John 14
1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.
2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
(KJV)

John fourteen one through three is sometimes quoted as evidence that Jesus taught a pre-tribulation rapture. Other pre-tribulationists believe the rapture was not revealed by Jesus at all. They believe Paul alone was the conduit for this revelation. Those who claim John fourteen teaches a pre-trib rapture believe this passage implies Jesus will take the raptured believers immediately to heaven.

The idea, that this passage teaches Christians will go to heaven after the rapture, would be strong support for pre-tribulationism and equally troublesome for post-tribulationism, if it were true. The post-tribulation view does not allow for the Church to go to heaven after the rapture, but directly into the Millennial Kingdom.

Presuppositions & Bias
One of the difficulties with the way this passage is interpreted is our own personal bias. If we believe in a pre-trib rapture, we naturally would look at this passage with a bias toward pre-trib. We might assume that since Jesus was referring to coming for His disciples, He had a pre-trib rapture in view. If we already believe that Christians are going to heaven after the rapture, we would be inclined to interpret "My Father's House" as heaven. But, if we have a bias toward the post-trib view, we would assume Jesus was referring to the second coming. If we are going to understand this passage correctly, we need to look beyond our own presuppositions, and look at John fourteen from the perspective of the disciples, whom Jesus was addressing. We all have presuppositions that we bring to a passage. The disciples themselves had presuppositions based on their Jewish upbringing and training in the Old Testament Scriptures, and based on Jesus' prior teaching. In order to correctly interpret this passage, we must jettison our own presuppositions, and understand the presuppositions the disciples brought to Jesus' teaching. What did they already know about Jesus' coming again for them? The prior understanding of the disciples regarding Jesus' coming for them must be a crucial component of our interpretation if we are going to be fair and unbiased, and if we are going to be faithful to grammatical historical method.

Too often Christians ask the wrong question of Scripture, "what does this passage mean to me?" Instead, we should ask, "what did Jesus' words mean to His disciples at the time?" It is clear from Jesus' own words in this very discourse that He was teaching His disciples ONLY what they could understand and digest at the time. He told them, "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." (John 16:12-13). Notice that eschatology was one of the things the Holy Spirit would further develop for them at a later date. It is apparent Jesus was only giving the disciples information they could receive and digest at the time. John 14:1-3 should be interpreted by us only as it WOULD have been understood by the disciples at the time. They would understand Jesus' teaching based on their knowledge of Old Testament Scriptures and Jesus' prior teaching to them.

Using a Double Standard
The difficulty that has yet to be overcome by pre-tribulationists is how to reconcile these verses with the Olivet Discourse. That discourse, occurring only two days earlier, was a lengthy discussion of the last days and the second coming. There is no pre-trib coming or rapture in the Olivet Discourse. The only coming of Christ mentioned by Jesus will occur "immediately after the tribulation" (Matt. 24:29-31). Jesus had given them a series of signs for which to watch. By paying attention to these signs they could know when His coming was "near, even at the doors" (Matt. 24:33). Then Jesus told them this:

Mark 13:32-37
32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
33 Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.
34 For the Son of man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch.
35 Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning:
36 Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping.
37 And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.
(KJV)

"That day" and "that hour" refer to Jesus' coming after the tribulation mentioned in the previous verses. The "man taking a far journey" was Jesus. He was about to return to heaven. That He "gave authority to His servants and to every man his work" refers to the Great Commission. Obviously, this concerns Christians, since the Great Commission was given to the disciples, and was passed down to us through the disciples. Likewise, the commands to watch for Jesus' coming "immediately after the tribulation" were given to the disciples, and passed on to us in succeeding generations as well. But, the point I would like to stress is the disciples' expectation from the Olivet Discourse was most certainly that Jesus would come back for them after the tribulation, not before.

Typically, pre-tribulationists disqualify the Olivet Discourse from any discussion of the rapture by claiming it is Jewish, and does not concern the Church. However, any reasoning they employ to disassociate the Olivet Discourse from the Church must also be applied to the Upper Room Discourse. Both were given to Jesus' disciples only two days apart, both in the midst of a Jewish setting. If the disciples "represent" a remnant of Jewish "tribulation saints" in the Olivet Discourse, why not in John fourteen? Just what in John 14 distinguishes this discourse from the Olivet Discourse, particularly since they were in the midst of observing the Jewish Passover? Isn't this a double standard? If we are going to do the Word of God justice, these two passages must be reconciled. They cannot be referring to two separate events or people groups since they were both delivered to the disciples in view of their looking for Christ's coming for them. The disciples could not be expecting to be persecuted by the Antichrist, watch for signs, and be gathered together "immediately after the tribulation," as the Olivet Discourse indicates, and still be expecting a pre-trib rapture based on John fourteen. Nor could John fourteen be simply further revelation, adding a pre-trib rapture to the scenario Jesus described on the Mount of Olives. The two ideas are mutually exclusive. The Olivet Discourse was not merely Jesus' informing them of future events for Israel. It was personal instruction to the disciples regarding watching for the signs so they would know when Jesus was coming for them. These signs would occur during and immediately after the tribulation. His parables of the fig tree, the thief in the night, the unfaithful servant, the ten virgins, and the man taking a journey (Matt. 24,25 & Mark 13), all illustrated how the disciples were to watch for the coming of Christ "immediately after the tribulation" mentioned in the context. The disciples were included in Jesus' "elect" who would be gathered together when Christ comes in glory, (Matt. 24:29-31). If Jesus was teaching them a pre-trib rapture in John fourteen, He was directly negating everything He had just told them two days earlier!!! If pre-tribulationists make the disciples representative of "Israel" in the Olivet Discourse, they must do the same in John fourteen, or they are using a double (false) standard. If the disciples represent the Church in John fourteen, they must also in the Olivet Discourse. Consistency and integrity in Biblical interpretation demands no less. The idea that Jesus taught His disciples about the second coming, using them as representatives of Israel and the Church indiscriminately without telling them, makes havoc of the Scriptures. This kind of teaching would have been incomprehensible to the disciples. It totally destroys the continuity of Jesus' teaching. Any legitimate attempt to interpret Jesus' teaching to His disciples must harmonize all of His teaching to them.

After the resurrection, Jesus gave them the Great Commission. Part of His instruction was to teach all new Gentile converts to "observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:20).  Since both the Upper Room Discourse and the Olivet Discourse were direct teaching of Jesus to His disciples, and BOTH included personal instructions and commandments regarding Jesus' coming for them, it is obvious that BOTH discourses were intended for the same people, and both must be passed on as Christian doctrine. Therefore, it is illegitimate to apply one to physical Israel and the other to the Church.

Where was Jesus Going?
The main point of the Upper Room Discourse was Jesus' preparing His disciples for His "going away." The disciples still did not fully appreciate two separate advents of Christ. In the Olivet Discourse Jesus discussed the events leading up to His appearing in the clouds in glory. He also indicated that a rather lengthy period would transpire before the Millennial Kingdom would be set up. He said the gospel must be published among all nations before the end would come. The disciples did not yet understand that Jesus would not be present with them as they preached the gospel among all nations. In the upper room Jesus told them He must go away to prepare a place for them. No doubt, the period of His absence includes the ascension and the entire time until His second coming. This is seen in the discussion of the coming of the Comforter. Yet, His going specifically to prepare a place for them referred primarily to the crucifixion. Since this discourse took place the night before the crucifixion, it seems natural that Jesus was preparing the disciples for what would happen the following day. As you read John 14:1-3 within its context, you will immediately see that Jesus was speaking initially of His "going away" to the cross to redeem mankind. Jesus was preparing the disciples for the events of the following day by foretelling the crucifixion, by which He would prepare a place in the Kingdom of God for His "little flock." In the verses immediately preceding the passage in question, Jesus' "going away" meant going to the cross. This is obvious from His remark to Peter about his denial.

John 13:31-14:3
31 Therefore, when he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him.
32 If God be glorified in him, God shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him.
33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you.
34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.
36 Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards.
37 Peter said unto him, Lord, why cannot I follow thee now? I will lay down my life for thy sake.
38 Jesus answered him, Wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice.
14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.
2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
(KJV)

In verse 36, Jesus told Peter that he could not follow Him yet, but that he would follow Him afterwards. This is most likely a reference to Peter's martyrdom Jesus foretold in John 21.

John 21:17-24
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?
21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.
23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?
24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.
(KJV)

Notice that Jesus left open the possibility that John might live until the second coming. But, Peter would not. He was to "follow Christ" on a cross. We know from Church history that Peter was crucified by the Romans about 30 years after Jesus. Since Jesus told Peter he could not follow Him now, but would follow Him later, His "going away" most likely had His crucifixion in view. All of this is strong evidence that Jesus was referring to His crucifixion when He first spoke of "going away" in chapter 13 and the beginning of chapter 14. His going to "prepare a place for you" should be understood within this context. Jesus was going to the cross to prepare the way of salvation, and to secure a place for His followers in His coming Kingdom.

Some might object that later in the discourse Jesus said "I go to the Father," and was therefore speaking of His ascension and not His crucifixion. However, the ascension witnessed by the disciples in Acts 1 was only the last trip to the Father, not the first. Jesus ascended to the Father earlier as part of His priestly atonement work immediately after the resurrection. Hebrews 9 indicates that the role Jesus played in the atonement was more than sacrificial, being the "Lamb of God." Jesus was BOTH the sacrifice and the High Priest who performed the atonement, by offering of His own blood in the literal presence of God in heaven.

Heb 9:12,23-26
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us....
23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
(KJV)

That Christ's role was both sacrifice and Priest is critical to understanding John 14's reference to His going to the Father. Immediately after the resurrection and coming out of the tomb, Jesus met Mary. While Mary was overwhelmed with joy, Jesus cautioned her. "Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God." (John 20:17). Jesus was not referring to His ascension, as recorded in Acts 1. That took place 40 days later. He was referring to His immediate ascension to the Father to complete His priestly duty, offering His own blood in the most Holy Place in the Temple in heaven. Jesus' statement in the Upper Room Discourse, that He was "going to the Father," was connected with the atonement. Jesus appeared several times to the disciples within the 40 days after the resurrection. The "ascension" in Acts 1 is merely the last time Jesus ascended to heaven, allowing His disciples to witness it. Therefore, we can conclude that Jesus' going away and also His had to do with His atoning work. It was the atonement that Jesus was referring to when He said, "I go to prepare a place for you." He was going to make atonement for the sins of His disciples so that they could rule and reign with Him. That Jesus was referring to His impending crucifixion and performance of His High Priestly atonement activities when He said, "I go to prepare a place for you," is also evident as the conversation developed further.

John 16:17-23
17 Then said some of his disciples among themselves, What is this that he saith unto us, A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me: and, Because I go to the Father?
18 They said therefore, What is this that he saith, A little while? we cannot tell what he saith.
19 Now Jesus knew that they were desirous to ask him, and said unto them, Do ye inquire among yourselves of that I said, A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me?
20 Verily, verily, I say unto you, That ye shall weep and lament, but the world shall rejoice: and ye shall be sorrowful, but your sorrow shall be turned into joy.
21 A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but as soon as she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world.
22 And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you.
23 And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.
(KJV)

In this passage, did Jesus refer to His ascension and present absence from the world? Or did He refer to His crucifixion and resurrection? Was their seeing Him again in reference to the second coming? Or the resurrection of Jesus? Answer this question and it is obvious what Jesus meant by His "going away." In the above verses, Jesus told them they would have intense sorrow upon His "going away" but would be filled with joy when they saw Him again. This begs the question, when did the disciples experience great sorrow? If pre-tribbers are correct, then the disciples should have experienced great sorrow when Jesus ascended to heaven. But according to Luke, just the opposite was the case. He wrote that the disciples returned from watching Jesus' ascension "with great joy" (Luke 24:50-53). Were the disciples sorrowful when Jesus was crucified? Absolutely! Jesus' prediction of His disciples experiencing great sorrow at His going away, and great joy when they see Him again, only fits the crucifixion and resurrection. It does not fit  the ascension and second coming.

Also, notice that the promise of their asking the Father directly in Jesus' name in prayer is placed AFTER their sorrow turns to joy, after they see Him again. This promise of asking the Father in prayer in Jesus' name was something reserved for after the resurrection, not after the second coming. (See John 15:16).

This is proof that Jesus' going away to prepare a place for them had absolutely NOTHING to do with returning to heaven to build Christian condominiums. It had everything to do with His making atonement for them and us, by offering Himself as the spotless Lamb of God, and performing His priestly duties by offering His own blood in the presence of the Father in the heavenly Temple. Just as the priest took the carcass of the animal outside the camp (Lev.4:21), so also Jesus suffered outside the camp.

Heb 13:11-12
11 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.
12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
(KJV)

And just as the priest was not finished after killing the animal, but must offer the blood in the presence of God, so too Jesus was not finished His priestly duties until He offered His own blood in the presence of God in heaven.

Heb 9:12,24
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. ...
24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
(KJV)

Jesus is not Building Christian Condos
Jesus did not go to heaven to build Christian condominiums at His final ascension. He went to sit down at the Father's right hand to await His enemies being made His footstool (Heb. 10:12,13). That Jesus was not referring to His going to heaven to construct Christian condominiums is proven by the language He used.

1. Jesus spoke of the dwelling places in the present tense. He said: "In my Father's house are many dwelling places." This language requires that the abodes Jesus was referring to already existed when Jesus said these words. Jesus was simply saying He would make room for His disciples among the already existing dwelling places.
2. The word "prepare" does not mean to "build," but to get something ready. This is the same word Jesus used when He sent the disciples ahead to make ready (prepare) the upper room to accommodate the Passover meal. They did not build a second story on the house, but prepared the upper room to accommodate the Passover celebration. Therefore, Jesus did not go away to build anything.

In what sense would Jesus' ascension to heaven have anything to do with making ready (or preparing) already existing "abodes" to accommodate His disciples, or making the way for the disciples to occupy these abodes? Where is such an idea taught in Scripture? The fact is, this idea is completely foreign to Scripture, and is based solely on pre-trib presuppositions.

What is "My Father's House?"
The words "my Father's house" do not refer to heaven. We cannot arbitrarily assign a meaning to this phrase without biblical precedent. It must be interpreted in the same manner we interpret any other biblical phrase, by looking at other occurrences of this and similar phrases. I can find no precedent in Scripture for supposing "my Father's house" means heaven. In the numerous Old Testament passages which mention the "house of the Lord," the Temple is always in view. This includes the Tabernacle [1 Samuel 1:24], Solomon's Temple (2 Chronicles 2:1, 7:16), as specifically to the Millennial Temple and Kingdom (Isaiah 2:2-4, Joel 3:18). The biblical writers never referred to heaven as the Lord's house. The "house of the Lord" is always earthly and related to the Temple, which will be the locus of Christ's Kingdom. Here is one example.

Isa 2:2-4
2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
(KJV)

In the New Testament, occasionally the "Church" is called the Lord's dwelling in a metaphorical sense, Eph. 2:19-22. But, the disciples were not familiar with this metaphorical usage by Paul, and would certainly not understand Jesus' words as a metaphor. They would understand His words in light of their familiarity with the Old Testament usage, and Jesus earlier usage of the phrase "my Father's house."

John 2:15-17
15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them out of the Temple,...
16 And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise.
17 And the disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.
(KJV)

Here Jesus unquestionably referred to the Temple in Jerusalem as "my Father's house." Verse 17 shows the disciples associated Jesus' expression with an Old Testament reference to the "house of the Lord," [Psalm 69:9]. Therefore, it is natural they would understand the same expression in John fourteen in the same way.

Luke 2:46,49
46 After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions....
49 "Why were you searching for me?" he asked. "Didn't you know I had to be in my Father's house?"
(NIV)

The disciples expected the Kingdom of God to be centered in Jerusalem, specifically in the Temple, (see: Isaiah 2:1-5, Psalm 68:29). In the Olivet Discourse, only two days before, Jesus emphasized their waiting and watching for the coming of His Kingdom, (Matt. 25:31, Luke 21:31). This was the focus of their hope. The disciples were familiar with the Old Testament usage of the term "house of the Lord" in reference to the Temple in Jerusalem. They were also familiar with Jesus' previous usage of the phrase "my Father's house" also in reference to the Temple. They were not familiar with modern pre-trib eschatology. It is virtually certain they understood Jesus to mean He was going to prepare a place in His Kingdom for them, more specifically in the Temple from which Jesus would rule. When He returned they would accompany Him to His Kingdom. "And if I go away, I will come again and receive you unto myself, that where I am, there ye may be also."

In Luke's parallel account of the Upper Room Discourse, there is more evidence Jesus was speaking of His Kingdom and not heaven in the upper room. While Luke did not record Jesus' statement about His "Father's house," it is clear from his account that the context of the discussion was indeed the coming of Christ's Kingdom to earth.

Luke 22:15-18,28-30
15 And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:
16 For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.
17 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come....
28 Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations.
29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;
30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
(KJV)

According to Luke's account, Jesus spoke of His Kingdom in the upper room and mentioned nothing of heaven. When Jesus said in John 14, "In my Father's house are many mansions [dwelling places], I go to prepare a place for you," He was speaking of the sacrifice of the Lamb of God in order to prepare a place in His Kingdom for His "little flock." Luke places them ruling beside Christ on twelve thrones, and eating with Him at His own table in the coming Kingdom. This places the disciples in the Millennial Temple, ruling with Christ in His Kingdom.

As the disciples listened to Jesus' words, they had to assimilate His new teaching with what He had previously taught them and their knowledge of the Old Testament. Based on a synthesis of all of this material, the disciples could only conclude that when Jesus returned they would accompany Him to His Kingdom, where they would sit on thrones and reign with Him. This is why, after the resurrection, they asked Jesus; "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" (Acts 1:6). They apparently believed His death was all there was to His "going away," and mistakenly thought the resurrection was His return, apparently thinking He was about to streak through the sky gathering together all the elect. After all, He told them only days before, "If I go away, I will come again and receive you unto myself." Of course Jesus had to correct their error by referring them back to the Olivet Discourse. The Gospel must first be preached among all nations, (Acts 1:8). But the important point here is apparent. Even after the resurrection, and in spite of their error, they were looking for Christ's Kingdom, not a trip to heaven.

Many Mansions
The Disciples were not only familiar with the Temple from Scripture, but had gone to the Temple complex many times. They had been at the Temple with Jesus the very day Jesus gave the Olivet Discourse. They were therefore familiar with the beautiful architecture of the Temple complex (Matt. 24:1) which included many apartments (mansions) which lined the Temple structure designed for the Temple priests (1 Kings 6:5-10 & 1 Chron. 9:26,27). Jesus said that the "many dwellings" in "My Father's House" (Temple) would be made ready for them. He told them they would rule with Him on twelve thrones and eat with Him at His table in His Kingdom. Knowing all this, the disciples no doubt imagined themselves as the Royal governing Cabinet, occupying the luxurious apartments at the Temple. The disciples were no doubt also familiar with Ezekiel 40-44, which describes in detail the many "chambers" (apartments) that will be a part of the future Kingdom Temple from which Christ will rule. It would be natural for them to associate the "many mansions" with these chambers, since they clearly associated Jesus' expression, "my Father's house" with the Temple, (John 2:16-19, Psalm 69:9).

Josephus, who was an eyewitness of the Temple of Jesus' day, described the apartments connected to the Temple structure atop the Temple Mount as follows. "Now, about the sides of the lower part of the temple, there were little houses, with passages out of one into another; there were a great many of them, and they were of three stories high; there were also entrances on each side into them from the gate of the temple."

Those occupying the "many mansions" at that time were not fit to rule with the Messiah. Jesus told them so in the hearing of His disciples, the very day He gave the Olivet Discourse. "And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching, and said, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?" (Matt. 21:23). Within ear-shot of these "many mansions," and speaking directly to the ones who were occupying them at the time, Jesus responded with the parable of the husbandmen who had custody of God's vineyard. But they beat His servants, and killed His Son. The result was they were destroyed by the land owner, and the vineyard given to others. This parable was meant to convict the chief priests and elders of their rejection of Jesus, and give them their eviction notice. Jesus closed His remarks with the following statement. "Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." (vs. 43). But to His disciples Jesus said: "Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom" (Luke 12:32).

When we compare these verses to Jesus' statements that the disciples would sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel in His Kingdom, the picture becomes clear. The disciples were chosen, not only to spread the gospel, but to replace the unfaithful Jewish priests in the Millennial Kingdom. This does not mean the Church replaces Israel, usurping her place and promises. The Disciples were Jewish, yet also the elders of the Church. The "Church" is purified Israel, with Gentiles adopted into Abraham's seed, forming one body of redeemed people.

I realize some may object to this view because there are certainly not enough "apartments" in the Kingdom Temple for the whole Church. But, as Luke's account indicates, Jesus was not speaking to all future Christians here, only His disciples. Certainly He did not mean for the whole Church to sit on twelve thrones and judge Israel! Both the passage in Luke twenty-two and John fourteen were meant for those disciples who "have continued with me in my temptations." (Luke 22:28). All saints of God will reign with Him in His Kingdom. But, the disciples earned a special place, ruling from Christ's side in the Temple. Other believers who suffer for Christ will be given positions of authority over various cities, (Luke 19:11-26, 2 Tim. 2:12).

Some may object that this view merges God's programs for Israel and the Church. However, this objection stems from excessive dispensationalism, not proper exegesis of the passages concerned. While there will be national distinctions in the Millennium, there will not be dispensational distinctions. There is only one program for both Jew and Gentile. There will be only one body of redeemed people who were saved prior to Christ's second coming. This will include Old and New Testament saints. "And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God" (Luke 13:29). And again, "When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Matt. 8:10-12).

See our series on Progressive Dispensationalism for more regarding the dispensational ramifications. See our article Jewish Wedding Customs & the Rapture for a discussion of how John 14 relates to the Jewish Wedding Customs.

Conclusion
There is no reason to separate Jesus' coming again in John 14 from what He had just told the disciples two days earlier on the Mount of Olives. As we attempt to apply the grammatical-historical method of interpretation to John 14:1-3, we must take into account the following things:
1. the context in which Jesus was speaking to going away to be crucified
2. the disciples' familiarity with Old Testament references to the "house of the Lord"
3. Jesus earlier usage of the phrase "My Father's house"
4. Jesus instructions in the Olivet Discourse given only 2 days earlier
5. the parallel passage in Luke 22, which shows the context of the discussion was the coming Kingdom
6. the apparent implication of the Jewish wedding custom associated with the "Father's house"  See our article Jewish Wedding Customs & the Rapture.

I do not mean to imply that a mansion in the sky is unbiblical. God has prepared a city for us, the New Jerusalem, described in Revelation twenty-one. However, it will not be presented to us until the end of the millennium, (Rev. 21:2). The mistake is the idea that the words "my Father's house" in John fourteen refer to heaven or the New Jerusalem. There is no precedent in Scripture for this interpretation and all evidence of similar language points to the Temple in Jerusalem during the Kingdom age. The pre-trib view of these verses hangs entirely on assumptions which cannot be substantiated from other Scriptures, and flow counter to everything else Jesus taught His disciples.

Given the Jewish background of the disciples, their familiarity with the Temple complex, their knowledge of the Old Testament, and their instruction in the Kingdom of God by Jesus, it is natural to conclude that they expected to experience the tribulation Jesus mentioned two days earlier, and be raptured at the coming of Jesus Christ immediately after it. They would then take up residence in the Temple "mansions," ruling with Christ seated on His right hand and on His left. The priests, who were at that time occupying the priestly chambers at the Temple, Jesus said would be evicted and locked out of His Kingdom.

Go to: Peter's First Sermon