Q. I have always heard men talk about the teaching of the Immanency of Christ’s return; that he can return at any moment and that there aren’t any “signs” that have to occur first. I really don’t understand this. It seems to me that, there were some signs and are others still, that have to happen before the Lord returns for us at the Rapture.
For example, didn’t Israel have to be reestablished as an independent nation again, first? If so, then throughout prior church history until Israel was a nation again, how could his return have been imminent? One other example is the battle described in Ezek.38-39. This battle can’t happen until, as Ezek.38:14 says, it happens “In that day when my people of Israel dwell safely,”. They are not dwelling safely (or securely) today. They are attacked frequently. I really can’t see how the doctrine (or teaching) of Imminence can stand. Do you have any views on this?
A. I used to feel a lot more comfortable applying the doctrine of immanency to our generation than to those in the past. And remember it applies only to the Rapture, not to the 2nd Coming. There’s no real connection between the Rapture and other End Times events, like there is with the 2nd Coming.
Then I realized that the Lord has come for every generation as death has overtaken them, and no one really knows when his or her personal encounter with the Lord will take place. So in my opinion, it’s best to live our lives as though the Lord could come for us at any moment, because He could.