Role: Executive Director of The Pre-Trib Research Center |
Dr. Ice is Executive Director of The Pre-Trib Research Center. He founded The Center in 1994 with Dr. Tim LaHaye to research, teach, and defend the pre-tribulational rapture and related Bible prophecy doctrines.
Dr. Ice has co-authored about 30 books, written hundreds of articles, and is a frequent conference speaker. He has served as a pastor for 15 years. Dr. Ice has a B.A. from Howard Payne University, a Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary, a Ph.D. from Tyndale Theological Seminary, and is a Doctoral Candidate at The University of Wales in Church History. Dr. Ice lives in Justin, Texas with his wife Janice and is a member of the Chafer Theological Seminary faculty.
Sixteen and a half years ago when I started working full-time as director of the Pre-Trib Research Center, I immersed myself in the major viewpoints of those of us who believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible. The theology that comes out of that approach is often called dispensationalism. While dispensationalists have amazing unity on so many issues, especially in comparison with other prophetic systems, I noticed a few significant areas of differences. What I hope to do in this new series is to identify the main areas of differences, suggest right views, and offer an explanation as to why dispensationalists have some differing viewpoints...
In an effort to resolve some differences among those of us who interpret the Bible and Bible prophecy in a consistently literal way, I will start by looking at our interpretative approach. Literal interpretation is shorthand for our hermeneutic which is called the grammatical, historical, contextual method. What does this mean and what are the implications of such a method...
I want to now turn to dealing with specific issues in an attempt to apply a consistent, grammatical, historical, contextual method of interpretation that yields a futurist outcome. My approach will be to argue that we should move from the clear to the less clear passages to see if there are parallel items in the clear passages that help us interpret the less clear passages. I know some will dispute my judgment as to what are the clear passages, but I will provide a rationale for my decisions...
When one looks at the New Testament Epistles for specific prophecy relating to the current church age, there is virtually nothing to be found. The church age is not a time of specific prophetic fulfillment and does not have a specific prophetic countdown or timetable, as does Israel and her 70 weeks of years prophecy (Dan. 9:24-27). The only specific future event prophesied for the church age is its end found in the rapture of the church event (John 14:1–3; 1 Thess. 4:13–18). There are general descriptions that give us an idea of the trends of the church age, but there is not specific prophecy like that which is found in abundance to describe the tribulation period...
In my previous installment, I noted that there are not specific prophecies relating to the current church age in which we live. There are only general trends that characterize the church age. Therefore, if my portrayal of the church age is correct, then it would follow that there would not be signs of the end of this age, which would amount to signs for the rapture since it is that event which we all agree terminates this dispensation. In order to examine this notion, I want to begin an appraisal of whether signs of the first section in the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24:3–14) relate to the church age or the tribulation...