The flip side to receiving the Mark and being damned is to repent and believe the gospel to be saved. People aren’t damned forever because of some physical act of having a mark stamped on them any more than someone is saved by a physical act such as walking an aisle or repeating a prayer, or turning baptism into a sacrament as some denominations do. Scripture sometimes focuses on specific sins to show that those who revel in and justify them have never had their hearts changed and are still lost. Look at Rev 21:8 and 1 Cor 6:9-10 for example. It seems John MacArthur also believes along these lines.

www.gty.org

Unforgivable?

Several years ago in a live Q&A session, someone asked John MacArthur if taking the mark of the Beast during the Great Tribulation would be an...
www.gty.org www.gty.org
 
Last edited:
biscuit1953 said:

Baptist Renegade - I believe the scriptures are clear that receiving the mark will be contingent upon giving unconditional allegiance (worship) to the beast.​

I have a different understanding concerning the Mark of the Beast. The angel preaching the “everlasting gospel” in Rev 14:6 takes place after Rev 13:16-18 and after receiving the Mark of the Beast. The angel preaching the gospel is urging the people of the world to change their allegiance from the beast to the Lamb. The flip side to receiving the Mark and being damned is to repent and believe the gospel to be saved. People aren’t damned forever because of some physical act of having a mark stamped on them any more than someone is saved by a physical act such as walking an aisle or repeating a prayer, or turning baptism into a sacrament as some denominations do. Scripture sometimes focuses on specific sins to show that those who revel in and justify them have never had their hearts changed and are still lost. Look at Rev 21:8 and 1 Cor 6:9-10 for example. It seems John MacArthur also believes along these lines.

www.gty.org

Unforgivable?

Several years ago in a live Q&A session, someone asked John MacArthur if taking the mark of the Beast during the Great Tribulation would be an...
www.gty.org www.gty.org
Click to expand...
I guess I'd have to look into some of the "allegorical" interpretations of some of the "A-mills" and "Post-Toasties" as well as preterist interpretations. My understanding is that it is literal and not that I am trying to be a prophet or anything, but it seems so clear to me that it is impossible for me to ignore or to see other viewpoints. I do tell the "Post-Toastie" folks that I would love to be persuaded to their position so I could be more optimistic concerning the future that perhaps my kids and grandkids will grow up in a better world.
 
John Rich's eschatology is not particularly original, it's remarkably similar to this tract - except for the Post-Trib interpretation. Meanwhile, any predictions of the shape of things to come, taken from the Book of Revelation, raise the question of how literally we are to take the symbols in that book, which we recently discussed in another thread.

0007_01.gif


0007_11.gif




0007_12.gif
 
Last edited:
In March of 1971 as an 18 year old working at a Kroger grocery store I picked up a gospel tract someone had slipped into a flower pot. I was brought up in church and was baptized in a river after repeating a prayer on a Wednesday night at ten years of age and convinced myself I was saved because of that. No work of grace was done in my heart and I could lie and steal with impunity. I had no desire to live for Jesus or read my Bible or anything else that would indicate a born again experience had taken place. I put that gospel tract in my pocket and read it when I got home and was brought under tremendous conviction, realizing from the depths of my soul that if I died that night I would go straight to hell. I didn’t get saved until a couple of weeks later but it was that particular gospel tract God used to show me my sinful heart. That gospel tract was “This Was Your Life.” The current version has a copyright date of 1972 but that is a revised edition that changed the invitation at the end of the booklet.

I will go on to say this. I believe too many Chick tracts are outright ridiculous in the scenarios they present and I strongly disagree with their KJV only teaching even though I knew nothing other than the KJV when I got saved. I believe “This Was Your Life” is a good tract and it is the only one I will ever use from that ministry and on every one I use I put the Living Waters address for contact information.
 
ALAYMAN said:
A pushback video from the DTS folk...


Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I have very little respect for DTS these days and far less regarding Grace Evangelical Society! Did he even open up the scriptures?
illinoisguy said:
John Rich's eschatology is not particularly original, it's remarkably similar to this tract - except for the Post-Trib interpretation. Meanwhile, any predictions of the shape of things to come, taken from the Book of Revelation, raise the question of how literally we are to take the symbols in that book, which we recently discussed in another thread.

0007_01.gif


0007_11.gif




0007_12.gif
Click to expand...
I remember that tract but The Last Generation is much closer to where I am these days and it does seem that we are headed to such a time sooner than we would care to realize!
 
There is one Chick Tract that is written only for Christians called “Why No Revival?” We all come from different backgrounds with many different denominational upbringings and that would include Jack Chick who may have published some things that are questionable but I fully believe he had a desire to see lost people saved in spite of any shortcomings he may have had. Every Christian of every denomination should read this powerful booklet.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top