Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
- First, normally the wedding or marriage (the second step) did not take place at the home of the bride.
- Second, in Bible times the marriage was a joyous, festive occasion.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Fifth, the Old Testament teaches that during the Millennium there will be another marriage supper, different from the marriage supper of the Lamb.
- 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.
Revelation 19:7–9
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 5:22–33 indicate 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.”1 This taking of the bride was usually done at night approximately one year after the betrothal.2,3 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.4 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.5 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.6 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).7
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.”8 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.”9 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.10 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 Lᴏʀᴅ 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.”11
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.12
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.”13 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.14 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.
ENDNOTE
- John Rea, “Marriage,” Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 2 (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1975), 1082.
- George B. Eager, “Marriage,” The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1957), 1998.
- “Marriage,” The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. 7, ed. Isaac Landman (New York, NY: Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Co., Inc. 1948), 372.
- Ibid.
- “Huppah,” The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. 5, ed. Isaac Landman (New York, NY: Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Co., Inc., 1948), 504.
- Joachim Jeremias, “numphe, numphios,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 4, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. and ed. by Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967), 1100.
- Ibid., 1103.
- Rea, “Marriage,” 1082.
- Eager, “Marriage,” 1998.
- “Huppah,” Vol. 5, 504.
- John A. Martin, “Isaiah,” The Bible Knowledge Commentary—Old Testament, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 1073-74.
- Ethelbert Stauffer, “gameo, gamos,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 1, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. and ed. by Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1964), 654.
- Jeremias, “numphe, numphios,” 1101.
- “Huppah,” Vol. 5, 504.
(1936-2019) Renald E. Showers was a world-renowned professor, theologian, and author who served with The Friends of Israel Gospel
Ministry for more than 30 years. He retired shortly before the Lord called him home on April 4, 2019.
Anonymous
First, normally the wedding or marriage (the second step) did not take place at the home of the bride.
Second, in Bible times the marriage was a joyous, festive occasion.
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.
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.
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.
Fifth, the Old Testament teaches that during the Millennium there will be another marriage supper, different from the marriage supper of the Lamb.
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.
REVELATION 19:7–9
Anonymous
Troy Day do you happen to have a reference that I can study for the wedding to be at the grooms parents home?
Anonymous
Troy Day, I agree. I suspect the marriage supper during the millennium may be the Father’s with Israel. Thoughts?
Anonymous
Amen! Amen!
Anonymous
how about this here post Brett Dobbs Gary Micheal Epping Robert L. Carpenter II James Pinkerton thou shalt be missing the wedding ? It’s funny how we think of natural laws like motion, gravity and mathematics as firm and inflexible. Modern man thinks of moral laws as malleable. Remember though that the 10 commandments were not written on a flimsy rubber band they were written in stone. Remember also that the natural laws were left for clever men to discover . The moral law was written clearly with the finger of God so that men are without excuse. God is the ultimate law giver he is the one who made the laws of nature and mathematics. He is also the One who made the moral law.
This fact is a great equalizer. It makes us all guilty in the eyes of a perfect moral law giver. It makes us all sinners in need of the Savior and God’s forgiving grace. There is none righteous no not one. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Jesus Christ suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the spirit. Today, You and I stand on level ground at the foot of his cross. Let go of your pride and cry out to him, “God have mercy on me a sinner.”
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life. Turn from sin and trust the Savior today.
Anonymous
you BEST believe it Kyle Williams Brett Dobbs Jeffrey Snyder It’s funny how we think of natural laws like motion, gravity and mathematics as firm and inflexible. Modern man thinks of moral laws as malleable. Remember though that the 10 commandments were not written on a flimsy rubber band they were written in stone. Remember also that the natural laws were left for clever men to discover . The moral law was written clearly with the finger of God so that men are without excuse. God is the ultimate law giver he is the one who made the laws of nature and mathematics. He is also the One who made the moral law.
This fact is a great equalizer. It makes us all guilty in the eyes of a perfect moral law giver. It makes us all sinners in need of the Savior and God’s forgiving grace. There is none righteous no not one. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Jesus Christ suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the spirit. Today, You and I stand on level ground at the foot of his cross. Let go of your pride and cry out to him, “God have mercy on me a sinner.”
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life. Turn from sin and trust the Savior today.
Anonymous
Troy Day Amen!
Anonymous
Kyle Williams you are agreeing the marriage supper of the LAMB will be in heaven – in the near future ?
Anonymous
Troy Day in the future, yes
Anonymous
It’s literally what our faith hinges on… Jesus said I go to prepare a place for you that where I am you may also be. We are going to be with him in heaven. He didn’t say I’m going to have you guys meet me in the air as I’m coming down and then we will conquer earth and then I will give you a portion of the new earth/Jerusalem. That will come after our honeymoon.
Anonymous
James Pinkerton The third heaven is only a pit stop to eternity. The true eternal rest is in the new heaven and new earth. “In my fathers house are many rooms”. I believe that is new Jerusalem.
A true dispensationalist should not only acknowledge separate plans of redemption for Jews and Gentiles, but should also carry that dispensation over into the eternal.
“In my fathers house are many rooms” is only for the Jews.
New Jerusalem is only for the Jews.
Revelation 21:12-12 (KJV) And had a wall great and high, [and] had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are [the names] of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
There is no gate with the gentiles name on it. But that doesn’t mean gentiles aren’t allowed in. They bring their glory and honor into it.
Revelation 21:24-24 (KJV) And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
Something else to note from a true dispensational theology, is that it seems that gentile believers will not be reigning with Christ 1,000 years. But only the elect Jews who came out of the tribulation. Because the Jews were the tribulation saints.
Revelation 20:4-4 (KJV) And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [I saw] the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
A true dispensationalist must also acknowledge that the phrase “the fullness of the gentiles” means that every single gentile that could of been saved is saved before the 70th week begins. And ends with the last gentile being saved, thus triggering the rapture. Therefore, with the absence of the Holy Spirit allowing the man of sin to be revealed means that no gentiles will come to faith during the 70th week.
I have many problems with this eschatological view. That’s why I’m no longer a dispensationalist.
There are two other views that at surface level seems to me, to be a little bit better at lining up completely with Gods overall redemptive plan. That is progressive dispensationalism and progressive covenant theology. I’m still investigating both of these views.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I’m a progressive dispensationalist.
Anonymous
James Pinkerton I listen to a light debate the other day between a progressive dispensationalist and a progressive covenant theology, both made sense to me. So I’m still bashing that out.
Anonymous
James Pinkerton I think Oscar Valdez is too but this is just to close to calvinistic progresso aMil etc.
Anonymous
Troy Day I should rephrase that I lean towards progressive dispensationalism… what is your eschatological position? Are you just a dispensationalist?
Anonymous
James Pinkerton yes you should rephrase because as shown to Oscar Valdez progressive dispensationalism is NOT Pentecostal to begin with and borders Baptist eschatology with its progressive calvinistic a-mil and leaning toward reformed postimilnialism
Anonymous
Troy Day You still have no clear idea about the good connection we can have between pentecostal eschatology and progressive disp.
Anonymous
Oscar Valdez I have an excellent view of progressive disp which was not what the first Pentecostals or the first Church believed. it is Evangelical Christian theology NOT Pentecostal one – it attempts to amalgamate the very calvinistic reformed a-mil of Kyle Williams with Pentecostalism and it is JUST not working too good @all
The debate is this: progressive dispensationalism says that Christ is right now at this present time sitting on David’s throne and ruling WHICH is basically where NAR starts with their kingdom-NOW just to end with amil eschatology – not a real difference in these views if you are to ask me
Anonymous
Troy Day You see! You have no idea. But I guess you like to be contrary all the time.
Anonymous
Oscar Valdez well thatS a pretty lame argument from you so early in the morning I have LONG suspected you got no clue of Pentecostal eschatology and you see how it shows just now – you have no ability to correlate what you believe to existing eschatology for the lack of basic knowledge BUT you shall learn – your claim for the davidic throne is unbiblical the least to say if not more There is a reason why Rev says NOW is the Kingdom and you simply cannot cut this and other scripture our of your BIBLE just to built your 70s progresso disp It simply does not fir Pentecostalism I have showed you this before and do not mind REposting my responses again to show you again that what you believe is NOT Pentecostal Just another reformed view https://knowingscripture.com/articles/covenant-theology-vs-dispensationalism
Anonymous
Troy Day That is the point! The progressive teaches that the kingdom is now.🤣
Anonymous
Oscar Valdez and yet Revelation DOES not say this until ch11 is it – so how can you state what the BIBLE does NOT say
and yes I was so right when I told you
your belief is what NAR teaches – just another Kingdom-now reformed baptistic covenant heresy – whatS new? https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/kingdom-now-dominion-theology-is-so-bad-its-terrible/
Anonymous
Troy Day And you keep twisting what I say! Now NAR 🤣 Its impossible to get to a point with you!
Anonymous
Oscar Valdez that is a pretty LAME argument
NAR believes KINGDOM NOW – it is their essence 🙂
You believe KINGDOM NOW as if it is your essence
Kyle Williams believes MILLENIAL kingdom now
yall are ALL progresso calvinists if you ask me
Anonymous
Troy Day Why are you making me laugh so early in the morning?
Anonymous
Oscar Valdez cause your theology is baptist @ best Jesus spoke the parable of the Unforgiving Servant (Mt. 18:23-35) by saying: “Therefore the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants (v.23).
Does the Parable imply “not forgiving our brothers from our heart” have a bearing on entering into the Kingdom of Heaven?
Could Verse 34b – “until he should pay all his debt” be a clue?
Text: Matt. 18:34-35 (ESV)
34 And in anger his master delivered him to the jailers, until he should pay all his debt. 35 So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart
Anonymous
James Pinkerton this one is fundamental
Brett Dobbs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCi7WYgtlO4
Anonymous
Troy Day https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/ancient-jewish-marriage/amp/
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs what is this all about? James Pinkerton
Anonymous
Troy Day it’s about the ancient Jewish wedding without the extra add ins. That Christians have possibly just made up or they have added their own spin to the actual known facts.
This source gives the straight facts of the details from a archaeology discovery. A ancient Jewish marriage certificate. I will copy and paste the details in another comment.
Anonymous
As a rule, the fathers arranged the match. The girl was consulted, but the “calling of the damsel and inquiring at her mouth” after the conclusion of all negotiations was merely a formality.
In those days a father was more concerned about the marriage of his sons than about the marriage of his daughters. No expense was involved in marrying off a daughter. The father received a dowry for his daughter whereas he had to give a dowry to the prospective father-in-law of his son when marrying him off.
The price paid by the father of the groom to the father of the bride was called mohar. (The term continues to be included in the text of the traditional ketubah, or Jewish wedding contract.) In Genesis (Parashat Vayishlah), Shekhem [Dinah’s suitor] said to Dinah’s father and her brothers: “Let me find favor in your eyes, and what ye shall say unto me I will give. Ask me never so much mohar and mattan, and I will give according as ye shall say unto me; but give me the damsel to wife.”
“Mattan” was the Hebrew word for the gifts given by the groom to the bride in addition to the mohar.
The mohar was not always paid in cash. Sometimes it was paid in kind, or in service. The Book of Genesis relates the story of the servant of Abraham, who, after his request for Rebecca [to marry Isaac] was granted, “brought forth jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment, and gave them to Rebecca; he gave also to her brother and to her mother precious things.” The servant thus gave mattan to Rebecca, and mohar to her brother and mother.
The Bible does not specify what was to be done with the mohar in case the marriage agreement was broken by either of the two parties.
The mohar was originally the purchase price of the bride, and it is therefore understandable why it was paid by the father of the groom to the father of the bride. In ancient days, marriage was not an agreement between two individuals, but between two families.
The newly married man usually did not found a new home for himself, but occupied a nook in his father’s house. The family of the groom gained, and the family of the bride lost, a valuable member who helped with all household tasks. It was reasonable, therefore, that the father of the groom should pay the father of the bride the equivalent of her value as a useful member of the family.
Yet in the course of time the mohar lost its original meaning as a purchase price paid to the father for his daughter and assumed the significance of a gift to the near relatives of the bride. As far back as in early biblical times, it was customary for a good father to give the whole of the mohar or at least a large part of it to his daughter. A father who appropriated the whole mohar for himself was considered unkind and harsh.
The portion of the mohar which the bride received from her father, and the mattan, which the groom presented to her, were not the only possessions she brought to matrimony. A rich father sometimes gave his daughter a field or other landed property as well as female slaves.
Until late in the Middle Ages, marriage consisted of two ceremonies that were marked by celebrations at two separate times, with an interval between. First came the betrothal [erusin]; and later, the wedding [nissuin]. At the betrothal the woman was legally married, although she still remained in her father’s house. She could not belong to another man unless she was divorced from her betrothed. The wedding meant only that the betrothed woman, accompanied by a colorful procession, was brought from her father’s house to the house of her groom, and the legal tie with him was consummated.
This division of marriage into two separate events originated in very ancient times when marriage was a purchase, both in its outward form and in its inner meaning. Woman was not recognized as a person but was bought in marriage, like chattel.
Marriage, as with any type of purchase, consisted of two acts. First the price was paid and an agreement reached on the conditions of sale. Sometime later the purchaser took possession of the object. In marriage, the mohar was paid and a detailed agreement reached between the families of the bride and groom. This betrothal was followed by the wedding, when the bride was brought into the home of the groom, who took actual possession of her.
In those days the betrothal was the more important of these two events and maintained its importance as long as marriage was actually based upon a purchase. But as women assumed more importance as individuals, and marriage ceased to be a purchase, attaining moral significance, the actual wedding became more important than the betrothal.
At the beginning of the 20th century, an actual Jewish marriage record during the period of the return from the Babylonian exile was discovered — the oldest marriage contract in Jewish history. The marriage did not take place in Palestine or among the exiles in Babylon, but among the Jews of Elephantine and Aswan, at the southern border of Egypt.
The marriage contract of Mibtachiah [the bride] and As-Hor [the groom] began with a declaration of marriage by As-Hor to Mibtachiah’s father. “I came to thy house for thee to give me thy daughter, Mibtachiah, to wife; she is my wife and I am her husband from this day and forever.”
Following this declaration of betrothal, all terms of the marriage contract were written in detail. As-Hor paid Machseiah, the father, five shekels, Persian standard, as a mohar for his daughter. Besides, Mibtachiah received a gift of 65 1/2 shekels from As-Hor. From this we gather that the mohar that fathers received for their daughters was then merely a nominal payment, the formality of an older custom.
According to the marriage contract, Mibtachiah had equal rights with her husband. She had her own property which she could bequeath as she pleased, and she had the right to pronounce a sentence of divorce against As-Hor, even as he had the right to pronounce it against her. All she had to do was to appear before the court of the community and declare that she had developed an aversion to As-Hor. We do not know to what degree the equality of rights enjoyed by Jewish women of Elephantine was due to Jewish or to Persian-Babylonian law.
In many points of content and form, Mibtachiah’s marriage contract resembles the version of the ketubah (wedding contract) still in vogue in modern Jewish life.
In references to marriage throughout the Bible, the mohar was paid and gifts presented, but a written contract was never mentioned. However, the Book of Deuteronomy specifically states that if a man dislikes his wife, “he writes her a bill of divorcement and gives it in her hand” (24: 3). Modern critics of the Bible have agreed that on the whole, the Deuteronomic law is a product of the century preceding the Babylonian exile. If a written document was employed at that period in dissolving a marriage, we have to assume that it was also employed in contracting a marriage.
Anonymous
YES James Pinkerton
It’s literally what our faith hinges on…
I have NOT a clue how Kyle Williams Oscar Valdez Link Hudson will be married to the LAMB without actually going to the HeavenS w/Jesus
Anonymous
Troy Day show where the Bible teaches the marriage happens in heaven. Read Revelation 19_20; The marriage supper of the Lamb is come, the the second coming passage, then we read of the beast and false prophet thrown into the lake of fire, then the first resurrection, then the millennial reign. How could the narriage take place before the first resurrection?
I am not saying that some of these events could not be happening simultaneously.
Anonymous
Link Hudson did you even read the post or you are just blabbing on auto-pilot again? The whole post SHOWS you where the Bible teaches the marriage happens in heaven You have got to be an obvious reader to ask for more explanation that what is already given you plainly
First, normally the wedding or marriage (the second step) did not take place at the home of the bride.
Second, in Bible times the marriage was a joyous, festive occasion.
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.
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.
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.
Fifth, the Old Testament teaches that during the Millennium there will be another marriage supper, different from the marriage supper of the Lamb.
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.
Anonymous
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 5:22–33 indicate 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.”1 This taking of the bride was usually done at night approximately one year after the betrothal.2,3 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.4 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.5 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.6 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.
In Bible times the marriage was a joyous, festive occasion…characterized by mirth and gladness.
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).7
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.
goes on to 5 and 6 and 7 Link Hudson read it already
Anonymous
Troy Day Your pretrib argument is extremely weak. Why?
Because there is no actual passage teaching a rapture before the 70th week. Pretrib adds an extra return of Christ and an extra rapture based on little hints or supposed problems, or in this case, Jewish culture.
Paul writes about the return of Christ as if it were one event we are looking for, not two. The coming of the Son of man happens AFTER the tribulation in Matthew 24. As I recall, recently, Troy placed the post tribulational resurrection of the dead that Daniels speaks of after the tribulation also, but said it was for the Jews.
But Paul was a Jew, and he was a Christian also. They that are in Christ’s partake of some of the same promises that believing Jews partake of. There is no reason to think that Jewish Christian Paul will be resurrected at a different time from Gentile Christians. The dead in Christ rise together, whether Jew or Gentile. Paul was apparently hoping to be transformed and raptured before his death when he wrote that ‘we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air’ in I Thessalonians 4. His audience would have included Gentile believers.
If Jewish culture about marriage is considered a big theological problem that must require a trip to heaven, that is still not evidence for putting a rapture before Daniel’s 70th week, before the tribulation, etc. If one is going to postulate events to solve this problem (the pre-trib approach) then one could postulate a quick pretribulational trip to heaven after the return of Christ and the millennium. Why would a trip to heaven take place seven years beforehand? What evidence is there for that? And why would this be an argument for pretrib and not midtrib or pre-wrath. If you try to argue that Jesus has to take us home for the marriage supper, where do you get the idea that it would have to be before the tribulation?
That just doesn’t have any support for it at all. And ‘the tribulation is going to be really tough’ is not a reasonable argument for pre-trib either.
Anonymous
how about this one/. Dan Anthony Jeffrey Snyder Brett Dobbs
Anonymous
Troy Day the marriage and marriage supper of the lamb occurs in revelation 19:1-10. It occurs on the day of Christ. While the marriage and marriage supper is taking place the vials of wrath- revelation 16 occurs on earth. At the end of Ch 16 at the 7th vial Jesus comes as a thief. And that co mingles with revelation 19:11-21.
There is not enough data for me to draw a conclusion of a 7 year long marriage and marriage supper. The only conclusion I can come to is that marriage will take the same length of time as the vials of wrath that is poured out. I have came up with 3 plausible options. 1 day, 7 days, or 30 days.
Anonymous
If the marriage hasn’t already happened then all the children born are illegitimate.
Anonymous
Dan Anthony well Kyle Williams says it happened in 70AD and Oscar Valdez too believe it is a kingdom-now thing and not in the soon coming future ?
Anonymous
Troy Day Christ’s kingdom has been since he was resurrected and glorified!
Anonymous
Kyle Williams not sure that that is a theological thing or Pentecostal at that matter BUT it seems Oscar Valdez is believing it as well We may ALSO need to poll Link Hudson Philip Williams Terry Wiles Michael Chauncey Neil Steven Lawrence because Revelation 11:15 PLAINLY states for all of us as:
A crescendo of voices in Heaven sang out,
The kingdom of the world is now the Kingdom of our God and his Messiah!
SO not until Rev 11 15 the way I read it …
Anonymous
Troy Day it’s definitely theological, and I’m not sure if it’s “pentecostal” but it’s definitely Apostolic
Anonymous
NOT a bad analogy Dan Anthony dont you think so Kyle Williams ?
Anonymous
https://www.pentecostalnews.com/2023/02/15/12-dec-2022-2/