PDA

View Full Version : Post-Tribulation Questions?



NMKeith
May 30th 2008, 09:23 PM
I posted this on another thread but I have yet got a response. So I thought I would repost it on a new thread..

I have been here on this board for a week, and I have debated little on this topic. I want to encourage our brothers and sisters and not debate them. But I have noticed a lot of Post-Trib believers here.. That's very strange because that leaves a lot of unanswered questions that a pre-triber would have. And not just the Pre-Tribers but Bible scholars as well.. Let's look at the difficult Post-Trib theory.

Please let's take this slow. I want to learn as much as the next person. But I do have questions for the Post-Trib believer.

Post-tribulation Problems

One of the strengths of the pre-trib view is that it is better able to harmonize the many events of end-time prophecy. There are some awkward difficulties with the post-tribulational view:

1) The post-tribulation view requires that the church be present during the 70th week of Daniel (Daniel 9:24-27), even though it was absent from the first 69. This is in spite of the fact that Dan 9:24 indicates that all 70 weeks are for Israel. I believe the church must depart prior to the 70th week, before the final seven-year period.

2) The post-tribulation view denies the New Testament teaching of imminency--that Christ could come at any moment--since there are intervening events required in that view. We believe there are no signs that must precede the Rapture.

3) The post-tribulation view has difficulties with who will populate the Millennium if the Rapture and the Second Coming occur at essentially the same time. Since all believers will be translated at the Rapture and all unbelievers are judged, because no unrighteous shall be allowed to enter Christ's Kingdom, then no one would be left in mortal bodies to start the population base for the Millennium.

4) Similarly, post-tribulationism is not able to explain the sheep and goats judgment after the Second Coming in Matthew 25:3-46. Where would the believers in mortal bodies come from if they are raptured at the Second Coming? Who would be able to enter into Christ's Kingdom?

5) The Bride of Christ, the church, is made ready to accompany Christ to earth (Revelation 19:7-8,14) before the Second Coming, but how could this reasonably happen if part of the church is still on the earth awaiting the Second Coming? If the Rapture of the church takes place at the Second Coming, then how does the Bride (the church) also come with Christ at His Return?

While many diligent scholars disagree, most of their views derive from their presuppositions about the Scripture. The more literal a view, the more there is an adoption of a pre-millennial pre-tribulation position. I encourage you to review the various passages yourself and develop your own conclusions. This is our "Blessed Hope," and you will not find a more exciting and rewarding discovery. This is just a overview of a complex subject, so apply 2 Timothy 2:15:

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

This topic is perhaps the most demanding from the point of view of requiring the greatest amount of integration of many portions of Scripture. Remember Acts 17:11:

"Receive the Word with all readiness of mind, but search the Scriptures daily to prove whether those things be so."


Enoch is also a model. He was pre-flood, not mid-flood or post-flood!

Let's not turn this into a battle of who's right and who's wrong. I just want to know your theory better. So please help me understand this position better..

God Bless brothers/sisters

Keith

Saved7
May 30th 2008, 09:55 PM
difficult? Funny, we post tribbers find the pre-trib theory to be difficult, since most of us came out of the pre-trib theology.;)

NMKeith
May 30th 2008, 10:03 PM
difficult? Funny, we post tribbers find the pre-trib theory to be difficult, since most of us came out of the pre-trib theology.;)


But I noticed you didn't answer one question.. How is one susppose to learn your theory without trying to answer the given questions?

Thanks for your opinion, but what was it good for?

vinsight4u8
May 30th 2008, 10:05 PM
I'll gladly answer your questions...first, I need to clarify something. We do agree the time of Titus is what is being referred to at the end part of Daniel 9:26?

So the church was not absent for the entire time of Daniel 9?

Daniel 9 ends with a link back to the beginning of the chapter. See how it says - till the consummation?
The "he" of 9:27 is coming back to finish something.


I also see the use of the word "determined" as to both verses 26 and 27 to show us that these verses are to be split apart.


Why do you think that Daniel seemed so upset at the start of Daniel 9? He was reading a prophecy about a "he" in Jeremiah 25:11-12.

White Spider
May 30th 2008, 10:06 PM
Well I lean toward the post tribulation view . . . These are many good questions and I'll have to look into them and get back to you. Just wanted to let you know you'll be getting answers. (If I find the answers ;))

vinsight4u8
May 30th 2008, 10:14 PM
I believe that Enoch will be killed by the beast during the 6th trumpet. Enoch and Elijah will then rise at the resurrection of the just at the 7th trumpet.

Rev. 11 shows they get killed in one trumpet time and rise at the hour of a great earthquake.

Rev. 11 refers to the two witnesses as getting killed after they finish their testimony. Hebrews 11 tells that Enoch was translated and at that time had a testimony.

Saved7
May 30th 2008, 10:14 PM
But I noticed you didn't answer one question.. How is one susppose to learn your theory without trying to answer the given questions?

Thanks for your opinion, but what was it good for?


Well I simply didin't answer because this debate is a bit wearisome to me; as I have discussed on many many occassions with pre-tribbers many of the questions you have already posed. Guess I am just confident enough to feel I don't need to; the reality is this, it's not a salvation issue, therefore, there is no need to divide over it. And these debates regularly turn into nothing more than divisive conversations.

However, if you would like answers, then I am sure I can answer some of the questions you ask, and offer answers to those that you didn't ask.
And I am sure there are many here who will gladly answer your questions.

But first I challenge you to this, if indeed the rapture occurs in Rev 4, as the pre-trib doctrine teaches, then find the resurrection first. AS we all know the resurrection MUST occur first, the resurrection is NO secret and is a huge item on God's agenda, I doubt He would leave that a secret.

Hint...it IS in the book of Rev, but nowhere before chapter 4 or even IN chapter 4.:saint:

vinsight4u8
May 30th 2008, 10:19 PM
Why do you think it has armies that come from heaven in Rev. 19 - yet later
only a single army fights the beast at Armageddon on God's side?

wpm
May 30th 2008, 10:23 PM
One of the strengths of the pre-trib view is that it is better able to harmonize the many events of end-time prophecy. There are some awkward difficulties with the post-tribulational view:

I beg to disagree. I would suggest that the weakness is actually with Pretrib and the fact there is not one single Scripture that suggests (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a Coming of Christ.



1) The post-tribulation view requires that the church be present during the 70th week of Daniel (Daniel 9:24-27), even though it was absent from the first 69. This is in spite of the fact that Dan 9:24 indicates that all 70 weeks are for Israel. I believe the church must depart prior to the 70th week, before the final seven-year period.


Pretrib actually decapitate a harmonious number of years by cutting off the last wk (without any sanction) and then propels it into the unknown. Most Posttribs over the centuries have viewed this as being fulfilled at Messiah's First Coming.

What future event do you believe will:

(1) "finish the transgression"?
(2) "make an end of sins"?
(3) "make reconciliation for iniquity"?
(4) "bring in everlasting righteousness"?
(5) "seal up the vision and prophecy"?
(6) "anoint the most Holy”?

And exactly in what way will this be accomplished? Please answer this question individually for points 1-6.

I of course believe this is talking about Christ and His earthly ministry. Was He not crucified in the midst of the last wk as predicted?

Where are your rapture and third coming in here?


2) The post-tribulation view denies the New Testament teaching of imminency--that Christ could come at any moment--since there are intervening events required in that view. We believe there are no signs that must precede the Rapture.

At Pentecost the Gospel still hadn't went out to the Gentiles. Christ couldn't come until it had gone to all nations. How could it have been imminent (any moment)?

Peter knew it wasn't imminent. Jesus had predicted he would live to be a an old man and that he wouldn't be raptured. John 21:18 records, "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."

All of the disciples would have been aware of this, and several other prophecies, therefore none of the disciples could have believed in this imminence concept. How could it have been imminent when Peter was still young? He had to get old and physical die.

What about the Gospel going out to the Gentiles? Surely this had to happen before the catching up of the saints? Evidently the disciples didn't believe what you do.



3) The post-tribulation view has difficulties with who will populate the Millennium if the Rapture and the Second Coming occur at essentially the same time. Since all believers will be translated at the Rapture and all unbelievers are judged, because no unrighteous shall be allowed to enter Christ's Kingdom, then no one would be left in mortal bodies to start the population base for the Millennium.

I believe we are in the millennium now.


4) Similarly, post-tribulationism is not able to explain the sheep and goats judgment after the Second Coming in Matthew 25:3-46. Where would the believers in mortal bodies come from if they are raptured at the Second Coming? Who would be able to enter into Christ's Kingdom?

N/A. This is the final judgement at Christ's one and only Coming.


5) The Bride of Christ, the church, is made ready to accompany Christ to earth (Revelation 19:7-8,14) before the Second Coming, but how could this reasonably happen if part of the church is still on the earth awaiting the Second Coming? If the Rapture of the church takes place at the Second Coming, then how does the Bride (the church) also come with Christ at His Return?

Christ comes with and for His Church. It is the final union. There is no 7 year tribulation period mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4 (which Pretrib presents as its proof-text). You would have to insert it in. This readings refers to the climactic Coming of Christ. I don’t see a third Coming of Christ mentioned or intimated anywhere in Scripture (including this passage). Rather, Scripture shows us that Christ comes with and for His elect (the redeemed of God) at this one final Coming.

1 Thessalonians 4:14-5:4 confirms this saying: “if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the Coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.”

This is a record of Christ’s one and only future Coming. This reading describes how Christ comes with and for His saints the next time. Verse 14 of our reading explicitly states, “them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.” This is the final uniting of the elect on earth (the live in Christ) and those in heaven (the dead in Christ). It is accompanied by the great sound of the trump ushering in the end. The word rendered “remain” in our King James Version (which relates to those that are alive at Christ’s Coming) is the Greek word perileipo, which means “to survive.” Thus, we can take from this reading that the Lord is returning for those who remain by surviving. These are tribulation saints.


While many diligent scholars disagree, most of their views derive from their presuppositions about the Scripture. The more literal a view, the more there is an adoption of a pre-millennial pre-tribulation position. I encourage you to review the various passages yourself and develop your own conclusions.

Literal? I have to disagree. Can you show us one single Scripture that describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further Coming of Christ?



This is our "Blessed Hope," and you will not find a more exciting and rewarding discovery. This is just a overview of a complex subject, so apply 2 Timothy 2:15:

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

This topic is perhaps the most demanding from the point of view of requiring the greatest amount of integration of many portions of Scripture. Remember Acts 17:11:

"Receive the Word with all readiness of mind, but search the Scriptures daily to prove whether those things be so."


Exactly. Totally agree here.


Enoch is also a model. He was pre-flood, not mid-flood or post-flood!

What is Enoch a model of?

Paul

jeffweeder
May 30th 2008, 11:16 PM
Excellent post Paul.

The disciples came to him privately and said what will be the sign of your coming?
Jesus said-After the tribulation of those days there shall be signs............

markedward
May 31st 2008, 02:08 AM
1) The post-tribulation view requires that the church be present during the 70th week of Daniel (Daniel 9:24-27), even though it was absent from the first 69. This is in spite of the fact that Dan 9:24 indicates that all 70 weeks are for Israel. I believe the church must depart prior to the 70th week, before the final seven-year period.The first 69 weeks led up to the life of Jesus. Daniel 9 directly calls the individual (who we now know was Jesus) "Messiah, the ruler." It goes on to say Messiah was cut off following the 69th week, i.e., in the 70th week. Jesus was indeed "cut off" following the 69th week, i.e., in the 70th week. It goes on to say "the ruler" (which "ruler"? "Messiah, the ruler") makes a "covenant" during the 70th week. Jesus did indeed make the New Covenant during the 70th week.

Daniel doesn't "require" that "the church" be present during the 70th week. What it does "require" is that the 70th week directly follow the 69th week, just as the 69th week directly followed the 68th. There is no "gap" seen or implied in Daniel.


2) The post-tribulation view denies the New Testament teaching of imminency--that Christ could come at any moment--since there are intervening events required in that view. We believe there are no signs that must precede the Rapture.The New Testament consistently taught a teaching of "imminency," but people nowadays don't understand what that means.

There are numerous New Testament passages that place a major eschatalogical event in the first century, in the lifetime of the people who saw Christ with their own eyes. Words like "soon" or "near" or "at hand" do not mean "perpetually looming ahead." They mean exactly what they mean to us in the modern day. Christ placed the fulfillment of His prophecies to His generation. Now Jesus did not say "soon." He made His prophecies circa 30 AD. But the epistles we read were written in the decades following Christ, and as we read through them, they consistently teach that the prophecies were to be fulfilled "soon," because the generation Christ has prophesied to was almost over. Eventually, we find epistles that outright say "the end times are upon us."

The New Testament does not teach a "imminency" in the sense of "perpetually looming ahead." It taught "imminency" in the sense of Jesus saying "within this generation" to Paul saying "soon" to Paul and John and the others say "now."


3) The post-tribulation view has difficulties with who will populate the Millennium if the Rapture and the Second Coming occur at essentially the same time. Since all believers will be translated at the Rapture and all unbelievers are judged, because no unrighteous shall be allowed to enter Christ's Kingdom, then no one would be left in mortal bodies to start the population base for the Millennium.The "difficulties" have nothing to do with these things. The "difficulty" is attempting to prove that the Scriptures teach something other than a post-tribulation view.

The Olivet Discourse says: There will be false prophets and false messiahs. Wars, famines, earthquakes. Persecution of the followers of Christ. The destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Then "immediately after the tribulation of those days" the Son of Man would come on the clouds, followed by the "gathering the elect."

So chronologically:

1 - False prophets/messiahs. Wars, famines, earthquakes. Persecution of the followers.
2 - Destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.
3 - The coming of the Son of Man.
4 - The gathering of the elect.

Jesus spelled it out, plain as day, in the form of what we now call "post-trib." He directly said that the "gathering of the elect" followed the Coming, which followed the destruction of Jerusalem, which followed the persecution.


4) Similarly, post-tribulationism is not able to explain the sheep and goats judgment after the Second Coming in Matthew 25:3-46. Where would the believers in mortal bodies come from if they are raptured at the Second Coming? Who would be able to enter into Christ's Kingdom?The event described in Matthew 25 is an expanded description of the "coming of the Son of Man." The only "problem" is trying to figure out the technicalities of the Coming/Rapture, but that does not mean the "post-trib rapture" is unScriptural just because someone gets confused.


5) The Bride of Christ, the church, is made ready to accompany Christ to earth (Revelation 19:7-8,14) before the Second Coming, but how could this reasonably happen if part of the church is still on the earth awaiting the Second Coming? If the Rapture of the church takes place at the Second Coming, then how does the Bride (the church) also come with Christ at His Return?Because the people seen in Revelation 19 were martyrs. They weren't "raptured," they were killed in the tribulation.

Redeemed by Grace
May 31st 2008, 02:18 AM
I've been studying eschatology with a focus for a few years now and am inches away from declaring the Pre-wrath view as being the closest biblical harmony of the sum of thy word...

What may be helpful is a brief overview to each position, and let each one be convinced as to which is best.


OVERVIEW OF THE DIFFERENT VIEWS OF THE RAPTURE

Pretribulationalism

This view was first known as "the secret" or "any moment rapture." It is a relatively new position which was first taught by the founder of the Catholic Apostolic Church, Edward Irving in the late 1820's. It was then picked up by Plymouth Brethren pastor John Nelson Darby, and he first preached on it in 1843. It came to America in the late 1800's and was popularized by C.I. Scofield when he revised his Bible study notes in 1917. Many people became pretribulationists as a result of Scofield’s notes. Many of the early Bible conferences, Bible colleges and seminaries adopted the pretribulational position.

Supporters today include Charles Feinberg, John Walvoord, Charles Ryrie, and Dwight Pentecost. Pretribulationists teach that the return of Christ has been imminent since the days of the early church and that the church will be raptured sometime before Daniel’s 70th week begins. Although there is no direct biblical evidence that supports this view, they say that there are no prophetic events before the rapture and that it can take place at any moment. The 70th week of Daniel is therefore considered to be a 7 year period of God's judgmental "tribulation" (hence the term pretribulation). This position generally views the 70th week as the Day of the Lord wrath from which the church is excluded.



Midtribulationism

This view emerged in 1941 with the publication of the book, "The End: Rethinking the Revelation" by Norman B. Harrison. Other scholars such as J. Oliver Buswell, Harold Ockenga, and Gleason Archer also support this view. They believe that the Rapture of the Church will occur at the mid-point of the 70th week of Daniel, immediately prior to the Great Tribulation. They understand the second half of the 70th week as the wrath of God triggered by the opening of the 7th trumpet judgment (Rev 11). Thus, they believe that the rapture will remove the church from God’s judgment, when he pours out His Day of the Lord wrath on the earth.



Posttribulationism

There are 2 related views in posttribulationism. The first is historic postribulationism, which says that the church will go through the entire 7 year tribulation period. This view does not exempt the church from the Day of the Lord wrath and was defended by Alexander Reese in his book, the Approaching Advent of Christ. The 2nd view is supported by Robert Gundry in his book, The Church and the Tribulation. His modification is that the tribulation is not the time of God’s wrath except at the very end. The wrath of God, according to Gundry, will begin very near the end of the 7 year period and will include the bowl judgments and the Battle of Armageddon. Since he believes the rapture will occur before the Day of the Lord, the church will be kept from God’s wrath, which he understands to cover a very brief period of time.



Prewrath

The Prewrath position maintains that the true church will be raptured when the Great Tribulation by Antichrist, inspired by Satan, is cut short by God's Day of the Lord wrath (Mark 13:24-27). This occurs between the 6th and 7th seals of Revelation (Rev 6:12-17), sometime during the second half of the 70th week. The persecution associated with the Great Tribulation of Antichrist is viewed as the wrath of Satan (Rev 12:12-17), whereas the events that follow, beginning with the 7th seal, is the Day of the Lord wrath. Another term that is sometimes used in this discussion is "historical premillennialism," which refers to the teaching of the early church fathers before 325 A.D. (anti-Nicene fathers). They believed that the church would face the persecution of Antichrist. Then Christ would return and defeat Antichrist and reign on earth for 1000 years. With the exception of two church fathers, Origen and Clement of Alexandria, who were allegorists, all the anti-Nicene fathers taught this view. Prewrath is simply an expansion of this view providing the intricate details surrounding the events of the 2nd coming of Christ.


For His Glory...

vinsight4u8
May 31st 2008, 02:20 AM
The 7th trumpet sounds during the 6th seal.

The wicked hide in the rocks at the return of Jesus Christ in the air.

The 6th seal opens as the trib is over.
Immediately after the trib come those signs.

sun darkened
not give her light

=sun black

5th seal = the great tribulation

vinsight4u8
May 31st 2008, 02:51 AM
When you read 1 Cor.15:51 -
continue all the way to v54.

What does that verse link as to the last trumpet time?
death is swallowed up in victory

So if the trib martyrs get slain after the last trumpet - then how would they ever have victory?

The only kind of death that would be left is non-victory as to people that rise later.

White Spider
May 31st 2008, 03:47 AM
. . . we find epistles that outright say "the end times are upon us."

And we all live after the end right? :lol:

Can I be Mad Max?

RevLogos
May 31st 2008, 04:31 AM
3) The post-tribulation view has difficulties with who will populate the Millennium if the Rapture and the Second Coming occur at essentially the same time. Since all believers will be translated at the Rapture and all unbelievers are judged, because no unrighteous shall be allowed to enter Christ's Kingdom, then no one would be left in mortal bodies to start the population base for the Millennium.



Why does anyone need to be alive with mortal bodies after Armageddon to re-populate the new-earth? God utterly destroys the old earth. It is dead and gone, dissolved, burned up and melted away. No one remains alive as there is no earth to remain alive on. I am not sure how God populates the new earth, but Peter says it is WE who should look forward to it.
2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat. And the earth and the works in it will be burned up.
2Pe 3:11 Then, all these things being about to be dissolved, what sort ought you to be in holy behavior and godliness,
2Pe 3:12 looking for and rushing the coming of the Day of God, on account of which the heavens, being on fire, will melt away, and the elements will melt, burning with heat?
2Pe 3:13 But according to His promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
2Pe 3:14 Therefore, beloved, looking for these things, be diligent, spotless, and without blemish, to be found by Him in peace.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth. For the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. And the sea no longer is.

NMKeith
May 31st 2008, 07:24 AM
So the church was not absent for the entire time of Daniel 9?

First, thank you for the response, it would seem I have a lot to answer. So I will start here:

In regards to the quote above. Please share any Scripture in either Greek, Hebrew, Latin or English that say's anything about a Church in the Old Testament? The Church was not present until the New Testament, Jesus promised a Church to founded on Peter; Acts speaks about the Church and the pouring out of the Holy Spirit. What Church was there? Please name them?



Daniel 9 ends with a link back to the beginning of the chapter. See how it says - till the consummation?

I'm trying to understand here.. What point does this one statement draw too or upon? The ultimate end? Where does this fit in the post-trib rapture theory?



The "he" of 9:27 is coming back to finish something.

Okay and what in your theory on what "he" is coming back to do?



I also see the use of the word "determined" as to both verses 26 and 27 to show us that these verses are to be split apart.

Daniel 9:26 "and unto the end of the war desolations are determined".

What is the desolation? The time when the antichrist sits in the temple and claims to be god. The determined time is God's time, not Satan's.

Daniel 9:27 "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate"

This is speaking about the antichrist breaking his seven year peace treaty with the Middle East. If you were to use this Scripture (regarding the rapture), this would be an argument to stand on the theory of Pre-Wrath or the Mid-Trib view.



Why do you think that Daniel seemed so upset at the start of Daniel 9? He was reading a prophecy about a "he" in Jeremiah 25:11-12.

I don't see him upset. But if I did, how would this fit the post-trib rapture
theory? Please elaborate

NMKeith
May 31st 2008, 07:33 AM
Well I simply didin't answer because this debate is a bit wearisome to me; as I have discussed on many many occassions with pre-tribbers many of the questions you have already posed. Guess I am just confident enough to feel I don't need to; the reality is this, it's not a salvation issue, therefore, there is no need to divide over it. And these debates regularly turn into nothing more than divisive conversations.

However, if you would like answers, then I am sure I can answer some of the questions you ask, and offer answers to those that you didn't ask.
And I am sure there are many here who will gladly answer your questions.

But first I challenge you to this, if indeed the rapture occurs in Rev 4, as the pre-trib doctrine teaches, then find the resurrection first. AS we all know the resurrection MUST occur first, the resurrection is NO secret and is a huge item on God's agenda, I doubt He would leave that a secret.

Hint...it IS in the book of Rev, but nowhere before chapter 4 or even IN chapter 4.:saint:

Someone does not have an answer..

I will answer Revelation chapter 4 at a later time in this debate. I have asked questions at this point in the debate. I'll get to what I believe later on. Thank you for wanting to know my theory..

BTW: If you would like a quick answer, I would suggest that you make a thread regarding the pre-Trib theory and we would love to answer. But this is about post-trib and how they are proving this theory. I'm a student of the Bible and like a good stewart/student, I just want to gain knowledge on this topic..

NMKeith
May 31st 2008, 07:41 AM
Why do you think it has armies that come from heaven in Rev. 19 - yet later
only a single army fights the beast at Armageddon on God's side?

I've heard this argument before. Please tell me where it shows two differtent armies..

Rev 19:14 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev019.html#14) And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

Rev 19:19 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev019.html#19) And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

This shows two different view points. 1) We get a glimpse in Heaven in v 14. We are in Heaven and follow Jesus back to this world; v19 shows a view point from earth and the beast, kings, and their armies come together against him on the horse and his army. This proves nothing in a post-trib theory. Even if it was two armies, who's to say God did not plan a strategic move and came in two waves? This leaves to many loop holes

NMKeith
May 31st 2008, 08:04 AM
I beg to disagree. I would suggest that the weakness is actually with Pretrib and the fact there is not one single Scripture that suggests (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a Coming of Christ.


Thanks for your opinion, but this is proving what to it's reader? Okay I have another opinion from someone .. Uhh Okay




Pretrib actually decapitate a harmonious number of years by cutting off the last wk (without any sanction) and then propels it into the unknown. Most Posttribs over the centuries have viewed this as being fulfilled at Messiah's First Coming.

What future event do you believe will:

(1) "finish the transgression"?
(2) "make an end of sins"?
(3) "make reconciliation for iniquity"?
(4) "bring in everlasting righteousness"?
(5) "seal up the vision and prophecy"?
(6) "anoint the most Holy”?

And exactly in what way will this be accomplished? Please answer this question individually for points 1-6.

I of course believe this is talking about Christ and His earthly ministry. Was He not crucified in the midst of the last wk as predicted?

Where are your rapture and third coming in here?

First you are going off track in your response, you provide nothing to me but ask everything.. Why is that? You have so far turned this around against the Pre-Trib.. Maybe you don't understand the questions I'm asking? I'm wanting someone to prove a post-trib theory?? This is all.. You have asked me here, is to answer your questions, but this is not provide anything to my questions. So it leaves reason to ask why you post at all?




At Pentecost the Gospel still hadn't went out to the Gentiles. Christ couldn't come until it had gone to all nations. How could it have been imminent (any moment)?


Luk 21:24 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Luk/Luk021.html#24) And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. Some believe this time was fulfilled when Israel became a nation again on May 14th 1948, some believe it was during the six day war. Most scholars would agree that it was during our generation



Peter knew it wasn't imminent. Jesus had predicted he would live to be a an old man and that he wouldn't be raptured. John 21:18 records, "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."

All of the disciples would have been aware of this, and several other prophecies, therefore none of the disciples could have believed in this imminence concept. How could it have been imminent when Peter was still young? He had to get old and physical die.

What about the Gospel going out to the Gentiles? Surely this had to happen before the catching up of the saints? Evidently the disciples didn't believe what you do.

Again you are asking so many questions, but want to answer nothing, where in this Scripture does it say the rapture is not an imminent event? I'm not seeing it here.




I believe we are in the millennium now.

When was the last time you saw a lamb sit down with a lion? Or a child playing in a vipers den.. PLease study up on the new millennium.. There is no sorrow etc etc





Christ comes with and for His Church. It is the final union. There is no 7 year tribulation period mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4 (which Pretrib presents as its proof-text). You would have to insert it in. This readings refers to the climactic Coming of Christ. I don’t see a third Coming of Christ mentioned or intimated anywhere in Scripture (including this passage). Rather, Scripture shows us that Christ comes with and for His elect (the redeemed of God) at this one final Coming.

Now you are just taking away the Bible to fit your theory. Read more on the seven year tribulation. What does a week stand for in Daniel.. Revelation reads..

Rev 11:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev011.html#3) And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

Simple math.. This is 3 1/2yrs in the tribulation; what happens to these witnessing in the middle of the tribulation? And the antichrist breaks his peace treaty of one week or in the middle of tribulation and Revelation actually breaks it down in days.. Can not be more clear than that..

The Village Idiot
May 31st 2008, 01:09 PM
...why do some theories rely on genuinely difficult and apocalyptic texts as their theological mainstay? Thankfully, we are more sober when we work in other parts of our theology--the Holy Trinity, the incarnation, etc. But when it comes to eschatology, people who are perfectly sane go completely nuts? Why IS that? :lol:

vinsight4u8
May 31st 2008, 01:24 PM
I've heard this argument before. Please tell me where it shows two differtent armies..

Rev 19:14 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev019.html#14) And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

Rev 19:19 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev019.html#19) And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

This shows two different view points. 1) We get a glimpse in Heaven in v 14. We are in Heaven and follow Jesus back to this world; v19 shows a view point from earth and the beast, kings, and their armies come together against him on the horse and his army. This proves nothing in a post-trib theory. Even if it was two armies, who's to say God did not plan a strategic move and came in two waves? This leaves to many loop holes


Why does Rev. 19 speak of armies for God, but at Armageddon He has only one army fighting the beast?
Why are there not still armies on God's side? Why does only one army - head to Armageddon?

the purpose of Armageddon is?
to overcome or we could say-to have victory over the beast

God's army will gain victory over the beast.
=over the man of sin

Rev. 19:14
"And the armies {which were} in heaven..."
v19
"And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army."

What?
Did God's other army run away- where is it? Why do they not fight at Armageddon?

Consider that the tribulation martyrs already have victory over the beast by loving their lives not unto the death. The tribulation martyrs refused the mark, his name, his number, wouldn't worship the beast's image.
They stood on God's side - and gained the victory...so they already won against the beast.

Rev. 19 shows armies that come from heaven, then the battle at Armageddon with one army for God, then what?
Rev. 19 will continue with John giving us the details of what happened with all of the characters in this story.

beast
false prophet

kings of the earth
their armies

Satan

God's arrmy?

Somewhere John must inform us as to God's army? After the battle of Armageddon...they do what?

v4
"And I saw thrones, and they sat..."

they?
So John has already told us about this bunch. He must be writing now as to the army that fought on God's side at Armageddon.

"...they sat upon them.."
Rev. 20:4
Okay, so the verse is referring to God's armies. So what happened with that other army that came from heaven for God?
they lived and reigned
They are not just now being raised from the dead, but John is letting us in on what army for God did not do battle for Him at Armageddon.

the saints
as the first resurrection bunches
came from heaven
as armies for God

one army - lived, fought, then reigned
the other army - lived - already had the victory -then reigned
so -
Rev. 20:4
"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them..and the souls of them that were beheaded...lived and reigned with Christ..."
But all of them were given their clean, white fine linen outfits back in Rev. 19 when they came from heaven with God as His armies.

vinsight4u8
May 31st 2008, 01:30 PM
Something else that shows me the rapture is post-trib...

Rev. 19 has the Word of God coming as wearing many crowns....at the time of Armageddon.

Rev. 14 has one like the Son of man coming on a white cloud, wearing one golden crown and reaps the earth.
rapture time

Rev. 15:1 shows that after this John was to see the seven last plagues.
/ - as in the trumpets must have ended as the first
seven plagues
the rapture took place

then the seven vials of God's wrath had yet to begin

vinsight4u8
May 31st 2008, 01:40 PM
I'll answer your other questions later, as I want to deal with only Rev. 19, if that's okay with you. So much is in this chapter that makes other parts of Revelation clearer.

Rev. 19 shows the Word of God riding on white. Why?
because=
in righteousness He doth judge and make war

Rev. 19:11
"And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse...in righteousness he doth judge and make war."

What about the rider on white of the first seal?
Wouldn't he have to be doing something similar in order to ride on white?

Yes.

The first seal is not the ac.

Ask yourself why is Savlation being said at the start of Rev. 19 - first verse?

Consider Rev. 12 as to those that are of the brethren, being accused in heaven, love not their lives unto the death, then comes salvation.

so-
At the start of Rev. 19 - the tribulation martyrs have all died during the time of Satan cast to the earth.

moonglow
May 31st 2008, 03:07 PM
NMKeith...hey..I am not post trib so I cannot answer your questions here..but I was just reading through the thread and noticed a couple of things that puzzled me...well first you don't seem to want to answer any questions...which is going to happen on a message board...sort of give and take...and yes I know its frustrating when a thread doesn't go how you would like it to go! But that is people for you! People never do what they are suppose too...:rolleyes:

Anyway you said this:


Originally Posted by NMKeith View Post
3) The post-tribulation view has difficulties with who will populate the Millennium if the Rapture and the Second Coming occur at essentially the same time. Since all believers will be translated at the Rapture and all unbelievers are judged, because no unrighteous shall be allowed to enter Christ's Kingdom, then no one would be left in mortal bodies to start the population base for the Millennium.

Now I was raised pre-trib rapture and I never heard of this...Jesus said there will be no marry in Heaven: Matthew 22:30
For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.

Mark 12:25
For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

Paul in the bible also explains how we will have new bodies...I am sure you know those verses. We won't be marrying, nor having babies...the believers themselves will populate the New Earth. I am just wondering where you even got this idea from in the first place as I never heard of it. By the way I am no longer pre-trib or pre-trib rapture. Just curious about this...I think Revolvr answered this well with his post.

On this one:


Quotewpm:
Peter knew it wasn't imminent. Jesus had predicted he would live to be a an old man and that he wouldn't be raptured. John 21:18 records, "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."

All of the disciples would have been aware of this, and several other prophecies, therefore none of the disciples could have believed in this imminence concept. How could it have been imminent when Peter was still young? He had to get old and physical die.

What about the Gospel going out to the Gentiles? Surely this had to happen before the catching up of the saints? Evidently the disciples didn't believe what you do.

And your response:


Again you are asking so many questions, but want to answer nothing, where in this Scripture does it say the rapture is not an imminent event? I'm not seeing it here.

What??? :o He did answer it..sometimes the questions a poster asks isn't a question they are really wanting an answer too but its put in a question to make a point...wpm was pointing out scriptures clearly show they weren't expecting a rapture to happen a second...you are demanding scriptures actually say they weren't expected it soon...totally ignoring the fact its clear they weren't. Even I can see that...just a person reading this thread can see that. Scripture isn't always worded like we want it to be. I am just shocked you are dismissing very obvious scriptures here simply because its not worded the way you would like it to be.

At least be honest in your responses here and don't ignore clear scriptures given...

If you really want to know what the post-trib theory is, I would suggest just doing a search on it and reading up on it on your own...but it seems like to me you know what it is, or you wouldn't be posting challenging their view point by point as you are. Also provide scriptures showing the thousand year period is perfect and without sin and the lion laying down with the lamb, etc...that would be helpful for people to know what exactly you are talking about here...don't just assume we know...post scriptures. thanks

God bless

wpm
May 31st 2008, 03:34 PM
First you are going off track in your response, you provide nothing to me but ask everything.. Why is that? You have so far turned this around against the Pre-Trib.. Maybe you don't understand the questions I'm asking? I'm wanting someone to prove a post-trib theory?? This is all.. You have asked me here, is to answer your questions, but this is not provide anything to my questions. So it leaves reason to ask why you post at all?

You need to clarify points if this discussion is going to develop. Others need to establish what you believe in order to address your arguments. If you don't like your views been questioned then you should not have directed a challenge on another belief. You need to explain some things. So far, you are not.

I actually addressed your point. In case you missed it, I said: "Most Posttribs over the centuries have viewed this as being fulfilled at Messiah's First Coming." History shows that the 490 years were congruent and sequential.

Those of us that take 490 years to mean exactly that do not have to prove that it is harmonious; we just have to accept what it states. We take it literally (1) because it happened literally, (2) there is no command to decapitate it and project it into the unknown. Seven multiplied by seventy comes to 490 cohesive years, not 2,490 broken up years and counting. There is no gap mentioned in the prophecy so there is no need or warrant to insert one in there.

Let’s use an illustration. If you were directed to go to the next county and told it was exactly a 490-mile journey (right down to the very yard). You were told that in-between the starting point and your destination you would pass two important landmarks, the first after 49 miles, which was accurate to the very yard. The next was a further 434 miles ahead (bringing your journey to 483 miles in total), which also occurred right down to the very yard. The journey's end would be a final 7 miles down the road from your second landmark, making your total journey 490 miles. Exactly half way between 483 miles and 490 (486 ½ miles) you would witness a monumental landmark that would surpass anything you have ever seen. How would you then feel if you were told when you hit the second landmark that your final location was still a possible 2,000+ miles down the road with NO exact finishing point? Such an idea would be totally unthinkable in the natural, but unprecedented in God's economy. God always fulfils His promises. The burden of proof is with you to show that Daniel 9 demands this gap theory.

In conclusion: Where are your rapture and third coming in Daniel 9? Please answer this - it is an important, reasonable, and elementary request.




(http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Luk/Luk021.html#24)
Luk 21:24 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Luk/Luk021.html#24) And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Luk/Luk021.html#24)

After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. Some believe this time was fulfilled when Israel became a nation again on May 14th 1948, some believe it was during the six day war. Most scholars would agree that it was during our generation
(http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Luk/Luk021.html#24)

I actually addressed my argument to rebut your imminent argument. I don't feel this is a direct or relevant response to my rebuttal.


Again you are asking so many questions, but want to answer nothing, where in this Scripture does it say the rapture is not an imminent event? I'm not seeing it here.

I have showed you 2 arguments to challenge what you are saying. There are many more. What they prove is that Jesus just couldn't have returned at any moment until certain things were fufilled. You seem to be tip-toeing round the issues. Let us take Peter living to be an old man. Please address that. Can you accept that none of the disciples could have held to your theory of imminence. They knew Peter would not die young.


When was the last time you saw a lamb sit down with a lion? Or a child playing in a vipers den.. PLease study up on the new millennium.. There is no sorrow etc etc

I will happily discuss the millennium with you on another thread, just start it up and give me the link. I don't want to side-track this. But I will briefly respond: where in Rev 20 does it state what you are applying to it? Your claims must be supported with evidence. So far, you are furnishing us with no corroboration for your view.

I introduced 1 Thess 4 and exegeted it. You totally avoided that passage and said:


Now you are just taking away the Bible to fit your theory. Read more on the seven year tribulation.

This is not a satisfactory response from someone suggesting Pretrib is biblical. Where are your rapture and third coming in 1 Thess 4? I believe that even 1 Thess 4 disallows the Pretrib theory.


What does a week stand for in Daniel.

7 yrs. I have told you that this harmonius prophecy has been fulfilled. You have said nothing to cause me to question a literal contextual reading of it.


Revelation reads..Rev 11:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev011.html#3) And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

Simple math.. This is 3 1/2yrs in the tribulation; what happens to these witnessing in the middle of the tribulation? And the antichrist breaks his peace treaty of one week or in the middle of tribulation and Revelation actually breaks it down in days.. Can not be more clear than that..



I have read Revelation many times, and I have counted more than two '3 ½s'. You need to clarify points if this discussion is going to develop or if we are going to take your claims serious.

Do you believe Revelation is a chronological unfolding of world events?

Do you believe Revelation 4:1 is the rapture?

Do you believe Revelation 4-19 is a harmonious chronological 7-year tribulation period?

Do you believe Revelation 19 is your 3rd Coming?

We need clarity here and transparancy.

Finally, Can you show us one single Scripture that describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further Coming of Christ? Answer this and others will give your belief credence. How can you attack other beliefs if you have failed to show that yours is even in the Bible?

Paul

vinsight4u8
May 31st 2008, 03:34 PM
You mentioned our blessed hope.

Titus 2:13
"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing..."

The blessed hope part arrives when Jesus appears. We have to check other verses and see just when will our Saviour be appearing.

Hebrews 9:28
"So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation."
/salvation time is appearing of Jesus Christ time

vinsight4u8
May 31st 2008, 04:07 PM
Rev. 19
summary

v 1
shows time for Jesus Christ to appear /Salvation
the trib martyrs are done dying under Satan's short time

v 2
He hath judged the great whorre city.
/This is the city that killed the trib martyrs.
God has avenged this city of the trib time.

v 4
the four and twenty elders
fall down
/take note they are not falling from seats -they already gave those seats up
for Jesus Christ was to come back as exalted alone!

v 5
ye that fear Him both small and great
/7th trumpet
last trumpet to sound
Rev. 11:18
them that fear Thy name, small and great

v7
marriage of the Lamb is come

Calvin
May 31st 2008, 04:38 PM
Could someone interpret verse 9 of 1st Thessalonians in it's context. I've always taken this to mean that God would take his bride out of here before he pours out his wrath on this earth. Kind of like a Pre trib salvation. The "rapture" scripture is in chapter 4:16 just before this:

1Th 5:1 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 1Th 5:2 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 1Th 5:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. 1Th 5:4 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. 1Th 5:5 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. 1Th 5:6 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Therefore let us not sleep, as [do] others; but let us watch and be sober. 1Th 5:7 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. 1Th 5:8 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation. 1Th 5:9 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 1Th 5:10 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.

Thanks.

wpm
May 31st 2008, 05:03 PM
Could someone interpret verse 9 of 1st Thessalonians in it's context. I've always taken this to mean that God would take his bride out of here before he pours out his wrath on this earth. Kind of like a Pre trib salvation. The "rapture" scripture is in chapter 4:16 just before this:

1Th 5:1 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 1Th 5:2 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 1Th 5:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. 1Th 5:4 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. 1Th 5:5 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. 1Th 5:6 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Therefore let us not sleep, as [do] others; but let us watch and be sober. 1Th 5:7 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. 1Th 5:8 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation. 1Th 5:9 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 1Th 5:10 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.

Thanks.

Yes, but wrath doesn't have to mean 7 years trib. That is what colours Pretribs in viewing this alternatively. There is no 7 yr trib here or anywhere else in Scripture.

If you would care to consider the next chapter to the one we are looking at, which is a continuation of the thought being addressed, Paul in I Thessalonians 5:2-7 reinforces the immediate and total destructive nature of judgment, saying, “the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night.For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober. For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.”

Peter describes the wrath also, it is a fiery destruction is poured out on the wicked and this current sin-cursed world that causes their destruction. 2 Peter 3:10-13 declares: “the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

Paul

vinsight4u8
May 31st 2008, 05:17 PM
Could someone interpret verse 9 of 1st Thessalonians in it's context. I've always taken this to mean that God would take his bride out of here before he pours out his wrath on this earth. Kind of like a Pre trib salvation. The "rapture" scripture is in chapter 4:16 just before this:

1Th 5:1 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 1Th 5:2 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 1Th 5:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. 1Th 5:4 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. 1Th 5:5 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. 1Th 5:6 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Therefore let us not sleep, as [do] others; but let us watch and be sober. 1Th 5:7 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. 1Th 5:8 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation. 1Th 5:9 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 1Th 5:10 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.

Thanks.

I'm leaving in a few minutes, so this will be just a short answer for now...sorry

God has not appointed to the church to any type of wrath that comes after salvation...but salvation begins after the tribulation has ended.
Look at Rev. 11:18 places God's wrath as only starting when the 7th trumpet sounds.

Look at the the say, Peace and safety part as this being the picture.

Rev. 11
the two witnesses have been slain
and the wicked world celebrates by sending gifts to one another

but the
day of the Lord
will come as a thief in the night
and end their wicked partying time

sudden destruction will come on the hooping it up gift givers

Got to go!

Calvin
May 31st 2008, 05:23 PM
Thank you WPM. I'm working on it.

RevLogos
May 31st 2008, 05:50 PM
2) The post-tribulation view denies the New Testament teaching of imminency--that Christ could come at any moment--since there are intervening events required in that view. We believe there are no signs that must precede the Rapture.




The problem here is that there is NO such NT teaching of imminency. Nowhere does the Bible say Jesus could return at any second. This is an invention of the pre-trib view; it is required by pre-trib, not a cause of pre-trib.

Jesus will not return in the next 5 minutes, nor next month, nor this year, nor in the next 5 years. Nothing in scripture suggests this is possible because all discussion of Jesus' return shows a number of events that will precede it.

Lets look at just a few examples:
Mat 24:29 “But immediately after the tribulation…” he discusses the great manifestations in heaven and earth that precede the coming of Jesus.

Mat 24:31 says the elect are gathered up after the sounding of a trumpet. Other verses show this is the 7th trumpet.

John 6:39-40, 44, 54 all state ALL will be raised “at the last day”.

1 Th 4:15-17 Jesus comes with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and trumpet of God, then the dead in Christ rise, then we who are still alive. This happens in one day, the "Day of the Lord".

1 Th 5:4-8 tell us that as believers we do not walk in darkness, therefore we will see and understand the preceding events and not be caught by surprise. We are to remain in faith, alert and sober. Jesus will appear like a thief in the night only to those unaware of the prophesy.

1 Th 5:9 says we are not destined for God’s wrath. The wrath of God begins at the 7th trumpet.

Rev 11:15 Jesus comes at the 7th trumpet, which marks the beginning of the wrath of God.
The 7 seals are all unsealed before the 7 trumpets are sounded. All of that unpleasant tribulation business in Rev 6, 8 and 9 happen before Jesus appears.

So to summarize, Jesus returns at the 7th trumpet, and all believers are raised, the dead in Christ first, then the living, on that last day. I can find no scripture that says Jesus return will happen without a series of preceding, prophesied, and remarkable events. Christians have always thought Jesus’ return would be soon, but not instant.

Calvin
May 31st 2008, 06:03 PM
I tell you there are some really strong aurguments here. So far we pre-tribs, have not done too good a job of proving our case. I've never been one for studying prophecy and end times, but you can believe me, I'm into it now.

I do believe we are in the last days. God help our children and grandchildren.

Calvin.

Clifton
May 31st 2008, 09:32 PM
Why does anyone need to be alive with mortal bodies after Armageddon to re-populate the new-earth? God utterly destroys the old earth. It is dead and gone, dissolved, burned up and melted away. No one remains alive as there is no earth to remain alive on. I am not sure how God populates the new earth, but Peter says it is WE who should look forward to it.

2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat. And the earth and the works in it will be burned up.
2Pe 3:11 Then, all these things being about to be dissolved, what sort ought you to be in holy behavior and godliness,
2Pe 3:12 looking for and rushing the coming of the Day of God, on account of which the heavens, being on fire, will melt away, and the elements will melt, burning with heat?
2Pe 3:13 But according to His promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
2Pe 3:14 Therefore, beloved, looking for these things, be diligent, spotless, and without blemish, to be found by Him in peace.

Third time in the past couple of weeks I have noticed that word “but” starting at verse 2 Peter 3:13 (what shows in a shift in context) gets dropped (or changed) in an editorial, and adding the word/phrase “Everything, all, utterly destroyed” (or changing other words) into the preceding paragraph/block of text. This is usually due to an oversight, influentials of replacement theologies, or both.

Oh well, at least Obama realizes when one needs to distance themselves from influentials, - eventually - he does seem to be quicker at doing so lately.

Blessings.

RevLogos
May 31st 2008, 09:48 PM
Third time in the past couple of weeks I have noticed that word “but” starting at verse 2 Peter 3:13 (what shows in a shift in context) gets dropped (or changed) in an editorial, and adding the word/phrase “Everything, all, utterly destroyed” (or changing other words) into the preceding paragraph/block of text. This is usually due to an oversight, influentials of replacement theologies, or both.

Oh well, at least Obama realizes when one needs to distance themselves from influentials, - eventually - he does seem to be quicker at doing so lately.

Blessings.


I don't follow your point. After Peter says the heavens and the earth will be destroyed, he says BUT don't sweat it, a new heaven and new earth will be ready for us.

Also I don't see an issue with using the word "destroyed". Does "the heavens will pass away" and other words of Peter suggest a different conclusion?

And how does Obama fit in to a discussion on the destruction of the universe? ;)

The Village Idiot
May 31st 2008, 10:17 PM
These two feasts occur in the same chapter and are separated by a mere eight verses. The parody is obvious. Why do we miss it?


"Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb" (Re 19:9).

"Come, assemble for the great supper of God..." (Re 19:17).

If we can't see this, we can't see much. This book isn't going to help the church until we dump the unstated premise that it is a predictive odyssey and learn to read it theologically as John intended.

BroRog
May 31st 2008, 10:35 PM
Could someone interpret verse 9 of 1st Thessalonians in it's context. I've always taken this to mean that God would take his bride out of here before he pours out his wrath on this earth. Kind of like a Pre trib salvation. The "rapture" scripture is in chapter 4:16 just before this:

1Th 5:1 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 1Th 5:2 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 1Th 5:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. 1Th 5:4 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. 1Th 5:5 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. 1Th 5:6 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Therefore let us not sleep, as [do] others; but let us watch and be sober. 1Th 5:7 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. 1Th 5:8 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation. 1Th 5:9 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 1Th 5:10 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=1Th&chapter=5&translation=kjv&x=14&y=12#) Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.

Thanks.

Since you asked about verse 9, I note the contrast between "wrath", on the one hand, and "salvation" on the other hand. I am then able to ask, "how is wrath different from salvation and why does Paul contrast the two?

If I understand the pre-trib view correctly, pre-trib doctrine identifies the calamities, injuries, and death taking place during the Great Tribulation as the "wrath" of 1Th 5:9. By contrast then, "salvation" is the supernatural removal of the Church off the earth to keep Christians from suffering these injuries and death. In this view then, "salvation" is not salvation of the soul, but salvation of the body.

It isn't as if salvation of the body isn't a good thing. I would rather be kept from drowning that not; I would rather be rescued from a burning building than not; I would rather my country's armies defeat our enemies so that I might flourish in peace. The question we must ask though, is whether Paul was making a point concerning our physical salvation or the salvation of our souls.

Another possiblity:

In Romans 1, Paul speaks of another kind of wrath.

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness . . .

And in the context of that chapter, he indicates the objectification of God's wrath in terms of what God did to those who suppressed the truth. In summary, God abandoned the human race to their own wild speculations, which lead to foolishness and darkness.

21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools . . .

He also gave us over to the lusts of our hearts and degrading passions, as Paul will go on to say later in the chapter. In this context then, "salvation" is seen in terms of our being released from darkness, foolishness, futile speculation, lust, and degrading passions.

Returning to the Thessalonian passage we see similar language concerning darkness, which is a figurative word meaning "foolishness". As Christians, as children of the light, we are not in darkness concerning God and we are not foolish in regards to his will, his intent for humanity, his love for us and for others, his mercy, and his grace. We have no cause to get drunk as those who lack hope, but we can rest in our sleep at night and awaken to a day of hope, faith and love.

Now, when he says, "ye have no need that I write unto you" he refers to the coming day of the Lord, which no one can know about, because he comes as a thief at night. And as the Lord says himself, "no one knows, not even the angels in heaven." Paul has not set out to assure the Thessalonian Church that God will take them off the earth, he has assured them that he has given them everything they need in preparation for that day when the Lord will come, namely the gospel message of hope and assurance of salvation.

yoSAMite
May 31st 2008, 11:05 PM
Paul asked:

the fact there is not one single Scripture that suggests (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a Coming of Christ.
I for the record, as a pre-tibber, do not believe in this statement. It's my belief that the rapture will happen some time before Daniel's 70th week starts, not immediately preceding it. The "great tribulation" will not begin for 3 1/2 years after that, then Jesus will return to earth.

wpm
May 31st 2008, 11:07 PM
Paul asked:

I for the record, as a pre-tibber, do not believe in this statement. It's my belief that the rapture will happen some time before Daniel's 70th week starts, not immediately preceding it. The "great tribulation" will not begin for 3 1/2 years after that, then Jesus will return to earth.

Can you show me that in Daniel 9?

Paul

Merton
May 31st 2008, 11:36 PM
(1) "finish the transgression"?
(2) "make an end of sins"?
(3) "make reconciliation for iniquity"?
(4) "bring in everlasting righteousness"?
(5) "seal up the vision and prophecy"?
(6) "anoint the most Holy”?

Daniel was concerned with the return of God's people from Babylon and God gave him a view of what must occur to accomplish that and what will be when they are delivered at the return of Christ.

God gave to Daniel the events which must occur throughout the book of Daniel, some by type, that were events of the last 3.5 years of the 70 weeks prophecy as are later described in the book of Rev. in further detail.

None of those things listed above are yet fully accomplished.

I am going out now but be back to show how later.

Merton

Clifton
May 31st 2008, 11:46 PM
I don't follow your point. After Peter says the heavens and the earth will be destroyed, he says BUT don't sweat it, a new heaven and new earth will be ready for us.

Actually, he does not say that. We note the Greek "holokleros" (i.e. "whole", "entire", "totally") is not present there. What happens here prior to verse 13 is a “purging” of the current Earth to usher in a new era for a select group, or groups. There is nothing in the text that even suggests that the “inner” parts of the Earth are "totally" done away with, and the other words in the context of 2 Peter 3:10-12 would not be there if that were the case, because those other various words would not be needed.

This is not the end we look/await for. That is why the “but” (the Greek “De”) is there at verse 13. It would be like saying, “We struggle in this life, there are wars and famine, poverty, health sufferings, (and so on), BUT, we look/wait for that which is eternal.” The English “But” here is used in the same manner as the Greek particle “de” here, which is strictly adversative, but more frequently denoting transition or conversion, and serving to introduce something else – so we see here with the context text, (and accounting for other contexts) that 2 Peter 3:13 opposes what precedes it, and it not a part of that event itself.

In ancient Jewish Literature, the heavens (or, “skies”) will be rolled up like a scroll. IOW, those in the new era (the so-called Millennium) there will not be any worshiping things in the skies because they will be different. Etc. Etc. Etc.


Also I don't see an issue with using the word "destroyed". Does "the heavens will pass away" and other words of Peter suggest a different conclusion? Please see paragraph one of this post – not “totally” destroyed – more like things will be dissolved, so there will be something left, not to mention, the core and a different surface. After the new era is over (which will probably amount to about “one” day in Heaven, by our Earthly understanding of time), this current physical Earth has fled away, the second resurrection and judgment and rewards, then there is a brand New Earth and Heavens (The Eternal Abode). ;)


And how does Obama fit in to a discussion on the destruction of the universe? ;) In the past couple of hours ago, today, Obama has announced that he has dropped his membership (resigned) with the church that has caused him issues, and broken his ties with that church. :o

But as for referencing him, and putting innocent “oversights” (as is common with us) in reading scriptures aside, it is a cautionary note about influentials (denominations, movements, churches, sects, etc.) that may “sway our reading of scriptures,” (causing a change in the actual context(s) of scriptures); thus, exegesis should win over eisegesis. ;)

Blessings!

jeffweeder
May 31st 2008, 11:55 PM
lets not forget that nobody is going to be taken up to be with the lord until the ressurection.
The living will not precede to him before the dead are raised first, then we all meet him together.
So is the tribulation after the ressurection?
That doesnt sound right does it?
The Trib is evident until the ressurection.


There will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth dismay among nations, in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the waves,
26 men fainting from fear and the expectation of the things which are coming upon the world; for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
27 "Then they will see THE SON OF MAN COMING IN A CLOUD with power and great glory.
28 "But when these things begin to take place, straighten up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near."


This redemption is the ressurection of the body, and the lord recieving us to himself.
Flesh and blood cannot inherit the place he has gone to prepare, but we shall not all sleep, but all will be changed to immortality when Jesus comes to raise us the last day.

yoSAMite
Jun 1st 2008, 12:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khoolaid

I for the record, as a pre-tibber, do not believe in this statement. It's my belief that the rapture will happen some time before Daniel's 70th week starts, not immediately preceding it. The "great tribulation" will not begin for 3 1/2 years after that, then Jesus will return to earth.

Can you show me that in Daniel 9?

PaulNo I can't because when I develop a theology I don't use just one verse or book of the Bible. I use the whole counsel of God to the best of my ability.

BroRog
Jun 1st 2008, 12:05 AM
1) The post-tribulation view requires that the church be present during the 70th week of Daniel (Daniel 9:24-27), even though it was absent from the first 69. This is in spite of the fact that Dan 9:24 indicates that all 70 weeks are for Israel. I believe the church must depart prior to the 70th week, before the final seven-year period.

2) The post-tribulation view denies the New Testament teaching of imminency--that Christ could come at any moment--since there are intervening events required in that view. We believe there are no signs that must precede the Rapture.

3) The post-tribulation view has difficulties with who will populate the Millennium if the Rapture and the Second Coming occur at essentially the same time. Since all believers will be translated at the Rapture and all unbelievers are judged, because no unrighteous shall be allowed to enter Christ's Kingdom, then no one would be left in mortal bodies to start the population base for the Millennium.

4) Similarly, post-tribulationism is not able to explain the sheep and goats judgment after the Second Coming in Matthew 25:3-46. Where would the believers in mortal bodies come from if they are raptured at the Second Coming? Who would be able to enter into Christ's Kingdom?

5) The Bride of Christ, the church, is made ready to accompany Christ to earth (Revelation 19:7-8,14) before the Second Coming, but how could this reasonably happen if part of the church is still on the earth awaiting the Second Coming? If the Rapture of the church takes place at the Second Coming, then how does the Bride (the church) also come with Christ at His Return?

I'd like to try to answer the objections, in brief of course.

Answers:

1. The objection concludes that the church must be absent from the 70th week of Daniel since she was absent for the other 69, and the prophecy has unique application to Israel. In this I don't see a problem. Even if the prophecy is unique to Israel (I think it is) it does not follow that the church has to be absent during it's fulfillment.

2. Are the passages indicating Jesus' imminence a problem for the post-trib view? Actually, the imminence of Jesus is a problem for both views. Unless one adopts the view of Preterists who take imminence passages literally, one must explain how the kingdom of God can be "right at the door" for 2,000 years. The objection here allows for additional signs of Jesus imminent return to take place in our future, but that none of these signs must precede his coming. Why? Pretrib doctrine solves the problem of imminence by postulating an additional coming of the Lord: a covert arrival to take Christians off the earth, and an overt arrival to make war with the antiChrist and his kingdom. In this view then, all the passages that give "signs of the times" only apply to his overt coming, and not to his covert coming.

The question is, how does posttrib doctrine account for imminence? Since the problem of Jesus' imminence stems from a literal view of those passages, posttrib doctrine tends to explain them in terms of the sequential order of events. Statements like "near" and "right at the door" signal that the next event in an entire sequence of events will be the return of Jesus. As he says, "when you see all these" it is assumed that "all these things" are events that must transpire prior to what comes after that.

3. This is a problem for both pre- and posttrib rapture doctrine, which tend to be premill. Whether the church is on or off the earth during the Great Tribulation, the church is on the earth, living among mortals during the Millennium according to the pre-millennial view.

4. Again this is a problem for both pre- and posttrib rapture doctrine since both views put the sheep and goats judgment after the tribulation but before the millennium. In essence, the objection is an argument between two groups who place the sheep/goats judgment at the beginning of the millennium rather than at the end.

In order for your objection to be valid, it must assume one of two things: 1. there are no sheep, or 2. there will be tribulation saints who survive the tribulation. You would be challenged to defend either one of these. And your objection also assumes that the sheep are mortal, which is also not dictated by the text itself.

5. Your objection assumes that the entire church must return with Jesus at the coming of the Lord. However, I believe the post- trib view interprets 1Thess. 4 in such a way as to have Jesus return from heaven, bringing with him those dead in Christ, and joining up with those who are alive and remain.

moonglow
Jun 1st 2008, 12:29 AM
These two feasts occur in the same chapter and are separated by a mere eight verses. The parody is obvious. Why do we miss it?



If we can't see this, we can't see much. This book isn't going to help the church until we dump the unstated premise that it is a predictive odyssey and learn to read it theologically as John intended.

I agree!....you are wrong and I am right...:P:P:lol:

Sorry! ;)...I just had to break things up on here! Everyone is so serious...don't forget we are brethren first and foremost everyone regardless of our beliefs...I think we run off the poor OP...:rolleyes:

But our Village Idiot isn't such an idiot and we need to realize we all cannot be right and its no shame in having it wrong! Be open to learning! (that goes for me too).

God bless

wpm
Jun 1st 2008, 01:24 AM
Daniel was concerned with the return of God's people from Babylon and God gave him a view of what must occur to accomplish that and what will be when they are delivered at the return of Christ.

God gave to Daniel the events which must occur throughout the book of Daniel, some by type, that were events of the last 3.5 years of the 70 weeks prophecy as are later described in the book of Rev. in further detail.

None of those things listed above are yet fully accomplished.

I am going out now but be back to show how later.

Merton

Messiah brought all these in with His earthly ministry. When do you believe these were/will be ushered in?

Paul

White Spider
Jun 1st 2008, 01:29 AM
I posted this on another thread but I have yet got a response. So I thought I would repost it on a new thread..
Post-tribulation Problems

1) The post-tribulation view requires that the church be present during the 70th week of Daniel (Daniel 9:24-27), even though it was absent from the first 69. This is in spite of the fact that Dan 9:24 indicates that all 70 weeks are for Israel. I believe the church must depart prior to the 70th week, before the final seven-year period.

God Bless brothers/sisters

Keith

I will first answer this question best I can.

(Sorry if I ask you questions you've answered, but as there are 4 new pages I am not going to read them all, sorry.)

I agree all 70 weeks are for Israel, but I don't think that means the rest of the world can't be a part of them. (Do you agree with that or . . . ?)

And I don't see where it says the church is absent during the first 69 weeks or where it says they are present. In fact I can't determine either way. Could you point out where it states the churches position in the 70 weeks? (Again sorry if you've answered this.)

Alright let's start with that. Hope I'm helping.

Merton
Jun 1st 2008, 08:34 AM
Messiah brought all these in with His earthly ministry. When do you believe these were/will be ushered in?

Paul

It is not the OP subject so see the new thread.

Merton

Servant89
Jun 1st 2008, 11:41 AM
<<The post-tribulation view denies the New Testament teaching of imminency--that Christ could come at any moment--since there are intervening events required in that view. We believe there are no signs that must precede the Rapture. >>

This is how I see it. If it helps, good. If not, that's fine too.

There is no verse that says the rapture is imminent (without any pre-requisite that has to be fulfilled first). That is man-made doctrine. And because it is repeated so often people end up beliving it. That is a conclusion based on reasoning around the fact that the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night (a surprise). Pre-tribers believe that once the last week of Daniel starts, they can figure out the time of the second coming and that (in their minds) eliminates the element of surprise. Therefore, they conclude, there must be a rapture before the last week of Daniel to be able to fulfill the part about coming as a surprise. However, the term thief in the night appears 5 times in the Bible and in 3 of the 5 times it clearly states that the time to come as a thief in the night is at the end of the last week of Daniel (not the beginning). The other two times indicates that it really should not be a surprise to those that are saved.

The three instances where the term “thief in the night” happens at the end of Daniel’s last week are shown below. First, notice the location of the next verse, it is immediately before the last vial is poured (the 7th).

Rev 16:15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame. 16And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon. 17And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done. 18And there were voices, and thunders, and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great.

2 Pet 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

Joel 2:9 They shall run to and fro in the city; they shall run upon the wall, they shall climb up upon the houses; they shall enter in at the windows like a thief. 10The earth shall quake before them; the heavens shall tremble: the sun and the moon shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their shining: 11And the LORD shall utter his voice before his army: for his camp is very great: for he is strong that executeth his word: for the day of the LORD is great and very terrible; and who can abide it?

The next two show the second coming should not be a surprise for God’s people.

1Thes 5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 3For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. 4But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.

Rev 3:3 (http://webnet77.com/cgi-bin/bible/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=66&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=3) Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.

The Bible says there are several signs that must happen before the rapture (our gathering together with him, when the church is presented blameless to Jesus Christ).

Sign # 1: There cannot be any rapture BEFORE there is a resurrection of the dead, for the dead shall rise first, and then we that are alive shall be caught up together with them in the air (1Thes 4:16-18). There must be a resurrection of the dead FIRST. No resurrection, no rapture. And that brings us to prerequisite # 2.

Sign # 2: And Job 14:12-14 states clearly that there will be no resurrection of the dead until the 6th seal occurs first (when heavens disappear). So, the Bible says there will be no rapture until the heavens be no more. What a coincidence; that is exactly what the Bible says in Mat 24:21-31, 2Pet 3:10-14; Luke 21:24-27, Luke 17:29-30; Mar 13:24-27; Act 14:22; Rev 20:4-5; 2Thes 1:6-8; 1Thes 3:4; 1Cor 15:23,52; Isa 26:20-27:1; Isa 13:3-13 and every other passage of Scripture dealing with this subject (100% of them).

Sign # 3, 4 & 5: 2Thes 2:1-3 states that our gathering together with him (the rapture, also called the day of Christ) can not come until:

The falling away (#3)

The man of sin is revealed (#4)

And the man of sin cannot be revealed until the restrainer is removed first (that would be sign # 5). Michael is the restrainer (Rev 12:7; Jude 1:9; Daniel 10:21; Daniel 12:1).

Note: The day of Christ (the rapture) is when the bride is presented to Christ blameless (see 1Cor 1:8; 1The 3:13; Phil 1:6-8; Phil 2:14-16; 1Thes 5:23; 2Pet 3:10-14). And that day will not come until a, b and c above happen first.

So, the restrainer is removed, the man of sin is revealed, the apostasy occurs, the heavens disappear, the dead are raised and then and only then, can there be a rapture. There are other things that must come to pass also which are the first 6 seals and the first 6 trumpets.

Peace

Servant89
Jun 1st 2008, 11:49 AM
<< The post-tribulation view has difficulties with who will populate the Millennium if the Rapture and the Second Coming occur at essentially the same time. Since all believers will be translated at the Rapture and all unbelievers are judged, because no unrighteous shall be allowed to enter Christ's Kingdom, then no one would be left in mortal bodies to start the population base for the Millennium. >>

There are many Scriptures that say that there will be people left alive after the second coming of Christ that will not be raptured, nor resurrected. You only need two to establish a doctrine. Pick the best two of these (Zec 14:1-16; Isa 6:11-13; Psa 102:10-16; Isa 13:10-12; Isa 14:1-9; Isa 24:1-6; Isa 27:13; Isa 45: 20-27; Isa 49:22-23; Isa 61:5-9; Isa 6615-20; Eze 12:16; Eze 20:38; Eze 30:12; Eze 33:33-36; Eze 37:27-28; Joel 2:30-32; Mic 4:1-5; Zep 2:3; Zec 8:23).


Peace

Servant89
Jun 1st 2008, 11:51 AM
<<The Bride of Christ, the church, is made ready to accompany Christ to earth (Revelation 19:7-8,14) before the Second Coming, but how could this reasonably happen if part of the church is still on the earth awaiting the Second Coming? If the Rapture of the church takes place at the Second Coming, then how does the Bride (the church) also come with Christ at His Return? >>

The Bible says that we should remain faithful until we are raptured and that day is described as the day when Jesus comes back with all his saints (that includes us). I do not argue with Scripture. God does not have to come down and explain himself to me. I have to mold my doctrine to reflect what the Bible says. It is written:

1Tes 3:11 Now God himself and our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our way unto you. 12And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you: 13To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.

Peace

Servant89
Jun 1st 2008, 11:59 AM
<<This is our "Blessed Hope," and you will not find a more exciting and rewarding discovery. >>

PRE-TRIBERS REFER TO THE RAPTURE AS THE BLESSED HOPE. THIS IS TAKEN FROM TITUS 2:13.

TIT 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

The very letter to Titus tells us what is the HOPE he is talking about (before and after Titus 2:13). Titus talks about our HOPE three times.

TIT 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
TIT 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
TIT 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

I do not see Rapture there, I see hope of eternal life. When the Bible says we are looking for that blessed hope, it is referring to the hope of eternal life which will be imparted at second coming (not 7 years before).

Mk 10:30 (http://webnet77.com/cgi-bin/bible/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=41&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=30) But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.

Here are more Scriptures showing what Christians are supposed to be looking for (before the tribulation or after?):


2PE 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. 14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

So, instead of looking to be taken out of this world when the evil comes (contrary to what Jesus prayed for in John 17:15), we look for the end of the great tribulation when Jesus returns.

John 17:15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.

Is Jesus for us or against us? Does Jesus pray against the will of the Father or in line with his will? If the Scripture does not reflect our theology, lets change our theology.

Shalom

Calvin
Jun 1st 2008, 12:52 PM
Granted, I've always been a pre-triber. But I was thinking last night while laying upon my bed, and having been part of this thread: The "rapture" scripture says The Lord will descend with a SHOUT and with the TRUMP of God.
That doesn't sound too much like a covert operation. Or secret happening. Is it a trump that only the children of God will hear?:rolleyes: I mean if you take it literally, it sounds more like a grand return for all to see and hear.

Calvin.

vinsight4u8
Jun 1st 2008, 01:03 PM
It is as simple at this section of Rev. 11:18 =7th trumpet
time
shouldest
reward

Rev. 22:12
tells us that Jesus Christ comes quickly
and His reward is with Him

vinsight4u8
Jun 1st 2008, 01:06 PM
If you see that part - then note too that God's wrath will begin to be allowed at the 7th trumpet.

Same for the end of the 6th seal - the wicked will hide in the rocks.

Why?
Because in the 6th seal God has shown up - they hide from His face.

So - we can conclude that the 7th trumpet and the 6th seal actually blend in timewise.
6th seal opens
end of trib time
7th trumpet goes blaring
the wicked hide from the face of God

vinsight4u8
Jun 1st 2008, 01:10 PM
Do you see where John wrote anything about Jesus descended in chapter 4?
You shouldn't....then think about the phrase that the four beasts are constantly repeating.

Then take note of the 24 elders
/They will toss off their golden crowns at the end of ch 4.

Why?

Calvin
Jun 1st 2008, 02:42 PM
And. I'm seeing trumpets in 1st Corintians 15. In the changing in the "twinkling of an eye" verse, It's at the LAST TRUMP.
It's odd how these trumpets are blaring at me all of a sudden. I think sometimes we just read over things without thought and our preconceived beliefs blind us to certain details. I'm dangling on the fence here...lol.

Calvin

TexasBeliever
Jun 1st 2008, 02:52 PM
Hi everyone:

I'd like to add a very short observation, as I'll leave the detailed debates to those with more stamina than I have:

The entire reason for Christ coming for those Christians still on the earth in what we call "rapture" is to spare them the wrath of God. On this point we all agree.

I think we further agree that there are seven years left to complete the prophecy regarding the 490 years. (with respect, some see only 3 1/2 years needed to complete this prophecy)

We agree that Satan has been given by God, a 42 month reign of power.

Here is what the Word of God says: Woe to the inhabitants of the earth, for the DEVIL has come down to you having great WRATH, for he knows that HIS TIME is short.

The bible clearly states that this 42 month period is the wrath of the devil, the same period that he "wears down the saints and overcomes them." This wrath is destroying believers in Christ; something that the wrath of God does not do.
When the Lord comes in HIS wrath, He comes to destroy those who destroy the earth and cast the antichrist into the lake of fire.

When the Lord come in HIS wrath, "The Lord alone will be exhalted."

This is proof positive that the wrath OF THE LORD does not come until after this 42 month period.
Therefore, the rapture--which takes us off the earth while the Lord judges the wicked of the earth with fire--does not happen until after this time.

HisGrace
Jun 1st 2008, 03:08 PM
I compiled a thread in Bible Studies, showing the step by step sequence of events, as recorded in Revelation. I don't know if this will answer any of your questions. I am a pre-tribber myself.


http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=118450&highlight=Revelation

vinsight4u8
Jun 1st 2008, 03:08 PM
And. I'm seeing trumpets in 1st Corintians 15. In the changing in the "twinkling of an eye" verse, It's at the LAST TRUMP.
It's odd how these trumpets are blaring at me all of a sudden. I think sometimes we just read over things without thought and our preconceived beliefs blind us to certain details. I'm dangling on the fence here...lol.

Calvin

Okay, good - we are told the last trump - for the trumpet shall sound...
Keep going and what does verse 54 show us happens at this last trumpet?
Key in on the last part of that verse.

death is swallowed up in victory

What does that mean?
Does it allow for tribulation martyrs to begin dying?
Can the tribulation martyrs start dying after this last trump sounds?

death is swallowed up in victory

So is the tribulation over or just beginning?

If all of the people dead, as to dying in victory time is over at the last trump - then what kind of death victory would be left for any future martyrs of Jesus Christ?

vinsight4u8
Jun 1st 2008, 03:14 PM
For more proof too - as to the wrath of God is not during the great tribulation...

Think about this one key in Rev. 11:18!

that Thou shouldest destroy

God is only just at the 7th trumpet going to start destroying.


More too -
What or whom will God destroy?

those that were destroying the earth

Will God destroy Himself?
7th trumpet - destroy those that destroy the earth

So -
was the 6th trumpet God's wrath?
Did God destroy the Rev. 11 two witnesses?
Is God the One destroying the earth at the 5th trumpet...

if in someone's misguided theory He is...
then their same theory would lead to - God must at the 7th trumpet destroy Himself
for destroying the earth

wpm
Jun 1st 2008, 06:47 PM
Granted, I've always been a pre-triber. But I was thinking last night while laying upon my bed, and having been part of this thread: The "rapture" scripture says The Lord will descend with a SHOUT and with the TRUMP of God.
That doesn't sound too much like a covert operation. Or secret happening. Is it a trump that only the children of God will hear?:rolleyes: I mean if you take it literally, it sounds more like a grand return for all to see and hear.

Calvin.

I agree. This is no secret rapture. The return of Christ in all His power and glory - with and for His saints. You should take other parallel passges when looking at this, you will find that they all correlate. I did a study a few yrs ago which may be of help.

We must always remember, no book of the Bible can be understood in complete isolation to the rest of Scripture – it either compliments it beautifully or it pitifully contradicts it. Likewise, no doctrine or prophetic view can stand firm lest it enjoys the support of other like-Scripture. Most sensible theologians give verbal adherence to this safe principle however many seem to lay it aside in their study of eschatology and more specifically the book of Revelation. Many do so in order to place their own private interpretation upon the unique symbolism of this apocalyptic book and to justify hitherto unknown teaching. Nevertheless, there is no intermediary resting-place between truth and error.

Elsewhere in Scripture we learn that the Coming of the Lord is ushered in by the sound of the trumpet. Christ said Himself, in Matthew 24:30-31, “they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”

1Thessalonians 4:15-16 says, “For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God.”

1 Corinthians 15:51-53 describes a ‘last trump’ saying, “Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.”

By clear implication, if the last trump relates to the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ there must be others that precede it. Revelation seems to support this weighty inference. Moreover, the seven trumpets outlined in Revelation chapters 8 to 10 are the only set of prophetic trumpets in Scripture. In the light of the explicit teaching and consistent pattern relating to the last trump elsewhere in the New Testament, and in order for our viewpoint to be true, accurate, compatible and complete (and all truth must fulfil this demanding criteria), the last trumpet in Revelation – number seven – must be a clear, vivid picture of the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Notwithstanding, when the Bible student carefully analyses the graphic descriptive detail of the seventh trumpet in Revelation in the light of other like Scripture he is left in no doubt to its subject matter and its startling cohesion with other prophetic readings. Only a blinkered eschatology student could deny that the last trumpet outlined in Revelation 10 is anything other that the same last trumpet outlined in other New Testament passages and a beautiful symbolic picture of the one final glorious Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Revelation 10:1-11 declares, describing the seventh trumpet, “And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire: And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth, And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders uttered their voices. And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.”

The symbolism and authority surrounding this great heavenly angel proves beyond a doubt that it is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ and a picture of His glorious Second Coming. We will the symbolism shortly.

Revelation 10:5-7 says of the Second Advent and the concluding last trumpet, “And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.”

There is clearly a major dilemma here for you those who mistakenly take Revelation to be a literal chronological unfolding of last day events. They must surely concede, if they are going to be consistent with their view that everything after Revelation 11 (which also makes reference to the seventh trumpet) is in the realm of eternity and the after-life. After all Revelation 10 plainly records thatwith this particular event “there should be time no longer.” For those who would lightly dismiss this important narrative as anything other than a magnificent picture of the Lord Jesus Christ and His glorious Second Coming, they do foolishly ignore the great wealth of explicit and consistent end-time teaching on this subject and divorce the undoubted harmony of this chapter from the rest of New Testament prophetic teaching.

The chronological hypothesis in relation to the complete book of Revelation is defective in the extreme as, by its very nature, it must project chapters 11-22 into ‘the age that is to come’, as from this chapter on, time shall clearly be no more. If the dispensationalist is consistent, it must exclude the prophetic relevance of chapters 11-22 to the Church and mankind today or to any generation preceding the Second Coming of the Lord. In reality, the chronological theory capitulates at this juncture, like other similar readings, enjoying not even the remotest support. In fact, it undermines the very character and import of the book of Revelation which embodies a number of repeated cycles outlining God’s Sovereign dealings with both the righteous and the wicked. Dealings that include the great overall battle between good and evil, between Christ and Satan, the Church and its enemies.

We must first of all recognise, this is the second of seven similar symbolic parallels relating to intra-advent period, each of which take us up to the one final future all-consummating Coming of Christ (the day of God’s wrath) and the end of the world (when time shall undoubtedly be no more). This pattern of repeating the record of the same event from different angles is common throughout Scripture on most themes, none more that the glorious Coming of Christ.

The third parallel in Revelation 11:15 also makes reference to the seventh angel with the last trump, again being in complete agreement with consistent New Testament teaching (including the conclusion of the second parallel in Revelation 10) on this single, final, all-consummating nature of the Second Advent, saying, “And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying,the kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.”

This is the end of the old temporal sin-cursed order and the introduction of the new eternal glorified order. Also, the undoubted finality surrounding the echo of the seventh trumpet proves beyond doubt that it is the last trump – the final trumpet sound for all mankind. “The kingdoms of this world” have finally “become the kingdoms of our lord, and of his Christ” and “he shall reign” not for 1000 years as some would have us believe but “for ever and ever.” Those who reject such concrete evidence do so (in the main) in order to support the pretribulationist doctrine. In doing so they oppose the clear truth of God’s Word rather than those who firmly hold the truth.

To cover this gaping hole in their positions, the respective chronological views dismiss the correct translation “there should be time no longer” and replace it by ‘there should be no more delay’. However, those who do such are still faced with insurmountable mountains, some of which we have already highlighted. Moreover, this is an undoubted forced interpretation, which must be opposed on several fronts.

Firstly, this is undoubtedly the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ – the end – it has absolutely nothing to do with delaying the days.

Secondly, the King James Version interprets the passage correctly and in context: “chronos ouketi estai”

‘Time - no longer – there shall be’!!!

Thirdly, the above interpretation of the Greek in this passage is in perfect and harmonious agreement with their consistent usage everywhere else in Scripture.

Revelation 11:18 concludes, speaking of the judgment that accompanies the final or last trumpet, saying, “And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest (1) give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest (2) destroy them which destroy the earth.”

Here we see the general judgment outlined. This is the one final all-embracing judgment of all mankind. There are two distinct peoples in view here, namely the righteous and wicked, standing before the one great heavenly throne, at the same judgment, albeit, they are receiving two divergent final sentences.

Paul

wpm
Jun 1st 2008, 06:53 PM
I compiled a thread in Bible Studies, showing the step by step sequence of events, as recorded in Revelation. I don't know if this will answer any of your questions. I am a pre-tribber myself.


http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=118450&highlight=Revelation

Where is your rapture in Rev? You just jump in saying "right after the rapture."

Paul

NMKeith
Jun 1st 2008, 07:38 PM
Sorry, I been away for almost two days. This thread is really catchy.. Okay so I read through 5 pages.. First.. I'm not going to answer all your questions.. Sorry I just don't have the time to answer five pages of questions.. If you can answer five pages, then I think you need to find another hobby, or spend more time with your family. So I'll respond with this..

Let's explore another reason why we favor a "pre-tribulation" view of the Harpázô, the "snatching up" of the Church. All through the Gospels, Jesus relied on the ancient Jewish wedding pattern for many of His parables, climaxing in His promise in the Upper Room in John 14. Many of us miss the full import of these allusions if we aren't familiar with the model of ancient Jewish wedding practices

Let's view these slowly..

The first step, the Ketubah, or Betrothal, was the establishment of the marriage covenant, usually when the prospective bridegroom took the initiative and negotiated the price (mohair) he must pay to purchase her.

Once the bridegroom paid the purchase price, the marriage covenant was established, and the young man and woman were regarded as husband and wife. From that moment on, the bride was declared to be consecrated or sanctified - set apart - exclusively for her bridegroom. As a symbol of the covenant relationship that had been established, the groom and bride drank from a cup of wine over which the betrothal had been pronounced.

After the marriage covenant was established, the groom left his bride at her home and returned to his father's house, where he remained separated from his bride for approximately 12 months. This afforded the bride time to gather her trousseau and prepare for married life.

During this period of separation, the groom prepared a dwelling place in his father's house to which he would later bring his bride. At the end of the period of separation, the bridegroom came - usually at night - to take his bride to live with him. The groom, the best man, and other male escorts left the father's house and conducted a torch-light procession to the home of the bride. Although the bride was expecting her groom to come for her, she did not know the time of his coming. As a result, the groom's arrival was preceded by a shout, which announced her imminent departure to be gathered with him.

After the groom received his bride, together with her female attendants, the enlarged wedding party returned from the bride's home to the groom's father's house, where the wedding guests had assembled.

Shortly after their arrival, the bride and groom were escorted by the other members of the wedding party to the bridal chamber (huppah). Prior to entering the chamber, the bride remained veiled so that no one could see her face. While the groomsmen and bridesmaids waited outside, the bride and groom entered the bridal chamber alone. There, in the privacy of that place, they entered into physical union for the first time, thereby consummating the marriage that had been covenanted approximately one year earlier.

After the marriage was consummated, the groom came out of the bridal chamber and announced the consummation of the marriage to the members of the wedding party waiting outside. Then, as the groom went back to his bride in the chamber, the members of the wedding party returned to the wedding guests and announced the consummation of the marriage.

Upon receiving the good news, the wedding guests remained in the groom's father's house for the next seven days, celebrating with a great wedding feast.

During the seven days of the wedding feast, the bride and groom remained hidden in the bridal chamber (Genesis 29:21-23, 27-28) for the seven days of the huppah. Afterwards, the groom came out of hiding, bringing his bride with him, but with her veil removed so that everyone could see her.

The Ultimate Bride

The New Testament portrays the Church as the Bride of Christ in Ephesians 5:22-33 (Paul even quotes Genesis 2:24 as the union at the Parousia of the Bridegroom in v.31!); Romans 7:4; 2 Corinthians 11:2; James 4:4. In the opening verses of John 14, the marriage covenant is confirmed. Paul continually reminds us of the purchase price and the covenant by which we, the Bride, are set apart, or sanctified.

Ecclesiology vs. Eschatology? ? ?

It is this distinctive nature of the Church that is often overlooked by students of prophecy: it is more a matter of ecclesiology than eschatology.

One thing that seems to highlight this distinctiveness is the strange remark Jesus made regarding John the Baptist:

Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. -Matthew 11:11

What does that mean? Jesus goes on to explain,

For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. - Matthew 11:13

It is John the Baptist that closes the Old Testament, not Malachi. A profound distinction appears to be drawn between the saints of the Old Testament and those of the New.

One of the challenges in fully appreciating Paul's epistles is the need to understand the staggering and distinctive advantages afforded the Church, in contrast to those of the Old Testament saints. And it is this role as the Bride of the Bridegroom that is emphasized in the parables and in the Book of Revelation.

The Departure of the Bridegroom

The Bridegroom has departed, and His return to gather His Bride is imminent. He has gone to prepare a place for you and me. (He has been at it for 2,000 years! It must be a spectacular abode!)
This very doctrine of "imminence" is taught throughout the New Testament and is a cornerstone of the "pre-tribulational" view: there is no event which is a prerequisite condition for His gathering of His Bride.

Post Tribulation view the Church going through the Great Tribulation. In exploring this issue, it is essential to distinguish between persecution, which clearly has been the lot of the Church for 19 centuries, and "the Great Tribulation" of eschatological significance. The persecution - and tribulation - of the Church was clearly promised to us:

These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world. John 16:33

The source of this tribulation is the world and, of course, Satan. However, "the Great Tribulation" of eschatological significance is quite another matter.

For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. Matthew 24:21

The context here is clearly Israel. Jesus is quoting from the Old Testament:

And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book Daniel 12:1

Note that "thy people will be delivered": the focus of the "Great Tribulation" is Israel. That is why it is called "the time of Jacob's Trouble":
Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it. Jeremiah 30:7
Jesus (in the Old Testament) explains:

I will go and return to my place, till they acknowledge their offence, and seek my face: in their affliction they will seek me earnestly. Hosea 5:15

To "return," He must have left His place! The offence referred to is singular and specific: their rejection of Him. In "their affliction" they will ultimately repent and He will respond.

The Great Tribulation also involves more than the wrath of the world or the wrath of Satan: it involves the indignation and wrath of God. In contrast, the Church has been promised:

For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 1 Thessalonians 5:9

And,

Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. Romans 5:9

And, specifically,

Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour [time] of temptation [trial], which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. Revelation 3:10

Peter also emphasizes,

The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: 2 Peter 2:9

Here, Peter is using the judgment upon Sodom and Gomorrah "as an example," as Jesus also did, in which the prior removal of Lot was a precondition before the angels could do their work.

A complete study of this issue involves careful and diligent study of both the Church (ecclesiology) as well as the eschatology (end time aspects) of the Great Tribulation, which, of course, far exceeds the focus of this brief review. It requires precise definitions of the terms used, and great care to understand how each of the elements of the revealed truth relate to each other.

But the fundamental doctrine of imminence has to be forfeited with any view that requires the Great Tribulation - or any other precedent event - to occur prior to the Rapture.

Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man. Luke 21:36

Are you going to escape these things that shall come to pass? If so, how? Or are you relying on the notion that the Lord is "delaying His coming?" This could be a very dangerous presumption. Brothers and sisters, I'm not here to argue with any of you.

The importance of our faith is Jesus Christ, let's not allow a topic to cause discord among the breathen. Never ONCE have I denied your theory, I just find more Scriptures against it. So I was looking for a understanding on this theory.

Thus far I've seen brothers get angry just because this topic was mentioned.

Someone who is steadfast in faith would not become so angry, but with brother love, try to help the next brother understand.. So far I don't see this happening here.. I see arguments and the "I'm right and your wrong" attribute standing at an open door. So I will just ask that you do your homework. It is important.

In His Love
-Keith

resbmc
Jun 1st 2008, 08:04 PM
none of these make any sense is you looked at it, that there is no 7 year reibulation, Daniel used the word shavium for the last week of seven and the word shavuot for the first 69, so the last week is not the same length as the previous 69, a day for a year or a week equals 7 years, it is not the same. Take the 7 year trib out of the equation, and all three fail.

NMKeith
Jun 1st 2008, 08:09 PM
none of these make any sense is you looked at it, that there is no 7 year reibulation, Daniel used the word shavium for the last week of seven and the word shavuot for the first 69, so the last week is not the same length as the previous 69, a day for a year or a week equals 7 years, it is not the same. Take the 7 year trib out of the equation, and all three fail.


You don't agree with any Rapture position?


2Ti 2:15 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2Ti/2Ti002.html#15) Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

wpm
Jun 1st 2008, 09:20 PM
First.. I'm not going to answer all your questions..

You didn't actually answer any of them. You seem to be more interested in promoting the Pretrib party line whilst carefully avoiding the many glaring consistencies with this school of thought. What is more, I though this thread was about your difficulties with Posttrib. Maybe you have seen this to be a futile endeavour, because several posters have showed you the error of such a concern.

Paul

wpm
Jun 1st 2008, 09:26 PM
Sorry, I been away for almost two days. This thread is really catchy.. Okay so I read through 5 pages.. First.. I'm not going to answer all your questions.. Sorry I just don't have the time to answer five pages of questions.. If you can answer five pages, then I think you need to find another hobby, or spend more time with your family. So I'll respond with this..

Let's explore another reason why we favor a "pre-tribulation" view of the Harpázô, the "snatching up" of the Church. All through the Gospels, Jesus relied on the ancient Jewish wedding pattern for many of His parables, climaxing in His promise in the Upper Room in John 14. Many of us miss the full import of these allusions if we aren't familiar with the model of ancient Jewish wedding practices

Let's view these slowly..

The first step, the Ketubah, or Betrothal, was the establishment of the marriage covenant, usually when the prospective bridegroom took the initiative and negotiated the price (mohair) he must pay to purchase her.

Once the bridegroom paid the purchase price, the marriage covenant was established, and the young man and woman were regarded as husband and wife. From that moment on, the bride was declared to be consecrated or sanctified - set apart - exclusively for her bridegroom. As a symbol of the covenant relationship that had been established, the groom and bride drank from a cup of wine over which the betrothal had been pronounced.

After the marriage covenant was established, the groom left his bride at her home and returned to his father's house, where he remained separated from his bride for approximately 12 months. This afforded the bride time to gather her trousseau and prepare for married life.

During this period of separation, the groom prepared a dwelling place in his father's house to which he would later bring his bride. At the end of the period of separation, the bridegroom came - usually at night - to take his bride to live with him. The groom, the best man, and other male escorts left the father's house and conducted a torch-light procession to the home of the bride. Although the bride was expecting her groom to come for her, she did not know the time of his coming. As a result, the groom's arrival was preceded by a shout, which announced her imminent departure to be gathered with him.

After the groom received his bride, together with her female attendants, the enlarged wedding party returned from the bride's home to the groom's father's house, where the wedding guests had assembled.

Shortly after their arrival, the bride and groom were escorted by the other members of the wedding party to the bridal chamber (huppah). Prior to entering the chamber, the bride remained veiled so that no one could see her face. While the groomsmen and bridesmaids waited outside, the bride and groom entered the bridal chamber alone. There, in the privacy of that place, they entered into physical union for the first time, thereby consummating the marriage that had been covenanted approximately one year earlier.

After the marriage was consummated, the groom came out of the bridal chamber and announced the consummation of the marriage to the members of the wedding party waiting outside. Then, as the groom went back to his bride in the chamber, the members of the wedding party returned to the wedding guests and announced the consummation of the marriage.

Upon receiving the good news, the wedding guests remained in the groom's father's house for the next seven days, celebrating with a great wedding feast.

During the seven days of the wedding feast, the bride and groom remained hidden in the bridal chamber (Genesis 29:21-23, 27-28) for the seven days of the huppah. Afterwards, the groom came out of hiding, bringing his bride with him, but with her veil removed so that everyone could see her.

The Ultimate Bride

The New Testament portrays the Church as the Bride of Christ in Ephesians 5:22-33 (Paul even quotes Genesis 2:24 as the union at the Parousia of the Bridegroom in v.31!); Romans 7:4; 2 Corinthians 11:2; James 4:4. In the opening verses of John 14, the marriage covenant is confirmed. Paul continually reminds us of the purchase price and the covenant by which we, the Bride, are set apart, or sanctified.

Ecclesiology vs. Eschatology? ? ?

It is this distinctive nature of the Church that is often overlooked by students of prophecy: it is more a matter of ecclesiology than eschatology.

One thing that seems to highlight this distinctiveness is the strange remark Jesus made regarding John the Baptist:

Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. -Matthew 11:11

What does that mean? Jesus goes on to explain,

For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. - Matthew 11:13

It is John the Baptist that closes the Old Testament, not Malachi. A profound distinction appears to be drawn between the saints of the Old Testament and those of the New.

One of the challenges in fully appreciating Paul's epistles is the need to understand the staggering and distinctive advantages afforded the Church, in contrast to those of the Old Testament saints. And it is this role as the Bride of the Bridegroom that is emphasized in the parables and in the Book of Revelation.

The Departure of the Bridegroom

The Bridegroom has departed, and His return to gather His Bride is imminent. He has gone to prepare a place for you and me. (He has been at it for 2,000 years! It must be a spectacular abode!)
This very doctrine of "imminence" is taught throughout the New Testament and is a cornerstone of the "pre-tribulational" view: there is no event which is a prerequisite condition for His gathering of His Bride.

Post Tribulation view the Church going through the Great Tribulation. In exploring this issue, it is essential to distinguish between persecution, which clearly has been the lot of the Church for 19 centuries, and "the Great Tribulation" of eschatological significance. The persecution - and tribulation - of the Church was clearly promised to us:

These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world. John 16:33

The source of this tribulation is the world and, of course, Satan. However, "the Great Tribulation" of eschatological significance is quite another matter.

For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. Matthew 24:21

The context here is clearly Israel. Jesus is quoting from the Old Testament:

And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book Daniel 12:1

Note that "thy people will be delivered": the focus of the "Great Tribulation" is Israel. That is why it is called "the time of Jacob's Trouble":
Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it. Jeremiah 30:7
Jesus (in the Old Testament) explains:

I will go and return to my place, till they acknowledge their offence, and seek my face: in their affliction they will seek me earnestly. Hosea 5:15

To "return," He must have left His place! The offence referred to is singular and specific: their rejection of Him. In "their affliction" they will ultimately repent and He will respond.

The Great Tribulation also involves more than the wrath of the world or the wrath of Satan: it involves the indignation and wrath of God. In contrast, the Church has been promised:

For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 1 Thessalonians 5:9

And,

Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. Romans 5:9

And, specifically,

Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour [time] of temptation [trial], which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. Revelation 3:10

Peter also emphasizes,

The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: 2 Peter 2:9

Here, Peter is using the judgment upon Sodom and Gomorrah "as an example," as Jesus also did, in which the prior removal of Lot was a precondition before the angels could do their work.

A complete study of this issue involves careful and diligent study of both the Church (ecclesiology) as well as the eschatology (end time aspects) of the Great Tribulation, which, of course, far exceeds the focus of this brief review. It requires precise definitions of the terms used, and great care to understand how each of the elements of the revealed truth relate to each other.

But the fundamental doctrine of imminence has to be forfeited with any view that requires the Great Tribulation - or any other precedent event - to occur prior to the Rapture.

Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man. Luke 21:36

Are you going to escape these things that shall come to pass? If so, how? Or are you relying on the notion that the Lord is "delaying His coming?" This could be a very dangerous presumption. Brothers and sisters, I'm not here to argue with any of you.

The importance of our faith is Jesus Christ, let's not allow a topic to cause discord among the breathen. Never ONCE have I denied your theory, I just find more Scriptures against it. So I was looking for a understanding on this theory.

Thus far I've seen brothers get angry just because this topic was mentioned.

Someone who is steadfast in faith would not become so angry, but with brother love, try to help the next brother understand.. So far I don't see this happening here.. I see arguments and the "I'm right and your wrong" attribute standing at an open door. So I will just ask that you do your homework. It is important.

In His Love
-Keith

Does the Jewish bride go through 7 yrs of terrible tribulation before she marries her groom? If you are going to present an illustartion it must match in some way. Is that what you are saying? Your words and that of Scripture don't correlate. Does it take 7 yrs for a Jewish Wedding to be consummated? Of course not. This is just Pretrib rhetoric that has no baring with God's infallible Word.

So far you have avoided a lot, and shared littel that would say Scripture teaches a Pretrib rapture. Please answer my question:

Can you show us one single Scripture that describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further Coming of Christ?

Paul

NMKeith
Jun 1st 2008, 09:26 PM
Can you show us one single Scripture that describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further Coming of Christ?

Our "Blessed Hope," there would seem to be seven harpázôs ("raptures") in the Bible: Enoch, Elijah, Philip, Paul, John and Jesus, and, of course, the Body of Christ, the Church. (In fact, the very Greek term, harpozô, is employed in four of these references.)

Since Paul highlights that the mystery of the Church was his privilege to reveal in the New Testament, it is fashionable to assume that it would be futile to expect any references to the Rapture of the Church in the Old Testament. However, here are some provocative passages for your personal consideration:

Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the LORD cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain. Isaiah 26:19-21

Who are to enter which chambers? How long are they to be hidden? (Compare this with John 14:1-3 and come to your own conclusions.)
And there are others:

Seek ye the LORD, all ye meek of the earth, which have wrought his judgment; seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the LORD'S anger. Zephaniah 2:3

For in the time of trouble he shall hide me in his pavilion: in the secret of his tabernacle shall he hide me; he shall set me up upon a rock. Psalm 27:5

But to me, the most provocative are the consistent patterns - or "types," metaphors, and similes - in the Old Testament:

Pattern is Prologue

It is interesting to notice the patterns that seem to be suggested in the Biblical text. One of the greatest judgments on the Planet Earth was, of course, the flood during the days of Noah. It is obvious that there were three groups of people facing that judgment:
1) Those that perished in the Flood;
2) Those who were preserved through the Flood, by means of the ark; and
3) Those who were removed prior to the Flood, namely, Enoch. (It can be argued that he was only one person, but so is the Church! It was G. H. Pember who first suggested that Revelation 12:5 might be a reference to the Church.)

Enoch is, for many reasons, one of the most intriguing characters in the Old Testament. There are also several provocative Jewish traditions regarding Enoch. He is regarded as having been born on the day the Jews observe Hag Shavout, the Feast of Weeks, or Pentecost. What is also interesting is that, by tradition, he is also believed to have been "translated" (or "raptured") on his birthday.

Since the Church was "born" on this day, one wonders if we, too, will be "raptured" on its birthday!
(As some pre-tribbers love to point out, Enoch wasn't "mid-flood" or "post-flood," he was "pre-flood.")

We all have enjoyed the famous confrontation between Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel's three friends in the fiery furnace in Daniel 3. Many prophecy buffs view Nebuchadnezzar and the forced worship of his image as a "type" of the Antichrist, and the three Jewish young men as a foreshadowing of the 144,000 miraculously preserved through the "furnace" of the tribulation. That leaves a provocative question: Where was Daniel himself? Who might he represent as a type?

Some prophecy buffs see the use of a threshing floor as an idiom alluding to the tribulation. The marvelous romance of Ruth, who becomes the Gentile bride of Boaz, her Kinsman-Redeemer, is seen as an anticipatory type of the Church and her Redeemer. In the critical threshing floor scene in chapter 3, where is Ruth? At the feet of her Redeemer. Interesting.
In Genesis 22, Abraham left the donkey and the two young men at the foot of the hill as he and Isaac went up to the top of Moriah for the famous offering of his son. After the episode concludes with the substitution of the ram, it lists those that then returned to Beersheba:

So Abraham returned unto his young men, and they rose up and went together to Beersheba; and Abraham dwelt at Beersheba.
Genesis 22:19

Where's Isaac? Obviously, Isaac also returned with Abraham and the two young men. But we are fascinated that the Holy Spirit appears to have edited the person of Isaac out of the record from the time he was offered until he is united with his bride two chapters later! We believe this was deliberate to have the narrative fully conform to the type.
One, of course, should not build doctrine from "types," metaphors, or similitudes. But we feel they can be instructive and illuminating.

For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope. Romans 15:4

I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets. - Hosea 12:10

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. -2 Timothy 2:15

The legendary John Walvoord used to joke that when he got to heaven, one of the first things he planned to do was to conduct a course on "Remedial Eschatology." But he admitted that he "wouldn't enjoy it as much because he would have lost his sin nature by then!"

He recently was called home to be with the Lord he served so faithfully for so many years. I wonder how he and Walter Martin are getting along…

wpm
Jun 1st 2008, 09:39 PM
Our "Blessed Hope," there would seem to be seven harpázôs ("raptures") in the Bible: Enoch, Elijah, Philip, Paul, John and Jesus, and, of course, the Body of Christ, the Church. (In fact, the very Greek term, harpozô, is employed in four of these references.)

Since Paul highlights that the mystery of the Church was his privilege to reveal in the New Testament, it is fashionable to assume that it would be futile to expect any references to the Rapture of the Church in the Old Testament. However, here are some provocative passages for your personal consideration:

Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the LORD cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain. Isaiah 26:19-21

Who are to enter which chambers? How long are they to be hidden? (Compare this with John 14:1-3 and come to your own conclusions.)
And there are others:

Seek ye the LORD, all ye meek of the earth, which have wrought his judgment; seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the LORD'S anger. Zephaniah 2:3

For in the time of trouble he shall hide me in his pavilion: in the secret of his tabernacle shall he hide me; he shall set me up upon a rock. Psalm 27:5

But to me, the most provocative are the consistent patterns - or "types," metaphors, and similes - in the Old Testament:

Pattern is Prologue

It is interesting to notice the patterns that seem to be suggested in the Biblical text. One of the greatest judgments on the Planet Earth was, of course, the flood during the days of Noah. It is obvious that there were three groups of people facing that judgment:
1) Those that perished in the Flood;
2) Those who were preserved through the Flood, by means of the ark; and
3) Those who were removed prior to the Flood, namely, Enoch. (It can be argued that he was only one person, but so is the Church! It was G. H. Pember who first suggested that Revelation 12:5 might be a reference to the Church.)

Enoch is, for many reasons, one of the most intriguing characters in the Old Testament. There are also several provocative Jewish traditions regarding Enoch. He is regarded as having been born on the day the Jews observe Hag Shavout, the Feast of Weeks, or Pentecost. What is also interesting is that, by tradition, he is also believed to have been "translated" (or "raptured") on his birthday.

Since the Church was "born" on this day, one wonders if we, too, will be "raptured" on its birthday!
(As some pre-tribbers love to point out, Enoch wasn't "mid-flood" or "post-flood," he was "pre-flood.")

We all have enjoyed the famous confrontation between Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel's three friends in the fiery furnace in Daniel 3. Many prophecy buffs view Nebuchadnezzar and the forced worship of his image as a "type" of the Antichrist, and the three Jewish young men as a foreshadowing of the 144,000 miraculously preserved through the "furnace" of the tribulation. That leaves a provocative question: Where was Daniel himself? Who might he represent as a type?

Some prophecy buffs see the use of a threshing floor as an idiom alluding to the tribulation. The marvelous romance of Ruth, who becomes the Gentile bride of Boaz, her Kinsman-Redeemer, is seen as an anticipatory type of the Church and her Redeemer. In the critical threshing floor scene in chapter 3, where is Ruth? At the feet of her Redeemer. Interesting.
In Genesis 22, Abraham left the donkey and the two young men at the foot of the hill as he and Isaac went up to the top of Moriah for the famous offering of his son. After the episode concludes with the substitution of the ram, it lists those that then returned to Beersheba:

So Abraham returned unto his young men, and they rose up and went together to Beersheba; and Abraham dwelt at Beersheba.
Genesis 22:19

Where's Isaac? Obviously, Isaac also returned with Abraham and the two young men. But we are fascinated that the Holy Spirit appears to have edited the person of Isaac out of the record from the time he was offered until he is united with his bride two chapters later! We believe this was deliberate to have the narrative fully conform to the type.
One, of course, should not build doctrine from "types," metaphors, or similitudes. But we feel they can be instructive and illuminating.

For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope. Romans 15:4

I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets. - Hosea 12:10

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. -2 Timothy 2:15

The legendary John Walvoord used to joke that when he got to heaven, one of the first things he planned to do was to conduct a course on "Remedial Eschatology." But he admitted that he "wouldn't enjoy it as much because he would have lost his sin nature by then!"

He recently was called home to be with the Lord he served so faithfully for so many years. I wonder how he and Walter Martin are getting along…

You are jumping around like a jack in the box and are hard to pin down. :bounce:

Moreover, you are throwing passage after passage that makes absolutely no reference to (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further Coming of Christ. Let us see biblical evidence that teaches what you are teaching on this board. I don't see anything.

Let us go through your so-called proof texts one at a time.

(1) Isaiah 26:19

Isaiah speaks of the resurrection of the dead, in Isaiah 26:19, and also identifies it with the destruction of the earth, saying, “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the LORD cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain. In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon.”

Here the resurrection of the dead (which expressly includes the writer Isaiah – an Old Testament saint) occurs at the Second Coming of the Lord, the same time that that great enemy of the kingdom of God that old serpent/dragon Satan and the wicked are once and for all destroyed. The Hebrew word used here for slain is harag meaning to destroy out of hand, kill, put to death. The resurrection of the righteous must therefore happen at the end of the millennium (and Satan’s little season), the time expressly advanced as the time when Satan is finally slain.

Job clearly identifies the great hope of the resurrection of the dead (which expressly here includes himself – an Old Testament saint) and places it at the time when the heavens (and therefore the current earth) pass away and consequently witness the appearance of the New Jerusalem at the last day. The word translated “till” here is the Hebrew word ‘ad’ that is consistently interpreted “unto” or “even unto” elsewhere throughout the Old Testament. Therefore, we can rightly understand this passage as saying: “So man lieth down, and riseth not: even unto the heavens be no more.”

People like myself who believe in a climactic Coming of the Lord hold that the whole redemptive history of this world is encompassed between Adam and the Second Coming of the second Adam. The transaction for redemption occurred at the Cross (in relation to God perfect all-sufficient act for the bondage of corruption) and terminates at the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. They believe that the Second Coming sees the fulfilment of the last aspect of the redemptive process – the “redemption” of their bodies. This corresponds with the final judgment of the wicked and their casting into the Lake of Fire.

Isaiah 26:19 actually refutes the Pretrib theory.

Paul

wpm
Jun 1st 2008, 09:51 PM
Enoch is, for many reasons, one of the most intriguing characters in the Old Testament. There are also several provocative Jewish traditions regarding Enoch. He is regarded as having been born on the day the Jews observe Hag Shavout, the Feast of Weeks, or Pentecost. What is also interesting is that, by tradition, he is also believed to have been "translated" (or "raptured") on his birthday.

Since the Church was "born" on this day, one wonders if we, too, will be "raptured" on its birthday!
(As some pre-tribbers love to point out, Enoch wasn't "mid-flood" or "post-flood," he was "pre-flood.")


This is another classic Pretrib misconception. The Church wasn't birthed at Pentecost. It has been going since the beginning. It is simply the congregation or assembly of God's people.

Christ speaking in the gospel that the dispensationalist say was written solely to the Jews – Matthew – confirms how the term church was related to the gathering of God’s people in His day, rather than some post-Pentecost New Testament period of time, as the same would try and argue. Jesus said, in Matthew 18:15-17, “if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.”

Here, in this supposed Jewish gospel, the disciples are carefully instructed in the proper way to deal with matters of religious discipline. Expressly, if the transgressor does not receive the private admonition of the ruling elders, the issue should be brought before ‘the congregation’ of God’s people – the Church – for public exposure. This is before Pentecost where you suggest the Church was birthed.

There was a NT Church before Pentecost!

The word interpreted "Church" in our English language is actually the Greek word ecclesia. It simply means the assembly or congregation of God's people. It relates to the people of God as much in the OT as it does to us in the NT. That’s why Stephen could declare, in reference to the Old Testament saints, in Acts 7:36-38, “he (Moses) had shewed wonders and signs in the land of Egypt, and in the Red sea, and in the wilderness forty years. This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear. This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us.”

Stephen locates the Old Testament saints in Acts 7:36-38 in the Church, even though he is describing OT Israel. There can be no doubt Israel is described as "the church in the wilderness." Nothing could be clearer. I feel that to deny that is denying the clear emphasis of the reading.

There was a OT Church before Pentecost!

Paul

NMKeith
Jun 1st 2008, 10:01 PM
Okay.. First, where have I said anything about me proving a pre-trib or trying to prove a pre-trib rapture on this thread? On the contrary I have offered Scripture, opinions, traditions, parables, ecclesiology and eschatology to defend my position (not prove anything). I guess I must be putting up a good argument, because you seem to be getting so hot headed about this topic and thinking I'm trying to prove you wrong? You have proved nothing either. You have offered nothing but the same; opinions, scriptures, parables etc. We see these Scriptures, opinions, and parables differently. I could answer your questions and it will come out to the same answer from your poistion on this topic (and that is fine). I just wanted a clear understanding; I have given you ALL five pages to try and show me some understanding on this theory. I have read what I have, and I will study more to validate your opinions (as a whole), this will take time. But at least I'm up to the challange that you are asking. I guess because there is doubt from both sides (rather you see it or not). You have not proved anything to us pre-tribs either if I was asking for such. I'm not here to prove your theory wrong, nor am I going to prove I'm right. I've explained already I'm not going to argue these poistions, civil debate is one thing, arguing your position is another. I'm new here and want to gain knowledge, I have asked that we take this slow. I come back and there are five pages. So yes I refuse to answer them all. I have more time to dedicate to my family, however I will study the Scriptures you have provided, and I will take note on the opinions you have asked. Again thanks for trying back your position, but the turn-out is just the same as expected.

NMKeith
Jun 1st 2008, 10:07 PM
This is another classic Pretrib misconception. The Church wasn't birthed at Pentecost. It has been going since the beginning. It is simply the congregation or assembly of God's people.



There was a OT Church before Pentecost!

Paul


This alone has me thinking that what you are saying is not full truth..

Mat 16:18 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Mat/Mat016.html#18) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.


Again, show proof of a Church in the Old Testament? The Church was not mentioned until the NT. However, assemblies where the faithful did gather, yes.. But please don't confuse that with the NT Church.

With just this quote here.. Already your position is unstable..

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 12:24 AM
This alone has me thinking that what you are saying is not full truth..

Mat 16:18 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Mat/Mat016.html#18) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Again, show proof of a Church in the Old Testament? The Church was not mentioned until the NT. However, assemblies where the faithful did gather, yes.. But please don't confuse that with the NT Church.

With just this quote here.. Already your position is unstable..

The Rock Christ is the eternal Son of God. There is no other entrance into heaven apart from this Rock. The OT saints were built upon this Rock, the OT saints are built upon this Rock. The Church throughout time is sbuilt upon this Rock. Acts 4:12 confirms, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."

I see you totally ignored my reference to Acts 7: 38 which proves OT Israel was the ancient Church. Anyway, the word ecclesia (Church) is found 77 times in the Greek Old Testament - Septuagint (LXX) - referring to the assembly of the people of God. The ‘Church’ ekklesia -1577 is found throughout the Greek Old Testament – the Septuagint, in Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, I Chroniciles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Lamentations, Joel, and Micah. That is 16 of the Old Testament books, which is nearly half of them.

The writer of the Hebrews quotes and applies the word ecclesia, as it exactly reads in Psalm 22:22 in the Greek Septuagint, to the Old Testament saints, saying: “I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee” (Hebrews 2:12).

Psalm 22:22 reads, “I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.”

You need to realise that the Church is an ongoing organism that Christ is building. He was building it in the OT, He is building it today, He will be building it tomorrow - if He tarries. It relates to the people of God throughout time.

Paul

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 01:05 AM
You need to clarify points if this discussion is going to develop. Others need to establish what you believe in order to address your arguments. If you don't like your views been questioned then you should not have directed a challenge on another belief. You need to explain some things. So far, you are not.

Was this thread a challenge? On the contrary, I never said I would disprove anything or prove anything for that matter. I basically asked 5 questions that should be considered valid points from a non post-tribulation believer. So what was the challenge? To defend it by answering five questions?




I actually addressed your point. In case you missed it, I said: "Most Posttribs over the centuries have viewed this as being fulfilled at Messiah's First Coming." History shows that the 490 years were congruent and sequential.

Sorry I missed this point you made. Since you are the one willing to take this topic serious. Let's follow you here.. Where in Scripture (scripture alone) does one see that all this was fulfilled?

Luk 21:24 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Luk/Luk021.html#24) And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Sorry if I seem ignorant or foolish for not seeing this. But Jerusalem was not destroyed until 70AD. How could this event 'alone' be fulfilled at His coming 70 years prior? Also at what point of Christ's first coming was the fulfillment made by the gentiles? Is not that until the rebirth of Israel on May 14th 1948? Until that time, the house of Israel has been trodden down with "gentiles". Many Jewish people in 1981 actually came back to the nation of Israel from Russia (Biblical Magog), Ethiopia, and Persia (fulfilling the verse quoted above as a future event, and Ezekiel 37). The Bible speaks in Ezekiel 37 about the "valley of dry bones" coming to life and fulfilling Ezekiel 37:10-14. The nation was dead for two thousand years following the death of Chirst, so how can we come here with an assurance that it was fulfilled in Christ's day?


Those of us that take 490 years to mean exactly that do not have to prove that it is harmonious; we just have to accept what it states. We take it literally (1) because it happened literally, (2) there is no command to decapitate it and project it into the unknown. Seven multiplied by seventy comes to 490 cohesive years, not 2,490 broken up years and counting. There is no gap mentioned in the prophecy so there is no need or warrant to insert one in there.

Thank you for the clear view. But allow me to ask, is it truly wise to just "accept what it states" with out looking into it and compare it with other Scripture? I believe (my opinion) it is not wise for any "rapture-view" to accept with out question.




In conclusion: Where are your rapture and third coming in Daniel 9? Please answer this - it is an important, reasonable, and elementary request.

Let's narrow this down. You are talking about Daniel 9:20-27 correct? First I don't know what you mean by "third coming" I only know of a second coming. And Daniel 9 is a prophesy about the tribulation period and the antichrist breaking his peace treaty. You won't find the rapture within it's 7 verses regarding this in chapter 9, why? I believe the rapture has already happened. So the logical question at this point is, where is your post tribulation rapture at the time when the antichrist is ruling in Daniel 9?




I actually addressed my argument to rebut your imminent argument. I don't feel this is a direct or relevant response to my rebuttal.

Not sure I follow this comment, but I'm glad you have the sense enough to rebuttal my position as I do yours.




I have showed you 2 arguments to challenge what you are saying. There are many more. What they prove is that Jesus just couldn't have returned at any moment until certain things were fufilled. You seem to be tip-toeing round the issues. Let us take Peter living to be an old man. Please address that. Can you accept that none of the disciples could have held to your theory of imminence. They knew Peter would not die young.

I agree some things needed to be fulfilled. But your theory speaks that everything must first be fulfilled (i.e. Third temple, antichrist, tribulation)

Luke 21:29-32 speaks about the fig tree. We are to know the times of the signs and the signs of the times. But no man knows the hour.

If this was the case I could almost count the days when Christ would return. I will answer that in a moment..








7 yrs. I have told you that this harmonius prophecy has been fulfilled. You have said nothing to cause me to question a literal contextual reading of it.

I have read Revelation many times, and I have counted more than two '3 ½s'. You need to clarify points if this discussion is going to develop or if we are going to take your claims serious.


Well I feel that I should answer these questions to the best of my knowledge..



The Tribulation is generally thought to occur before the 2nd Coming of Jesus and the end of the world. It is theorized that each week represents 7 years, with the timetable beginning from the order by King Artaxerxes to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. After 7 plus 62 weeks, the prophecy says that the messiah will be "cut off", which is taken to correspond to the death of Christ. This is seen as creating a break of indeterminate length in the timeline, with one week remaining to be fulfilled.

This seven-year week may be further divided into two periods of 3.5 years each, from the two 3.5-year periods in Daniel's prophecy where the last seven years are divided into two 3.5-year periods, (Daniel 9:27)The time period for these beliefs is also based on other passages: in the book of Daniel, "time, times, and half a time," interpreted as "a year, two years, and half a year," and the book of Revelation, "a thousand two hundred and threescore days" and "forty and two months" (the prophetic month averaging 30 days, hence 1260/30 = 42 months or 3.5 years). The 1290 days of Daniel 12:11, (rather than the 1260 days of Revelation 11:3), is thought to be the result of either a simple intercalary leap month adjustment, or due to further calculations related to the prophecy.

There are four things listed in Daniel's vision referenced in Daniel 8:9-14, and a time table given for those four things:
1. "the daily sacrifice"
2. "the rebellion that causes desolation"
3. "the surrender of the sanctuary"
4. "the host that will be trampled underfoot"

There are 2,550 days in the seven year period allocated by Daniel 9:27 for the Tribulation, but only "2,300 evenings and mornings" referenced in Daniel 8:14, for daily sacrifice.
This 250 day gap, or 8 1/2 months is the time that will be required for the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, after the Antichrist confirms the "covenant."

We operate under the Gregorian calendar of 365 days per year with a leap day every four years. 365 days time 7 years, plus one leap day totals 2,556 days.
Daniel operated under the lunar calendar of 12 periods with 30 days, totaling 360 days per year, with a leap month every 7 years. 360 days time 7 years, plus one leap month totals 2,550 days.

We will not know the day or hour for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, because if for no other reason, we do not know when the leap month will be applied.

In His Love
-Keith

The Village Idiot
Jun 2nd 2008, 01:09 AM
"I have proclaimed glad tidings of righteousness in the great congregation" (Ps 40:9).

"Glad tidings" in this text translates "euvhggelisa,mhn" (euangelizo) in the LXX. I preached the gospel in the church. Unless I'm mistaken, the good news is another concept that has no place in the OT.


"Get you up to a high mountain, O Zion, herald of good news; lift up your voice with strength, O Jerusalem, herald of good news; lift it up, fear not; say to the cities of Judah, 'Behold your God'" (Is 40:9).



"How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news, who publishes peace, who brings good news of happiness, who publishes salvation, who says to Zion, 'Your God reigns'" (Is 52:7).

"The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed me to bring good news to the poor; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound" (Is 61:1).

"Behold, upon the mountains, the feet of him who brings good news" (Na 1:15).

Perhaps Isaiah and Nahum likewise ran a pint short of the full truth.

Also, that Jesus "will" build "my church" does not mean that the church did not yet exist. Arguably, it implies that he already had a church to build.


"The Aoristic Future conceives of an action simply as an event, and affirms that it will take place in future time. It may be indefinite, inceptive, or resultative. As indefinite it may be momentary, comprehensive, or collective."

"The Progressive Future affirms that an action will be in progress in future time."

--Burton's Moods and Tenses

Where doctirnal distinctives are concerned, I think that arguments based on tense need collaborative support. It also helps when the collaborative texts support the argument being made.

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 01:27 AM
Sorry I missed this point you made. Since you are the one willing to take this topic serious. Let's follow you here.. Where in Scripture (scripture alone) does one see that all this was fulfilled?

Luk 21:24 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Luk/Luk021.html#24) And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Sorry if I seem ignorant or foolish for not seeing this. But Jerusalem was not destroyed until 70AD. How could this event 'alone' be fulfilled at His coming 70 years prior? Also at what point of Christ's first coming was the fulfillment made by the gentiles? Is not that until the rebirth of Israel on May 14th 1948? Until that time, the house of Israel has been trodden down with "gentiles". Many Jewish people in 1981 actually came back to the nation of Israel from Russia (Biblical Magog), Ethiopia, and Persia (fulfilling the verse quoted above as a future event, and Ezekiel 37). The Bible speaks in Ezekiel 37 about the "valley of dry bones" coming to life and fulfilling Ezekiel 37:10-14. The nation was dead for two thousand years following the death of Chirst, so how can we come here with an assurance that it was fulfilled in Christ's day?


Daniel 9 doesn't say that it is within the 70 weeks. While the rebuilding of the city was to occur within the 70 weeks (the first 7 weeks specifically) the date of the final destruction of the temple – which resulted from the once all-sufficient sacrifice for sin (in the midst of the 70th week) as predicted in Daniel 9:27 – is not specified. It says, “for (or because of) the overspreading of abominationshe shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate (the temple and its now obsolete ordinances).”

In God's eyes the old covenant arrangement was finished. That is all that mattered. That was predicted to happen after 3 1/2 yrs of Messiah's earthly ministry. And guess what? It occurred right on time. It simply tells us why, not when. Whilst there is a marker at the 7th and 69th years there is not a division. I believe history shows that the 490 years were congruent and sequential. Where does it say to decapitate this 490 years?

Christ applied this reading to AD 70. So therefore should we. After all, no one had greater understanding of the Old Testament than Him. The destruction occurs because of the abominations continued within the temple. It is "for" or 'because of' or 'for the reason of' these abominations that destruction was pronounced on the temple. Nowhere does it locate the destruction within the 70 weeks. Although the continuation of the abominations after Calvary (which commenced in the middle of the 70th week) caused God to destroy the temple down.

AD 70, and the awful judgment that befell the Jews at that time, emanated from the wrath of God and His righteous dealing with Israel for their wanton rejection of His only eternal provision for sin and uncleanness, in the form of His “only begotten Son” – the Lord Jesus Christ. This ultimate rejection was best manifested in the wicked continuation of the now defunct temple sacrifices, after God had eternally abolished them, through Christ’s substitutionary death. The temple therefore being the focus, and the symbol, of Jewish rebellion was therefore the edifice that God would totally destroy, as Christ perfectly prophesied, even to the Consummation. Interestingly, Luke’s record of the Lord’s prophecy of AD 70 in Luke 21:20-24, declares, “for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled” (Luke 21:22-24).

When Christ died the need for the temple and the animal sacrifices was removed in God's economy. The fact the temple remained standing till AD70 did not negate the fact that it was finished in God’s mind. Even though AD70 was the time where the desolation actually occurred, when Christ declared the temple at Jerusalem to be desolate – it was essentially desolate. Notwithstanding, the desolation, does not have to be a part of the 70th week.

Those who insist that the destruction had to be destroyed within the limits of the 70 weeks fail to provide Scripture to prove such an idea. It is definitely not in the text.

The whole focus of Daniel 9 is (1) the Calvary sacrifice, and, (2) the error of the Jews continuing to make blood sacrifices in the temple, after they were once and forever abolished. The desolation (mentioned in Daniel 9) was evidently the visible manifestation and ultimate consequence of the Jews rejection of Calvary. Christ’s atoning sacrifice was the undoubted focus of this Old Testament prophecy. The desolation was the awful result of the Jews blasphemous rejection of the sin destroying new covenant and the continuation of the old. That is why the desolation related to, and was focus on, the heart of this rebellion – the temple. We could rightly view the above reference as basically indicating the destruction owing to the abominations, this would better explain the Lord’s quote from the Greek Old Testament Septuagint which states, “the abomination of desolation.”

Paul

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 01:33 AM
"I have proclaimed glad tidings of righteousness in the great congregation" (Ps 40:9).

"Glad tidings" in this text translates "euvhggelisa,mhn" (euangelizo) in the LXX. I preached the gospel in the church. Unless I'm mistaken, the good news is another concept that has no place in the OT.



Perhaps Isaiah and Nahum likewise ran a pint short of the full truth.

Also, that Jesus "will" build "my church" does not mean that the church did not yet exist. Arguably, it implies that he already had a church to build.



--Burton's Moods and Tenses

Where doctirnal distinctives are concerned, I think that arguments based on tense need collaborative support. It also helps when the collaborative texts support the argument being made.

Amen.

KJV - Psalms 40:9 says, “I have preached righteousness in the great congregation: lo, I have not refrained my lips, O LORD, thou knowest.”

LXX - Psalms 40:9 (39:10) says, “euhggelisamhn {<2097> V-AMI-1S} dikaiosunhn {<1343> N-ASF} en {<1722> PREP} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577)N-DSF} megalh {<3173> A-DSF} idou {<2400> INJ} ta {<3588> T-APN} ceilh {<5491> N-APN} mou {<1473> P-GS} ou {<3364> ADV} mh {<3165> ADV} kwlusw {<2967> V-AAS-1S} kurie {<2962> N-VSM} su {<4771> P-NS} egnwv {<1097> V-AAI-2S}.”

Paul

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 01:37 AM
I see you totally ignored my reference to Acts 7: 38 which proves OT Israel was the ancient Church. Anyway, the word ecclesia (Church) is found 77 times in the Greek Old Testament - Septuagint (LXX)

I see you have great conviction, and your knowledge is wonderful; so knowing a little Greek myself I understand where you are going with this.. Let's discuss this because ecclesia means several things.

In the Old Testament usage, "Church" was not originally a specifically religious word It's own root idea is that of "a body of called out ones," and was translated by the Latin term ecclesia, from two Greek words, ek, meaning "out" and kalein, "to call." Although ecclesia is now used in a distinctively Christian sense yet it is found scattered throughout the Old Testament in many forms. It's Hebrew equivalent Kahal is found less than than 123 times and was used to describe a congregation, assembly, multitude or company of any kind.

The first occurrence of the word is found in the blessing of Jacob by Issac, "Be a multitude of people" (Genesis 28:3). It is seen again in Nehemiah's pronouncement "The Moabites should not come into the congregation of God for ever" (13:1). Thus wherever the word is found, it signifies a group of certain people selected from among others for a particular purpose. And not necessarily religious. The gathering of rioters at Ephesus is referred to as the ecclesia (Acts 19:32). So again though ecclesia now means the Church. Back in the Old Testament it meant many different things.

HisGrace
Jun 2nd 2008, 01:43 AM
Where is your rapture in Rev? You just jump in saying "right after the rapture."

PaulRev. 4:1 Then as I looked, I saw a door standing open in heaven, and the same voice I had heard before spoke to me with the sound of a mighty trumpet blast. The voice said, "Come up here and I will show you what must happen after these things."

Like everyone else, John was raptured. Remember the trumpet blast mentioned in 1 Thess. 4:6?

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 01:45 AM
Let's narrow this down. You are talking about Daniel 9:20-27 correct? First I don't know what you mean by "third coming" I only know of a second coming. And Daniel 9 is a prophesy about the tribulation period and the antichrist breaking his peace treaty. You won't find the rapture within it's 7 verses regarding this in chapter 9, why? I believe the rapture has already happened. So the logical question at this point is, where is your post tribulation rapture at the time when the antichrist is ruling in Daniel 9?

But where is your Second Coming? You have admitted it is not a rapture passage, but where is this supposed third appearance of Christ you speak about?

I don't believe Dan 9 is a Second Coming passage, I have told you that, I believe it is a First Advent reading. Why therefore are you asking me: "where is your post tribulation rapture at the time when the antichrist is ruling in Daniel 9?"?

Also, Pretribs take parousia (Coming) passages and apply them to 2 future Comings of Christ - thus Second and Third Coming.



I agree some things needed to be fulfilled. But your theory speaks that everything must first be fulfilled (i.e. Third temple, antichrist, tribulation)

Luke 21:29-32 speaks about the fig tree. We are to know the times of the signs and the signs of the times. But no man knows the hour.

If this was the case I could almost count the days when Christ would return. I will answer that in a moment..


Sorry? The third and final temple is Christ and His spiritual body. Daniel made clear the destroyed temple would be left desolate till the "consummation" or climactic Coming of Christ. It still is. Tribulation started with Stephen, we are still in it. What is more, antichrist has been on the go since Bible times.



The Tribulation is generally thought to occur before the 2nd Coming of Jesus and the end of the world. It is theorized that each week represents 7 years, with the timetable beginning from the order by King Artaxerxes to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. After 7 plus 62 weeks, the prophecy says that the messiah will be "cut off", which is taken to correspond to the death of Christ. This is seen as creating a break of indeterminate length in the timeline, with one week remaining to be fulfilled.

This seven-year week may be further divided into two periods of 3.5 years each, from the two 3.5-year periods in Daniel's prophecy where the last seven years are divided into two 3.5-year periods, (Daniel 9:27)The time period for these beliefs is also based on other passages: in the book of Daniel, "time, times, and half a time," interpreted as "a year, two years, and half a year," and the book of Revelation, "a thousand two hundred and threescore days" and "forty and two months" (the prophetic month averaging 30 days, hence 1260/30 = 42 months or 3.5 years). The 1290 days of Daniel 12:11, (rather than the 1260 days of Revelation 11:3), is thought to be the result of either a simple intercalary leap month adjustment, or due to further calculations related to the prophecy.

There are four things listed in Daniel's vision referenced in Daniel 8:9-14, and a time table given for those four things:
1. "the daily sacrifice"
2. "the rebellion that causes desolation"
3. "the surrender of the sanctuary"
4. "the host that will be trampled underfoot"

There are 2,550 days in the seven year period allocated by Daniel 9:27 for the Tribulation, but only "2,300 evenings and mornings" referenced in Daniel 8:14, for daily sacrifice.
This 250 day gap, or 8 1/2 months is the time that will be required for the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, after the Antichrist confirms the "covenant."

We operate under the Gregorian calendar of 365 days per year with a leap day every four years. 365 days time 7 years, plus one leap day totals 2,556 days.
Daniel operated under the lunar calendar of 12 periods with 30 days, totaling 360 days per year, with a leap month every 7 years. 360 days time 7 years, plus one leap month totals 2,550 days.

We will not know the day or hour for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, because if for no other reason, we do not know when the leap month will be applied.


These are not rapture passages. These are not Second Coming passages. Please show me your 2nd and 3rd Comings with 7 yrs sandwiched in between in these OT readings? Surely the burden of proof is with you: after all, he who alleges must prove.

You have not addressed Rev yet. I would like your run down on it. Where is your rapture and Second Coming there?

Paul

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 01:57 AM
Daniel 9 doesn't say that it is within the 70 weeks. While the rebuilding of the city was to occur within the 70 weeks (the first 7 weeks specifically) the date of the final destruction of the temple – which resulted from the once all-sufficient sacrifice for sin (in the midst of the 70th week) as predicted in Daniel 9:27 – is not specified. It says, “for (or because of) the overspreading of abominationshe shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate (the temple and its now obsolete ordinances).”

In God's eyes the old covenant arrangement was finished. That is all that mattered. That was predicted to happen after 3 1/2 yrs of Messiah's earthly ministry. And guess what? It occurred right on time. It simply tells us why, not when. Whilst there is a marker at the 7th and 69th years there is not a division. I believe history shows that the 490 years were congruent and sequential. Where does it say to decapitate this 490 years?

Christ applied this reading to AD 70. So therefore should we. After all, no one had greater understanding of the Old Testament than Him. The destruction occurs because of the abominations continued within the temple. It is "for" or 'because of' or 'for the reason of' these abominations that destruction was pronounced on the temple. Nowhere does it locate the destruction within the 70 weeks. Although the continuation of the abominations after Calvary (which commenced in the middle of the 70th week) caused God to destroy the temple down.

AD 70, and the awful judgment that befell the Jews at that time, emanated from the wrath of God and His righteous dealing with Israel for their wanton rejection of His only eternal provision for sin and uncleanness, in the form of His “only begotten Son” – the Lord Jesus Christ. This ultimate rejection was best manifested in the wicked continuation of the now defunct temple sacrifices, after God had eternally abolished them, through Christ’s substitutionary death. The temple therefore being the focus, and the symbol, of Jewish rebellion was therefore the edifice that God would totally destroy, as Christ perfectly prophesied, even to the Consummation. Interestingly, Luke’s record of the Lord’s prophecy of AD 70 in Luke 21:20-24, declares, “for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled” (Luke 21:22-24).

When Christ died the need for the temple and the animal sacrifices was removed in God's economy. The fact the temple remained standing till AD70 did not negate the fact that it was finished in God’s mind. Even though AD70 was the time where the desolation actually occurred, when Christ declared the temple at Jerusalem to be desolate – it was essentially desolate. Notwithstanding, the desolation, does not have to be a part of the 70th week.

Those who insist that the destruction had to be destroyed within the limits of the 70 weeks fail to provide Scripture to prove such an idea. It is definitely not in the text.

The whole focus of Daniel 9 is (1) the Calvary sacrifice, and, (2) the error of the Jews continuing to make blood sacrifices in the temple, after they were once and forever abolished. The desolation (mentioned in Daniel 9) was evidently the visible manifestation and ultimate consequence of the Jews rejection of Calvary. Christ’s atoning sacrifice was the undoubted focus of this Old Testament prophecy. The desolation was the awful result of the Jews blasphemous rejection of the sin destroying new covenant and the continuation of the old. That is why the desolation related to, and was focus on, the heart of this rebellion – the temple. We could rightly view the above reference as basically indicating the destruction owing to the abominations, this would better explain the Lord’s quote from the Greek Old Testament Septuagint which states, “the abomination of desolation.”

Paul


quote=wpm;1657572]Daniel 9 doesn't say that it is within the 70 weeks. While the rebuilding of the city was to occur within the 70 weeks (the first 7 weeks specifically) the date of the final destruction of the temple

Please back this statement in other Scripture please.. Because to fit this into your point, one must rip up the entire 12th chapter of Daniel.

I read this whole response three times, and I do not see how this all proves a post tribulation.. In no form what so ever. We are disagreeing now on the time table in which the prophecies were/and are fulfilled.. Or am I just not wise enough to see it.. After reading this again, are you claiming to be a post-trib believer or a mid-trib believer? Everything seems to be 3 1/2 years. Most people who I talk to use these same Scriptures and argument to defend either a mid-trib or a pre-wrath view. This is why I ask..

The Village Idiot
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:04 AM
This is John's calling/comissioning. This is John's equivalent to Is 6 where Isaiah is lifted up into the heavenl council in a vision. This is John's equivalent to Ezekiel's experience of being received into God's heavenly council. Read it in Ezekiel 1, man! John borrows the thunderstorm and 4 living creature theme from Ezekiel's commission (Ez 1:4ff), and tailors it to express his own call/commissioning in Re 4:1-6 and following. Moses had the same experience when he ascended the Mount of God where Yahweh met him in the thunderstorm. This is how YHWH commissioned prophets to speak in his name.

The use of these motifs show that this is John's commissioning. He is lifted up into the Throne room of the Almighty, where he receives Yahweh's perspectives and the judgments that he is to reveal--which leads to the seals/trumpets/vials, the four horsemen, etc.

Not a rapture--but a calling, a commissioning to speak in YH's Name.

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:06 AM
In the Old Testament usage, "Church" was not originally a specifically religious word It's own root idea is that of "a body of called out ones," and was translated by the Latin term ecclesia,from two Greek words, ek, meaning "out" and kalein, "to call." Although ecclesia is now used in a distinctively Christian sense yet it is found scattered throughout the Old Testament in many forms. It's Hebrew equivalent Kahal is found less than than 123 times and was used to describe a congregation, assembly, multitude or company of any kind.

The first occurrence of the word is found in the blessing of Jacob by Issac, "Be a multitude of people" (Genesis 28:3). It is seen again in Nehemiah's pronouncement "The Moabites should not come into the congregation of God for ever" (13:1). Thus wherever the word is found, it signifies a group of certain people selected from among others for a particular purpose. And not necessarily religious. The gathering of rioters at Ephesus is referred to as the ecclesia (Acts 19:32). So again though ecclesia now means the Church. Back in the Old Testament it meant many different things.



The word means the same in the OT as it does in the NT.

ekklesia (ek-klay-see'-ah); from a compound of NT:1537 and a derivative of NT:2564; a calling out, i.e. (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both):

KJV - assembly, church.

That is what it meant in the OT as you demonstrate and exactly what it means today. There has always been a congregation [eclessia] of God's people. This refutes this Pretrib theory that the eclessia of God's people began at Pentecost. This is simply not true.

I think even you see that Israel was the Church in the wilderness. Although you seem to shy away from directly admitting this NT linkage to the OT Church. I feel to do so would pull apart this Pretrib fundamental.

Finally after admitting that "The gathering of rioters at Ephesus is referred to as the ecclesia (Acts 19:32)" you then say, "though ecclesia now means the Church. Back in the Old Testament it meant many different things." However it has alway meant a congregation or assembly - OT and NT. The true redeemed Church has alway been in the midst of the wider congregation - in both ages. We today are one body with the redeemed before the cross. We are one spiritual organism.

Paul

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:14 AM
[/color][/font][/size]

Please back this statement in other Scripture please.. Because to fit this into your point, one must rip up the entire 12th chapter of Daniel.

I read this whole response three times, and I do not see how this all proves a post tribulation.. In no form what so ever. We are disagreeing now on the time table in which the prophecies were/and are fulfilled.. Or am I just not wise enough to see it.. After reading this again, are you claiming to be a post-trib believer or a mid-trib believer? Everything seems to be 3 1/2 years. Most people who I talk to use these same Scriptures and argument to defend either a mid-trib or a pre-wrath view. This is why I ask..

No, you present Daniel 9 as evidence of a Pretrib rapture. I asked 'where is your rapture?' You say it is not in there. I say how then can you claim it for your secret rapture? This is a fair point. I also ask, where is your Second Coming here? You present nothing in response. From your silence (or avoidance) I can only conclude that it refers to what I believe it is: a historic record of Christ's First Advent.

I do not believe it pertains to the Second Advent so why are you pressing me to apply it to soomething I don't believe. As I have said, the burden of proof is with you.

If you want passages that prove a Posttrib Coming of Christ I will give you plenty, but Dan 9 is not one. It is long fulfilled.

Paul

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:20 AM
But where is your Second Coming? You have admitted it is not a rapture passage, but where is this supposed third appearance of Christ you speak about?

And I never said it was a rapture passage.. I said it was the seven years of Tribulation and the antichrist. The rapture is nowhere to be found.. I never use Daniel 9 to defend my position, I use it as a tool to confirm the seven year tribulation.. Nothing more.. So I thought since you brought up this passage I would learn something new.. But now I ask why did you even use Daniel 9 at all? Unless you don't believe in the seven year tribulation?



Also, Pretribs take parousia (Coming) passages and apply them to 2 future Comings of Christ - thus Second and Third Coming.

Again I don't see a third coming.. I know of a second coming.. Most confuse the rapture and the 2nd coming as the same event. I assume you are thinking the same then?




Sorry? The third and final temple is Christ and His spiritual body. Daniel made clear the destroyed temple would be left desolate till the "consummation" or climactic Coming of Christ. It still is. Tribulation started with Stephen, we are still in it. What is more, antichrist has been on the go since Bible times.

You don't watch to much TV or read much on Israel today do you? Did you know that they have everything that is required to rebuild the temple? yes it will be rebuilt, infact that is the next event one must forsee to happen. Even Jewish people are expecting their messiah to appear.. Why? One example: The red heifer.. Please do research on the red heifer


The red heifer is seen by some Jewish people as the missing link needed for religious Jews to rebuild their ancient Temple in Jerusalem. Sacrificing the animal in its third year and using its ashes in a purification rite would allow Jews to return 2000 years later to the Temple site, a spot holy to both Jews and Muslims.


RED HEIFER SIGNALS THIRD TEMPLE


The birth of a red heifer in Israel is being hailed by religious Jews as a sign from God that work can soon begin on building the Third Temple in Jerusalem.


A team of rabbinical experts last week confirmed that the animal, born six months ago on a religious kibbutz near the north Israeli port of Haifa, meets the correct Biblical criteria for a genuine holy cow. According to the Book of (Numbers 19: 2-7), the animal is needed for an ancient Jewish purification ritual.


"Speak unto the children of Israel that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came yoke," says the fourth book of the Old Testament, also part of Jewish holy scripture, the Torah.


The heifer will be slaughtered and burned, and its ashes made into a liquid paste and used in a ceremony which religious Jews believe they must undergo before they can enter the old Temple site in Jerusalem to start building a new structure.


Since Herod's Temple was destroyed by the Roman emperor Titus in AD 70, no flawless red heifer has been born within the biblical land of Israel, according to rabbinical teaching.


The birth of the animal, to a black-and-white mother and a dun-colored bull, is being hailed as a "miracle" by activists who want to rebuild the Third Temple and prepare the way for the Jewish messiah's entry to Jerusalem.


The faithful will need to wait until the heifer is at least three before it can be used in a ritual sacrifice. That would enable religious Jews to start the new millennium (a Christian event, but still regarded as portentous) in a state of purity.


More than anything the Jewish people want to rebuild their temple.. It will happen




You have not addressed Rev yet. I would like your run down on it. Where is your rapture and Second Coming there?



Paul

I'm not there yet. We have many things to cover first. As I said, this is about your position on the post-trib.. Not mine on a pre-trib, there are many threads about that.. You came here to defend it, because this is why I posted it. So this is what we will do, allow you to defend it.. As I stated I will take this slow. And slow I will take it.. AGAIN I'm not here to disprove anything. We study what we share with each other and we as the faithful, come to our own conclusion. If you think I'm here to prove/disprove to you anything, then you have come to the wrong place to argue.

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:21 AM
Rev. 4:1 Then as I looked, I saw a door standing open in heaven, and the same voice I had heard before spoke to me with the sound of a mighty trumpet blast. The voice said, "Come up here and I will show you what must happen after these things."

Like everyone else, John was raptured. Remember the trumpet blast mentioned in 1 Thess. 4:6?

Revelation 4:1 is not a record of the rapture. It is simply a record of John being caught up in the Spirit into heaven 2,000 yrs ago. Anyway, there is absolutely no mention of the Church in the reading.

Paul

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:25 AM
The word means the same in the OT as it does in the NT.

ekklesia (ek-klay-see'-ah); from a compound of NT:1537 and a derivative of NT:2564; a calling out, i.e. (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both):

KJV - assembly, church.

That is what it meant in the OT as you demonstrate and exactly what it means today. There has always been a congregation [eclessia] of God's people. This refutes this Pretrib theory that the eclessia of God's people began at Pentecost. This is simply not true.

I think even you see that Israel was the Church in the wilderness. Although you seem to shy away from directly admitting this NT linkage to the OT Church. I feel to do so would pull apart this Pretrib fundamental.

Finally after admitting that "The gathering of rioters at Ephesus is referred to as the ecclesia (Acts 19:32)" you then say, "though ecclesia now means the Church. Back in the Old Testament it meant many different things." However it has alway meant a congregation or assembly - OT and NT. The true redeemed Church has alway been in the midst of the wider congregation - in both ages. We today are one body with the redeemed before the cross. We are one spiritual organism.

Paul


I will disagree with this.. Because the "Church" was not found in the Old Testament. You may say it means the same, but there is not one record found in the OT that mentions anything about the church, as it does in the NT. So I will not beat down a dead horse (subject).

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:34 AM
And I never said it was a rapture passage.. I said it was the seven years of Tribulation and the antichrist. The rapture is nowhere to be found.. I never use Daniel 9 to defend my position, I use it as a tool to confirm the seven year tribulation.. Nothing more.. So I thought since you brought up this passage I would learn something new.. But now I ask why did you even use Daniel 9 at all? Unless you don't believe in the seven year tribulation?

Ok, so Daniel 9 isn't a so-called rapture passage, it isn't a Second Coming, where is a seven yrs trib then??? Please quote the verses. I will repeat, Daniel 9 is a clear and explicit First Advent reading that does not need cut apart by Pretribbers trying to prove a so-called rapture. It just doesn’t belong any where other than where it was located back 2,000 yrs ago.


Again I don't see a third coming.. I know of a second coming.. Most confuse the rapture and the 2nd coming as the same event. I assume you are thinking the same then?

Ok, lets clarify this once and for all:

Is your rapture described as a Coming (or parousia)?

Is your final Coming described as a Coming (or parousia)?



You don't watch to much TV or read much on Israel today do you? Did you know that they have everything that is required to rebuild the temple? yes it will be rebuilt, infact that is the next event one must forsee to happen. Even Jewish people are expecting their messiah to appear.. Why? One example: The red heifer.. Please do research on the red heifer


The red heifer is seen by some Jewish people as the missing link needed for religious Jews to rebuild their ancient Temple in Jerusalem. Sacrificing the animal in its third year and using its ashes in a purification rite would allow Jews to return 2000 years later to the Temple site, a spot holy to both Jews and Muslims.


RED HEIFER SIGNALS THIRD TEMPLE


The birth of a red heifer in Israel is being hailed by religious Jews as a sign from God that work can soon begin on building the Third Temple in Jerusalem.


A team of rabbinical experts last week confirmed that the animal, born six months ago on a religious kibbutz near the north Israeli port of Haifa, meets the correct Biblical criteria for a genuine holy cow. According to the Book of Numbers (XIX: 2-7), the animal is needed for an ancient Jewish purification ritual.


"Speak unto the children of Israel that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came yoke," says the fourth book of the Old Testament, also part of Jewish holy scripture, the Torah.


The heifer will be slaughtered and burned, and its ashes made into a liquid paste and used in a ceremony which religious Jews believe they must undergo before they can enter the old Temple site in Jerusalem to start building a new structure.


Since Herod's Temple was destroyed by the Roman emperor Titus in AD 70, no flawless red heifer has been born within the biblical land of Israel, according to rabbinical teaching.


The birth of the animal, to a black-and-white mother and a dun-colored bull, is being hailed as a "miracle" by activists who want to rebuild the Third Temple and prepare the way for the Jewish messiah's entry to Jerusalem.


The faithful will need to wait until the heifer is at least three before it can be used in a ritual sacrifice. That would enable religious Jews to start the new millennium (a Christian event, but still regarded as portentous) in a state of purity.


More than anything the Jewish people want to rebuild their temple.. It will happen


This does not remotely prove a third temple, quite the opposite. This actual supports the position I am presenting that there is no longer any need for a third temple. It only serves to prove these apostate rabbis (1) still hate Christ, (2) reject His final sacrifice for sin, and (3) oppose the powerful OT words in Isaiah 53 that show Christ alone as the only substitute for sin. These religious charlatans are no different from the Pharisees 2,000 yrs ago.

Hebrews 10:18 says, “there is no more offering for sin.”

Why? Because Christ finished the need of sin-offerings at the Cross.

Hebrews 10:26 says, “there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.”

Why? Because Christ finished the need of sin-offerings at the Cross.

Christ is man's only substitute for sin. Why would we need other substitutes for sin? Surely this is a serious assault upon the merits and value of the Cross. Christ is the final sacrifice for sin. Christ has made that one final satisfactory sacrifice for sin. The old ordinances were nailed to the tree with Christ. The old covenant was removed with the introduction of the new.

We should let Scripture speak for itself. Colossians 2:14 plainly declares, speaking of these animal sacrifices, “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.”

Q. When did/will the "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances" occur?

A. Christ "took it out of the way" by "nailing it to his cross.”

These ordinances embraced the old covenant civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical law. They were finished at the cross.

When Christ made that final sacrifice for sin He satisfied all God’s holy demands for sin and uncleanness and thus Christ became the final propitiation and substitution for the sinner. Ephesians 2:15 also says, “Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances.”

You say it is not done away with. Scripture describes the old covenant sacrificial system as “that which is done away” (2 Corinthians 3:11). I choose to run with Scripture. It tells us, the “vail is done away in Christ” (2 Corinthians 3:14). Hebrews 10:9 confirms, “He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.”

You say there are more offerings for sin. Hebrews 10:18 says, “there is no more offering for sin.” You say, there remains more sacrifices for sins,Hebrews 10:26 says, “there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.” Scripture is more reliable.

Regards.

Paul

The Village Idiot
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:34 AM
What would you accept as evidence that it is?

References to ekklesia don't count. References to the evangel don't count. The Acts 7:36 reference to the ekklesia in the wilderness doesn't count. So what does? Can you construct a plan that is both sound and valid which, upon completion, will win you to this position? What do you need to see to believe?

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:44 AM
What would you accept as evidence that it is?

References to ekklesia don't count. References to the evangel don't count. The Acts 7:36 reference to the ekklesia in the wilderness doesn't count. So what does? Can you construct a plan that is both sound and valid which, upon completion, will win you to this position? What do you need to see to believe?

Exactly. That is a good summing up of this discourse on the ecclesia. ;)

Paul

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:47 AM
Ok, lets stop playiung word games:

Is your rapture described as a Coming (or parousia)?

Is your final Coming described as a Coming (or parousia)?

Finally we agree..
Let me give you the answer to the best of my knowledge:

Parousia is a Greek word used 24 times in the New Testament to mean "coming, arrival, personal presence". It is most often used to indicate the second coming and the arrival of the Son of Man though it can also indicate a visit by a Christian worker, apostle or even the "man of lawlessness". In the Greek world of the New Testament it meant among other things a) A State visit or b) The presence or appearance of a deity during worship e.g. by divine fire. It has a range of meaning to that of the archaic English word "visitation". Here is a definition from Strong's concordance:

Definition
3952. parousia, par-oo-see'-ah; from the pres. part. of G3918; a being near, i.e. advent (often, return; spec. of Christ to punish Jerusalem, or finally the wicked); (by impl.) phys. aspect:--coming, presence.

There are six uses of the word to describe a visit by a person or their personal "presence" (1 Cor 16;17; 2Cor6:6, 2Cor 6;7; 2Cor 10:10; Phil 1:26; 2:12) this combination of "arrival" plus "personal presence" gives the flavour to the word even when it is being used theologically. The Parousia of Jesus Christ is both His arrival and the manifestation of His "presence" to all mankind.

This is the 2nd coming.. Not the rapture



This does not remotely prove a third temple, quite the opposite. It only serves to prove these apostate rabbis (1) still hate Christ, (2) reject His final sacrifice for sin, and (3) oppose the powerful OT words in Isaiah 53 that show Christ alone as the only substitute for sin. These religious charlatans are no different from the Pharisees 2,000 yrs ago.

Hebrews 10:18 says, “there is no more offering for sin.”

Why? Because Christ finished the need of sin-offerings at the Cross.

Hebrews 10:26 says, “there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.”

Why? Because Christ finished the need of sin-offerings at the Cross.

Christ is man's only substitute for sin. Why would we need other substitutes for sin? Surely this is a serious assault upon the merits and value of the Cross. Christ is the final sacrifice for sin. Christ has made that one final satisfactory sacrifice for sin. The old ordinances were nailed to the tree with Christ. The old covenant was removed with the introduction of the new.

We should let Scripture speak for itself. Colossians 2:14 plainly declares, speaking of these animal sacrifices, “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.”

Q. When did/will the "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances" occur?

A. Christ "took it out of the way" by "nailing it to his cross.”

These ordinances embraced the old covenant civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical law. They were finished at the cross.

When Christ made that final sacrifice for sin He satisfied all God’s holy demands for sin and uncleanness and thus Christ became the final propitiation and substitution for the sinner. Ephesians 2:15 also says,“Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances.”

You say it is not done away with. Scripture describes the old covenant sacrificial system as “that which is done away” (2 Corinthians 3:11). I choose to run with Scripture. It tells us, the “vail is done away in Christ” (2 Corinthians 3:14). Whether agree or not, Hebrews 10:9 confirms, “He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.”

You say there are more offerings for sin. Hebrews 10:18 says, “there is no more offering for sin.” You say, there remains more sacrifices for sins,Hebrews 10:26 says, “there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.” Scripture is more reliable.

Regards.

Paul

And all this we will soon see. We will just agree to disagree, this proves a lot. I would advise you to go to Israel's News Paper and add it to your favorites. http://www.jpost.com/

Diggindeeper
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:50 AM
I will disagree with this.. Because the "Church" was not found in the Old Testament. You may say it means the same, but there is not one record found in the OT that mentions anything about the church, as it does in the NT. So I will not beat down a dead horse (subject).

NMKeith, I don't like to be disagreeable, but the "church" is DEFINITELY found in the Old Testament! This is not a dead horse...

Acts 7:37-38
37 This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.

38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

The Village Idiot
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:55 AM
"...all ate the same spiritual food; and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ" (1Co 10:3-4).

Tell us what counts!

Oh yes--I balance the Israeli press with stuff like Electronic Intifada (http://electronicintifada.net/new.shtml) and Al Jazeera News (http://english.aljazeera.net/News).

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 02:57 AM
What would you accept as evidence that it is?

References to ekklesia don't count. References to the evangel don't count. The Acts 7:36 reference to the ekklesia in the wilderness doesn't count. So what does? Can you construct a plan that is both sound and valid which, upon completion, will win you to this position? What do you need to see to believe?


Nothing in regards to the ecclesia. Because I know the definitions of their meaning. It was used in (Acts 7:38, Mat. 16:18, Mat. 18:17, Acts 5:11, 8:1, Acts 13:1 15:22 and Acts 18:22). These I don't disagree with, nor the one's mentioned in the OT. It's how one is using those words and saying what they feel are defined as is. I'm open to other view points, but I also have understanding and some knowledge on this issue, so some things like ecclesia has been wasted time, but I'm trying to answer as I go on here..

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 03:02 AM
NMKeith, I don't like to be disagreeable, but the "church" is DEFINITELY found in the Old Testament! This is not a dead horse...

Acts 7:37-38
37 This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.

38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:


The actual meaning is congregation in the wilderness. But to set the argument aside, let's say the term "Church" was mentioned in the OT (I disagree), but I would still find it hard to get into a position to believe in a post-rapture..

The Village Idiot
Jun 2nd 2008, 03:10 AM
...when evkklhsi,a is mentioned in the OT LXX, it doesn't mean church. But when evkklhsi,a is mentioned in the NT--it DOES mean church UNLESS it refers to the evkklhsi,a in the desert, in which changes meaning to "congregation?" What it looks like this: scores of LXX references to evkklhsi,a can't refer to "church" because "church" doesn't exist in the OT. And when it refers to the evkklhsi,a in the wilderness, it doesn't "mean" church either--because "church" doesn't exist in the NT. Either we have a circular argument, or else the "meaning" of evkklhsi,a mutates to fit our theology. We get the sense that evkklhsi,a means whatever tribbers want it to mean...

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 03:24 AM
...when evkklhsi,a is mentioned in the OT LXX, it doesn't mean church. But when evkklhsi,a is mentioned in the NT--it DOES mean church UNLESS it refers to the evkklhsi,a in the desert, in which changes meaning to "congregation?" What it looks like this: scores of LXX references to evkklhsi,a can't refer to "church" because "church" doesn't exist in the OT. And when it refers to the evkklhsi,a in the wilderness, it doesn't "mean" church either--because "church" doesn't exist in the NT. Either we have a circular argument, or else the "meaning" of evkklhsi,a mutates to fit our theology. We get the sense that evkklhsi,a means whatever tribbers want it to mean...


Argh! You are not getting the translations here my friend. This was a term translated into Greek it was translated from the Latin term ecclesia, is from two Greek words, ek, meaning "out" and kalein, "to call." Ecclesia is now used in a Christian sense yet it is found to be scattered throughout the Old Testament in many different forms. Why? Was the Old Testament written in Hebrew or Greek? It's Hebrew equivalent Kahal is found less than than 123 times and was used to describe a congregation, assembly, multitude or company of any kind. And it's the same word found in Acts: 7:38 So I do not deny anything. I just have a understanding on the word ecclesia and it's equivalents. That's all

The Village Idiot
Jun 2nd 2008, 03:34 AM
Why would Helenic Jews translate Hebrew into Latin into Greek? I know that it's a compound. Have you read Kittel on this?

BTW--I'm crashing for tonight. It's late. Take care.

Diggindeeper
Jun 2nd 2008, 03:36 AM
What would you accept as evidence that it is?

References to ekklesia don't count. References to the evangel don't count. The Acts 7:36 reference to the ekklesia in the wilderness doesn't count. So what does? Can you construct a plan that is both sound and valid which, upon completion, will win you to this position? What do you need to see to believe?

I don't understand what you are saying..."The Acts 7:36 reference to the ekklesia in the wilderness doesn't count. So what does?" Am I to believe you, simply because to you, that verse does not count? What do YOU say it says? I'm saying what the Bible says. Nothing more.

But then, it was Phillip who said this, and the crowd didn't like him saying that either, it seems. Here's the rest of that chapter:

Acts 7:54-60

54 When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.

55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,

56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

57 Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,

58 And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.

59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.

60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.


It WAS the church in the wilderness. You saying it is not, it seems to me, is contradicting plain and clear scripture. Those reading this (whether they are replying or not!) can surely discern which is right. You say there was no church in the Old Testament. My Bible says thats what it was and clearly declares it was the church in the wilderness.

White Spider
Jun 2nd 2008, 03:48 AM
Well I was going to try to answer your questions NMKieth but it seems you no longer want them answered so if you'd like them answered let me know. But you've gone off in another direction so :rolleyes:

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 04:13 AM
[/font][/color]
Parousia is a Greek word used 24 times in the New Testament to mean "coming, arrival, personal presence". It is most often used to indicate the second coming and the arrival of the Son of Man though it can also indicate a visit by a Christian worker, apostle or even the "man of lawlessness". In the Greek world of the New Testament it meant among other things a) A State visit or b) The presence or appearance of a deity during worship e.g. by divine fire. It has a range of meaning to that of the archaic English word "visitation". Here is a definition from Strong's concordance:

Definition
3952. parousia, par-oo-see'-ah; from the pres. part. of G3918; a being near, i.e. advent (often, return; spec. of Christ to punish Jerusalem, or finally the wicked); (by impl.) phys. aspect:--coming, presence.

There are six uses of the word to describe a visit by a person or their personal "presence" (1 Cor 16;17; 2Cor6:6, 2Cor 6;7; 2Cor 10:10; Phil 1:26; 2:12) this combination of "arrival" plus "personal presence" gives the flavour to the word even when it is being used theologically. The Parousia of Jesus Christ is both His arrival and the manifestation of His "presence" to all mankind.

This is the 2nd coming.. Not the rapture

Ok, I think I am getting you, you are saying it is wrong to apply the Greek word parousia to the Pretrib rapture.

1Thessalonians 4:15-17 says,“For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the parousia (or) coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever.”

Is this your rapture or your Second Advent?

1 Corinthians 15:22-24 tells us,“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his parousia (or) coming. Then cometh the end.”

Is this your rapture or your Second Advent?

2 Peter 3:3-4 says, “there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his parousia coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.”

The reading continues, in verses 5-7, by referring to the flood and the end of the world in relation to Christ’s one future coming, saying, “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men”

Verses 11-12 continues,“Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the parousia coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

Is this your rapture or your Second Advent?


And all this we will soon see. We will just agree to disagree, this proves a lot. I would advise you to go to Israel's News Paper and add it to your favorites. http://www.jpost.com/

So, you are suggesting we should accept the word of Christ-rejecting Jews above that of Christ?

Paul

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 04:22 AM
Argh! You are not getting the translations here my friend. This was a term translated into Greek it was translated from the Latin term ecclesia, is from two Greek words, ek, meaning "out" and kalein, "to call." Ecclesia is now used in a Christian sense yet it is found to be scattered throughout the Old Testament in many different forms. Why? Was the Old Testament written in Hebrew or Greek? It's Hebrew equivalent Kahal is found less than than 123 times and was used to describe a congregation, assembly, multitude or company of any kind. And it's the same word found in Acts: 7:38 So I do not deny anything. I just have a understanding on the word ecclesia and it's equivalents. That's all

The Greek Septuagint was a Bible regularly used and quoted from by Jesus, and Paul, and the disciples in the first century AD. It is this well known and authentically accepted document that tells us that the ekklesia (or Church) was alive and kicking, and commonly written about throughout the Old Testament.

Facts are stubborn things. So, let us look at some facts:

KJV - Deuteronomy 4:10 says, “Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children.”

LXX - Deuteronomy 4:10 says, “hmeran {<2250> N-ASF} hn {<3739> R-ASF} esthte {<2476> V-AAI-2P} enantion {<1726> PREP} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} umwn {<4771> P-GP} en {<1722> PREP} cwrhb {N-PRI} th {<3588> T-DSF} hmera {<2250> N-DSF} thv {<3588> T-GSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF} ote {<3753> ADV} eipen {V-AAI-3S} kuriov {<2962> N-NSM} prov {<4314> PREP} me {<1473> P-AS} ekklhsiason {V-AAD-2S} prov {<4314> PREP} me {<1473> P-AS} ton {<3588> T-ASM} laon {<2992> N-ASM} kai {<2532> CONJ} akousatwsan {<191> V-AAD-3P} ta {<3588> T-APN} rhmata {N-APN} mou {<1473> P-GS} opwv {<3704> CONJ} maywsin {<3129> V-AAS-3P} fobeisyai {<5399> V-PMN} me {<1473> P-AS} pasav {<3956> A-APF} tav {<3588> T-APF} hmerav {<2250> N-APF} av {<3739> R-APF} autoi {<846> D-NPM} zwsin {<2198> V-PAI-3P} epi {<1909> PREP} thv {<3588> T-GSF} ghv {<1065> N-GSF} kai {<2532> CONJ} touv {<3588> T-APM} uiouv {<5207> N-APM} autwn {<846> D-GPM} didaxwsin {<1321> V-AAS-3P}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - Deuteronomy 9:10 says, “And the LORD delivered unto me two tables of stone written with the finger of God; and on them was written according to all the words, which the LORD spake with you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly.”

LXX - Deuteronomy 9:10 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} edwken {<1325> V-AAI-3S} kuriov {<2962> N-NSM} emoi {<1473> P-DS} tav {<3588> T-APF} duo {<1417> N-NUI} plakav {<4109> N-APF} tav {<3588> T-APF} liyinav {<3035> A-APF} gegrammenav {<1125> V-RMPAP} en {<1722> PREP} tw {<3588> T-DSM} daktulw {<1147> N-DSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} ep {<1909> PREP} autaiv {<846> D-DPF} egegrapto {<1125> V-YPI-3S} pantev {<3956> A-NPM} oi {<3588> T-NPM} logoi {<3056> N-NPM} ouv {<3739> R-APM} elalhsen {<2980> V-AAI-3S} kuriov {<2962> N-NSM} prov {<4314> PREP} umav {<4771> P-AP} en {<1722> PREP} tw {<3588> T-DSN} orei {<3735> N-DSN} hmera {<2250> N-DSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - Deuteronomy 18:16 says, “According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.”

LXX - Deuteronomy 18:16 says, “kata {<2596> PREP} panta {<3956> A-APN} osa {<3745> A-APN} hthsw {<154> V-AMI-2S} para {<3844> PREP} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} sou {<4771> P-GS} en {<1722> PREP} cwrhb {N-PRI} th {<3588> T-DSF} hmera {<2250> N-DSF} thv {<3588> T-GSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF} legontev {<3004> V-PAPNP} ou {<3364> ADV} prosyhsomen {<4369> V-FAI-1P} akousai {<191> V-AAN} thn {<3588> T-ASF} fwnhn {<5456> N-ASF} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} hmwn {<1473> P-GP} kai {<2532> CONJ} to {<3588> T-ASN} pur {<4442> N-ASN} to {<3588> T-ASN} mega {<3173> A-ASN} touto {<3778> D-ASN} ouk {<3364> ADV} oqomeya {<3708> V-FMI-1P} eti {<2089> ADV} oude {<3761> CONJ} mh {<3165> ADV} apoyanwmen {<599> V-AAS-1P}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - Deuteronomy 23:1 says, “He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD.”

LXX - Deuteronomy 23:1 (23:2) says, “ouk {<3364> ADV} eiseleusetai {<1525> V-FMI-3S} yladiav {N-NSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} apokekommenov {<609> V-RMPNS} eiv {<1519> PREP} ekklhsian { (ekklesia-1577) N-ASF} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - Deuteronomy 23:2 says, “B*stard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.”

LXX - Deuteronomy 23:2 (23:3) says, “ouk {<3364> ADV} eiseleusetai {<1525> V-FMI-3S} ek {<1537> PREP} pornhv {<4204> N-GSF} eiv {<1519> PREP} ekklhsian { (ekklesia-1577) N-ASF} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - Deuteronomy 23:3 says, “An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever.”

LXX - Deuteronomy 23:3 (23:4) says, “ouk {<3364> ADV} eiseleusetai {<1525> V-FMI-3S} ammanithv {N-NSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} mwabithv {N-NSM} eiv {<1519> PREP} ekklhsian { (ekklesia-1577) N-ASF} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} ewv {<2193> PREP} dekathv {<1182> A-GSF} geneav {<1074> N-GSF} ouk {<3364> ADV} eiseleusetai {<1525> V-FMI-3S} eiv {<1519> PREP} ekklhsian { (ekklesia-1577) N-ASF} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} ewv {<2193> CONJ} eiv {<1519> PREP} ton {<3588> T-ASM} aiwna {<165> N-ASM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - Deuteronomy 23:8 says, “The children that are begotten of them shall enter into the congregation of the LORD in their third generation.”

LXX - Deuteronomy 23:8 (23:9) says, “uioi {<5207> N-NPM} ean {<1437> CONJ} genhywsin {<1096> V-APS-3P} autoiv {<846> D-DPM} genea {<1074> N-NSF} trith {<5154> A-NSF} eiseleusontai {<1525> V-FMI-3P} eiv {<1519> PREP} ekklhsian { (ekklesia-1577) N-ASF} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - Deuteronomy 31:30 says, “And Moses spake in the ears of all the congregation of Israel the words of this song, until they were ended.”

LXX - Deuteronomy 31:30 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} elalhsen {<2980> V-AAI-3S} mwushv {N-NSM} eiv {<1519> PREP} ta {<3588> T-APN} wta {<3775> N-APN} pashv {<3956> A-GSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} ta {<3588> T-APN} rhmata {N-APN} thv {<3588> T-GSF} wdhv {<3592> N-GSF} tauthv {<3778> D-GSF} ewv {<2193> CONJ} eiv {<1519> PREP} telov {<5056> N-ASN}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - Joshua 8:35 says, “There was not a word of all that Moses commanded, which Joshua read not before all the congregation of Israel, with the women, and the little ones, and the strangers that were conversant among them.”

LXX - Joshua 8:35 (9:2f) says, “ouk {<3364> ADV} hn {<1510> V-IAI-3S} rhma {N-NSN} apo {<575> PREP} pantwn {<3956> A-GPN} wn {<3739> R-GPM} eneteilato {<1781> V-AMI-3S} mwushv {N-NSM} tw {<3588> T-DSM} ihsoi {<2424> N-PRI} o {<3739> R-ASN} ouk {<3364> ADV} anegnw {<314> V-AAI-3S} ihsouv {<2424> N-PRI} eiv {<1519> PREP} ta {<3588> T-APN} wta {<3775> N-APN} pashv {<3956> A-GSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF} uiwn {<5207> N-GPM} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} toiv {<3588> T-DPM} andrasin {<435> N-DPM} kai {<2532> CONJ} taiv {<3588> T-DPF} gunaixin {<1135> N-DPF} kai {<2532> CONJ} toiv {<3588> T-DPN} paidioiv {<3813> N-DPN} kai {<2532> CONJ} toiv {<3588> T-DPM} proshlutoiv {<4339> N-DPM} toiv {<3588> T-DPM} prosporeuomenoiv {<4365> V-PMPDP} tw {<3588> T-DSM} israhl {<2474> N-PRI}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - Judges 20:2 says, “And the chief of all the people, even of all the tribes of Israel, presented themselves in the assembly of the people of God, four hundred thousand footmen that drew sword.”

LXX - Judges 20:2 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} estayhsan {<2476> V-API-3P} kata {<2596> PREP} proswpon {<4383> N-ASN} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} pasai {<3956> A-NPF} ai {<3588> T-NPF} fulai {<5443> N-NPF} tou {<3588> T-GSM} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} en {<1722> PREP} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-DSF} tou {<3588> T-GSM} laou {<2992> N-GSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} tetrakosiai {<5071> A-NPF} ciliadev {<5505> N-NPF} andrwn {<435> N-GPM} pezwn {A-GPM} elkontev {V-PAPNP} romfaian {N-ASF}.”

************************************************** ***********************************


KJV - Judges 21:5 says, “And the children of Israel said, Who is there among all the tribes of Israel that came not up with the congregation unto the LORD? For they had made a great oath concerning him that came not up to the LORD to Mizpeh, saying, He shall surely be put to death.”

LXX - Judges 21:5 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} eipon {V-AAI-3P} oi {<3588> T-NPM} uioi {<5207> N-NPM} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} tiv {<5100> I-NSN} ouk {<3364> ADV} anebh {<305> V-AAI-3S} en {<1722> PREP} th {<3588> T-DSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-DSF} apo {<575> PREP} paswn {<3956> A-GPF} fulwn {<5443> N-GPF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} prov {<4314> PREP} kurion {<2962> N-ASM} oti {<3754> CONJ} o {<3588> T-NSM} orkov {<3727> N-NSM} megav {<3173> A-NSM} hn {<1510> V-IAI-3S} toiv {<3588> T-DPM} ouk {<3364> ADV} anabebhkosin {<305> V-RAPDP} prov {<4314> PREP} kurion {<2962> N-ASM} eiv {<1519> PREP} masshfa {N-PRI} legontev {<3004> V-PAPNP} yanatw {<2288> N-DSM} yanatwyhsetai {<2289> V-FPI-3S}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - Judges 21:8 says, “And they said, What one is there of the tribes of Israel that came not up to Mizpeh to the LORD? And, behold, there came none to the camp from Jabeshgilead to the assembly.”

LXX - Judges 21:8 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} eipan {V-AAI-3P} tiv {<5100> I-NSM} eiv {<1519> A-NSM} apo {<575> PREP} fulwn {<5443> N-GPF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} ov {<3739> R-NSM} ouk {<3364> ADV} anebh {<305> V-AAI-3S} prov {<4314> PREP} kurion {<2962> N-ASM} eiv {<1519> PREP} masshfa {N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} idou {<2400> INJ} ouk {<3364> ADV} hlyen {<2064> V-AAI-3S} anhr {<435> N-NSM} eiv {<1519> PREP} thn {<3588> T-ASF} parembolhn {N-ASF} apo {<575> PREP} iabiv {N-PRI} galaad {N-PRI} eiv {<1519> PREP} thn {<3588> T-ASF} ekklhsian { (ekklesia-1577) N-ASF}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 1 Samuel 17:47 says, “And all this assembly shall know that the LORD saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is the LORD’S, and he will give you into our hands.”

LXX - 1 Samuel 17:47 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} gnwsetai {<1097> V-FMI-3S} pasa {<3956> A-NSF} h {<3588> T-NSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF} auth {<3778> D-NSF} oti {<3754> CONJ} ouk {<3364> ADV} en {<1722> PREP} romfaia {N-DSF} kai {<2532> CONJ} dorati {N-DSN} swzei {<4982> V-PAI-3S} kuriov {<2962> N-NSM} oti {<3754> CONJ} tou {<3588> T-GSM} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} o {<3588> T-NSM} polemov {<4171> N-NSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} paradwsei {<3860> V-FAI-3S} kuriov {<2962> N-NSM} umav {<4771> P-AP} eiv {<1519> PREP} ceirav {<5495> N-APF} hmwn {<1473> P-GP}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

Paul

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 04:26 AM
Argh! You are not getting the translations here my friend. This was a term translated into Greek it was translated from the Latin term ecclesia, is from two Greek words, ek, meaning "out" and kalein, "to call." Ecclesia is now used in a Christian sense yet it is found to be scattered throughout the Old Testament in many different forms. Why? Was the Old Testament written in Hebrew or Greek? It's Hebrew equivalent Kahal is found less than than 123 times and was used to describe a congregation, assembly, multitude or company of any kind. And it's the same word found in Acts: 7:38 So I do not deny anything. I just have a understanding on the word ecclesia and it's equivalents. That's all

KJV - 1 Samuel 19:20 says, “And Saul sent messengers to take David: and when they saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as appointed over them, the Spirit of God was upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied.”

LXX - 1 Samuel 19:20 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} apesteilen {<649> V-AAI-3S} saoul {<4549> N-PRI} aggelouv {<32> N-APM} labein {<2983> V-AAN} ton {<3588> T-ASM} dauid {N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} eidan {<3708> V-AAI-3S} thn {<3588> T-ASF} ekklhsian { (ekklesia-1577) N-ASF} twn {<3588> T-GPM} profhtwn {<4396> N-GPM} kai {<2532> CONJ} samouhl {<4545> N-PRI} eisthkei {<2476> V-YAI-3S} kayesthkwv {<2525> V-RAPNS} ep {<1909> PREP} autwn {<846> D-GPM} kai {<2532> CONJ} egenhyh {<1096> V-API-3S} epi {<1909> PREP} touv {<3588> T-APM} aggelouv {<32> N-APM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} saoul {<4549> N-PRI} pneuma {<4151> N-NSN} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} profhteuousin {<4395> V-PAI-3P}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 1 Kings 8:14 says, “And the king turned his face about, and blessed all the congregation of Israel: (and all the congregation of Israel stood).”

LXX - 1 Kings 8:14 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} apestreqen {<654> V-AAI-3S} o {<3588> T-NSM} basileuv {<935> N-NSM} to {<3588> T-ASN} proswpon {<4383> N-ASN} autou {<846> D-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} euloghsen {<2127> V-AAI-3S} o {<3588> T-NSM} basileuv {<935> N-NSM} panta {<3956> A-ASM} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} pasa {<3956> A-NSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} eisthkei {<2476> V-YAI-3S}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 1 Kings 8:22 says, “And Solomon stood before the altar of the LORD in the presence of all the congregation of Israel, and spread forth his hands toward heaven.”

LXX - 1 Kings 8:22 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} esth {<2476> V-AAI-3S} salwmwn {N-PRI} kata {<2596> PREP} proswpon {<4383> N-ASN} tou {<3588> T-GSN} yusiasthriou {<2379> N-GSN} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} enwpion {<1799> PREP} pashv {<3956> A-GSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} diepetasen {V-AAI-3S} tav {<3588> T-APF} ceirav {<5495> N-APF} autou {<846> D-GSM} eiv {<1519> PREP} ton {<3588> T-ASM} ouranon {<3772> N-ASM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************
KJV - 1 Kings 8:55 says, “And he stood, and blessed all the congregation of Israel with a loud voice, saying.”

LXX - 1 Kings 8:55 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} esth {<2476> V-AAI-3S} kai {<2532> CONJ} euloghsen {<2127> V-AAI-3S} pasan {<3956> A-ASF} ekklhsian { (ekklesia-1577) N-ASF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} fwnh {<5456> N-DSF} megalh {<3173> A-DSF} legwn {<3004> V-PAPNS}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 1 Kings 8:65 says, “And at that time Solomon held a feast, and all Israel with him, a great congregation, from the entering in of Hamath unto the river of Egypt, before the LORD our God, seven days and seven days, even fourteen days.”

LXX - 1 Kings 8:65 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} epoihsen {<4160> V-AAI-3S} salwmwn {N-PRI} thn {<3588> T-ASF} eorthn {<1859> N-ASF} en {<1722> PREP} th {<3588> T-DSF} hmera {<2250> N-DSF} ekeinh {<1565> D-DSF} kai {<2532> CONJ} pav {<3956> A-NSM} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} met {<3326> PREP} autou {<846> D-GSM} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF} megalh {<3173> A-NSF} apo {<575> PREP} thv {<3588> T-GSF} eisodou {<1529> N-GSF} hmay {N-PRI} ewv {<2193> PREP} potamou {<4215> N-GSM} aiguptou {<125> N-GSF} enwpion {<1799> PREP} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} hmwn {<1473> P-GP} en {<1722> PREP} tw {<3588> T-DSM} oikw {<3624> N-DSM} w {<3739> R-DSM} wkodomhsen {<3618> V-AAI-3S} esyiwn {<2068> V-PAPNS} kai {<2532> CONJ} pinwn {<4095> V-PAPNS} kai {<2532> CONJ} eufrainomenov {<2165> V-PMPNS} enwpion {<1799> PREP} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} hmwn {<1473> P-GP} epta {<2033> N-NUI} hmerav {<2250> N-APF}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 1 Chronicles 13:2 says, “And David said unto all the congregation of Israel, If it seem good unto you, and that it be of the LORD our God, let us send abroad unto our brethren every where, that are left in all the land of Israel, and with them also to the priests and Levites which are in their cities and suburbs, that they may gather themselves unto us.”

LXX - 1 Chronicles 13:2 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} eipen {V-AAI-3S} dauid {N-PRI} th {<3588> T-DSF} pash {<3956> A-DSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-DSF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} ei {<1487> CONJ} ef {<1909> PREP} umin {<4771> P-DP} agayon {<18> A-ASM} kai {<2532> CONJ} para {<3844> PREP} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} hmwn {<1473> P-GP} euodwyh {<2137> V-APS-3S} aposteilwmen {<649> V-AAS-1P} prov {<4314> PREP} touv {<3588> T-APM} adelfouv {<80> N-APM} hmwn {<1473> P-GP} touv {<3588> T-APM} upoleleimmenouv {<5275> V-RMPAP} en {<1722> PREP} pash {<3956> A-DSF} gh {<1065> N-DSF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} met {<3326> PREP} autwn {<846> D-GPM} oi {<3588> T-NPM} iereiv {<2409> N-NPM} oi {<3588> T-NPM} leuitai {<3019> N-NPM} en {<1722> PREP} polesin {<4172> N-DPF} katascesewv {<2697> N-GSF} autwn {<846> D-GPM} kai {<2532> CONJ} sunacyhsontai {<4863> V-FPI-3P} prov {<4314> PREP} hmav {<1473> P-AP}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 1 Chronicles 13:4 says, “And all the congregation said that they would do so: for the thing was right in the eyes of all the people.”

LXX - 1 Chronicles 13:4 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} eipen {V-AAI-3S} pasa {<3956> A-NSF} h {<3588> T-NSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF} tou {<3588> T-GSN} poihsai {<4160> V-AAN} outwv {<3778> ADV} oti {<3754> CONJ} euyhv {A-NSM} o {<3588> T-NSM} logov {<3056> N-NSM} en {<1722> PREP} ofyalmoiv {<3788> N-DPM} pantov {<3956> A-GSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} laou {<2992> N-GSM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 1 Chronicles 28:2 says, “Then David the king stood up upon his feet, and said, Hear me, my brethren, and my people: As for me, I had in mine heart to build an house of rest for the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and for the footstool of our God, and had made ready for the building.”

LXX - 1 Chronicles 28:2 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} esth {<2476> V-AAI-3S} dauid {N-PRI} en {<1722> PREP} mesw {<3319> A-DSM} thv {<3588> T-GSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF} kai {<2532> CONJ} eipen {V-AAI-3S} akousate {<191> V-AAD-2P} mou {<1473> P-GS} adelfoi {<80> N-NPM} kai {<2532> CONJ} laov {<2992> N-NSM} mou {<1473> P-GS} emoi {<1473> P-DS} egeneto {<1096> V-AMI-3S} epi {<1909> PREP} kardian {<2588> N-ASF} oikodomhsai {<3618> V-AAN} oikon {<3624> N-ASM} anapausewv {<372> N-GSF} thv {<3588> T-GSF} kibwtou {<2787> N-GSF} diayhkhv {<1242> N-GSF} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} stasin {<4714> N-ASF} podwn {<4228> N-GPM} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} hmwn {<1473> P-GP} kai {<2532> CONJ} htoimasa {<2090> V-AAI-1S} ta {<3588> T-APN} eiv {<1519> PREP} thn {<3588> T-ASF} kataskhnwsin {<2682> N-ASF} epithdeia {<2006> A-APN}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 1 Chronicles 28:8 says, “Now therefore in the sight of all Israel the congregation of the LORD, and in the audience of our God, keep and seek for all the commandments of the LORD your God: that ye may possess this good land, and leave it for an inheritance for your children after you for ever.”

LXX - 1 Chronicles 28:8 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} nun {<3568> ADV} kata {<2596> PREP} proswpon {<4383> N-ASN} pashv {<3956> A-GSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} en {<1722> PREP} wsin {<3775> N-DPN} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} hmwn {<1473> P-GP} fulaxasye {<5442> V-AMD-2P} kai {<2532> CONJ} zhthsate {<2212> V-AAD-2P} pasav {<3956> A-APF} tav {<3588> T-APF} entolav {<1785> N-APF} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} hmwn {<1473> P-GP} ina {<2443> CONJ} klhronomhshte {<2816> V-AAS-2P} thn {<3588> T-ASF} ghn {<1065> N-ASF} thn {<3588> T-ASF} agayhn {<18> A-ASF} kai {<2532> CONJ} kataklhronomhshte {V-AAS-2P} toiv {<3588> T-DPM} uioiv {<5207> N-DPM} umwn {<4771> P-GP} mey {<3326> PREP} umav {<4771> P-AP} ewv {<2193> PREP} aiwnov {<165> N-GSM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 1 Chronicles 29:1 says, “Furthermore David the king said unto all the congregation, Solomon my son, whom alone God hath chosen, is yet young and tender, and the work is great: for the palace is not for man, but for the LORD God.”

LXX - 1 Chronicles 29:1 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} eipen {V-AAI-3S} dauid {N-PRI} o {<3588> T-NSM} basileuv {<935> N-NSM} pash {<3956> A-DSF} th {<3588> T-DSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-DSF} salwmwn {N-PRI} o {<3588> T-NSM} uiov {<5207> N-NSM} mou {<1473> P-GS} eiv {<1519> A-NSM} on {<3739> R-ASM} hretiken {<140> V-RAI-3S} en {<1722> PREP} autw {<846> D-DSM} kuriov {<2962> N-NSM} neov {<3501> A-NSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} apalov {<527> A-NSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} to {<3588> T-NSN} ergon {<2041> N-NSN} mega {<3173> A-NSN} oti {<3754> CONJ} ouk {<3364> ADV} anyrwpw {<444> N-DSM} h {<3588> T-NSF} oikodomh {<3619> N-NSF} all {<235> CONJ} h {<2228> CONJ} kuriw {<2962> N-DSM} yew {<2316> N-DSM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************
KJV - 1 Chronicles 29:10 says, “Wherefore David blessed the LORD before all the congregation: and David said, Blessed be thou, LORD God of Israel our father, for ever and ever.”

LXX - 1 Chronicles 29:10 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} euloghsen {<2127> V-AAI-3S} o {<3588> T-NSM} basileuv {<935> N-NSM} dauid {N-PRI} ton {<3588> T-ASM} kurion {<2962> N-ASM} enwpion {<1799> PREP} thv {<3588> T-GSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF} legwn {<3004> V-PAPNS} euloghtov {<2128> A-NSM} ei {<1510> V-PAI-2S} kurie {<2962> N-VSM} o {<3588> T-NSM} yeov {<2316> N-NSM} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} o {<3588> T-NSM} pathr {<3962> N-NSM} hmwn {<1473> P-GP} apo {<575> PREP} tou {<3588> T-GSM} aiwnov {<165> N-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} ewv {<2193> PREP} tou {<3588> T-GSM} aiwnov {<165> N-GSM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

No ekklesia before Pentecost? Evidence says the opposite.

Paul

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 04:30 AM
Argh! You are not getting the translations here my friend. This was a term translated into Greek it was translated from the Latin term ecclesia, is from two Greek words, ek, meaning "out" and kalein, "to call." Ecclesia is now used in a Christian sense yet it is found to be scattered throughout the Old Testament in many different forms. Why? Was the Old Testament written in Hebrew or Greek? It's Hebrew equivalent Kahal is found less than than 123 times and was used to describe a congregation, assembly, multitude or company of any kind. And it's the same word found in Acts: 7:38 So I do not deny anything. I just have a understanding on the word ecclesia and it's equivalents. That's all

KJV - 1 Chronicles 29:20 says, “And David said to all the congregation, Now bless the LORD your God. And all the congregation blessed the LORD God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped the LORD, and the king.”

LXX - 1 Chronicles 29:20 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} eipen {V-AAI-3S} dauid {N-PRI} pash {<3956> A-DSF} th {<3588> T-DSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-DSF} euloghsate {<2127> V-AAD-2P} kurion {<2962> N-ASM} ton {<3588> T-ASM} yeon {<2316> N-ASM} umwn {<4771> P-GP} kai {<2532> CONJ} euloghsen {<2127> V-AAI-3S} pasa {<3956> A-NSF} h {<3588> T-NSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF} kurion {<2962> N-ASM} ton {<3588> T-ASM} yeon {<2316> N-ASM} twn {<3588> T-GPM} paterwn {<3962> N-GPM} autwn {<846> D-GPM} kai {<2532> CONJ} kamqantev {<2578> V-AAPNP} ta {<3588> T-APN} gonata {<1119> N-APN} prosekunhsan {<4352> V-AAI-3P} tw {<3588> T-DSM} kuriw {<2962> N-DSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} tw {<3588> T-DSM} basilei {<935> N-DSM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 2 Chronicles 1:3 says, “So Solomon, and all the congregation with him, went to the high place that was at Gibeon; for there was the tabernacle of the congregation of God, which Moses the servant of the LORD had made in the wilderness.”

LXX - 2 Chronicles 1:3 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} eporeuyh {<4198> V-API-3S} salwmwn {N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} pasa {<3956> A-NSF} h {<3588> T-NSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF} met {<3326> PREP} autou {<846> D-GSM} eiv {<1519> PREP} thn {<3588> T-ASF} uqhlhn {<5308> A-ASF} thn {<3588> T-ASF} en {<1722> PREP} gabawn {N-PRI} ou {<3739> R-GSM} ekei {<1563> ADV} hn {<1510> V-IAI-3S} h {<3588> T-NSF} skhnh {<4633> N-NSF} tou {<3588> T-GSN} marturiou {<3142> N-GSN} tou {<3588> T-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} hn {<3739> R-ASF} epoihsen {<4160> V-AAI-3S} mwushv {N-NSM} paiv {<3816> N-NSM} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} en {<1722> PREP} th {<3588> T-DSF} erhmw {<2048> N-DSF}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 2 Chronicles 1:5 says, “Moreover the brasen altar, that Bezaleel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, had made, he put before the tabernacle of the LORD: and Solomon and the congregation sought unto it.”

LXX - 2 Chronicles 1:5 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} to {<3588> T-ASN} yusiasthrion {<2379> N-ASN} to {<3588> T-ASN} calkoun {A-ASN} o {<3739> R-NSM} epoihsen {<4160> V-AAI-3S} beselehl {N-PRI} uiov {<5207> N-NSM} ouriou {<3774> N-GSM} uiou {<5207> N-GSM} wr {N-PRI} ekei {<1563> ADV} hn {<1510> V-IAI-3S} enanti {<1725> ADV} thv {<3588> T-GSF} skhnhv {<4633> N-GSF} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} exezhthsen {<1567> V-AAI-3S} auto {<846> D-ASN} salwmwn {N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} h {<3588> T-NSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 2 Chronicles 6:3 says, “And the king turned his face, and blessed the whole congregation of Israel: and all the congregation of Israel stood.”

LXX - 2 Chronicles 6:3 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} epestreqen {<1994> V-AAI-3S} o {<3588> T-NSM} basileuv {<935> N-NSM} to {<3588> T-ASN} proswpon {<4383> N-ASN} autou {<846> D-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} euloghsen {<2127> V-AAI-3S} thn {<3588> T-ASF} pasan {<3956> A-ASF} ekklhsian { (ekklesia-1577) N-ASF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} pasa {<3956> A-NSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} pareisthkei {<3936> V-RAI-3S}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 2 Chronicles 6:12 says, “And he stood before the altar of the LORD in the presence of all the congregation of Israel, and spread forth his hands.”

LXX - 2 Chronicles 6:12 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} esth {<2476> V-AAI-3S} katenanti {ADV} tou {<3588> T-GSN} yusiasthriou {<2379> N-GSN} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} enanti {<1725> ADV} pashv {<3956> A-GSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} diepetasen {V-AAI-3S} tav {<3588> T-APF} ceirav {<5495> N-APF} autou {<846> D-GSM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 2 Chronicles 6:13 says, “For Solomon had made a brasen scaffold, of five cubits long, and five cubits broad, and three cubits high, and had set it in the midst of the court: and upon it he stood, and kneeled down upon his knees before all the congregation of Israel, and spread forth his hands toward heaven.”

LXX - 2 Chronicles 6:13 says, “oti {<3754> CONJ} epoihsen {<4160> V-AAI-3S} salwmwn {N-PRI} basin {<939> N-ASF} calkhn {A-ASF} kai {<2532> CONJ} eyhken {<5087> V-AAI-3S} authn {<846> D-ASF} en {<1722> PREP} mesw {<3319> A-DSM} thv {<3588> T-GSF} aulhv {<833> N-GSF} tou {<3588> T-GSM} ierou {<2413> A-GSM} pente {<4002> N-NUI} phcwn {<4083> N-GPM} to {<3588> T-ASN} mhkov {<3372> N-ASN} authv {<846> D-GSF} kai {<2532> CONJ} pente {<4002> N-NUI} phcewn {<4083> N-GPM} to {<3588> T-NSN} eurov {N-NSN} authv {<846> D-GSF} kai {<2532> CONJ} triwn {<5140> A-GPM} phcewn {<4083> N-GPM} to {<3588> T-NSN} uqov {<5311> N-NSN} authv {<846> D-GSF} kai {<2532> CONJ} esth {<2476> V-AAI-3S} ep {<1909> PREP} authv {<846> D-GSF} kai {<2532> CONJ} epesen {<4098> V-AAI-3S} epi {<1909> PREP} ta {<3588> T-APN} gonata {<1119> N-APN} enanti {<1725> ADV} pashv {<3956> A-GSF} ekklhsiav { (ekklesia-1577) N-GSF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} diepetasen {V-AAI-3S} tav {<3588> T-APF} ceirav {<5495> N-APF} autou {<846> D-GSM} eiv {<1519> PREP} ton {<3588> T-ASM} ouranon {<3772> N-ASM}.”

************************************************** ***********************************
KJV - 2 Chronicles 7:8 says, “Also at the same time Solomon kept the feast seven days, and all Israel with him, a very great congregation, from the entering in of Hamath unto the river of Egypt.”

LXX - 2 Chronicles 7:8 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} epoihsen {<4160> V-AAI-3S} salwmwn {N-PRI} thn {<3588> T-ASF} eorthn {<1859> N-ASF} en {<1722> PREP} tw {<3588> T-DSM} kairw {<2540> N-DSM} ekeinw {<1565> D-DSM} epta {<2033> N-NUI} hmeraiv {<2250> N-DPF} kai {<2532> CONJ} pav {<3956> A-NSM} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} met {<3326> PREP} autou {<846> D-GSM} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF} megalh {<3173> A-NSF} sfodra {<4970> ADV} apo {<575> PREP} eisodou {<1529> N-GSF} aimay {N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} ewv {<2193> PREP} ceimarrou {N-GSM} aiguptou {<125> N-GSF}.”

************************************************** ***********************************
KJV - 2 Chronicles 10:3 says, “And they sent and called him. So Jeroboam and all Israel came and spake to Rehoboam, saying.”

LXX - 2 Chronicles 10:3 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} apesteilan {<649> V-AAI-3P} kai {<2532> CONJ} ekalesan {<2564> V-AAI-3P} auton {<846> D-ASM} kai {<2532> CONJ} hlyen {<2064> V-AAI-3S} ieroboam {N-PRI} kai {<2532> CONJ} pasa {<3956> A-NSF} h {<3588> T-NSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF} israhl {<2474> N-PRI} prov {<4314> PREP} roboam {N-PRI} legontev {<3004> V-PAPNP}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 2 Chronicles 20:5 says, “And Jehoshaphat stood in the congregation of Judah and Jerusalem, in the house of the LORD, before the new court.”

LXX - 2 Chronicles 20:5 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} anesth {<450> V-AAI-3S} iwsafat {<2498> N-PRI} en {<1722> PREP} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-DSF} iouda {<2448> N-PRI} en {<1722> PREP} ierousalhm {<2419> N-PRI} en {<1722> PREP} oikw {<3624> N-DSM} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} kata {<2596> PREP} proswpon {<4383> N-ASN} thv {<3588> T-GSF} aulhv {<833> N-GSF} thv {<3588> T-GSF} kainhv {<2537> A-GSF}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 2 Chronicles 20:14 says, “Then upon Jahaziel the son of Zechariah, the son of Benaiah, the son of Jeiel, the son of Mattaniah, a Levite of the sons of Asaph, came the Spirit of the LORD in the midst of the congregation.”

LXX - 2 Chronicles 20:14 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} tw {<3588> T-DSM} ozihl {N-PRI} tw {<3588> T-DSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} zacariou {<2197> N-GSM} twn {<3588> T-GPM} uiwn {<5207> N-GPM} banaiou {N-GSM} twn {<3588> T-GPM} uiwn {<5207> N-GPM} elehl {N-PRI} tou {<3588> T-GSM} manyaniou {N-GSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} leuitou {N-GSM} apo {<575> PREP} twn {<3588> T-GPM} uiwn {<5207> N-GPM} asaf {N-PRI} egeneto {<1096> V-AMI-3S} ep {<1909> PREP} auton {<846> D-ASM} pneuma {<4151> N-NSN} kuriou {<2962> N-GSM} en {<1722> PREP} th {<3588> T-DSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-DSF}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

KJV - 2 Chronicles 23:3 says, “And all the congregation made a covenant with the king in the house of God. And he said unto them, Behold, the king’s son shall reign, as the LORD hath said of the sons of David.”

LXX - 2 Chronicles 23:3 says, “kai {<2532> CONJ} dieyento {V-AAI-3P} pasa {<3956> A-NSF} ekklhsia { (ekklesia-1577) N-NSF} iouda {<2448> N-PRI} diayhkhn {<1242> N-ASF} en {<1722> PREP} oikw {<3624> N-DSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} yeou {<2316> N-GSM} meta {<3326> PREP} tou {<3588> T-GSM} basilewv {<935> N-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} edeixen {<1166> V-AAI-3S} autoiv {<846> D-DPM} ton {<3588> T-ASM} uion {<5207> N-ASM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} basilewv {<935> N-GSM} kai {<2532> CONJ} eipen {V-AAI-3S} autoiv {<846> D-DPM} idou {<2400> INJ} o {<3588> T-NSM} uiov {<5207> N-NSM} tou {<3588> T-GSM} basilewv {<935> N-GSM} basileusatw {<936> V-AAD-3S} kaywv {<2531> ADV} elalhsen {<2980> V-AAI-3S} kuriov {<2962> N-NSM} epi {<1909> PREP} ton {<3588> T-ASM} oikon {<3624> N-ASM} dauid {N-PRI}.”

************************************************** ***********************************

If you want more I will post them. Surely there can be no question now that the ecclesia was a NT innovation created at the cross. This is the same Church in the wilderness that Peter talked about. This is the same body we belong to today.

Paul

Diggindeeper
Jun 2nd 2008, 05:05 AM
Yes, and just as Jesus was there, all through the Old Testament...we are now included in that same "congregation"--church.

Another thing that to me cannot fit with the pre-trib view the OP is attempting validate is that Jesus' second coming cannot happen until this:

1 Thess. 4:14-17
14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Make no mistake about it...the dead in Christ WILL rise first!

If...IF...some are to be "left behind" for a second chance at salvation, they have certainly MISSED the "rapture". And so they finally get saved, then when martyred, because they finally do believe, according to the pre-trib view, they would just stay dead or what? After all, they have already missed the time when the dead in Christ DID rise first!

Literalist-Luke
Jun 2nd 2008, 04:13 PM
One of the strengths of the pre-trib view is that it is better able to harmonize the many events of end-time prophecy. That is based on a misunderstanding of the sequence of events in the Post-Tribulational view that I used to hold as well when I was a Pre-Tribulationist. Having now cleared up my understanding of the sequence of events, I can confidently say that the Post-Tribulational view harmonizes the Scriptures much more successfully. I’ll explain as we go through your questions here. But first, I have to ask a question of my own: Are you simply trying to discredit Post-Trib, or are you actually genuinely open to the idea that you might be wrong?
There are some awkward difficulties with the post-tribulational view:

1) The post-tribulation view requires that the church be present during the 70th week of Daniel (Daniel 9:24-27), even though it was absent from the first 69. This is in spite of the fact that Dan 9:24 indicates that all 70 weeks are for Israel. I believe the church must depart prior to the 70th week, before the final seven-year period.Where in the Bible does it ever say that the Church cannot be present for any of the 70 weeks? That is an assumption that has no Biblical support. Pre-Tribbers have been saying for decades that “God cannot deal with both Israel and the Church at the same time”, but then when I ask them to prove it I get no answer. Please show me Scripturally why both cannot be present at the same time. (And if you use the word “Dispensationalism”, then be prepared to defend the Scriptural realism of Dispensationalism as well, because I can prove from Romans 1 that Dispensationalism as proposed by Pre-Tribbers is not true.)
2) The post-tribulation view denies the New Testament teaching of imminency--that Christ could come at any moment--since there are intervening events required in that view. We believe there are no signs that must precede the Rapture. Show me which verse in the Bible teaches imminency. I was challenged to do the same thing a little over a year ago and found that I couldn’t defend it when I started looking at the verses I had always assumed would support it. So show me your verses that “prove” imminency.
3) The post-tribulation view has difficulties with who will populate the Millennium if the Rapture and the Second Coming occur at essentially the same time. Since all believers will be translated at the Rapture and all unbelievers are judged, That is not true that “all unbelievers” are judged. Jesus’ exact words were “all nations” will be gathered before Him. There are numerous uses throughout the Bible of the phrase “all nations.” Zechariah 14:2 says “I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it.” Using your understanding of Matthew 25, this would mean that every man, woman, and child on the earth will be gathered together to “fight” against Jerusalem. Is that what you wish to assert? In addition, look at the following quotes:

Isaiah 2:2-4 – “In the last days the mountain of the LORD’s temple will be established as the highest of the mountains; it will be exalted above the hills, and all nations will stream to it. Many peoples will come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us his ways, so that we may walk in his paths.” The law will go out from Zion, the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. He will judge between the nations and will settle disputes for many peoples. They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.”

Who is the bolded part speaking of if not unbelievers who have entered the Millennial Kingdom? Most Pre-tribbers would quickly argue (as I once did) that this is talking about unbelievers who are born later on during the already-established Kingdom. But then, where did the “swords” and “spears” come from? If all weapons are banned during the Millennial Kingdom, why are these people having to “beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks”? They have apparently entered the Kingdom with this equipment and are now having to destroy it.

Isaiah 14:1-2 – “The LORD will have compassion on Jacob; once again he will choose Israel and will settle them in their own land. Foreigners will join them and unite with the house of Jacob. Nations will take them and bring them to their own place. And the house of Israel will take possession of the nations and make them male and female servants in the LORD’s land. They will make captives of their captors and rule over their oppressors.”

Again, who is the bolded part speaking of if not unbelievers who have entered the Millennial Kingdom?

One more:

Zechariah 14:16 – “Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, and to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles.”

Who are these survivors?

You must answer who all these people are. For the Pre-Trib view to succeed, it must harmonize ALL of the Scripture, not just the pet phrases that Pre-Tribbers enjoying tossing about. You are required to explain who these “survivors” are.
because no unrighteous shall be allowed to enter Christ's Kingdom, then no one would be left in mortal bodies to start the population base for the Millennium.As I have just demonstrated at length, that is an erroneous assumption based on a presupposition of a Pre-Trib Rapture. It fails to account for the passages that I have just quoted.
4) Similarly, post-tribulationism is not able to explain the sheep and goats judgment after the Second Coming in Matthew 25:3-46. Where would the believers in mortal bodies come from if they are raptured at the Second Coming? Who would be able to enter into Christ's Kingdom? They will come from 3 groups: (1) the Jewish remnant saved at the 2nd Coming, (2) they will come from children around the world at the time of the 2nd Coming who have not yet reached the age of accountability and who are consequently allowed to enter the Millennial Kingdom as full-fledged citizens, and (3) from survivors from “all the nations” who enter the Kingdom as servants of Israel. As we saw in the Isaiah and Zechariah passages above. Matthew 25 is no problem for Post-Trib.
5) The Bride of Christ, the church, is made ready to accompany Christ to earth (Revelation 19:7-8,14) before the Second Coming, Um, where in Revelation 19 does is say the Brides “accompanies” Christ from heaven to earth????????? Please show me the quote with chapter and verse.
but how could this reasonably happen if part of the church is still on the earth awaiting the Second Coming? If the Rapture of the church takes place at the Second Coming, then how does the Bride (the church) also come with Christ at His Return? We don’t. You don’t understand Post-Trib correctly.
While many diligent scholars disagree, most of their views derive from their presuppositions about the Scripture. That’s funny, I would say the same thing about you.
The more literal a view, the more there is an adoption of a pre-millennial pre-tribulation position. I would agree about literalness leading to a Pre-Millennial position, but it is Pre-Trib that has to take a more allegorical point of view in order to force a Pre-Trib view on the Scriptures. I’ll explain in a moment….
I encourage you to review the various passages yourself and develop your own conclusions. This is our "Blessed Hope," and you will not find a more exciting and rewarding discovery. This is just a overview of a complex subject, so apply 2 Timothy 2:15:

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

This topic is perhaps the most demanding from the point of view of requiring the greatest amount of integration of many portions of Scripture. Remember Acts 17:11:

"Receive the Word with all readiness of mind, but search the Scriptures daily to prove whether those things be so."


Enoch is also a model. He was pre-flood, not mid-flood or post-flood!

Let's not turn this into a battle of who's right and who's wrong. I just want to know your theory better. So please help me understand this position better.. Let me ask you this: Based on the Olivet Discourse found in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, how were the 12 apostles supposed to arrive at any conclusion besides one that Jesus would return for the world’s believers at the end of the Tribulation? Show me where in any of Jesus’ teachings we find a Pre-Trib Rapture. You also must keep in mind one thing that most Pre-Tribbers misunderstand about the Scriptures: The Tribulation is NOT the Day of the Lord. The Day of the Lord comes AFTER the Tribulation, AFTER the 2nd Coming, AFTER the Sixth Seal, AFTER the Seventh Trumpet, AFTER the Seventh Seal, and AFTER the Rapture.

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 04:17 PM
We don’t. You don’t understand Post-Trib correctly.

Why do you think I asked the five questions I asked??

After seeking prayer about this last night and seeing how this thread is going this morning (way off topic). I figured I would not get a direct answer to my five questions from the start, but gave the benefit of the doubt. These questions where answered by other questions, and then stated "they were answered" LOL, Okay!! Very typical position I have seen the post-trib use to validate their view.. All that one would had to do, was answer the five questions proposed and it would have been done, these questions where asked to help someone understand the theory of the post-tribulation, now I see more people are confused even more now then before me asking the questions to start with (including myself). So thanks Post-tribbers for helping us to understand your position. It was a simple task that not one person could do with out trying to tear down or rip apart another view. I noticed that the post-trib did not focus much at all on the Mid-trib view here? Basically they use the same Scriptures that the Pre-trib uses. yet it was all based on the pre-trib view.

So I'm done with this thread.. I got all the answeres I needed.. Your view has to many loop holes. Plain and Simple..

1Cr 14:33 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1Cr/1Cr014.html#33) For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Literalist-Luke
Jun 2nd 2008, 04:42 PM
difficult? Funny, we post tribbers find the pre-trib theory to be difficult, since most of us came out of the pre-trib theology.;)Then what about the questions?

Literalist-Luke
Jun 2nd 2008, 04:44 PM
Well I lean toward the post tribulation view . . . These are many good questions and I'll have to look into them and get back to you. Just wanted to let you know you'll be getting answers. (If I find the answers ;))How do you know what the "truth" is if you don't even know why?

Literalist-Luke
Jun 2nd 2008, 04:47 PM
f indeed the rapture occurs in Rev 4, as the pre-trib doctrine teaches...I used to be a Pre-Tribber yet was strongly opposed to taking "Come up here" as representing the Rapture. It is unfortunate that many pre-tribbers (who claim to be literalists) try to make that the Rapture because it's as allegorical an interpretation of Scripture as can be found.

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 04:52 PM
Well duh.. Why do you think I asked the five questions I asked??

After seeking prayer about this last night and seeing how this thread is going this morning (way off topic). I figured I would not get a direct answer to my five questions from the start, but gave the benefit of the doubt. These questions where answered by other questions, and then stated "they were answered" LOL, Okay!! Very typical position I have seen the post-trib use to validate their view.. All that one would had to do, was answer the five questions proposed and it would have been done, these questions where asked to help someone understand the theory of the post-tribulation, now I see more people are confused even more now then before me asking the questions to start with (including myself). So thanks Post-tribbers for helping us to understand your position. It was a simple task that not one person could do with out trying to tear down or rip apart another view. I noticed that the post-trib did not focus much at all on the Mid-trib view here? Basically they use the same Scriptures that the Pre-trib uses. yet it was all based on the pre-trib view.

So I'm done with this thread.. I got all the answeres I needed.. Your view has to many loop holes. Plain and Simple..

1Cr 14:33 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1Cr/1Cr014.html#33) For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

You started this thread off on several faulty premises which you have not been able to substantiate when challenged. When you were shown the error of your assumptions you refused to accept the Posttrib explanation. What is more, when the Pretrib theory was examined in relation to them it was shown to be without any biblical support. Contrary to what you stated at the start: Posttribs have proved that their belief harmonizes best with the many events of end-time prophecy.

All the salient points have been addressed but you have circumvented them to maintain your supposition. The question that you need to address but can't (as it it isn't in Scripture) is: Can you show us one single Scripture that describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further Coming of Christ?

Until you address this then Posttribs reserve the right to reject it. This is one reason why I abandoned Pretrib - I could could find no Scripture that teaches it. I trust you seriously consider this issue with an open mind.

Thanks for your time.

Paul

DurbanDude
Jun 2nd 2008, 05:00 PM
1) The post-tribulation view requires that the church be present during the 70th week of Daniel (Daniel 9:24-27), even though it was absent from the first 69. This is in spite of the fact that Dan 9:24 indicates that all 70 weeks are for Israel. I believe the church must depart prior to the 70th week, before the final seven-year period.



Ok Keith , I will answer your questions clearly , they are clear enough and so deserve a clear answer:

1) So many people have differing views on Daniel 9:27 so it's difficult for you to make any valid points with this as your basis. As a post-tribber I have a less-common viewpoint on Daniel 9:27 , taking the view of many bibles that the one who confirms the covenant is in fact a different person to the desolater. You are right about the period of significance for the Jews , guess what the period is called that separates or splits the 70 sevens. It is the famous "time of the gentiles". It starts at the crucifixion when salvation becomes available to Jews and non-Jews , before this Jesus was open that his ministry was primarily for the Jews. This period ends when the gospel has gone out to all the gentile nations , then the last 3.5 years of Jewish significance continues. The first half of the last seven was fulfilled by Jesus , Jesus confirmed the Jewish Messianic covenant when he was baptised and began his ministry , then 3.5 years later Jesus put an end to sacrifice and offering when he hung on the cross. It is fallacy that an antichrist covenant will begin the 7 year trib , Jesus himself says that the "abomination" will begin the tribulation and other verses tell that this period is 3.5 years long. There is no reason to assume that the church will not be there during this period , it is merely a time of focus on the Jews , while the church is being persecuted. There are many verses that indicate the presence of the church during this period.

Literalist-Luke
Jun 2nd 2008, 05:06 PM
You started this thread off on several faulty premises which you have not been able to substantiate when challenged. When you were shown the error of your assumptions you refused to accept the Posttrib explanation. What is more, when the Pretrib theory was examined in relation to them it was shown to be without any biblical support. Contrary to what you stated at the start: Posttribs have proved that their belief harmonizes best with the many events of end-time prophecy.

All the salient points have been addressed but you have circumvented them to maintain your supposition. The question that you need to address but can't (as it it isn't in Scripture) is: Can you show us one single Scripture that describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further Coming of Christ?The problem with this approach is that it's only an argument from silence. It doesn't affirmatively prove anything. (Keep in mind that I am saying this as a Post-Tribber.) When somebody starts asking questions about why we should believe one way or another about the Rapture, simply tearing down other positions proves nothing. We must be able to prove our position affirmatively. This is very simple to do with Post-Trib.

In the Olivet Discourse at Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, the 12 apostles wanted to know when the believers should be watching for Christ's return. He answered with the most sequentially detailed account that had ever been given regarding the "end of the age" and the start of the Kingdom. In that answer, Jesus told the disciples they should lift up their heads "after all these things", which affirmatively places the Rapture AFTER the Tribulation. It is then very simple to examine other relevant Scriptures (such as Paul's Rapture passages in 1/2 Thessalonians, I Corinthians 15, etc.) with that in mind and to find that there is no conflict between the passages at hand. But we have to start with an affirmative teaching. Merely tearing down another position only proves that we don't know how to defend our own and accomplishes nothing.

Literalist-Luke
Jun 2nd 2008, 05:11 PM
I believe we are in the millennium now.In that case, I want off at the next stop. This is as good as it gets???????????????????

NMKeith
Jun 2nd 2008, 05:17 PM
The problem with this approach is that it's only an argument from silence. It doesn't affirmatively prove anything. (Keep in mind that I am saying this as a Post-Tribber.) When somebody starts asking questions about why we should believe one way or another about the Rapture, simply tearing down other positions proves nothing. We must be able to prove our position affirmatively. This is very simple to do with Post-Trib.

In the Olivet Discourse at Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, the 12 apostles wanted to know when the believers should be watching for Christ's return. He answered with the most sequentially detailed account that had ever been given regarding the "end of the age" and the start of the Kingdom. In that answer, Jesus told the disciples they should lift up their heads "after all these things", which affirmatively places the Rapture AFTER the Tribulation. It is then very simple to examine other relevant Scriptures (such as Paul's Rapture passages in 1/2 Thessalonians, I Corinthians 15, etc.) with that in mind and to find that there is no conflict between the passages at hand. But we have to start with an affirmative teaching. Merely tearing down another position only proves that we don't know how to defend our own and accomplishes nothing.


Thank you very much.. That was a loaded response full of brothely love and compassion. I will look at the link you provided.

Again, this is a dead thread now. I have all the answers I'm seeking and found someone who will take the time and answer them if more arise.

God Bless you all

DurbanDude
Jun 2nd 2008, 05:25 PM
2) The post-tribulation view denies the New Testament teaching of imminency--that Christ could come at any moment--since there are intervening events required in that view. We believe there are no signs that must precede the Rapture.



Read 2 Thess 2:1-3 meditate on it , here we are warned that certain events come first before the imminence. I dare you , do an honest meditation.
Then read Mathew 24 , with a honest heart, those same Christians that Jesus is talking to earlier (Jesus says 'you' will do this and this ) are the same Christians who are there at the end (Mathew 24:26). They do not avoid the tribulation but the ones who are persecuted earlier in the chapter are the same ones (you) , who are there when Jesus comes again after the abomination has appeared. If it was a pre-trib rapture Jesus would say 'you' will do this and that , and then 'others' would be there for the abomination and second coming.

Note , there are many indications in the bible of Christians knowing the signs of the times and being prepared for that day. Also note that Jesus says "no-one knows the day or the hour". Carefully chosen words by Jesus. There are 2 facets to this , it is written in the present tense , no-one of Jesus' day knew the day and the hour. If you don't like this argument , point number two , Jesus said "the day or the hour" , if Jesus meant the 'month and the year' Jesus would have said that , Jesus chose the words day and hour. I believe the trigger point is taught to us clearly as the sign of the abomination , when we see the abomination we will know that 3.5 years is left. The day and the hour will remain unknown.

HisGrace
Jun 2nd 2008, 05:40 PM
Revelation 4:1 is not a record of the rapture. It is simply a record of John being caught up in the Spirit into heaven 2,000 yrs ago. Anyway, there is absolutely no mention of the Church in the reading.

Paul
The word church is not always mentioned in Rapture scriptures. The trump is mentioned and the rising up is mentioned in Rev. 4:1. If you believe in pre-trib John will have to be raptured like everyone else, and he will given the special privilege of being given visions.

The Village Idiot
Jun 2nd 2008, 05:51 PM
The word church is not always mentioned in Rapture scriptures. The trump is mentioned and the rising up is mentioned in Rev. 4:1. If you believe in pre-trib John will have to be raptured like everyone else, and he will given the special privilege of being given visions.

But we do find references to the tribulation!


"I, John, your brother and fellow partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance which are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus" (Re 1:9).

How odd that John thought that he was in the tribulation even then! But there's more. His string of substantives (tribulation, kingdom and perseverance) joined by "kai" where the first takes the article and the later don't--John indicates that the tribulation, kingdom and perseverance ALL REFER TO THE SAME REALITY. Think of it as considering what it is to be "in Jesus" from several standpoints.

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 06:40 PM
In that case, I want off at the next stop. This is as good as it gets???????????????????

The Premil new earth is no different to ours. It is still blighted by the curse. It is saturated in all the result of the fall - sin, death, decay, sickness, wars and rebellion. Funny, it is no different than today. Might that be because it is speaking of our age?

All corruption is removed from the Amil new earth at Christ’s Coming. This means, anything that is not glorified is destroyed and cast into the lake of fire. I Corinthians 15:50 makes it explicitly clear, “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption."

We must note the careful connection between "flesh and blood" and "corruption" (which relates to “this present time”) in comparison to "the kingdom of God" (that appears in all its final glory when "the trumpet shall sound") and "incorruption." To secure man's access to this glorified eternal kingdom, which is inherited alone by the meek (Psalm 37:9-11, 22, Matthew 5:5), "this corruptible must put on incorruption." This passage, which is speaking of the period immediately following the Coming of Christ, confirms that no element of the fall can access the incorruptible eternal kingdom. The whole context of this reading is man’s final deliverance from his fallen corruptible state in order that he can inherit the incorruptible eternal kingdom on earth. It is talking of glorification and the eternal state on the new earth. This reading makes plain, “flesh and blood” or mortal believers cannot inherit a glorified earth that has been purified by fire of every last vestige of the curse.

Man in his sinful corruptible state cannot inherit an incorruptible regenerated earth. Nothing could be plainer. The kingdom that is to be inherited is of an incorruptible character, and can only be possessed by those that are the same. This is the very reason and necessity for glorification that glorified humans would live on a glorified earth. The kingdom of God that appears at Christ’s return is eternal and untarnished by the taint of sin. It is a state that is free of the bondage of corruption. Corruption cannot enter it. It is forbidden by divine decree. How can corruptible perishable humans enter into such a kingdom? Mortals (or sinful creatures or those in their corruptible state) are therefore forbidden entry to this curse-free, sin-free, death-free, decay-free kingdom.

Paul

wpm
Jun 2nd 2008, 06:47 PM
The word church is not always mentioned in Rapture scriptures. The trump is mentioned and the rising up is mentioned in Rev. 4:1. If you believe in pre-trib John will have to be raptured like everyone else, and he will given the special privilege of being given visions.

Please read the passage the way it reads and forget about all the Pretrib books and teaching for a moment.

Revelation 4:1-2 commences, “After this (speaking of his supernatural encounter with Christ on Patmos) I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.”

Nowhere in this chapter do we find any description of, or allusion to, the rapture of the saints. Rather, in contrast, it is a record of the catching away of John “in the Spirit” (4:2) to receive further revelation. In fact, chapters 4 & 5 in their totality outline a detailed description, by John, of the heavenly court and the One who sits upon the throne. Moreover, nowhere in this chapter is there even the slightest allusion to the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ or the Church of Jesus Christ – generally.

(1) Who was this command addressed to?
(2) When did, or will, this event occur?
(3) What was it specifically speaking of?

(1) John
(2) It occurred 2,000 years ago
(3) John being caught up “in the spirit” into “heaven” to receive a supernatural revelation of things to come “hereafter.”

In this reading, the Lord simply commands John to “Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.” The revelation that he would now receive would thus relate to events from this time (2,000 years ago) forth. The same idea and similar wording is found in two other passages in this apocalyptic book, after he had been caught up:

Paul

HisGrace
Jun 2nd 2008, 07:09 PM
But we do find references to the revelation!
How odd that John thought that he was in the tribulation even then! But there's more. His string of substantives (tribulation, kingdom and perseverance) joined by "kai" where the first takes the article and the later don't--John indicates that the tribulation, kingdom and perseverance ALL REFER TO THE SAME REALITY. Think of it as considering what it is to be "in Jesus" from several standpoints.
John was receiving clues of things to come. Not until Rev. 4:1 did Jesus say. "Come up here and I will show you what must happen after these things.'" Then John says. "And instantly I was in the Spirit. and I saw a throne in heaven and someone sitting on it. The one sitting on the throne was as brilliant as gemstones - jasper carnelian. And the glow of an emerald circled his throne like a rainbow......"

After the continuing of this magestic description in Rev. 4, the scroll was released with seven seals in Rev. 5. The first seal was broken in Rev. 6 ,releasing the anti-christ, thus beginning the tribulation.

BroRog
Jun 2nd 2008, 07:17 PM
Why do you think I asked the five questions I asked??

After seeking prayer about this last night and seeing how this thread is going this morning (way off topic). I figured I would not get a direct answer to my five questions from the start, but gave the benefit of the doubt. These questions where answered by other questions, and then stated "they were answered" LOL, Okay!! Very typical position I have seen the post-trib use to validate their view.. All that one would had to do, was answer the five questions proposed and it would have been done, these questions where asked to help someone understand the theory of the post-tribulation, now I see more people are confused even more now then before me asking the questions to start with (including myself). So thanks Post-tribbers for helping us to understand your position. It was a simple task that not one person could do with out trying to tear down or rip apart another view. I noticed that the post-trib did not focus much at all on the Mid-trib view here? Basically they use the same Scriptures that the Pre-trib uses. yet it was all based on the pre-trib view.

So I'm done with this thread.. I got all the answeres I needed.. Your view has to many loop holes. Plain and Simple..

1Cr 14:33 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1Cr/1Cr014.html#33) For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Keith, I did answer all five questions in post #45. I thought my answers were straightforward and succinct and did not tear anyone or any other view down. I looked for a reply, but alas, you were gone for two days and probably didn't see it.

Literalist-Luke
Jun 2nd 2008, 07:18 PM
Posttribulationism

There are 2 related views in posttribulationism. The first is historic postribulationism, which says that the church will go through the entire 7 year tribulation period. This view does not exempt the church from the Day of the Lord wrath and was defended by Alexander Reese in his book, the Approaching Advent of Christ. The 2nd view is supported by Robert Gundry in his book, The Church and the Tribulation. His modification is that the tribulation is not the time of God’s wrath except at the very end. The wrath of God, according to Gundry, will begin very near the end of the 7 year period and will include the bowl judgments and the Battle of Armageddon. Since he believes the rapture will occur before the Day of the Lord, the church will be kept from God’s wrath, which he understands to cover a very brief period of time.Both are wrong. The Day of the Lord is sequentially after the seven-year Tribulation. The two are completely mutually exclusive. The Rapture occurs between the two.
Prewrath

The Prewrath position maintains that the true church will be raptured when the Great Tribulation by Antichrist, inspired by Satan, is cut short by God's Day of the Lord wrath (Mark 13:24-27). This occurs between the 6th and 7th seals of Revelation (Rev 6:12-17), sometime during the second half of the 70th week.This fails to explain the parallels between the Sixth Seal, the Seventh Trumpet, and the Seventh Bowl.
The persecution associated with the Great Tribulation of Antichrist is viewed as the wrath of Satan (Rev 12:12-17),by pre-wrathers, that is
whereas the events that follow, beginning with the 7th seal, is the Day of the Lord wrath. Another term that is sometimes used in this discussion is "historical premillennialism," which refers to the teaching of the early church fathers before 325 A.D. (anti-Nicene fathers). They believed that the church would face the persecution of Antichrist. Then Christ would return and defeat Antichrist and reign on earth for 1000 years. With the exception of two church fathers, Origen and Clement of Alexandria, who were allegorists, all the anti-Nicene fathers taught this view. Prewrath is simply an expansion of this view providing the intricate details surrounding the events of the 2nd coming of Christ.This view is actually pretty close to true Post-Tribulationism. It just doesn't take into account how the Sixth Seal, the Seventh Trumpet, and the Seventh Bowl are all parallel with each other. But I do appreciate Pre-Wrath's understanding that the Day of the Lord and the Tribulation are two separate events that do not occur simultaneously.

vinsight4u8
Jun 2nd 2008, 08:52 PM
John was receiving clues of things to come. Not until Rev. 4:1 did Jesus say. "Come up here and I will show you what must happen after these things.'" Then John says. "And instantly I was in the Spirit. and I saw a throne in heaven and someone sitting on it. The one sitting on the throne was as brilliant as gemstones - jasper carnelian. And the glow of an emerald circled his throne like a rainbow......"

After the continuing of this magestic description in Rev. 4, the scroll was released with seven seals in Rev. 5. The first seal was broken in Rev. 6 ,releasing the anti-christ, thus beginning the tribulation.

The scroll couldn't be released till the last part of Rev. 4 comes to pass-which is a 7th trumpet event!

The 24 elders stay seated - while the four beasts rest not day and night - speaking a certain phrase...then it comes close to when Jesus is to return and the four beasts give thanks, the at the end of their sitting time 24 elders fall down and cast off their golden crowns.

HisGrace
Jun 2nd 2008, 09:57 PM
The scroll couldn't be released till the last part of Rev. 4 comes to pass-which is a 7th trumpet event!
The 7th trumpet event doesn't occur until away down the road after the seven scrolls are broken. Then we have the seven angels with the seven trumpets, who prepare to blow their trumpets with a mighty blast (Rev.8-11),each trumpet signifying demonstrations of terror.

After that we see how the dragon, ,mentioned in Rev. 12, gives the anti-christ unbelieavalbe power in Rev. 13, and the mark of the beast is introduced, which is the last 3 1/2 years of the tribulaton.

Rev. 13:5 Then the beast was allowed to speak great blasphemies against God . And he was given authority to do what he wanted for forty-two months.

vinsight4u8
Jun 2nd 2008, 10:25 PM
Actually, what happens in Rev. 4:

John heard the same voice that he had heard back in ch1 - as a trumpet.
John was caught up to see things...

I will shew

So how much sense does it make to then soon cry over a sealed book?

John sees so much in ch 4 - He was caught up to see and see he did!

And there appeared a great wonder in heaven...

Rev. 12 is where to start...

John would not see the sealed book until after he was in the time of the 7th trumpet (at the end of Rev. 4...which puts him also at the end of Rev. 15.

John saw the trumpets - then was shown after the 7th one started - that the trumpet events would have to slide into the time of the sealed book.
In the 6th seal - John saw the great earthaquake that was the angel key of the 7th trumpet to realize when the two witnesses would rise from the dead.

Look at Rev. 12 and think about how John was caught up to be shown things for Rev. 4.

appeared a great wonder

another wonder

Rev. 15
another sign

John is for all of this in the appearing time of I will shew you things of ch 4.

HisGrace
Jun 3rd 2008, 12:39 AM
Actually, what happens in Rev. 4:

John heard the same voice that he had heard back in ch1 - as a trumpet.
John was caught up to see things... There is no reason to believe that the trumpet mentioned in Rev. 4 is the same as the 7th Trumpet.
The 7th Trumpet was a trumpet of wrath and the trumpet in Rev. 4, which first of all, isn't called the 7th trumpet, is a trumpet of announcement, no terror or wrath indicated. The voice said, (which was Jesus' voice) , "Come up here and I will show you what must happen after these things."

We get the same type of announcment in Rev. 1, as in Rev. 4 and even more docile, since it was the Lord's Day and John was worshipping in the Spirit. Suddenly I heard a loud voice behind me, a voice that sounded like a trumpet blast. It said (Jesus again)"Write down what y ou see and send it to the seven churches, Ephesus, Smyma, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sandis, Philidelphia and Laodicea." The seven letters were far removed from what took place with the terrors of the seven trumpets. God's wrath was involved in the trumpets of terror, not Jesus'.


The Seventh Trumpet brings what the Bible describes as the Third Terror -

Rev. 11:19 Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and within his temple was seen the ark of his covenant. And there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake and a great hailstorm.

It then speaks about the woman and the dragon. She was clothed with the sun, with the moon beneath her feet, and a crown of twelve stars on her head. She was pregnant and cried out in the pain of labour as she awaited her delivery.

Many think that this woman was Mary, but other believe that she was Israel, because of the twelve stars, denoting the twelve tribes of Israel, and verses 5-6 say -

She gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron scepter. And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. The woman fled into the desert to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.

Apparently there will be a special place prepared for the Jewish nation to escape to during the Great Tribulation.

In verses3,4 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on his heads. 4His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that he might devour her child the moment it was born

Starting in verse7 it speaks about the dragon fighting with Michael and the angels under his command. The dragon lost the battle and was forced out of heaven. There was great rejoicing in heaven.

He tried to pursue the woman who had given birth, but she was given two wings to fly to the place prepared for her. The dragon became very angry and declared war against the rest of her children/nation.

After that we see how the dragon gives the anti-christ unbelieavalbe power and the mark of the beast is introduced.

wpm
Jun 3rd 2008, 06:08 AM
There is no reason to believe that the trumpet mentioned in Rev. 4 is the same as the 7th Trumpet.
The 7th Trumpet was a trumpet of wrath and the trumpet in Rev. 4, which first of all, isn't called the 7th trumpet, is a trumpet of announcement, no terror or wrath indicated. The voice said, (which was Jesus' voice) , "Come up here and I will show you what must happen after these things."

We get the same type of announcment in Rev. 1, as in Rev. 4 and even more docile, since it was the Lord's Day and John was worshipping in the Spirit. Suddenly I heard a loud voice behind me, a voice that sounded like a trumpet blast. It said (Jesus again)"Write down what y ou see and send it to the seven churches, Ephesus, Smyma, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sandis, Philidelphia and Laodicea." The seven letters were far removed from what took place with the terrors of the seven trumpets. God's wrath was involved in the trumpets of terror, not Jesus'.


The Seventh Trumpet brings what the Bible describes as the Third Terror -

Rev. 11:19 Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and within his temple was seen the ark of his covenant. And there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake and a great hailstorm.

It then speaks about the woman and the dragon. She was clothed with the sun, with the moon beneath her feet, and a crown of twelve stars on her head. She was pregnant and cried out in the pain of labour as she awaited her delivery.

Many think that this woman was Mary, but other believe that she was Israel, because of the twelve stars, denoting the twelve tribes of Israel, and verses 5-6 say -

She gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron scepter. And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. The woman fled into the desert to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.

Apparently there will be a special place prepared for the Jewish nation to escape to during the Great Tribulation.

In verses3,4 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on his heads. 4His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that he might devour her child the moment it was born

Starting in verse7 it speaks about the dragon fighting with Michael and the angels under his command. The dragon lost the battle and was forced out of heaven. There was great rejoicing in heaven.

He tried to pursue the woman who had given birth, but she was given two wings to fly to the place prepared for her. The dragon became very angry and declared war against the rest of her children/nation.

After that we see how the dragon gives the anti-christ unbelieavalbe power and the mark of the beast is introduced.

You are missing what I am saying. This is a record of John being caught up “in the spirit” into “heaven” 2,000 years ago to receive a supernatural revelation of things to come “hereafter.”

Revelation 4:1-2 commences, “After this (speaking of his supernatural encounter with Christ on Patmos) I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.”

In this reading, the Lord simply commands John to “Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.” The revelation that he would now receive would thus relate to events from this time (2,000 years ago) forth. The same idea and similar wording is found in two other passages in this apocalyptic book, after he had been caught up:

Revelation 17:1-3 in the same way says, “And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters … So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.”

Is this also evidence of another rapture?

Revelation 21:9-10 in the same way says, “And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God.”

Is this even further evidence of third rapture?

Three times John is commanded “come hither” and all three times he is expressly “in the spirit.” All three passages closely mirror each other, in the sense that they describe the same supernatural manner in which John received the visions. Notwithstanding, none of them make the slightest allusion to the catching away of the saints.

Revelation 4:1-2 “come up hither” “in the spirit”
Revelation 17:1-3 “come hither” “in the spirit”
Revelation 21:9-10 “come hither” “in the spirit”

If the Pretribbers insist on Revelation 4:1-2 being a definite record of the rapture then they must also accept Revelation 17:1-3 and Revelation 21:9-10 as recording two similar secret raptures. That is if they are going to be consistent.

The Apostle Paul similarly testified of a man that was "caught up" into the “third heaven” – paradise to experience the mysteries of heaven and of God. Most commentators suppose Paul was personally testifying of his own experience. 2 Corinthians 12:2, 4 says, “I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth) such an one caught up to the third heaven. How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.”

Paul

HisGrace
Jun 3rd 2008, 12:45 PM
Revelation 4:1-2 “come up hither” “in the spirit”
Revelation 17:1-3 “come hither” “in the spirit”
Revelation 21:9-10 “come hither” “in the spirit” Notice that only in Rev. 4:1-2 does it say "come up hither". In the other two instances he would already be up in heaven in the spirit. Come hither would simply mean. "Come here," not necessarily "Come up here - he's already 'up' there. Don't forget John is having visions so in his mind he could be could be spiritually carried away.

vinsight4u8
Jun 3rd 2008, 01:08 PM
Rev. 1
v10
" I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet."
..........

Rev. 4
v1
"...and the first voice which I heard {was as} it were of a trumpet..."
v2
"And immediately I was in the spirit..."

Ask yourself?

How many times will John see the sealed book that needs to be opened?
Why?
Because that links up with the end of ch4 as to where the 24 elders cast their crowns to.
the place of the sealed book

So the 24 elders only cast their golden crowns once.

vinsight4u8
Jun 3rd 2008, 01:14 PM
Hi HisGrace,

You brought up a part as in the future the temple opens in heaven.

What do you think as to the last part of Rev. 15 and how does it apply to when men can enter into the temple in heaven?

How many plagues must end first?


and
How does that fit with the temple opens in Rev. 11:19 in heaven - at the start of the 7th trumpet - yet no mention of men there, just the ark is seen?

HisGrace
Jun 3rd 2008, 01:33 PM
vinsight4u8 ,the tribulation is a series of complex and involved events. What are you trying to prove?

NMKeith
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:02 PM
HisGrace, Thank you for your thoughts on this thread. It's great to see another pre-trib here. In the past when dealing with this subject, they (post-trib) allude to questions, because what I feel is that there still may be some doubt on their position. It's okay to ask questions, but then there comes a point when you must defend your position. I have not seen a post-trib do this very effective. This is why I started a thread, hoping to find someone willing to just back their position. But again they allude the answer(s) by turning it around.. At this point, it's either just tell me what you have or don't give me nothing at all. We all know how to read the Bible, so share Scripture and let that person come to their own understanding..

At least this is where I am.. All these word games, and playing with the time table, we can all do this, some better then others. I just want Scripture and I'll find the answer myself..

Literalist-Luke
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:13 PM
There comes a point when you must defend your position[/U]. I have not seen a post-trib do this very effective. I just want Scripture and I'll find the answer myself..Do you still need those first five questions you asked to be answered? I thought I had covered them, but if you need more discussion of them, I'll certainly be happy to oblige.

NMKeith
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:14 PM
Thank you again.. Those questions have been answered..

White Spider
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:16 PM
1) The post-tribulation view requires that the church be present during the 70th week of Daniel (Daniel 9:24-27), even though it was absent from the first 69. This is in spite of the fact that Dan 9:24 indicates that all 70 weeks are for Israel. I believe the church must depart prior to the 70th week, before the final seven-year period.


I will first answer this question best I can.

(Sorry if I ask you questions you've answered, but as there are 4 new pages I am not going to read them all, sorry.)

I agree all 70 weeks are for Israel, but I don't think that means the rest of the world can't be a part of them. (Do you agree with that or . . . ?)

And I don't see where it says the church is absent during the first 69 weeks or where it says they are present. In fact I can't determine either way. Could you point out where it states the churches position in the 70 weeks? (Again sorry if you've answered this.)

Alright let's start with that. Hope I'm helping.

I was going to try to explain, but you never got back to me, perhaps now you have time :cool:

White Spider
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:17 PM
Thank you again.. Those questions have been answered..

Oh never mind then, :lol:

What is it you want now :confused

NMKeith
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:18 PM
What is it you want now

Read my response on page 9

vinsight4u8
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:20 PM
vinsight4u8 ,the tribulation is a series of complex and involved events. What are you trying to prove?

I just wanted you to take a moment and consider some parts of Revelation - as to what is really going on at that point - and how does this section silde into the rest of the things for the book?

In Rev. 15 the temple is closed to men.
So how was there a rapture?
When will there be a rapture of men?

"And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled."

so - Is this verse letting us know that men won't be able to enter the temple - as in raptured men - till the last plague is over?
the last plague that the seven angels had

At v 6 - things start going back in time - to let John in on more as to the seven angels.
How did they get plagues?
How many of them must end before men can enter into the temple in heaven?

It shows us that they came from heaven with seven plagues - then one of the four beasts gave them the seven vials of God's wrath. John writes as to the plagues of the seven angels must end before men can enter the temple in heaven.

So - isn't that the same as saying that the seven trumpet plagues must end before men can enter into the temple in heaven?

"....no man...till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled."

Rev. 11 shows that 7th trumpet beginning to blow at verses 15-18 and v19 speaks of the ark is seen in the temple in heaven.
So - seems to me that it should just be getting to that time of when men can enter in.

Literalist-Luke
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:21 PM
Thank you again.. Those questions have been answered..OK, I'm guess I'm confused then. http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w40/litluke/confused.gif

(And I pray that my words here will not come across hatefully, they are absolutely meant in a spirit of love, so I'm trying to choose my words carefully.) I agree that most people (both Pre-Tribbers and Post-Tribbers) do a poor job of defending their position as we have seen demonstrated in this thread and will often resort to unproductively tearing down of the other position (which is usually based on not even understanding the other position correctly). I thought I had given you some pretty straight-forward, affirmative answers to your questions. Is there something that you need to discuss further?

Literalist-Luke
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:30 PM
Interpreting Revelation 4:1 as a Pre-Trib Rapture creates a self-contradiction in the Pre-Trib theory. When John goes up to heaven at the beginning of Revelation 4 to observe his visions, the Pre-Tribulational Rapture has already happened. Contrary to an unfortunately popular teaching that has no basis in literal interpretation, John's “coming up” to heaven has no connection whatsoever with the Rapture. He is going up to heaven to observe the contents of the vision he was given, not to participate in the Rapture. Notice that he finds the 24 elders already there. The vast majority of Pre-Tribulationists take the 24 elders to be the Raptured Church, so if John's arrival is to be taken as representing the Rapture, then he's late! It would be nice to be able to point to this as an indicator in favor of a Pre-Trib rapture, but to do so would require an allegorical interpretation that cannot be scripturally supported.

NMKeith
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:32 PM
OK, I'm guess I'm confused then. http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w40/litluke/confused.gif

(And I pray that my words here will not come across hatefully, they are absolutely meant in a spirit of love, so I'm trying to choose my words carefully.) I agree that most people (both Pre-Tribbers and Post-Tribbers) do a poor job of defending their position as we have seen demonstrated in this thread and will often resort to unproductively tearing down of the other position (which is usually based on not even understanding the other position correctly). I thought I had given you some pretty straight-forward, affirmative answers to your questions. Is there something that you need to discuss further?


Yes you have. They were straight forward, and yes the link your provided great insight to the post-tribulation view. I was asked to defend my Rev. 4 rapture view. I did, and then I saw that HisGrace responded after I did. And I also see his and vinsight going around and around for three pages now. So there comes a point when one must just defend their position. I have seen yours and understand yours. But others take Scripture away like the seven year tribulation.. Fine.. If that is what one wants to believe, but they should have Scripture to back such events. As I did on page 9 regarding Rev. 4..

God Bless my friend

vinsight4u8
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:34 PM
I'm 100% sure the rapture is at the 7th trumpet, as in post-trib. I saw it just after I was saved at fifteen via praying and studying on my own.


Take a look at Rev. 19...What comes at the start of that chapter?
Salvation

Now apply Rev. 12's requirement of what is to happen before salvation comes.
Satan is cast from heaven forever
and they loved not their lives unto the death
Now is come salvation!


1 Thes. 5:9
not appointed unto wrath
but salvation

The church is appointed to any wrath that comes as long as the salvation moment hasn't arrived yet.

NMKeith
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:34 PM
Interpreting Revelation 4:1 as a Pre-Trib Rapture creates a self-contradiction in the Pre-Trib theory. When John goes up to heaven at the beginning of Revelation 4 to observe his visions, the Pre-Tribulational Rapture has already happened. Contrary to an unfortunately popular teaching that has no basis in literal interpretation, John's “coming up” to heaven has no connection whatsoever with the Rapture. He is going up to heaven to observe the contents of the vision he was given, not to participate in the Rapture. Notice that he finds the 24 elders already there. The vast majority of Pre-Tribulationists take the 24 elders to be the Raptured Church, so if John's arrival is to be taken as representing the Rapture, then he's late! It would be nice to be able to point to this as an indicator in favor of a Pre-Trib rapture, but to do so would require an allegorical interpretation that cannot be scripturally supported.

I actually broke down Rev. 4 on page 9 and I used Greek words that were only used twice in the entire NT and both are found in Revelation. It fits perfect with a pre-trib rapture..

Literalist-Luke
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:40 PM
“Dispensationalism” is the idea that God's approach in dealing with humankind has been a gradually developing process in which the rules “change” occasionally, going from one “dispensation” to another. Two prominent examples of occasions when the rules supposedly “changed” would be the giving of the Ten Commandments, which initiated the Mosaic Covenant, and Christ's death/resurrection, which made the so-called “Church Age” possible. (There are other examples in Biblical history, these are only two of them.)

The argument used most often is that the beginning of the Church Age supposedly necessitated the end of the Mosaic Covenant in which God's dealing with humans was primarily through Israel. The Mosaic Covenant is now over (supposedly) and God is now dealing primarily through the Church. The reasoning this leads to about the Rapture is that when the Rapture occurs, membership in the Church is cut off, meaning that the “rules” that apply during the Church Age can no longer be in effect necessitating a reverting back to the Mosaic Covenant rules and a change of God’s focus from the Church to Israel. This argument is most often used in support of the Pre-Trib position, since God said in Daniel 9:26-27 that there would be so many “sevens” for Israel and, as most of us would agree, there is still one “seven” left to go. Therefore, since God supposedly cannot be dealing with Israel and the Church simultaneously, the Church must be gone by the time that final seven years begins.

Some problems with this line of reasoning are as follows:

1. The suggestion that God “cannot” deal with two groups at once is ridiculous. God can do whatever He durn well pleases. There is nothing in Scripture that makes it impossible for God to deal with more than one group at a time. In fact, as we will see in a moment, there are actually Scriptures that specifically indicate that He does indeed deal with more than one group at once today at this very moment!

2. Even a Dispensationalist would agree that Israel's national salvation depends on their final acceptance as a nation of Jesus not only as their Messiah, but also as their Savior. Therefore, the “rules” of the Mosaic Covenant are not in effect, at least certainly not in their original form (which would beg the question, what other changes can we expect? to which a reasonable answer does not seem possible without useless random speculation and guesswork). There was no Jesus during the Old Testament that Israel had to accept, so the Mosaic Covenant’s rules therefore cannot be re-applied. There's no going back.

3. It seems foolish to suggest that every single Gentile on the entire planet who remains after the Rapture (unless it is literally a Post-Trib Rapture) has absolutely no further opportunity for salvation. This would mean that God's focus will not be exclusively on Israel. In fact, even Pre-Tribbers agree that Gentiles will be saved (by the billions, is what Pre-Tribbers usually say) during the Tribulation! That sets up a contradiction in a Pre-Trib Dispensationalist’s position. They say that God will be dealing only with Israel, but then they say there will be billions of Gentile converts. So which is it??

4. Paul stated in his epistles that the Mosaic sacrifices were never intended to achieve true justification before God for Israel. They were only a “shadow”. Ultimately, even the Old Testament saints are dependent on Christ's death on the cross for their salvation, even if they were not aware at the time of the specifics of precisely how their salvation was won for them by God. For God, this is no problem since He sees all of history occurring simultaneously, including history that is still future from our point of view, so to Him when Old Testament saints died, Christ's death was an already-accomplished fact since He was “slain from the foundation of the world”. This being the case, Christ's death is the only reason that anybody ever gets into Heaven all the way from Adam & Eve until the end of the Millennial Kingdom. The procedures and rules for what believers of each period were expected to do changed, yes, but the means of salvation has always been Christ's death ever since that first bite from the forbidden fruit. Without Christ’s death on the cross, there would be no salvation for anybody at any time in all of history, no can do, no sir, no how, do not pass Go, do not collect $200. God even specified that Jesus’ death would be the key event when he said at Genesis 3:15:

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”, which most prophecy students would agree is the first prophecy of the coming Messiah/Savior. If Jesus had not died on the cross, there would be no salvation for anybody throughout all of history and every single human in all of history would be doomed, no matter how many sacrifices we kill on the alter, no matter how many “wave” offerings we bring to the Temple, no matter how many “arks” we build, no matter how many times we prove that we are willing to sacrifice our Isaacs on an alter. It would all be for nothing were it not for Jesus’ death on that cross.

So the means of salvation has never changed, ever. As a matter of fact, the Mosaic Covenant is STILL in effect today and we are still living under it! Now before you start accusing me of being a Judiadizing legalist, I'll point out that we live in a time when the Mosaic Covenant has been fulfilled on our behalf by Christ’s perfect, sinless life, and we are therefore not bound by its rules, just as Paul went to great lengths to explain in Romans and Galatians, among other places. Because Christ paid a price for us that He didn’t owe for Himself, we don't have to worry about the Mosaic Law, because Christ fulfilled it for us. The Law is still in effect, but we can get out of it, so to speak, by claiming Christ’s death as our own. That's why Paul explains at great lengths in Romans that those who choose to live as being under the Law must obey the ENTIRE law or bring condemnation on themselves, because the Law is still in effect today. If it wasn’t still in effect, then one cannot bring the Law’s condemnation on oneself by breaking even just one law and the apostle Paul is a liar. It's just that you and I don't have to worry about it, because we have been given judicial immunity because of Christ’s death and our acceptance of it on our behalf.

All these things being the case, the Rapture will have NO EFFECT on who God is dealing with. He’ll simply be clearing the chessboard, so to speak, of His own people. The ones left will still be eligible to be “grafted in”, which at the time it occurs will be the Jewish remnant at Petra/Bosrah in fulfillment of Romans 9-11.

There’s another problem with Dispensationalism that I’ll mention. Notice in Romans Chapter 1 that God is holding everyone throughout history in the entire world responsible for rejecting Him:

Romans 1:19-20 – “...what may be known about God is plain to them [humankind in general], because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.”

Notice here that God is talking about a level of revelation that involves no Israel, no Mosaic sacrificial system, no Scriptures, and no Christ, only nature and the creation around us. God says we should know based only on His revelation of Himself in the creation around us. This is precisely the condition that existed up until Moses wrote the Pentateuch. And yet Paul is using it as a reason for God's condemnation of the lost AFTER the start of the “Church Age”. “...what may be known about God IS plain to them...” “...so that people ARE without excuse.”

Here’s why that’s a problem – traditional Dispensationalism has one phase of God’s revelation replacing the previous one, all going sequentially in order. This is why a lot of people believe that, today, unless you believe on the name “Jesus”, you are automatically condemned to hell, even if you've never even heard the name Jesus. Romans Chapter 1 directly contradicts this. Romans Chapter 1 suggests that we are only responsible for the level of revelation that we have been given. That being the case, the only logical conclusion is that God’s phases of revelation do not replace each other, but rather are added on top of each other, each one clarifying the previous and giving us a better understanding of the issues at hand.

The highest level of revelation we have been given thus far is the combination of the completed 66 books of the Word of God along with the historical revelation of Christ Himself in the flesh when He visited the earth 2000 years ago. But that doesn't mean that everything else before that simply gets thrown out with the bathwater.

This is proof that it is indeed possible for God to deal with more than one group of people at a time. He is not restricted to dealing only with Israel or only with Gentiles. This is an assumption made by Pre-Tribbers.

I should also point out that this does not provide an “excuse” for us to not respond to Christ. We cannot say “Well, I don't want to respond to Christ, but I can agree that the world around me was definitely created by an intelligent being, so I'll just respond on that level.” Nope, sorry Charlie, you're still condemned, because Christ was revealed to you and you are responsible to respond to the revelation that you were given.

So my point is that different phases of Dispensationalism do not cancel each other out, they simply clarify previous phases. It's like adding layers on a cake. Each layer makes the cake better, because it adds more flavor, but the lower layers are still kept. The key is that we are all responsible for the level of revelation that we have been given.

So there is no requirement that the start of the 70th “Week” requires the removal of the Church.

Literalist-Luke
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:42 PM
I actually broke down Rev. 4 on page 9 and I used Greek words that were only used twice in the entire NT and both are found in Revelation. It fits perfect with a pre-trib rapture..I saw that and you did indeed put a lot of work into it, but what about the fact that the 24 elders are already there? I used to be a Pre-Tribber and even then I still couldn't reconcile Revelation 4:1 as being the Rapture. John is being brought to heaven to receive the message of the book of Revelation, not to be Raptured.

vinsight4u8
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:43 PM
John would not use 24 people to represent the entire church - and they wear golden crowns that get tossed off of their heads and then John sees the sealed book.

Check too the words of the four beasts.
Isn't that an odd phrase to be saying over and over again - day and night - they rest not, if Jesus had just come back?

They are speaking of He will come.

Also, Jesus did not descend - no mention of a sickle for the harvest is gathered - or any mention of reward time.

Rev. 22:12 shows that Jesus Christ comes back with His reward.

Isaiah wrote as to how He will come back as exalted alone.
So - that makes it odd for others to be wearing crowns around the thone at John's arrval in heaven to see the future.
The 24 elders will cast off their golden crowns - just before it is time for Jesus to come and get the church.

Hebrews - also tells us that He waits in heaven - till it is time to make His enemies His footstool.
So - How could the beast rule after Jesus comes back - how could he not have started to be taken down?

Hebrews 1:13

NMKeith
Jun 3rd 2008, 02:58 PM
“Dispensationalism” is the idea that God's approach in dealing with humankind has been a gradually developing process in which the rules “change” occasionally, going from one “dispensation” to another. Two prominent examples of occasions when the rules supposedly “changed” would be the giving of the Ten Commandments, which initiated the Mosaic Covenant, and Christ's death/resurrection, which made the so-called “Church Age” possible. (There are other examples in Biblical history, these are only two of them.)

The argument used most often is that the beginning of the Church Age supposedly necessitated the end of the Mosaic Covenant in which God's dealing with humans was primarily through Israel. The Mosaic Covenant is now over (supposedly) and God is now dealing primarily through the Church. The reasoning this leads to about the Rapture is that when the Rapture occurs, membership in the Church is cut off, meaning that the “rules” that apply during the Church Age can no longer be in effect necessitating a reverting back to the Mosaic Covenant rules and a change of God’s focus from the Church to Israel. This argument is most often used in support of the Pre-Trib position, since God said in Daniel 9:26-27 that there would be so many “sevens” for Israel and, as most of us would agree, there is still one “seven” left to go. Therefore, since God supposedly cannot be dealing with Israel and the Church simultaneously, the Church must be gone by the time that final seven years begins.

Some problems with this line of reasoning are as follows:

1. The suggestion that God “cannot” deal with two groups at once is ridiculous. God can do whatever He durn well pleases. There is nothing in Scripture that makes it impossible for God to deal with more than one group at a time. In fact, as we will see in a moment, there are actually Scriptures that specifically indicate that He does indeed deal with more than one group at once today at this very moment!

2. Even a Dispensationalist would agree that Israel's national salvation depends on their final acceptance as a nation of Jesus not only as their Messiah, but also as their Savior. Therefore, the “rules” of the Mosaic Covenant are not in effect, at least certainly not in their original form (which would beg the question, what other changes can we expect? to which a reasonable answer does not seem possible without useless random speculation and guesswork). There was no Jesus during the Old Testament that Israel had to accept, so the Mosaic Covenant’s rules therefore cannot be re-applied. There's no going back.

3. It seems foolish to suggest that every single Gentile on the entire planet who remains after the Rapture (unless it is literally a Post-Trib Rapture) has absolutely no further opportunity for salvation. This would mean that God's focus will not be exclusively on Israel. In fact, even Pre-Tribbers agree that Gentiles will be saved (by the billions, is what Pre-Tribbers usually say) during the Tribulation! That sets up a contradiction in a Pre-Trib Dispensationalist’s position. They say that God will be dealing only with Israel, but then they say there will be billions of Gentile converts. So which is it??

4. Paul stated in his epistles that the Mosaic sacrifices were never intended to achieve true justification before God for Israel. They were only a “shadow”. Ultimately, even the Old Testament saints are dependent on Christ's death on the cross for their salvation, even if they were not aware at the time of the specifics of precisely how their salvation was won for them by God. For God, this is no problem since He sees all of history occurring simultaneously, including history that is still future from our point of view, so to Him when Old Testament saints died, Christ's death was an already-accomplished fact since He was “slain from the foundation of the world”. This being the case, Christ's death is the only reason that anybody ever gets into Heaven all the way from Adam & Eve until the end of the Millennial Kingdom. The procedures and rules for what believers of each period were expected to do changed, yes, but the means of salvation has always been Christ's death ever since that first bite from the forbidden fruit. Without Christ’s death on the cross, there would be no salvation for anybody at any time in all of history, no can do, no sir, no how, do not pass Go, do not collect $200. God even specified that Jesus’ death would be the key event when he said at Genesis 3:15:

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”, which most prophecy students would agree is the first prophecy of the coming Messiah/Savior. If Jesus had not died on the cross, there would be no salvation for anybody throughout all of history and every single human in all of history would be doomed, no matter how many sacrifices we kill on the alter, no matter how many “wave” offerings we bring to the Temple, no matter how many “arks” we build, no matter how many times we prove that we are willing to sacrifice our Isaacs on an alter. It would all be for nothing were it not for Jesus’ death on that cross.

So the means of salvation has never changed, ever. As a matter of fact, the Mosaic Covenant is STILL in effect today and we are still living under it! Now before you start accusing me of being a Judiadizing legalist, I'll point out that we live in a time when the Mosaic Covenant has been fulfilled on our behalf by Christ’s perfect, sinless life, and we are therefore not bound by its rules, just as Paul went to great lengths to explain in Romans and Galatians, among other places. Because Christ paid a price for us that He didn’t owe for Himself, we don't have to worry about the Mosaic Law, because Christ fulfilled it for us. The Law is still in effect, but we can get out of it, so to speak, by claiming Christ’s death as our own. That's why Paul explains at great lengths in Romans that those who choose to live as being under the Law must obey the ENTIRE law or bring condemnation on themselves, because the Law is still in effect today. If it wasn’t still in effect, then one cannot bring the Law’s condemnation on oneself by breaking even just one law and the apostle Paul is a liar. It's just that you and I don't have to worry about it, because we have been given judicial immunity because of Christ’s death and our acceptance of it on our behalf.

All these things being the case, the Rapture will have NO EFFECT on who God is dealing with. He’ll simply be clearing the chessboard, so to speak, of His own people. The ones left will still be eligible to be “grafted in”, which at the time it occurs will be the Jewish remnant at Petra/Bosrah in fulfillment of Romans 9-11.

There’s another problem with Dispensationalism that I’ll mention. Notice in Romans Chapter 1 that God is holding everyone throughout history in the entire world responsible for rejecting Him:

Romans 1:19-20 – “...what may be known about God is plain to them [humankind in general], because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.”

Notice here that God is talking about a level of revelation that involves no Israel, no Mosaic sacrificial system, no Scriptures, and no Christ, only nature and the creation around us. God says we should know based only on His revelation of Himself in the creation around us. This is precisely the condition that existed up until Moses wrote the Pentateuch. And yet Paul is using it as a reason for God's condemnation of the lost AFTER the start of the “Church Age”. “...what may be known about God IS plain to them...” “...so that people ARE without excuse.”

Here’s why that’s a problem – traditional Dispensationalism has one phase of God’s revelation replacing the previous one, all going sequentially in order. This is why a lot of people believe that, today, unless you believe on the name “Jesus”, you are automatically condemned to hell, even if you've never even heard the name Jesus. Romans Chapter 1 directly contradicts this. Romans Chapter 1 suggests that we are only responsible for the level of revelation that we have been given. That being the case, the only logical conclusion is that God’s phases of revelation do not replace each other, but rather are added on top of each other, each one clarifying the previous and giving us a better understanding of the issues at hand.

The highest level of revelation we have been given thus far is the combination of the completed 66 books of the Word of God along with the historical revelation of Christ Himself in the flesh when He visited the earth 2000 years ago. But that doesn't mean that everything else before that simply gets thrown out with the bathwater.

This is proof that it is indeed possible for God to deal with more than one group of people at a time. He is not restricted to dealing only with Israel or only with Gentiles. This is an assumption made by Pre-Tribbers.

I should also point out that this does not provide an “excuse” for us to not respond to Christ. We cannot say “Well, I don't want to respond to Christ, but I can agree that the world around me was definitely created by an intelligent being, so I'll just respond on that level.” Nope, sorry Charlie, you're still condemned, because Christ was revealed to you and you are responsible to respond to the revelation that you were given.

So my point is that different phases of Dispensationalism do not cancel each other out, they simply clarify previous phases. It's like adding layers on a cake. Each layer makes the cake better, because it adds more flavor, but the lower layers are still kept. The key is that we are all responsible for the level of revelation that we have been given.

So there is no requirement that the start of the 70th “Week” requires the removal of the Church.


Thank you for all this great information, but I also disagree with many "Dispensationalism" we all don't agree eye to eye. So there are a lot of points I agree with and a lot of points I disagree with. Example: God will be dealing with two people on this world.. 1) The Church 2) The house of Israel.. Most Dispensationalism disagree with this.. But it does not shake my foundation on a pre-trib rapture..

If I believed in a post-trib rapture.. Why wouldn't I just renounce Chirst for the moment; sin as I may, do what I want, be my own lord and look to the signs like the peace treaty to be signed, and then accept Christ back to be my Lord and Savior? That's just morbid.. But it's true if one wants to agree with a post-tribulation. They have a license to sin (sort a speak) because they know when Christ will return by looking at the bowl judgements, trumpet judgments, the Seal judgements, the 144,000 being sealed, the mark of the beast, the rise of the antichrist, one currency etc etc.. Sorry but my faith in Christ depends more on faith and to be looking up because my redemption draws near.

Literalist-Luke
Jun 3rd 2008, 03:31 PM
John would not use 24 people to represent the entire churchWhy not? Pre-Tribbers actually have a pretty sophisticated argument based on the priesthood of I Chronicles 24 that the 24 elders could be symbolic of the completed priesthood. So what is your empirical reason for rejecting the elders as the Church?
- and they wear golden crowns that get tossed off of their heads and then John sees the sealed book.

Check too the words of the four beasts.
Isn't that an odd phrase to be saying over and over again - day and night - they rest not, if Jesus had just come back?

They are speaking of He will come.Not if they're referring to the 2nd Coming as opposed to the Pre-Trib Rapture.
Also, Jesus did not descend - no mention of a sickle for the harvest is gathered - or any mention of reward time.

Rev. 22:12 shows that Jesus Christ comes back with His reward.

Isaiah wrote as to how He will come back as exalted alone.
So - that makes it odd for others to be wearing crowns around the thone at John's arrval in heaven to see the future.
The 24 elders will cast off their golden crowns - just before it is time for Jesus to come and get the church.

Hebrews - also tells us that He waits in heaven - till it is time to make His enemies His footstool.
So - How could the beast rule after Jesus comes back - how could he not have started to be taken down?

Hebrews 1:13Pre-Tribbers would argue that the Rapture is not the 2nd Coming so this argument doesn't apply.

wpm
Jun 3rd 2008, 03:42 PM
Notice that only in Rev. 4:1-2 does it say "come up hither". In the other two instances he would already be up in heaven in the spirit. Come hither would simply mean. "Come here," not necessarily "Come up here - he's already 'up' there. Don't forget John is having visions so in his mind he could be could be spiritually carried away.

It is not talking about the Church in Rev 4:1. There is no mention of the Church. It is speaking about John getting caught up in the spirit. Can you not see the wording? There is no Pretrib rapture here. There is no Pretrib rapture anywhere in Scripture. This happened 2,000 yrs ago. Can you not see that Rev 1-3 was received bodily on Patmos, Rev 4-22 was in the spirit heaven. You are battling with the actual wording of the narrative, not me.

The Pretrib argument for no Church in the trib in Rev 4-19 is based on the faulty premise the Church is not mentioned there. But the word “church” isn’t remotely mentioned anywhere in Revelation 4 (or 5).

We can see here immediately that there is a major discrepancy in the Pretrib thinking that undoubtedly pulls apart the whole foundation of its teaching. Surely the very absence of the word ‘church’ between chapters 4 &19 is their main justification for arguing that the Church must, of necessity, be delivered from a supposed 7-year Great Tribulation on earth? If the Prettribber is consistent then the same rule of reasoning must be applied to their understanding of Revelation 4 also. Significantly, if it was, then they have absolutely no basis whatsoever for locating the Church in Revelation 4, as they do, and therefore arguing for a secret rapture of the Church in that chapter. On the basis of this logic we can safely assume that the Church isn’t remotely in view or can it participate in the happenings of this chapter.

Of course, this isn’t the main basis upon which many reject such a theory, although, it is somewhat ironic that it is Pretribulationalisms own carefully constructed gallows that ultimately hang its own theology. It is this defective method of interpretation that completely destroys any tenuous validation for believing in a Pretrib secret rapture in Revelation 4:1. Such an approach exposes the actual duplicity of the Pretrib position. This, surely, is the fairest way of testing the authenticity and consistency on any system of interpretation. On this simple trial the Pretrib paradigm again completely falls apart.

The main reason why we reject a Pretrib secret rapture in Revelation 4:1 is because that it isn’t remotely speaking of Christ’s return or any supposed rapture of God’s elect. In actual fact, neither Revelation 4:1 or any other verse in chapters 4 and 5 makes the slight reference to a future Coming of Christ (or any supposed secret rapture), but is simply a straightforward record of John being caught up in the Spirit into heaven 2,000 years ago to receive a remarkable supernatural insight into the spiritual realm, and particularly the future. This is then fully revealed in Revelation 6 – 19.

Hal Lindsey outlines the typical Pretribulationist understanding of the layout of Revelation, saying, “It’s important to note that the Church has been the main theme of Revelation until Chapter 4. Starting with this chapter, the Church isn’t seen on earth again until Chapter 19, where we suddenly find it returning to earth with Christ as He comes to reign as King of kings and Lord of lords.... Although Revelation 4:1 does not specifically refer to Christ’s reappearance at the Rapture, I believe that the Apostle John’s departure for heaven after the church era closes in Chapter 3 and before the tribulation chronicle begins in Chapter 6 strongly suggests a similar catching away for the Church.”

Hal Lindsey acknowledges the scriptural silence in relation to a secret rapture in Revelation 4:1, although, he still insists on defending it, being one of its main proponents worldwide, conceding, “Revelation 4:1 does not specifically refer to Christ’s reappearance at the Rapture.”

Speaking of this statement, Posttrib writer Brian Schwertley in an article ‘Is the Pretribulation Rapture Biblical?’ an at e modern popularity of the Pretrib theory. omething that is keeping with Hios charcter thd. declares, “There are a number of reasons why this argument in favour of Pretribulationism should be rejected. First, this argument is an argument from silence in which the idea of the pretribulation rapture is presupposed and then imposed upon this section of Scripture. In the immediate context (Revelation 4:2) it says that John the apostle is transported to the throne room of heaven. Not one word is uttered that suggests that John represents the church or that the people of God as a whole are taken to heaven. Also, there is not any mention or any indication whatsoever of a descent by Christ or a resurrection of the saints.”

“come up hither”

Have you read Revelation 11? It uses the same terminology “come up hither” and it is assuredly not speaking of John and consequently him being “in the spirit,” but it undoubtedly refers to the Second Advent, is the very passage that Pretribbers carefully ignore.

In Revelation 11, the two witnesses are symbolically seen lying dead in the street. In Revelation 11:11 we learn, “And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.”

The temple in Revelation 11 is a symbol of the Church (the true professors), the outer-court (which is significantly not measured) is the false professors, the two witnesses are the Word of God and the Spirit of God operating within the Church and within the world currently, which is symbolised here by Jerusalem (Sodom and Egypt). The work of these two witnesses will therefore be killed (or forbidden at the end), dying in the eyes of the world, just prior to the ‘catching away’.

That did not mean it carried the significance it did before the cross or that it continued to be the true temple. Paul makes this clear in his writings. The temple of God bacame a spiritual organism. The symbolism contained within represnts spiritual truth. It is not intended to depict the physical, earthly temporal brick temple. Rev is written in sign language.

Revelation 11:12 continues, “And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.”

Here is a symbolic picture of the rapture of the Church. This is supported by the finality of the reading including the wording of the remainder of the passage. A few verses later, Revelation 11:15 shows us that this occurs at the last trump, which is in complete agreement with consistent New Testament teaching (including Revelation 10) on this single, final, all-consummating nature of the Second Advent, saying, “And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, the kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever."

The unquestionable finality surrounding the echo of the seventh trumpet proves beyond doubt that it is the last trump – the final trumpet sound for all mankind. “The kingdoms of this world” have finally “become the kingdoms of our lord, and of his Christ” and “he shall reign for ever and ever.”

Paul

Literalist-Luke
Jun 3rd 2008, 03:57 PM
If I believed in a post-trib rapture.. Why wouldn't I just renounce Chirst for the moment; sin as I may, do what I want, be my own lord and look to the signs like the peace treaty to be signed, and then accept Christ back to be my Lord and Savior? That's just morbid.. It would also not be true repentance and not true faith. Revelation speaks of the "patient endurance" of the saints. Once one takes the Mark of the Beast, salvation appear to be unavailable, so the choice would still be required before the 2nd Coming/Rapture.
But it's true if one wants to agree with a post-tribulation. They have a license to sin (sort a speak) because they know when Christ will return by looking at the bowl judgements, trumpet judgments, the Seal judgements, the 144,000 being sealed, the mark of the beast, the rise of the antichrist, one currency etc etc.. I'm concerned that merely knowing the approximate time of Jesus' return could be taken that way. For somebody to adopt such an approach would be only a recognition of who Jesus is, but not an acceptance of it. Satan recognizes who Jesus is (just as James 2:19 speaks of), but he rejects it. For somebody to deliberately live a sinful lifestyle right up to the end and then to deliberately schedule their "salvation" at the last second would be no salvation at all. "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those who do the will of my Father who is in heaven." - Matthhew 7:21
Sorry but my faith in Christ depends more on faith and to be looking up because my redemption draws near.What will you do if a man starts performing miracles and claims to be "god" but you're still here? Have you considered that possibility? We certainly have the right to adopt whatever position we want, but we must do so with the recognition that whatever God's plan is, it is already set and it is up to us to find out what it really is. God is not going to take a poll of the world's Christians and then use that to decide what He's going to do. I agree that, on a fleshly level, Pre-Trib seems more appealing than Post-Trib, I mean who would want to go through the Tribulation? But if that's what we're going to have to do, I would much rather know it now rather than get a nasty surprise when the seven-year covenant begins and I haven't been Raptured. :)

ProjectPeter
Jun 3rd 2008, 04:16 PM
This is speaking about John. Can I remind you John lived 2,000 yrs ago? He will not be around on the earth for your Pretrib rapture? Where do you get such a belief from? John is already in heaven. He is gone. He is in the presence of the Lord long before your supposed Pretrib rapture. How can this therefore be the rapture? Moreover, it says he was in the spirit 2,000 yrs ago.

Several other passages that I presented here show that John was "in the spirit" - in the spirit. This is not glorification. It doesn't say he is caught up physically. John was commanded to "Come up hither" because prior to that he was on Patmos. Why would he be asked to come up hither again if he was already in heaven in the spirit? I don't understand your reasoning. When he invited to come up John testified: "immediately I was in the spirit:." Rev 4-22 was a spiritual revelation he received when he was caught up to heaven.

Elsewhere he was asked to "Come hither" because he was already in heaven, he didn't need to be caught up again. That is why he testified: "he carried me away in the spirit." Can you not see this? We don't need to import anything into the reading, it is all there in black and white.
Well Paul... hold onto something here... yeah, I agree. This is taking something very clear and hyper-spiritualizing it to try and make a point that fits your doctrine. This is clearly speaking of John being caught up.

Let me add just for the sake of sending this thread on a likely rabbit trail if we ain't careful! :lol:

I believe that this is exactly who Paul was speaking of in 2 Corinthians although a lot of folks believe he was speaking of himself.

2 Corinthians 12:2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago -- whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows -- such a man was caught up to the third heaven.
3 And I know how such a man -- whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows --
4 was caught up into Paradise, and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak.
5 On behalf of such a man will I boast; but on my own behalf I will not boast, except in regard to my weaknesses.

It was later in his life that God had John record this which we still have till this day.

wpm
Jun 3rd 2008, 04:45 PM
Well Paul... hold onto something here... yeah, I agree. This is taking something very clear and hyper-spiritualizing it to try and make a point that fits your doctrine. This is clearly speaking of John being caught up.

Let me add just for the sake of sending this thread on a likely rabbit trail if we ain't careful! :lol:

I believe that this is exactly who Paul was speaking of in 2 Corinthians although a lot of folks believe he was speaking of himself.

2 Corinthians 12:2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago -- whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows -- such a man was caught up to the third heaven.
3 And I know how such a man -- whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows --
4 was caught up into Paradise, and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak.
5 On behalf of such a man will I boast; but on my own behalf I will not boast, except in regard to my weaknesses.

It was later in his life that God had John record this which we still have till this day.

I am glad to see us on the same page on something. It makes me feel good again. :hug:

Good to see you back from your trip. I hope it went well and was refreshing.

Paul

HisGrace
Jun 3rd 2008, 04:54 PM
In Rev. 15 the temple is closed to men.
So how was there a rapture?
When will there be a rapture of men?

"So - isn't that the same as saying that the seven trumpet plagues must end before men can enter into the temple in heaven?

"....no man...till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled."

Rev. 11 shows that 7th trumpet beginning to blow at verses 15-18 and v19 speaks of the ark is seen in the temple in heaven.
So - seems to me that it should just be getting to that time of when men can enter in.
Many will be converted during the tribulation and this is referring to those people.
Rev. 15:I saw before me what seemed to be a crystal sea mixed with fire. And on it stood all the people who had been victorious over the beast and his statue and the number representing his name. They were all holding harps that God had given thm And they were signing the song of Moses the servant of God and the song of the Lamb.

wpm
Jun 3rd 2008, 05:27 PM
AGAIN!!! You rebuttal my view by asking questions.. Paul I don't care about your opinion when it comes to my view!! How else am I susppose to say this to you? That is my view and I have provided Scripture so you and others can understand my view, I don't care that you disagree with them. I CARE LESS!! Where is your Scriptures? Where is your defense??

I have asked you to prove your view since you are so strong about it.. And you haven't, or you can't, either way it's plain and simple.. So just fold your hand and walk away..

If you can not defend your own position, then you have no position to lean on!!

Therefore your knowledge on your post-trib view again is VERY UNSTABLE

You again divert around the glaring contradiction in this reading for Pretrib. How can John be raptured when he is already in heaven???

Posttrib

Firstly, nowhere does it say how long the tribulation is. There is no 7 yrs trib mentioned anywhere.
Secondly, the church has always been in tribulation. John in Rev is a case in point. Revelation 1:9 tells us: "I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation"

The tribulation of the saints was occuring during John's day; otherwise he could not have been a brother and companion in tribulation' - that seems pretty clear.

Tribulation Now!

We are currently in the tribulation and the rapture is still future. At the rapture the elect in total are rescued and the wicked in total are destroyed.

Jesus said in John 15:18-21, "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me."

2 Timothy 3:12 declares, “all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.”

Jesus said in John 16:33, “In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.”

Acts 14:22 says, “we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.”

II Corinthians 1:3-5 says, "Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort; Who comforteth us in all our tribulation, that we may be able to comfort them which are in any trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of God. For as the sufferings of Christ abound in us, so our consolation also aboundeth by Christ."

Ephesians 3:13 says, "Wherefore I desire that ye faint not at my tribulations for you, which is your glory."

II Thessalonians 1:4 says, "So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure: Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:"


Jesus said in Matthew 5:10-13, “Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice,and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.”

I Peter 4:12-16 says, "Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: But rejoice,inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy. If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified. "

II Corinthians 4:8-10 says, "We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed; Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body. For we which live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus' sake"

Christ's One and only coming

1 Thessalonians 4:14-5:4 confirms this saying: “if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the Coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.”

This is a record of Christ’s one and only future Coming. This reading describes how Christ comes with and for His saints the next time. Verse 14 of our reading explicitly states, “them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.” This is the final uniting of the elect on earth (the live in Christ) and those in heaven (the dead in Christ). It is accompanied by the great sound of the trump ushering in the end. The word rendered “remain” in our King James Version (which relates to those that are alive at Christ’s Coming) is the Greek word perileipo, which means “to survive.” Thus, we can take from this reading that the Lord is returning for those who remain by surviving. These are tribulation saints.

Jesus says of His Coming, in Matthew 24:29-30, "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”

This is referring to the exact same event as is described in 1 Thessalonians 4. It is the Coming of the Lord that is signalled by the sound of the last trump and the uniting of the elect both on earth and in heaven. Christ tells us that the angels “shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” This agrees with Paul’s assertion in 1 Thessalonians 4 that Christ will come with and for His saints at His Coming. Those saints that the angels gather in heaven are the "dead in Christ," those that are gathered from the four winds of the earth are 'the live in Christ'. This seems to be describing the same event. Moreover, this passage locates the catching away at the end of the tribulation, not seven years before it.

What is more, not only does 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 and Matthew 24:29-30 correlate, but we get further detail in 1 Corinthians 15:51-53. There Paul says of this final Coming, “Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.”

Here again we see the two distinct groups of redeemed mentioned who will be finally unified at Christ’s one final Coming. When Paul says “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed” he is saying that the dead in Christ will be resurrected with new bodies but the live in Christ will be instantly “changed.” Those that are alive do not need resurrected as they don’t die. They just need transformed from mortality to immortality. Paul explains it as: “In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.” The “dead in Christ” are gathered from “one end of heaven to the other” and come with Christ to be united with their new spiritual bodies. The ‘live in Christ’ on the other hand are gathered together from “the four winds” of earth and are caught up together with them after instantly receiving their new bodies. Collectively the redeemed are made one in the act of glorification. This ushers in the end.

The word rendered "last" in “last trump" is the Greek word eschatos meaning end, last, farthest or final. This negates the Pretrib idea of a further trumpet seven yrs later. We are therefore looking at the final trumpet sound at the one final Coming of Christ. What is more, by clear implication, if the last trump relates to the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ there must be others that precede it. Revelation seems to support this weighty inference. Moreover, the seven trumpets outlined in Revelation chapters 8 to 10 are the only set of prophetic trumpets in Scripture. In the light of the explicit teaching and consistent pattern relating to the last trump elsewhere in the New Testament, and in order for what I am presenting to be true, accurate, compatible and complete (and all truth must fulfil this demanding criteria), the last trumpet in Revelation – number seven – must be a clear, vivid picture of the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. When the Bible student carefully analyses the graphic descriptive detail of the seventh trumpet in Revelation in the light of other like Scripture he is left in no doubt to its subject matter and its startling cohesion with other prophetic readings. The last trumpet outlined in Revelation 10 seems to be referring to the same last trumpet outlined in other New Testament passages and a beautiful symbolic picture of the one final glorious Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Revelation 10:1-11 declares, describing the seventh trumpet, “And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire: And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth, And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders uttered their voices. And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.”

The symbolism and authority surrounding this great heavenly angel proves beyond a doubt that it is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ and a picture of His glorious Second Coming. Firstly, we can see the angel comes clothed with a cloud. Significantly, the Lord prophesied of His return, “for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.” Please refer also to Mark 14:61-62, Acts 1:9-11, 1Thessalonians 4:16-17, Revelation 1:7). Secondly, the angel comes crowned with a rainbow. The rainbow crowned upon this great angel’s head reminds us that we serve a mighty covenant keeping God. It is clearly a marvellous symbol of providential nature of God and His faithfulness. None but Christ would be qualified to adorn such a symbol, being the bodily manifestation of the living holy God. We see the same symbolic rainbow surrounding Christ when John was caught up in the Spirit into heaven in Revelation 4 to receive the revelation about the Church and the end times. John explicitly says, “there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald” (v3).

Paul

Literalist-Luke
Jun 3rd 2008, 05:33 PM
http://bibleprophesy.org/rev4.htmNMKeith, I read the article and I see your well-documented points about the similar meanings between the words you are discussing ("door", "trumpet", "ascend", etc.). Have you given any consideration to the sequence of events that is in view here? For instance, you speak of John's journey up to heaven as representing the Rapture, and I can see your point about the words describing his journey being similar to the same words in the other passages you cited.

Just for one example, you mention Luke 21:28 - "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." but you don't discuss that fact that Jesus places this Luke 21 event after the events of the Tribulation (the Abomination of Desolation, etc.).

Your linguistic arguments are well-taken, but I'd like to see you do some discussion of the sequential aspects that are involved as well. That appears to me to be where you could get into some really good discussions.

I do appreciate your earnestness in seeking this out. I work in sales and would much rather deal with a customer who has a lot of questions that somebody who has their mind made up and doesn't want me to "confuse them with the facts". :)

ProjectPeter
Jun 3rd 2008, 05:35 PM
I am glad to see us on the same page on something. It makes me feel good again. :hug:

Good to see you back from your trip. I hope it went well and was refreshing.

Paul
It was and we have one more to make. Going to St. Louis tomorrow for the rest of the week. Jennifer is singing at the Relay for Life event at the Children's Hospital. Shoot... I can brag on her a bit and will exercise some Admin privilege and derail for a sec! :)

Don't know if you remember the struggle that DebraR's grandson went through before succumbing to cancer... but we were there for his final days and it changed Jennifer's life in many ways. You can read about that here (http://worldwithnofaces.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=109&Itemid=40).




This is the song she wrote about Nathaniel and it is titled Broken (http://www.worldwithnofaces.org/4mieke/Broken.mp3) and this is what she'll be singing. You guys can pray about it too.... been years since she's sang in front of a really large crowd.

wpm
Jun 3rd 2008, 05:49 PM
It was and we have one more to make. Going to St. Louis tomorrow for the rest of the week. Jennifer is singing at the Relay for Life event at the Children's Hospital. Shoot... I can brag on her a bit and will exercise some Admin privilege and derail for a sec! :)

Don't know if you remember the struggle that DebraR's grandson went through before succumbing to cancer... but we were there for his final days and it changed Jennifer's life in many ways. You can read about that here (http://worldwithnofaces.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=109&Itemid=40).




This is the song she wrote about Nathaniel and it is titled Broken (http://www.worldwithnofaces.org/4mieke/Broken.mp3) and this is what she'll be singing. You guys can pray about it too.... been years since she's sang in front of a really large crowd.

Keep up the good work. :)

Paul

wpm
Jun 3rd 2008, 08:38 PM
John was receiving clues of things to come. Not until Rev. 4:1 did Jesus say. "Come up here and I will show you what must happen after these things.'" Then John says. "And instantly I was in the Spirit. and I saw a throne in heaven and someone sitting on it. The one sitting on the throne was as brilliant as gemstones - jasper carnelian. And the glow of an emerald circled his throne like a rainbow......"

After the continuing of this magestic description in Rev. 4, the scroll was released with seven seals in Rev. 5. The first seal was broken in Rev. 6 ,releasing the anti-christ, thus beginning the tribulation.

This is speaking about John. Can I remind you John lived 2,000 yrs ago? He will not be around on the earth for your Pretrib rapture? Where do you get such a belief from? John is already in heaven. He is gone. He is in the presence of the Lord long before your supposed Pretrib rapture. How can this therefore be the rapture? Moreover, it says he was in the spirit 2,000 yrs ago.

Several other passages that I presented here show that John was "in the spirit" - in the spirit. This is not glorification. It doesn't say he is caught up physically. John was commanded to "Come up hither" because prior to that he was on Patmos. Why would he be asked to come up hither again if he was already in heaven in the spirit? I don't understand your reasoning. When he invited to come up John testified: "immediately I was in the spirit:." Rev 4-22 was a spiritual revelation he received when he was caught up to heaven.

Elsewhere he was asked to "Come hither" because he was already in heaven, he didn't need to be caught up again. That is why he testified: "he carried me away in the spirit." Can you not see this? We don't need to import anything into the reading, it is all there in black and white.

Paul

ProjectPeter
Jun 3rd 2008, 08:49 PM
This is speaking about John. Can I remind you John lived 2,000 yrs ago? He will not be around on the earth for your Pretrib rapture? Where do you get such a belief from? John is already in heaven. He is gone. He is in the presence of the Lord long before your supposed Pretrib rapture. How can this therefore be the rapture? Moreover, it says he was in the spirit 2,000 yrs ago.

Several other passages that I presented here show that John was "in the spirit" - in the spirit. This is not glorification. It doesn't say he is caught up physically. John was commanded to "Come up hither" because prior to that he was on Patmos. Why would he be asked to come up hither again if he was already in heaven in the spirit? I don't understand your reasoning. When he invited to come up John testified: "immediately I was in the spirit:." Rev 4-22 was a spiritual revelation he received when he was caught up to heaven.

Elsewhere he was asked to "Come hither" because he was already in heaven, he didn't need to be caught up again. That is why he testified: "he carried me away in the spirit." Can you not see this? We don't need to import anything into the reading, it is all there in black and white.

Paul
Well on that... He says "come up here" in chapter four... and for example in chapter six it simply says "come." There is a difference. Never been caught up in heaven like John was... but come look is still quite different than come up here and then talking about being taken up into heaven! But the only time I think he says come up here in the context of John being caught up... chapter four.

moonglow
Jun 3rd 2008, 09:07 PM
It was and we have one more to make. Going to St. Louis tomorrow for the rest of the week. Jennifer is singing at the Relay for Life event at the Children's Hospital. Shoot... I can brag on her a bit and will exercise some Admin privilege and derail for a sec! :)

Don't know if you remember the struggle that DebraR's grandson went through before succumbing to cancer... but we were there for his final days and it changed Jennifer's life in many ways. You can read about that here (http://worldwithnofaces.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=109&Itemid=40).




This is the song she wrote about Nathaniel and it is titled Broken (http://www.worldwithnofaces.org/4mieke/Broken.mp3) and this is what she'll be singing. You guys can pray about it too.... been years since she's sang in front of a really large crowd.

I'm butting in here too..haven't really been posting on this thread or reading it but saw you posted and went to snoopy...lol...wow Jennifer has an awesome voice! Seriously! You guys need to put her on Godtube...though the many Christians on youtube would enjoy this too. :) She sounds like a professional singer...who did the recording..they did an excellent job with the sound? Who was playing the instruments? Its really, really good! :) She needs to put out some CD's...I'd buy one for sure!

God bless

ProjectPeter
Jun 3rd 2008, 09:12 PM
I'm butting in here too..haven't really been posting on this thread or reading it but saw you posted and went to snoopy...lol...wow Jennifer has an awesome voice! Seriously! You guys need to put her on Godtube...though the many Christians on youtube would enjoy this too. :) She sounds like a professional singer...who did the recording..they did an excellent job with the sound? Who was playing the instruments? Its really, really good! :) She needs to put out some CD's...I'd buy one for sure!

God bless
She did the music with a small ten buck a month computer program and did it here in the camper with her simple computer mic. Then with some free shareware she put it all together and there it is. :lol:

She has about a dozen more... I'll send you the links via PM. And yeah... she hates it when I do this but I've gotta brag on her some!!!

moonglow
Jun 3rd 2008, 09:30 PM
She did the music with a small ten buck a month computer program and did it here in the camper with her simple computer mic. Then with some free shareware she put it all together and there it is. :lol:

She has about a dozen more... I'll send you the links via PM. And yeah... she hates it when I do this but I've gotta brag on her some!!!

Ok...thanks! Gee, send me the shareware program links too...:lol: Maybe they can make my pitiful singing sound...well better then the sound of some poor animal dying in the woods...:cool:

God Bless

HisGrace
Jun 3rd 2008, 09:46 PM
This is speaking about John. Can I remind you John lived 2,000 yrs ago? He will not be around on the earth for your Pretrib rapture? Where do you get such a belief from? John is already in heaven. He is gone. He is in the presence of the Lord long before your supposed Pretrib rapture. How can this therefore be the rapture? Moreover, it says he was in the spirit 2,000 yrs ago. Everything that happens in the book of Revelation is a revelaion of the future.

Rev.1:1 This is a revelation from Jesus Christ which go gave him concerning the events that will happen soon.

There is a time lapse from Rev. 1 to Rev. 4. If there is a pre-trib rapture John would be raptured in the future the same as us. His visions still could be part of the future. How did the twenty-four elders get to heaven, as mentioned in Rev.4:10? Elders represent the church.

wpm
Jun 3rd 2008, 10:09 PM
Everything that happens in the book of Revelation is a revelaion of the future.

Rev.1:1 This is a revelation from Jesus Christ which go gave him concerning the events that will happen soon.

There is a time lapse from Rev. 1 to Rev. 4. If there is a pre-trib rapture John would be raptured in the future the same as us. His visions still could be part of the future. How did the twenty-four elders get to heaven, as mentioned in Rev.4:10? Elders represent the church.

Is John going to be reincarnated and brought back to the earth for the Pretrib rapture (Rev 4:1)?

You do believe John is talking here?

Paul

wpm
Jun 3rd 2008, 10:10 PM
Well on that... He says "come up here" in chapter four... and for example in chapter six it simply says "come." There is a difference. Never been caught up in heaven like John was... but come look is still quite different than come up here and then talking about being taken up into heaven! But the only time I think he says come up here in the context of John being caught up... chapter four.

I take it you see John being caught up in Rev 4:1 like Paul to heaven in the spirit to receive a revelation from God? I hope I am hearing you right.

Paul

Clifton
Jun 3rd 2008, 11:43 PM
If there is a pre-trib rapture John would be raptured in the future the same as us.

True, (according to scripture), because it pertains to both dead and alive saints.

Blessings.

Calvin
Jun 4th 2008, 12:58 AM
I take it you see John being caught up in Rev 4:1 like Paul to heaven in the spirit to receive a revelation from God? I hope I am hearing you right.

Paul

Saying the whole "come up hither" is the rapture is kinda weak. I mean it's reaching. I probably know less than the lest here, but I don't see that in any way as being the "rapture". :2cents:

ProjectPeter
Jun 4th 2008, 01:54 AM
I take it you see John being caught up in Rev 4:1 like Paul to heaven in the spirit to receive a revelation from God? I hope I am hearing you right.

Paul
In chapter four and elsewhere where it says "come" in chapter six... yes. That was simply part of John's vision. Has nothing to do with the rapture at all. That would be totally losing all grasp of the English language to make that a "rapture".

Gods Child
Jun 4th 2008, 04:36 AM
Bible Base / Post-Tribulation Questions




Posttribulationism

There are 2 related views in posttribulationism. The first is historic postribulationism, which says that the church will go through the entire 7 year tribulation period. This view does not exempt the church from the Day of the Lord wrath and was defended by Alexander Reese in his book, the Approaching Advent of Christ. The 2nd view is supported by Robert Gundry in his book, The Church and the Tribulation. His modification is that the tribulation is not the time of God’s wrath except at the very end. The wrath of God, according to Gundry, will begin very near the end of the 7 year period and will include the bowl judgments and the Battle of Armageddon. Since he believes the rapture will occur before the Day of the Lord, the church will be kept from God’s wrath, which he understands to cover a very brief period of time.

If I had to put my view into a box, I would put it in this one. The Robert Gundry view, although I have never heard of him and I’m not sure what he really believes, but reading it here it sounds the closest to my view.

I believe that we will not be here for the vials, which is God’s Wrath is the vials as described in the bible



1) The post-tribulation view requires that the church be present during the 70th week of Daniel (Daniel 9:24-27), even though it was absent from the first 69. This is in spite of the fact that Dan 9:24 indicates that all 70 weeks are for Israel. I believe the church must depart prior to the 70th week, before the final seven-year period. .
If we remember that there were no chapters and verses and continue into the book of Daniel, we will see that the time of trouble is not just for Israel. The time of trouble is for all thy people (God’s People) who are written in the book (book of life) – those who shall sleep in the dust (1 Thes 4:16-17/ 1 Cor 15:51-52) and awake to everlasting life….Dan 12 would include Christians (sleep in the dust/book of life) as 1 Thes 4 & 1 Cor 15:51 describes.
Dan 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.





2) The post-tribulation view denies the New Testament teaching of imminency--that Christ could come at any moment--since there are intervening events required in that view. We believe there are no signs that must precede the Rapture. ,
In Mathew 24, Jesus himself taught that there were certain things that had to happen before his coming. In your view -What scripture is it that teaches immanency? I have not found one, so it is hard to comment on a scripture that I have not found.


3) The post-tribulation view has difficulties with who will populate the Millennium if the Rapture and the Second Coming occur at essentially the same time. Since all believers will be translated at the Rapture and all unbelievers are judged, because no unrighteous shall be allowed to enter Christ's Kingdom, then no one would be left in mortal bodies to start the population base for the Millennium. . Within my view of scripture I do not see much difference between who will populate the Millennium than from your view. The only difference between your view and mine is approx. 7 years. Within my view, The same people would populate the earth, which would be the Jews who would be present for the wrath/Armageddon.
I believe that we will be taken out at the 7 trumpet, which is the “last trumpet” described in 1 Cor 15:51-52, which is just prior to the Vials=Wrath of God (we are not appointed to wrath) At the “Last Trumpet” of the 7th trumpet (Rev 11 & 14) we see for the FIRST time that Jesus comes in the clouds just prior to the Vials/Wrath of God. Which lines up with scripture of we are gathered at the “last trumpet” of 1 Cor 15:51-52.
Rev 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.
Rev. 14:14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.

1 Cor 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.


4) Similarly, post-tribulationism is not able to explain the sheep and goats judgment after the Second Coming in Matthew 25:3-46. Where would the believers in mortal bodies come from if they are raptured at the Second Coming? Who would be able to enter into Christ's Kingdom? .

I do not see a contradiction. If you read the 7th trumpet (last trumpet) of Rev 11:15 & Rev 14:14-20, you will see the separation of the sheep and goats at the “last trumpet” (7th). It makes it easy on me, for I do not have to explain it…for it is written.


5) The Bride of Christ, the church, is made ready to accompany Christ to earth (Revelation 19:7-8,14) before the Second Coming, but how could this reasonably happen if part of the church is still on the earth awaiting the Second Coming? If the Rapture of the church takes place at the Second Coming, then how does the Bride (the church) also come with Christ at His Return? . It makes perfect sense if you read that we are taken at the last trumpet (1 cor 15:51-52) Then at the 7th trumpet (last trumpet of Rev 11 & Rev 14) we see Jesus comes in the clouds and this Kingdom become the Kingdom of our Christ (at the 7th trumpet) Then you read on that we get our reward then (7th trumpet). After Jesus reaps his from the earth (Rev 14),-we are Gone,- Then the vials (wrath of God) is poured out on the earth.
We are taken at the 7th trumpet – then the vials happen – while the vials are going on here on earth we are ALL in heaven having the marriage supper – then we come back down during the battle of Armageddon. As it is shown in scripture at the 7th trumpet, I can not see how one can deny it. Which makes perfect sense. We are ALL taken at the last trumpet as 1 Cor 15 states…Not one of Jesus is left behind…Would Jesus ever leave one behind…The bible says NO!...Then the wrath of God is poured out in the vials, while ALL of the bride is enjoying the Marriage Supper…Then we come back after the vials.

At the 7th Trumpet – Jesus comes back for a Whole bride/Whole Church – Because Jesus would NEVER come back for half a Bride or half a Church and Jesus would NEVER leave any Believer behind….NOT ONE.

The Jews at the battle of Armageddon will populate the earth. They will be like doubting Thomas – They will need to see the wounds in his hands in order to believe -as we have been told in the bible.


Zech 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.]
Zech 13:6 And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

You see NMKeith, the only difference between your view and mine is the timing. You have it towards the beginning and I have it towards the end, but we both see the same people populate the earth.

I have searched these things and the difference is that there are scriptures to support the 7th trumpet view, but I have not found scriptures to support the pre-view.
Within my heart the pre-trib view sounds better (My flesh would really not like to be here during that time), but the 7th trumpet (Rev 14) is when we are shown that Jesus comes in the clouds to reap his from the earth...So I have to let God describe to me what he wants (7th trumpet)…and not let it be "My wants"....
I HAVE TO LET IT BE WHAT GOD WANTS>>>NOT MINE !!!

It's really late - I hope that you can see why I stand where I do and that I explained it well enough...After all it is late for me...My brain is weak for lack of sleep. Time for Bed...Good Night. I will try to get back on real soon...Time seems limited you know.

God bless,

vinsight4u8
Jun 4th 2008, 10:35 AM
Many will be converted during the tribulation and this is referring to those people.
Rev. 15:I saw before me what seemed to be a crystal sea mixed with fire. And on it stood all the people who had been victorious over the beast and his statue and the number representing his name. They were all holding harps that God had given thm And they were signing the song of Moses the servant of God and the song of the Lamb.

Look at what happens just before the trumpets begin.
It is in Rev. 8:4.
incense

Incense is the time when men pray outside of the temple.
So - men are not in the temple at the start of the trumpets
thus - an angel has the prayers
- as to has the prayers of all saints

then the trumpet message goes out to show how long the punishment time will last...as in till the earthquake comes.

then - finally with the 7th trumpet earthquake hour arriving - the trumpet ends and men can enter the temple in heaven

HisGrace
Jun 4th 2008, 01:38 PM
Look at what happens just before the trumpets begin.
It is in Rev. 8:4.
incense The events in Rev. 15 had long past the events in Rev. 8. The saints who had refused the mark of the beast were rejoicing in heaven.

Rev. 15: 1 Then I saw in heaven another marvelous event of great significance. Seven angels were holding the seven last plagues, which would bring God’s wrath to completion.

2 I saw before me what seemed to be a glass sea mixed with fire. And on it stood all the people who had been victorious over the beast and his statue and the number representing his name. They were all holding harps that God had given them. 3 And they were singing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb

wpm
Jun 4th 2008, 04:53 PM
The events in Rev. 15 had long past the events in Rev. 8. The saints who had refused the mark of the beast were rejoicing in heaven.

Rev. 15: 1 Then I saw in heaven another marvelous event of great significance. Seven angels were holding the seven last plagues, which would bring God’s wrath to completion.

2 I saw before me what seemed to be a glass sea mixed with fire. And on it stood all the people who had been victorious over the beast and his statue and the number representing his name. They were all holding harps that God had given them. 3 And they were singing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb

Do you believe Revelation is a chronological unfolding of world events?

Do you believe Revelation 4-19 is a harmonious chronological 7-year tribulation period?

Do you believe Revelation 19 is your 2nd Coming?

Paul

John146
Jun 4th 2008, 05:16 PM
I posted this on another thread but I have yet got a response. So I thought I would repost it on a new thread..

I have been here on this board for a week, and I have debated little on this topic. I want to encourage our brothers and sisters and not debate them. But I have noticed a lot of Post-Trib believers here.. That's very strange because that leaves a lot of unanswered questions that a pre-triber would have. And not just the Pre-Tribers but Bible scholars as well.. Let's look at the difficult Post-Trib theory.

Please let's take this slow. I want to learn as much as the next person. But I do have questions for the Post-Trib believer.

Post-tribulation Problems

One of the strengths of the pre-trib view is that it is better able to harmonize the many events of end-time prophecy.

I haven't read any of the other responses yet, so I apologize if I repeat something that's already been said. By the way, that last statement of yours is a matter of opinion. I personally believe post-trib, and particularly the amillennial view harmonize with scripture much better than the pre-trib, premillennial view.



There are some awkward difficulties with the post-tribulational view:

1) The post-tribulation view requires that the church be present during the 70th week of Daniel (Daniel 9:24-27), even though it was absent from the first 69. This is in spite of the fact that Dan 9:24 indicates that all 70 weeks are for Israel. I believe the church must depart prior to the 70th week, before the final seven-year period.

This one makes no sense. I personally believe the prophecy is fulfilled, but even if the 70th week was future, the argument that the church wasn't around for the first 69 weeks so it has to be gone for the 70th is weak, at best.


2) The post-tribulation view denies the New Testament teaching of imminency--that Christ could come at any moment--since there are intervening events required in that view. We believe there are no signs that must precede the Rapture.

2 Thess 2 is quite clear that a falling away from the faith and the man of sin being revealed had to occur before "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" and "our gathering together unto him". Don't you believe "our gathering together unto Him" is a description of the rapture?


3) The post-tribulation view has difficulties with who will populate the Millennium if the Rapture and the Second Coming occur at essentially the same time. Since all believers will be translated at the Rapture and all unbelievers are judged, because no unrighteous shall be allowed to enter Christ's Kingdom, then no one would be left in mortal bodies to start the population base for the Millennium.

You are correct that this is a difficulty for the the post-trib, premillennial view. The post-trib, amillennial view has no such problem as we believe that all believers are changed and caught up to the Lord when He returns and all unbelievers are destroyed and then judged and condemned at the judgment.


4) Similarly, post-tribulationism is not able to explain the sheep and goats judgment after the Second Coming in Matthew 25:3-46. Where would the believers in mortal bodies come from if they are raptured at the Second Coming? Who would be able to enter into Christ's Kingdom?

Where does it say that believers in mortal bodies are present at the sheep and goats judgment? By the way, the sheep and goats judgment is clearly the final judgment because it depicts people either being cast into everlasting fire with everlasting punishment (Matt 25:41,46) or being given eternal life in the kingdom of God (Matt 25:34,46).


5) The Bride of Christ, the church, is made ready to accompany Christ to earth (Revelation 19:7-8,14) before the Second Coming, but how could this reasonably happen if part of the church is still on the earth awaiting the Second Coming? If the Rapture of the church takes place at the Second Coming, then how does the Bride (the church) also come with Christ at His Return?

Does 1 Thess 4:13-17 not say that the dead in Christ (their souls) will return with Him when He comes? That is what Rev 19 is speaking about. There will not be anyone who already has new immortal resurrected bodies with Him when He comes. We are not changed until He comes at the last trumpet.

the rookie
Jun 4th 2008, 05:26 PM
I am glad to see us on the same page on something. It makes me feel good again. :hug:

Good to see you back from your trip. I hope it went well and was refreshing.

Paul

This strikes me as one of those threads in which a bunch of us would agree on a whole bunch of things. :lol:

The only one I'm not in with (though I don't want to derail) is that Paul was speaking of John the Apostle related to the Revelation of Jesus Christ. The timing wouldn't work, as it would place John's exile to Patmos around 45 AD - when Christianity wasn't really being targeted by Rome (it was still considered a branch of Judaism and "legal" until after 70 AD and Christians began differentiating themselves to avoid being identified with Jews, who had become "enemies of the state".

Christians weren't sent to Patmos until Domitian's reign, which could be considered the first "global" persecution of Christians; versus Nero's localized version (focused on Rome proper) and other regional governors who could imprison / execute Christians at their discretion. Thus, paul may have been talking about John in a general sense - but it's hard to connect that account to the Revelation experience.

In terms of Rev. 4:1 being a "rapture" verse, I've always found that interpretation to be the sloppiest "spiritualized" interpretation of a literal descriptive of John being "taken up" as Paul had been (whether in the body or out of the body, he didn't know) - to receive revelation, not to escape trouble or welcome an incoming king. I find it troubling that pre-trib theologians use that verse to prove a corporate "catching up in the air" when the "plain sense reading" indicates no such thing.

So, come on Paul! We're on the same team! Whoot!

John146
Jun 4th 2008, 05:26 PM
...why do some theories rely on genuinely difficult and apocalyptic texts as their theological mainstay? Thankfully, we are more sober when we work in other parts of our theology--the Holy Trinity, the incarnation, etc. But when it comes to eschatology, people who are perfectly sane go completely nuts? Why IS that? :lol:

Very good question. It doesn't make any sense to me, either. :lol:

ProjectPeter
Jun 4th 2008, 05:44 PM
This strikes me as one of those threads in which a bunch of us would agree on a whole bunch of things. :lol:

The only one I'm not in with (though I don't want to derail) is that Paul was speaking of John the Apostle related to the Revelation of Jesus Christ. The timing wouldn't work, as it would place John's exile to Patmos around 45 AD - when Christianity wasn't really being targeted by Rome (it was still considered a branch of Judaism and "legal" until after 70 AD and Christians began differentiating themselves to avoid being identified with Jews, who had become "enemies of the state".

Christians weren't sent to Patmos until Domitian's reign, which could be considered the first "global" persecution of Christians; versus Nero's localized version (focused on Rome proper) and other regional governors who could imprison / execute Christians at their discretion. Thus, paul may have been talking about John in a general sense - but it's hard to connect that account to the Revelation experience.

In terms of Rev. 4:1 being a "rapture" verse, I've always found that interpretation to be the sloppiest "spiritualized" interpretation of a literal descriptive of John being "taken up" as Paul had been (whether in the body or out of the body, he didn't know) - to receive revelation, not to escape trouble or welcome an incoming king. I find it troubling that pre-trib theologians use that verse to prove a corporate "catching up in the air" when the "plain sense reading" indicates no such thing.

So, come on Paul! We're on the same team! Whoot!
Well keep in mind what Paul said... AT THE TIME... " was caught up into Paradise, and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak." It wasn't time for that message. We know that John was on Patmos when he wrote this... hence the greeting. But.. no where does it say that the vision occured there that I recall. Keep in mind that you guys are much greater students of escatology than I. I've always been a "get me through the nasty now and now" sort of guy until the last four or five years. It was only then that end times stuff became a burden and thing of study for me. :) I totally believe, as do most scholars, that this was written much later in time.

the rookie
Jun 4th 2008, 05:56 PM
Well keep in mind what Paul said... AT THE TIME... " was caught up into Paradise, and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak." It wasn't time for that message. We know that John was on Patmos when he wrote this... hence the greeting. But.. no where does it say that the vision occured there that I recall. Keep in mind that you guys are much greater students of escatology than I. I've always been a "get me through the nasty now and now" sort of guy until the last four or five years. It was only then that end times stuff became a burden and thing of study for me. :) I totally believe, as do most scholars, that this was written much later in time.

Ah! I follow you. John was "taken up" and received the revelatory information; but didn't actually record it until 90 AD when he had a little time on his hands...got it. I never thought of that - that's an interesting angle for sure.

I tend to think that John functioned as more of a scribe, transcribing what he saw as he saw it (IOW, mostly in "real time") which explains the grammatical contradictions with some of his more "well-edited" work (like his gospel, which is grammatically "cleaner"); there are about a dozen more reasons that I think that the vision wasn't given to John until 90 AD (ish) but that would really derail the thread. A big one, in this stream of discussion, is that I have a hard time imagining that John waited 15 years (preterist view) or 45 years (futurist view) before writing down and transmitting such a critical work for the body of Christ in peril and trouble.

It seems as if, in 1:9-10, John is providing a narrative account of the "how" behind the "what": "I John...was on the island of Patmos...I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day..."; but I can see where you could say that the two points don't necessarily have to mean that he was in the same place for both reception of the vision and the recording of it.

John146
Jun 4th 2008, 06:00 PM
I see you have great conviction, and your knowledge is wonderful; so knowing a little Greek myself I understand where you are going with this.. Let's discuss this because ecclesia means several things.

In the Old Testament usage, "Church" was not originally a specifically religious word It's own root idea is that of "a body of called out ones," and was translated by the Latin term ecclesia, from two Greek words, ek, meaning "out" and kalein, "to call." Although ecclesia is now used in a distinctively Christian sense yet it is found scattered throughout the Old Testament in many forms. It's Hebrew equivalent Kahal is found less than than 123 times and was used to describe a congregation, assembly, multitude or company of any kind.

The first occurrence of the word is found in the blessing of Jacob by Issac, "Be a multitude of people" (Genesis 28:3). It is seen again in Nehemiah's pronouncement "The Moabites should not come into the congregation of God for ever" (13:1). Thus wherever the word is found, it signifies a group of certain people selected from among others for a particular purpose. And not necessarily religious. The gathering of rioters at Ephesus is referred to as the ecclesia (Acts 19:32). So again though ecclesia now means the Church. Back in the Old Testament it meant many different things.


I'm sure you're aware that Romans 11 makes mention of "the good olive tree". The good olive tree is another term for the church. Another term is the body of Christ. Yet another term is the household of God. Whatever you want to call it, it's been around from the beginning. Because of Christ's sacrifice, the Gentiles were able to be grafted into the good olive tree, which is the church.

The cornerstone of the church, of course, is Christ. The church in Old Testament times was founded in Christ. We can see in 1 Cor 10:1-4 that the Old Testament saints "did all eat the same spiritual meat; and did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ". Once He came, He built upon that foundation of the church, starting with His apostles. Ephesians 2:19-22 describes the church and tells us that Christ is the chief cornerstone and that it was "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets".

John146
Jun 4th 2008, 06:14 PM
[/font][/color]

Finally we agree..
Let me give you the answer to the best of my knowledge:

Parousia is a Greek word used 24 times in the New Testament to mean "coming, arrival, personal presence". It is most often used to indicate the second coming and the arrival of the Son of Man though it can also indicate a visit by a Christian worker, apostle or even the "man of lawlessness". In the Greek world of the New Testament it meant among other things a) A State visit or b) The presence or appearance of a deity during worship e.g. by divine fire. It has a range of meaning to that of the archaic English word "visitation". Here is a definition from Strong's concordance:

Definition
3952. parousia, par-oo-see'-ah; from the pres. part. of G3918; a being near, i.e. advent (often, return; spec. of Christ to punish Jerusalem, or finally the wicked); (by impl.) phys. aspect:--coming, presence.

There are six uses of the word to describe a visit by a person or their personal "presence" (1 Cor 16;17; 2Cor6:6, 2Cor 6;7; 2Cor 10:10; Phil 1:26; 2:12) this combination of "arrival" plus "personal presence" gives the flavour to the word even when it is being used theologically. The Parousia of Jesus Christ is both His arrival and the manifestation of His "presence" to all mankind.

This is the 2nd coming.. Not the rapture

And the word is used in the following verse, which pre-tribs inexplicably try to use to support their view.

For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive [and] remain unto the coming (parousia) of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. - 1 Thess 4:15

This verse is clearly speaking of the second coming of Christ. So why do pre-tribs attribute it to a pre-trib rapture seven years before the second coming?

ProjectPeter
Jun 4th 2008, 06:19 PM
Ah! I follow you. John was "taken up" and received the revelatory information; but didn't actually record it until 90 AD when he had a little time on his hands...got it. I never thought of that - that's an interesting angle for sure.

I tend to think that John functioned as more of a scribe, transcribing what he saw as he saw it (IOW, mostly in "real time") which explains the grammatical contradictions with some of his more "well-edited" work (like his gospel, which is grammatically "cleaner"); there are about a dozen more reasons that I think that the vision wasn't given to John until 90 AD (ish) but that would really derail the thread. A big one, in this stream of discussion, is that I have a hard time imagining that John waited 15 years (preterist view) or 45 years (futurist view) before writing down and transmitting such a critical work for the body of Christ in peril and trouble.

It seems as if, in 1:9-10, John is providing a narrative account of the "how" behind the "what": "I John...was on the island of Patmos...I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day..."; but I can see where you could say that the two points don't necessarily have to mean that he was in the same place for both reception of the vision and the recording of it.
He wouldn't have to be at all. It was simply time. John was either near the end of his life (obvious with the timeline of when most think it written) or in fact there is some freaky thing happening with that whole "they thought he'd live forever thing... :lol:.

My point is simple that while on Patmos John wrote down the vision that he'd of shared with Paul, and likely the other Apostles, whom we know Paul met with in the Acts 15 time period. I can't buy that it was Paul speaking of himself because I honestly think Paul was humbled after hearing John's vision. Paul... all of the great revelation that he had about the Gentile... that paled in comparison to the vision that John had. If Paul was speaking of Paul himself... then Paul was crowing about himself even if by the back door. I think Paul would say... MAY IT NEVER BE!!!!!!! He wasn't speaking of himself but about someone else. My theory (mind you it is just that and not set in stone nor would I teach it as such because Scripture is not CLEAR on this... just my theory ***EMPHASIS ON "MY THEORY"***) is that he was speaking of John.

But even more FREAKY... we are both siding with Paul on this one!!!! :lol: ANd yeah Paul... having fun at your expense! :lol: Love ya and would still minister beside your reformed self any day or any time.... you name it. :)

the rookie
Jun 4th 2008, 06:28 PM
He wouldn't have to be at all. It was simply time. John was either near the end of his life (obvious with the timeline of when most think it written) or in fact there is some freaky thing happening with that whole "they thought he'd live forever thing... :lol:.

My point is simple that while on Patmos John wrote down the vision that he'd of shared with Paul, and likely the other Apostles, whom we know Paul met with in the Acts 15 time period. I can't buy that it was Paul speaking of himself because I honestly think Paul was humbled after hearing John's vision. Paul... all of the great revelation that he had about the Gentile... that paled in comparison to the vision that John had. If Paul was speaking of Paul himself... then Paul was crowing about himself even if by the back door. I think Paul would say... MAY IT NEVER BE!!!!!!! He wasn't speaking of himself but about someone else. My theory (mind you it is just that and not set in stone nor would I teach it as such because Scripture is not CLEAR on this... just my theory ***EMPHASIS ON "MY THEORY"***) is that he was speaking of John.

And it's not a bad theory, at that - despite all of its holes. :lol::lol::rofl:


But even more FREAKY... we are both siding with Paul on this one!!!! :lol: ANd yeah Paul... having fun at your expense! :lol: Love ya and would still minister beside your reformed self any day or any time.... you name it. :)

Same here - I would say the same without hesitation.

wpm
Jun 4th 2008, 06:30 PM
This strikes me as one of those threads in which a bunch of us would agree on a whole bunch of things. :lol:

The only one I'm not in with (though I don't want to derail) is that Paul was speaking of John the Apostle related to the Revelation of Jesus Christ. The timing wouldn't work, as it would place John's exile to Patmos around 45 AD - when Christianity wasn't really being targeted by Rome (it was still considered a branch of Judaism and "legal" until after 70 AD and Christians began differentiating themselves to avoid being identified with Jews, who had become "enemies of the state".

Christians weren't sent to Patmos until Domitian's reign, which could be considered the first "global" persecution of Christians; versus Nero's localized version (focused on Rome proper) and other regional governors who could imprison / execute Christians at their discretion. Thus, paul may have been talking about John in a general sense - but it's hard to connect that account to the Revelation experience.

In terms of Rev. 4:1 being a "rapture" verse, I've always found that interpretation to be the sloppiest "spiritualized" interpretation of a literal descriptive of John being "taken up" as Paul had been (whether in the body or out of the body, he didn't know) - to receive revelation, not to escape trouble or welcome an incoming king. I find it troubling that pre-trib theologians use that verse to prove a corporate "catching up in the air" when the "plain sense reading" indicates no such thing.

So, come on Paul! We're on the same team! Whoot!

I didn't say that Paul and John expereinced the same incident, only similar type being caught up in he spirit to receive revelation.

Paul

wpm
Jun 4th 2008, 06:35 PM
He wouldn't have to be at all. It was simply time. John was either near the end of his life (obvious with the timeline of when most think it written) or in fact there is some freaky thing happening with that whole "they thought he'd live forever thing... :lol:.

My point is simple that while on Patmos John wrote down the vision that he'd of shared with Paul, and likely the other Apostles, whom we know Paul met with in the Acts 15 time period. I can't buy that it was Paul speaking of himself because I honestly think Paul was humbled after hearing John's vision. Paul... all of the great revelation that he had about the Gentile... that paled in comparison to the vision that John had. If Paul was speaking of Paul himself... then Paul was crowing about himself even if by the back door. I think Paul would say... MAY IT NEVER BE!!!!!!! He wasn't speaking of himself but about someone else. My theory (mind you it is just that and not set in stone nor would I teach it as such because Scripture is not CLEAR on this... just my theory ***EMPHASIS ON "MY THEORY"***) is that he was speaking of John.

But even more FREAKY... we are both siding with Paul on this one!!!! :lol: ANd yeah Paul... having fun at your expense! :lol: Love ya and would still minister beside your reformed self any day or any time.... you name it. :)

Same battle, same Lord, same side. :pp

Paul

ProjectPeter
Jun 4th 2008, 06:36 PM
It does have holes no doubt! Not enough mentioned that I can say it with ABSOLUTE confidence. Like I said... just one of my theories. :lol: I used to be the same way about the seven day theory (yeah... had to go there) but I don't see any holes left in that therefore I don;t count it a theory! :lol:

ProjectPeter
Jun 4th 2008, 06:37 PM
I didn't say that Paul and John expereinced the same incident, only similar type being caught up in he spirit to receive revelation.

Paul
That we do know. Be it the same or similar... there is Scriptural agreement.

ProjectPeter
Jun 4th 2008, 06:38 PM
Same battle, same Lord, same side. :pp

Paul
No doubt of that. :)

John146
Jun 4th 2008, 06:57 PM
It's group hug time. :hug: :hug: :D

the rookie
Jun 4th 2008, 09:02 PM
I didn't say that Paul and John expereinced the same incident, only similar type being caught up in he spirit to receive revelation.

Paul

I know - I was speaking about PP's point. I knew we were on the same page in this regard as well. It makes me want to keep the ball rolling while we're on a win streak...

HisGrace
Jun 4th 2008, 09:04 PM
Do you believe Revelation is a chronological unfolding of world events?

Do you believe Revelation 4-19 is a harmonious chronological 7-year tribulation period?

Do you believe Revelation 19 is your 2nd Coming?

Paul

Yes, yes, yes.....

wpm
Jun 4th 2008, 10:20 PM
Yes, yes, yes.....

When we examine the time-periods embodied within Revelation 4-19 we significantly find that they add up to a period of 19 years, 4 ½ days and 3 hours.

5 months – the wicked tormented (Rev 9:5-10).
1 year, 1 month, 1 day, 1 hour – four angels prepared to pour out the 6th trumpet judgment (Rev 9:15)
42 months – the temple trampled by Gentiles (Rev 11:2).
1260 days – the two witnesses prophesy (Rev 11:3).
3 ½ days – two witnesses lie dead (Rev 11:9).
1260 days – woman flees into the wilderness (Revelation 12:6).
Times, time, and half a time – woman nourished in the wilderness (Rev 12:14).
42 months – power given to the beast (Rev 13:5).
1 hour – the beast receives power with the ten kings (Rev 17:12).
1 hour – Babylon destroyed (Rev 18:10-19).

5 x 3 ½ years + 1 year = 18 ½ years.
5 months + 1 month = 6 months (or ½ year).
3 ½ days + 1 day = 4 ½ days.
3 x 1 hr = 3 hrs.

TOTAL 19 years, 4 ½ days and 3 hours.

This is calculated by:

5 x 3 ½ years + 1 year = 18½ years.
5 months + 1 month = 6 months (or ½ year).
3 ½ days + 1 day = 4½ days.
3 x 1 hr = 3 hrs.

There are five 3 ½ years:

42 months from Rev 11:2 (temple trampled by Gentiles).
1260 days from Rev 11:3 (two witnesses prophesy).
1260 days from Rev 12:6 (woman flees into the wilderness).
Times, time, and half a time from Rev 12:14 (woman nourished in the wilderness).
42 months from Rev 13:5 (power given to the beast)

42months + 1260days + 1260days + times, time, and half a time (assuming 3 ½ years interpretation) + 42 months = A 17.5 year period in Revelation.

Paul

the rookie
Jun 4th 2008, 10:51 PM
When we examine the time-periods embodied within Revelation 4-19 we significantly find that they add up to a period of 19 years, 4 ½ days and 3 hours.

5 months – the wicked tormented (Rev 9:5-10).
1 year, 1 month, 1 day, 1 hour – four angels prepared to pour out the 6th trumpet judgment (Rev 9:15)
42 months – the temple trampled by Gentiles (Rev 11:2).
1260 days – the two witnesses prophesy (Rev 11:3).
3 ½ days – two witnesses lie dead (Rev 11:9).
1260 days – woman flees into the wilderness (Revelation 12:6).
Times, time, and half a time – woman nourished in the wilderness (Rev 12:14).
42 months – power given to the beast (Rev 13:5).
1 hour – the beast receives power with the ten kings (Rev 17:12).
1 hour – Babylon destroyed (Rev 18:10-19).

5 x 3 ½ years + 1 year = 18 ½ years.
5 months + 1 month = 6 months (or ½ year).
3 ½ days + 1 day = 4 ½ days.
3 x 1 hr = 3 hrs.

TOTAL 19 years, 4 ½ days and 3 hours.

This is calculated by:

5 x 3 ½ years + 1 year = 18½ years.
5 months + 1 month = 6 months (or ½ year).
3 ½ days + 1 day = 4½ days.
3 x 1 hr = 3 hrs.

There are five 3 ½ years:

42 months from Rev 11:2 (temple trampled by Gentiles).
1260 days from Rev 11:3 (two witnesses prophesy).
1260 days from Rev 12:6 (woman flees into the wilderness).
Times, time, and half a time from Rev 12:14 (woman nourished in the wilderness).
42 months from Rev 13:5 (power given to the beast)

42months + 1260days + 1260days + times, time, and half a time (assuming 3 ½ years interpretation) + 42 months = A 17.5 year period in Revelation.

Paul

Why couldn't the 42 months, 1260 days, time / time / 1/2 a time all be referring to the same time frame? What in the book of Revelation explicitly negates such a possibility? Why would that time frame not also match what the angel swore to Daniel related to the great tribulation in Dan. 12:7? Would that be an impossibility, and if so, what passage of scripture explicitly negates such a possibility?

Consequently, why couldn't that 1260 day time frame contain a year-long preparation period and a five month period of torment?

I mean, of course, beyond interpretive schools that don't even think that there will be a 3 1/2 yr. time frame of great trouble, don't imagine that there will even be a preparation period before loosing the second woe upon the nations, and can't comprehend that there will be a literal five month time frame of torment related to God's wrath against the nations. That aside, what negates the possibility of all of these time frames happening within a broader 3 1/2 year time frame?

HisGrace
Jun 5th 2008, 01:42 AM
When we examine the time-periods embodied within Revelation 4-19 we significantly find that they add up to a period of 19 years, 4 ½ days and 3 hours.
5 months – the wicked tormented (Rev 9:5-10).
1 year, 1 month, 1 day, 1 hour – four angels prepared to pour out the 6th trumpet judgment (Rev 9:15)
42 months – the temple trampled by Gentiles (Rev 11:2).
1260 days – the two witnesses prophesy (Rev 11:3).
3 ½ days – two witnesses lie dead (Rev 11:9).
1260 days – woman flees into the wilderness (Revelation 12:6).
Times, time, and half a time – woman nourished in the wilderness (Rev 12:14).
42 months – power given to the beast (Rev 13:5).
1 hour – the beast receives power with the ten kings (Rev 17:12).
1 hour – Babylon destroyed (Rev 18:10-19).

5 x 3 ½ years + 1 year = 18 ½ years.
5 months + 1 month = 6 months (or ½ year).
3 ½ days + 1 day = 4 ½ days.
3 x 1 hr = 3 hrs.

TOTAL 19 years, 4 ½ days and 3 hours.

This is calculated by:

5 x 3 ½ years + 1 year = 18½ years.
5 months + 1 month = 6 months (or ½ year).
3 ½ days + 1 day = 4½ days.
3 x 1 hr = 3 hrs.

There are five 3 ½ years:

42 months from Rev 11:2 (temple trampled by Gentiles).
1260 days from Rev 11:3 (two witnesses prophesy).
1260 days from Rev 12:6 (woman flees into the wilderness).
Times, time, and half a time from Rev 12:14 (woman nourished in the wilderness).
42 months from Rev 13:5 (power given to the beast)

42months + 1260days + 1260days + times, time, and half a time (assuming 3 ½ years interpretation) + 42 months = A 17.5 year period in Revelation.

Paul
__________________
God bless,

You are using a lot of numbers within the same time frame, or using some numbers from the first 3 1/2 and years and sometimes the same numbers are used for the second 3 1/2 years of the tribulation.

e.g. the 42 months – the temple trampled by Gentiles (Rev 11:2).
1260 days – the two witnesses prophesy (Rev 11:3).
3 ½ days – two witnesses lie dead (Rev 11:9).
1260 days – woman flees into the wilderness (Revelation 12:6).
All in the same time frame - the first 3 1/2 years.

42 months – power given to the beast (Rev 13:5).
1 hour – the beast receives power with the ten kings (Rev 17:12).
1 hour – Babylon destroyed (Rev 18:10-19).
Same time frame - second 3 1/2 years.



42months + 1260days + 1260days + times, time, and half a time (assuming 3 ½ years interpretation) + 42 months = A 17.5 year period in Revelation.

42 months = 3 1/2 years = approx.1260 days, the first part of the tribulation x 2 for the second half = 7 years.

wpm
Jun 5th 2008, 04:09 AM
You are using a lot of numbers within the same time frame, or using some numbers from the first 3 1/2 and years and sometimes the same numbers are used for the second 3 1/2 years of the tribulation.

e.g. the 42 months – the temple trampled by Gentiles (Rev 11:2).
1260 days – the two witnesses prophesy (Rev 11:3).
3 ½ days – two witnesses lie dead (Rev 11:9).
1260 days – woman flees into the wilderness (Revelation 12:6).
All in the same time frame - the first 3 1/2 years.

42 months – power given to the beast (Rev 13:5).
1 hour – the beast receives power with the ten kings (Rev 17:12).
1 hour – Babylon destroyed (Rev 18:10-19).
Same time frame - second 3 1/2 years.




42 months = 3 1/2 years = approx.1260 days, the first part of the tribulation x 2 for the second half = 7 years.

This is a change from your previous position. When I asked: 'Do you believe Revelation is a chronological unfolding of world events? Do you believe Revelation 4-19 is a harmonious chronological 7-year tribulation period? Do you believe Revelation 19 is your 2nd Coming?', you replied: yes, yes, yes." This was where I was trying to bring you too. It is not what you and Pretrib teaches a chronological unfolding on end time events, it is a series of recapitulations. If you can truly see this you will see that the Pretrib reasoning of this doesn't fit.

It is interesting that there are several references to the one final Coming of Christ, but you choose to ignore them, rather having John being raptured even though he has been dead for near 2,000 yrs. This is not a trick question, but, is he coming back to earth again just in time for a Pretrib rapture?

Paul

HisGrace
Jun 5th 2008, 06:49 PM
This certainly hasn't changed my position that there is a chronological unfolding of events in the end times. Recapitulate merely means a summary, so the summary of events adds up to seven years. Do you not believe in the tribulation, wpm?


It is interesting that there are several references to the one final Coming of Christ, but you choose to ignore them, rather having John being raptured even though he has been dead for near 2,000 yrs.

I was never asked about the final coming of Christ, which is the true Second Coming, because Christ doesn't set foot on the earth during the Rapture.

Jesus' Second Coming after the Tribulation
Rev. 19 describes how the bride will be prepared in heaven for Jesus' return in his Second Coming, with a great wedding feast and her being clothed in the finest white linen.

Rev. 19:6-10.And from the throne came a voice that said "Praise our God, all his servants, from the least to the greatest, all who fear him."

Then I heard again what sounded like the shout of a huge crowd, or the roar of mighty ocean waves, or the crash of loud thunder: "Hallelujah! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns. Let us be glad and rejoice and honor him. For the time has come for the wedding feast of the Lamb, and his bride has prepared herself. She is permitted to wear the finest white linen." (Fine linen represents the good deeds done by the people of God.)

And the angel said, "Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding feast of the Lamb." And he added, "These are true words that come from God."

Then I fell down at his feet to worship him, but he said, "No, don't worship me. For I am a servant of God, just like you and other brothers and sisters who testify of their faith in Jesus. Worship God. For the essence of prophecy is to give a clear witness for Jesus."

Here Comes Jesus -

The Rider on the White Horse
Rev. 19:11-14.Then I saw heaven opened, and a white horse was standing there. And the one sitting on the horse was named Faithful and True. For he judges fairly and then goes to war. His eyes were bright like flames of fire, and on his head were many crowns.

A name was written on him, and only he knew what it meant. He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and his title was the Word of God. The armies of heaven, dressed in pure white linen, followed him on white horses.

From his mouth came a sharp sword, and on his robe and thigh were written this title, "King and King and Lord of lords." The beast (anti-christ) gathered the kings and armies of the earth to fight the one on the horse, BUT beast was capturefd, along with the false prophet who did mighty miracles on behalf of the beast and accepted the mark of the beast and worshipped his statue.


This is not a trick question, but, is he coming back to earth again just in time for a Pretrib rapture?

Rememberr? Revelation is about the future so John will be raptured the same time as the saints and given visions at that time. There is quite a bit of celebrating going on in Rev. 4 and 5, which means the saints have gathered there, including the 24 elders. How did these representatives of the church get to heaven unless they were raptured?

John is still seeing visions during the tribulation -
Rev. 20 we read about an angel coming down from heaven with the key to the bottomless pit and a heavy chain in his hand. Satan is bound and thrown into the bottomless pit, where he will remain for 1000 years..

John in his vision sees people sitting around thrones. They are souls who have been beheaded for their testimony about Jesus, proclaiming the word of God. He also sees souls of those who would not take the mark or worship the beast.. They came to life again and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

wpm
Jun 6th 2008, 12:09 AM
Rememberr? Revelation is about the future so John will be raptured the same time as the saints and given visions at that time. There is quite a bit of celebrating going on in Rev. 4 and 5, which means the saints have gathered there, including the 24 elders. How did these representatives of the church get to heaven unless they were raptured?

Is he caught up (raptured) or resurrected at Christ's return? There is a difference.

Paul

HisGrace
Jun 6th 2008, 01:06 AM
Is he caught up (raptured) or resurrected at Christ's return? There is a difference.

PaulJesus' second coming is mentioned in Rev. 19. We hear about John's visions long before that in Rev. 4.

wpm
Jun 6th 2008, 01:47 AM
Jesus' second coming is mentioned in Rev. 19. We hear about John's visions long before that in Rev. 4.

I'm not sure what you are saying. Could you answer quesry? Is he caught up (raptured) or resurrected at Christ's return? There is a difference.

Paul

HisGrace
Jun 6th 2008, 02:39 AM
If you read Rev. 19 the bride is being prepared to descend from heaven with Jesus for the Second Coming. All who have been raptured, including John and the 24 elders, will be included.

Rev. 19:6-10.And from the throne came a voice that said "Praise our God, all his servants, from the least to the greatest, all who fear him."

Then I heard again what sounded like the shout of a huge crowd, or the roar of mighty ocean waves, or the crash of loud thunder: "Hallelujah! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns. Let us be glad and rejoice and honor him. For the time has come for the wedding feast of the Lamb, and his bride has prepared herself. She is permitted to wear the finest white linen." (Fine linen represents the good deeds done by the people of God.

wpm
Jun 6th 2008, 03:04 AM
If you read Rev. 19 the bride is being prepared to descend from heaven with Jesus for the Second Coming. All who have been raptured, including John and the 24 elders, will be included.

Rev. 19:6-10.And from the throne came a voice that said "Praise our God, all his servants, from the least to the greatest, all who fear him."

Then I heard again what sounded like the shout of a huge crowd, or the roar of mighty ocean waves, or the crash of loud thunder: "Hallelujah! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns. Let us be glad and rejoice and honor him. For the time has come for the wedding feast of the Lamb, and his bride has prepared herself. She is permitted to wear the finest white linen." (Fine linen represents the good deeds done by the people of God.

The 'live in Christ' are caught up (raptured) at His Coming, the "dead in Christ" (which I assume includes John who has been dead for near 2,000 yrs) are resurrected. You are putting him in the wrong company - the live in Christ. Is he around at the moment? No. Will he be resurrected before Christ's Coming in order to make the rapture company? Of course not. Your depiction of John being physically raptured does not therefore fit with Rev 4:1.

Paul

HisGrace
Jun 6th 2008, 03:42 AM
Back to the trump.

Matthew 24:30 And then at last, the sign that the Son of Man is coming will appear in the heavens, and there will be deep mourning among all the peoples of the earth. And they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he will send out his angels with the mighty blast of a trumpet, and they will gather his chosen ones from all over the world—from the farthest ends of the earth and heaven.

Rev 4:1 Then as I looked, I saw a door standing open in heaven, and the same voice I had heard before spoke to me like a trumpet blast. The voice said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must happen after this.” 2 And instantly I was in the Spirit, and I saw a throne in heaven and someone sitting on it.

This is speaking about the trumpet announcing the Rapture. There is no mention of trumps during the Second Coming, just loud shouts.

wpm
Jun 6th 2008, 03:59 PM
Back to the trump.

Matthew 24:30 And then at last, the sign that the Son of Man is coming will appear in the heavens, and there will be deep mourning among all the peoples of the earth. And they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he will send out his angels with the mighty blast of a trumpet, and they will gather his chosen ones from all over the world—from the farthest ends of the earth and heaven.

Rev 4:1 Then as I looked, I saw a door standing open in heaven, and the same voice I had heard before spoke to me like a trumpet blast. The voice said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must happen after this.” 2 And instantly I was in the Spirit, and I saw a throne in heaven and someone sitting on it.

This is speaking about the trumpet announcing the Rapture. There is no mention of trumps during the Second Coming, just loud shouts.

Is every trumpet blast a Pretrib rapture?

Paul

Clifton
Jun 6th 2008, 04:12 PM
Back to the trump.

Matthew 24:30 And then at last, the sign that the Son of Man is coming will appear in the heavens, and there will be deep mourning among all the peoples of the earth. And they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he will send out his angels with the mighty blast of a trumpet, and they will gather his chosen ones from all over the world—from the farthest ends of the earth and heaven.

Rev 4:1 Then as I looked, I saw a door standing open in heaven, and the same voice I had heard before spoke to me like a trumpet blast. The voice said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must happen after this.” 2 And instantly I was in the Spirit, and I saw a throne in heaven and someone sitting on it.

This is speaking about the trumpet announcing the Rapture. There is no mention of trumps during the Second Coming, just loud shouts.

In all fairness, note your bolded text - Revelation 4:1 is not a Trumpet but a comparative: a "voice" that sounded as that of a trumpet blast ("like it"), not a trumpet-blast itself.;)

Blessings.

Literalist-Luke
Jun 6th 2008, 05:28 PM
In all fairness, note your bolded text - Revelation 4:1 is not a Trumpet and a comparative: a "voice" that sounded as that of a trumpet blast ("like it"), not a trumpet-blast itself.Thank you! http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w40/litluke/thumb.gif

HisGrace
Jun 6th 2008, 11:21 PM
In all fairness, note your bolded text - Revelation 4:1 is not a Trumpet but a comparative: a "voice" that sounded as that of a trumpet blast ("like it"), not a trumpet-blast itself.;)

Blessings.

Rev.4:1 KJV After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me;

There are difference references in the Bible referring to the trumpet as being like a voice.

Exodus 19:16After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me;

Exodus 19:19And when the voice of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice.

Isaiah 58:1 “Shout with the voice of a trumpet blast.Shout aloud! Don’t be timid.Tell my people Israel of their sins

Revelation 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

Rev.8:13 And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!


Is every trumpet blast a Pretrib rapture?

Paul No

Clifton
Jun 7th 2008, 12:04 AM
Rev.4:1 KJV After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me;

Exodus 19:16After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me;

Exodus 19:19And when the voice of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice.

Isaiah 58:1 “Shout with the voice of a trumpet blast.Shout aloud! Don’t be timid.Tell my people Israel of their sins

Revelation 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

Rev.8:13 And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!

There are difference references in the Bible referring to the trumpet as being like a voice.

Right, which I was pointing out to you the difference between a voice sounding like a trumpet and the the trumpet and its sound. My dad might tell you my mom sounds like a trumpet when he hears her voice, but that does not make her a trumpet! ;)

Blessings.

HisGrace
Jun 7th 2008, 12:23 AM
Right, which I was pointing out to you the difference between a voice sounding like a trumpet and the the trumpet and its sound. My dad might tell you my mom sounds like a trumpet when he hears her voice, but that does not make her a trumpet! ;)

Blessings.Don't forget we are speaking in the spiritual realm

"the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me;"

For all we know that may be the voice of God.

wpm
Jun 7th 2008, 01:10 AM
Rev.4:1 KJV After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me;

There are difference references in the Bible referring to the trumpet as being like a voice.

Exodus 19:16After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me;

Exodus 19:19And when the voice of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice.

Isaiah 58:1 “Shout with the voice of a trumpet blast.Shout aloud! Don’t be timid.Tell my people Israel of their sins

Revelation 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

Rev.8:13 And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!

No

Do you correlate all these explict NT passages?

Elsewhere in Scripture we learn that the Coming of the Lord is ushered in by the sound of the trumpet. Christ said Himself, in Matthew 24:30-31, “they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”

1Thessalonians 4:15-16 says, “For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God.”

1 Corinthians 15:51-53 describes a ‘last trump’ saying, “Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.”

Revelation 10:1-11 declares, describing the seventh trumpet, “And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire: And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth, And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders uttered their voices. And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.”

Revelation 10:5-7 says of the Second Advent and the concluding last trumpet, “And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.”

The fourth parallel in Revelation 11:15 also makes reference to the seventh angel with the last trump, again being in complete agreement with consistent New Testament teaching (including the conclusion of the third parallel in Revelation 10) on this single, final, all-consummating nature of the Second Advent, saying, “And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying,the kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.”

Paul

HisGrace
Jun 7th 2008, 01:18 AM
Now we are getting into a different topic about trumpets other than the verses I quoted wpm.

The verses you quoted are regarding the rapture and the tribulation.

Clifton
Jun 7th 2008, 01:23 AM
"the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me;"

Yep, that is what pops would say about mommy.:D

Nevertheless, we LONG-TIME "rapture" believers (for the dead and living saints) know it is not in Revelation 4, at least not on this planet - but hey, they are checking out Mars now, so maybe there are some MSS there.:)

Blessings.

wpm
Jun 7th 2008, 04:11 AM
Now we are getting into a different topic about trumpets other than the verses I quoted wpm.

The verses you quoted are regarding the rapture and the tribulation.

I feel I asked you a reasonable question: can we equate them? To me, the 7th trumpet and the other 3 readings refer to the Coming of the Lord - a lot clearer than Pretribs re-locating John physically on the earth 2,000 yrs+ after he has died for the rapture. I would appreciate if you would address this apparent anomoly in the Pretrib paradigm.

Also, do you agree with me: Jesus is Coming with and for His saints the next time?

Paul

wpm
Jun 7th 2008, 04:41 AM
If you read Rev. 19 the bride is being prepared to descend from heaven with Jesus for the Second Coming. All who have been raptured, including John and the 24 elders, will be included.


But John along (with the rest of the dead in Christ) is in heaven according to Pretrib when Jesus raptures His Church! How do you get him to earth?

Paul

vinsight4u8
Jun 7th 2008, 04:16 PM
All John is doing in Rev. 4 as to the voice part is letting his readers know that he was listening to the very same voice that he had heard when ch 1 took place.

ch 1
heard a voice
as of a trumpet
turned to see the voice that spake with me

ch 4
and the first voice which I heard
/as in the voice of ch 1
{was as} it were of a trumpet

vinsight4u8
Jun 7th 2008, 04:28 PM
So John hears the same as it was a trumpet voice that was speaking to him at the end of ch 3.
John is cuaght up to see the endtime things.

He describes the throne area.

Now follow the way that John writes.

v 2
a throne was set in heaven
on the throne

v 4
four and twenty seats
upon the seats

Keep going and you wlll be able to get some of Revelation's chronology just by following when John add "the" to something.

For instance: When does John first see angels?
Rev. 15:1
seven angels

Rev. 8:2
I saw the seven angels

Flag this!
Rev. 15 happens before Rev. 8:2

HisGrace
Jun 8th 2008, 02:11 AM
I feel I asked you a reasonable question: can we equate them? To me, the 7th trumpet and the other 3 readings refer to the Coming of the Lord - a lot clearer than Pretribs re-locating John physically on the earth 2,000 yrs+ after he has died for the rapture. I would appreciate if you would address this apparent anomoly in the Pretrib paradigm.

PaulIn the first part of Revelation we see that John was exiled to the island of Patmos to write a letter to each of the seven churches.

Revelation 1:9-11 I, John, am your brother and your partner in suffering and in God’s Kingdom and in the patient endurance to which Jesus calls us. I was exiled to the island of Patmos for preaching the word of God and for my testimony about Jesus. 10 It was the Lord’s Day, and I was worshiping in the Spirit. Suddenly, I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet blast. 11 It said, “Write in a book everything you see, and send it to the seven churches in the cities of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea.”

In Rev.4:1 we see John being called up to heaven again with a trumpet blast, like the one we will hear during the Rapture. As I said before the 24 elders are there, so they must have been raptured with the rest of the church.


Also, do you agree with me: Jesus is Coming with and for His saints the next time? First there will be a rapture before the tribulation and second Jesus will return with the raptured bride after the tribulation back to earth to reign for 1000 years.


But John along (with the rest of the dead in Christ) is in heaven according to Pretrib when Jesus raptures His Church! How do you get him to earth?
PaulThe Second Coming as recorded in Rev. 19


All John is doing in Rev. 4 as to the voice part is letting his readers know that he was listening to the very same voice that he had heard when ch 1 took place.

ch 1
heard a voice
as of a trumpet
turned to see the voice that spake with me

ch 4
and the first voice which I heard
/as in the voice of ch 1
{was as} it were of a trumpet

These two trumps are in a different time frame. There are many trumpet calls throughout the Bible. The one in Chapter 1 was on the isle of Patmos, coming from behind him; the one in Chapter 4 was from heaven.


v 4
For instance: When does John first see angels?
Rev. 15:1
seven angels

Rev. 8:2
I saw the seven angels

Flag this!
Rev. 15 happens before Rev. 8:2I get very confused when people start jumping all over the Bible and putting events out of chronological order

Rev. 5 talks about Jesus holding a scroll in his right hand and it was sealed with seven seals. The tribulation is introduced. Among these broke seals the anti-christ is released, peace is taken from the earth, and there will be a shortage of food.

Rev. 8 is talking about the Seventh Seal

The Lamb Breaks the Seventh Seal
Rev. 8: 1 When the Lamb broke the seventh seal on the scroll, there was silence throughout heaven for about half an hour. 2 I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and they were given seven trumpets.
3 Then another angel with a gold incense burner came and stood at the altar. And a great amount of incense was given to him to mix with the prayers of God’s people as an offering on the gold altar before the throne.

4 The smoke of the incense, mixed with the prayers of God’s holy people, ascended up to God from the altar where the angel had poured them out. 5 Then the angel filled the incense burner with fire from the altar and threw it down upon the earth; and thunder crashed, lightning flashed, and there was a terrible earthquake.

Rev. 15 speaks about the seven bowls of the seven plagues something entirely different than seven seals being broken from the scroll.

Rev. 15: 5 Then I looked and saw that the Temple in heaven, God’s Tabernacle, was thrown wide open. 6 The seven angels who were holding the seven plagues came out of the Temple. They were clothed in spotless white linen[a] with gold sashes across their chests. 7 Then one of the four living beings handed each of the seven angels a gold bowl filled with the wrath of God, who lives forever and ever. 8 The Temple was filled with smoke from God’s glory and power. No one could enter the Temple until the seven angels had completed pouring out the seven plagues

Rev. 16:17-21 speaks about the seventh angel pouring out his bowl. 17 Then the seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air. And a mighty shout came from the throne in the Temple, saying, “It is finished!” 18 Then the thunder crashed and rolled, and lightning flashed. And a great earthquake struck—the worst since people were placed on the earth.

19 The great city of Babylon split into three sections, and the cities of many nations fell into heaps of rubble. So God remembered all of Babylon’s sins, and he made her drink the cup that was filled with the wine of his fierce wrath. 20 And every island disappeared, and all the mountains were leveled.

21 There was a terrible hailstorm, and hailstones weighing seventy-five pounds[a] fell from the sky onto the people below. They cursed God because of the terrible plague of the hailstorm

wpm
Jun 8th 2008, 02:48 AM
The Second Coming as recorded in Rev. 19


In one breath you are telling me Rev 4:1 is John being caught up at the rapture the next you are telling me he is instead involved in the Second Coming. Which is it? I am confused!

Frankly, if John is dead near 2,000 yrs I would assume he is amongst the "dead in Christ" in heaven now; how then can you position him in the rapture crowd (or ‘live in Christ') at Christ’s return? This just doesn't add up.


First there will be a rapture before the tribulation and second Jesus will return with the raptured bride after the tribulation back to earth to reign for 1000 years.

From your posts on this thread, it seems like you are saying: John will be both raptured in Rev 4:1 to be with Christ and then resurrected in Rev 19 to be with Christ? Please confirm which event John is involved in?

Previously you said:


Back to the trump.

Matthew 24:30 And then at last, the sign that the Son of Man is coming will appear in the heavens, and there will be deep mourning among all the peoples of the earth. And they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And he will send out his angels with the mighty blast of a trumpet, and they will gather his chosen ones from all over the world—from the farthest ends of the earth and heaven.

Rev 4:1 Then as I looked, I saw a door standing open in heaven, and the same voice I had heard before spoke to me like a trumpet blast. The voice said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must happen after this.” 2 And instantly I was in the Spirit, and I saw a throne in heaven and someone sitting on it.

This is speaking about the trumpet announcing the Rapture.

However, in your last post you announced:



In Rev.4:1 we see John being called up to heaven again with a trumpet blast, like the one we will hear during the Rapture.

You said, John's trumpet will be "like the one we will hear during the Rapture." I thought you were arguing a few posts ago Rev 4:1 is the rapture trumpet? It seems like you have done a complete U-turn.

Paul

HisGrace
Jun 8th 2008, 04:13 AM
In one breath you are telling me Rev 4:1 is John being caught up at the rapture the next you are telling me he is instead involved in the Second Coming. Which is it? I am confused!All believers will be involved in the rapture and all believers will be involved in the second coming. Once we are raptured up into heaven, we will be prepared, as the bride, to come back to earth with Jesus during his Second Coming, as explained in Rev. 19.


Frankly, if John is dead near 2,000 yrs I would assume he is amongst the "dead in Christ" in heaven now; how then can you position him in the rapture crowd (or ‘live in Christ') at Christ’s return? This just doesn't add up.I believe John is dead now and will be raptured with us. John was a prophet so he prophesied in Rev. 1,2,3 to the seven churches and also will prophecy when he is raptured, as we see in Rev. 4.


From your posts on this thread, it seems like you are saying: John will be both raptured in Rev 4:1 to be with Christ and then resurrected in Rev 19 to be with Christ? Please confirm which event John is involved in? I said that John will be raptured, as in Rev. 4:1 and then will return to earth from heaven, not resurrected.

I found this article and it explains the twenty-four elders better than I can and ties John into what is said in Rev. 4.

http://www.geocities.com/truedino/ch7rapt.htm


You said, John's trumpet will be "like the one we will hear during the Rapture." I thought you were arguing a few posts ago Rev 4:1 is the rapture trumpet? It seems like you have done a complete U-turn.

Paul Poor choice of words. I meant that it was the same trumpet as we hear.

wpm
Jun 8th 2008, 04:25 AM
All believers will be involved in the rapture and all believers will be involved in the second coming. Once we are raptured up into heaven, we will be prepared, as the bride, to come back to earth with Jesus during his Second Coming, as explained in Rev. 19.

I believe John is dead now and will be raptured with us. John was a prophet so he prophesied in Rev. 1,2,3 to the seven churches and also will prophecy when he is raptured, as we see in Rev. 4.

I said that John will be raptured, as in Rev. 4:1 and then will return to earth from heaven, not resurrected.

The dead in Christ must be resurrected not caught up/raptured - these are completely different matters. 1 Corinthians 15:52 confirms: "the dead shall be raised (or egeiro or resurrected) incorruptible, and we shall be changed."

If John is already in heaven, does he come back with Jesus at the Pretrib rapture?

Paul

HisGrace
Jun 8th 2008, 04:36 AM
The dead in Christ must be resurrected not caught up/raptured - these are completely different matters. 1 Corinthians 15:52 confirms: "the dead shall be raised (or egeiro or resurrected) incorruptible, and we shall be changed." If John is already in heaven, does he come back with Jesus at the Pretrib rapture?

PaulI am just taking one more peak before I pack it in for the night. I don't know why it is so confusing.

The dead in Christ will be resurrected from the dead and then caught up and raptured into heaven when Jesus comes for us.. After that the living will be caught up and raptured into heaven.

John is presently dead so he will be resurrected and then caught up and raptured into heaven also.

After the tribulation all of the saints, along with John, will come back to earth with Jesus in his Second Coming.

Nite

wpm
Jun 8th 2008, 04:43 AM
I am just taking one more peak before I pack it in for the night. I don't know why it is so confusing.

The dead in Christ will be resurrected from the dead and then caught up and raptured into heaven when Jesus comes for us.. After that the living will be caught up and raptured into heaven.

John is presently dead so he will be resurrected and then caught up and raptured into heaven also.

After the tribulation all of the saints, along with John, will come back to earth with Jesus in his Second Coming.

Nite

But Jesus must bring the dead in Christ with Him if their souls and bodies are to be united?

Paul

Clifton
Jun 8th 2008, 01:20 PM
Don't forget we are speaking in the spiritual realm

"the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me;"

For all we know that may be the voice of God.

Right, thanks for pointing out that there is even a difference in the spiritual realms - but that is nothing new to us that there are differentiations in the spiritual realms as well. Anything influenced in Greek knows that Revelation 4 does NOT refer to "the rapture" - that is in 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor. 15.

Blessings.

resbmc
Jun 8th 2008, 07:09 PM
with the beginning of this thread, you have not read any of my post, because I answer a lot in them, The book of Mathew, all talk about when the Lord comes back, but in Mathew all of them are about the judgement after the 1000 years. Not before some 7 year trib. that I do not believe is scriptual.

HisGrace
Jun 8th 2008, 08:49 PM
But Jesus must bring the dead in Christ with Him if their souls and bodies are to be united?

PaulNaturally


Right, thanks for pointing out that there is even a difference in the spiritual realms - but that is nothing new to us that the differentiations in the spiritual realms as well. Anything influenced in Greek knows that Revelation 4 does NOT refer to "the rapture" - that is 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor. 15.

Blessings.1 Thess 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 10Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him. 11Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.

John 14:1 “Don’t let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God, and trust also in me. 2 There is more than enough room in my Father’s home.[a] If this were not so, would I have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you?[b] 3 When everything is ready, I will come and get you, so that you will always be with me where I am. 4 And you know the way to where I am going.”

1 Thess. 5: 1Now concerning how and when all this will happen, dear brothers and sisters,[a] we don’t really need to write you. 2 For you know quite well that the day of the Lord’s return will come unexpectedly, like a thief in the night. 3 When people are saying, “Everything is peaceful and secure,” then disaster will fall on them as suddenly as a pregnant woman’s labor pains begin. And there will be no escape.

Isaiah 26:19 19 But those who die in the LORD will live; their bodies will rise again! Those who sleep in the earth will rise up and sing for joy! For your life-giving light will fall like dew on your people in the place of the dead!

Luke 2134 “Watch out! Don’t let your hearts be dulled by carousing and drunkenness, and by the worries of this life. Don’t let that day catch you unaware, 35 like a trap. For that day will come upon everyone living on the earth. 36 Keep alert at all times. And pray that you might be strong enough to escape these coming horrors and stand before the Son of Man.”

2 Thess 2:7Don’t you remember that I told you about all this when I was with you? 6 And you know what is holding him back, for he can be revealed only when his time comes. 7 For this lawlessness is already at work secretly, and it will remain secret until the one who is holding it back[the church)steps out of the way. 8 Then the man of lawlessness will be revealed, but the Lord Jesus will kill him with the breath of his mouth and destroy him by the splendor of his coming.

(The church, through God's grace, has to be caught away, before he will bring his full force of the tribulation on this earth. Notice in Rev.6 Jesus wastes no time in breaking the first seal to releaze the anti-christ.)

Matthew 24:30 And then at last, the sign that the Son of Man is coming will appear in the heavens, and there will be deep mourning among all the peoples of the earth. And they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he will send out his angels with the mighty blast of a trumpet, and they will gather his chosen ones from all over the world—from the farthest ends of the earth and heaven



with the beginning of this thread, you have not read any of my post, because I answer a lot in them, The book of Mathew, all talk about when the Lord comes back, but in Mathew all of them are about the judgement after the 1000 years. Not before some 7 year trib. that I do not believe is scriptual.I have just seen one of your posts . I have spent many hours studying and reading about Rev. and there is no point in dicussing that there will be no tribulation because it is totally scripturally unfounded.

resbmc
Jun 8th 2008, 09:13 PM
I said I do not beleve in a 7 year trib, some post or pre trib 7 year period, you oviously have not read my post today for Pretrib people.

resbmc
Jun 8th 2008, 09:15 PM
we are not appointed to wrath, his wrath is after the 7th trump, read what happens before the 7th trum. the marrige supper is getting ready!

Clifton
Jun 8th 2008, 09:22 PM
1 Thess 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 10Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him. 11Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.

John 14:1 “Don’t let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God, and trust also in me. 2 There is more than enough room in my Father’s home.[a] If this were not so, would I have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you?[b] 3 When everything is ready, I will come and get you, so that you will always be with me where I am. 4 And you know the way to where I am going.”

1 Thess. 5: 1Now concerning how and when all this will happen, dear brothers and sisters,[a] we don’t really need to write you. 2 For you know quite well that the day of the Lord’s return will come unexpectedly, like a thief in the night. 3 When people are saying, “Everything is peaceful and secure,” then disaster will fall on them as suddenly as a pregnant woman’s labor pains begin. And there will be no escape.

Isaiah 26:19 19 But those who die in the LORD will live; their bodies will rise again! Those who sleep in the earth will rise up and sing for joy! For your life-giving light will fall like dew on your people in the place of the dead!

Luke 2134 “Watch out! Don’t let your hearts be dulled by carousing and drunkenness, and by the worries of this life. Don’t let that day catch you unaware, 35 like a trap. For that day will come upon everyone living on the earth. 36 Keep alert at all times. And pray that you might be strong enough to escape these coming horrors and stand before the Son of Man.”

2 Thess 2:7Don’t you remember that I told you about all this when I was with you? 6 And you know what is holding him back, for he can be revealed only when his time comes. 7 For this lawlessness is already at work secretly, and it will remain secret until the one who is holding it back[the church)steps out of the way. 8 Then the man of lawlessness will be revealed, but the Lord Jesus will kill him with the breath of his mouth and destroy him by the splendor of his coming.

(The church, through God's grace, has to be caught away, before he will bring his full force of the tribulation on this earth. Notice in Rev.6 Jesus wastes no time in breaking the first seal to releaze the anti-christ.)

Matthew 24:30 And then at last, the sign that the Son of Man is coming will appear in the heavens, and there will be deep mourning among all the peoples of the earth. And they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he will send out his angels with the mighty blast of a trumpet, and they will gather his chosen ones from all over the world—from the farthest ends of the earth and heaven

None of those scriptures rewrites Revelation Chapter 4 at all to refer to the Rapture as it is referred to in the other scriptures. In fact, if The Seer, John The Presbyter, penned anything about Paul's Rapture doctrine, it is lost to us (there is a hole (lost text) in Chapter 19, so that would most likely be the place where it was to be) - same applies as hearing such a doctrine from Yeshua - if He taught such a doctrine, it too, is lost to us. So we accept it as legitimate due to Paul's Writings.

If you are interested in a breakdown of The Lord's Day (rapture, tribulation, etc.), from long-time experts in the Greek and Hebrew, I refer you to the post on this board:

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1664495&postcount=32

Otherwise, if you are interesting in turning some scripture for something that it does not refer to, try Nahum 2:4 for a more colorful and vivid scenario;

The chariots dash about in the streets, they rush one another in the broad ways. They look like flaming torches, they run like lightning.
Nahum 2:4 The Scriptures 1998+

And just say this shows automobiles will run amuck because the saints that were driving were raptured.:D

Blessings.

HisGrace
Jun 8th 2008, 09:38 PM
My head is spinning right now due to so many different opinions, and because of personal reasons, I don't have the strength to continue this discussion at present - maybe later.

God Bless Everyone... :)

Clifton
Jun 9th 2008, 12:29 AM
My head is spinning right now due to so many different opinions, and because of personal reasons, I don't have the strength to continue this discussion at present - maybe later.

God Bless Everyone... :)


Take a deep breath - it is alright.;)

In studying the original languages of the Bible that the English comes from:

The Second Advent consists of stages, or comings of coming.


The Rapture
Tribulation
Renovation of this current Earth
Millennium
This current physical Earth Sent away (to somewhere or another).
Judgment
Brand New Earth - apparently a Bigger and better Earth to sustain our eternal bodies and accommodate the saints
Eternity


I came to be in the Spirit on the Day of יהוה, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet,
Revelation 1:10 The Scriptures 1998+

From The Rapture through the Judgment is the Lord's Day - how long all that lasts (the "Day") by our understanding of time, we don't know (cp. Psalms 90:4). Since John expresses he was in spirit on this "day", it is more likely the rapture had already happened (because it initializes it), or it is embedded within, encrypted, or was in text that is lost to us. Nevertheless, we just do not need to take other scriptures to express something that is already present in the bulk of the other scriptures, that all I was pointing out.;)

Hope you feel better.:pray:

Blessings.

John146
Jun 9th 2008, 03:08 PM
But Jesus must bring the dead in Christ with Him if their souls and bodies are to be united?
Naturally

Okay, since you acknowledge that Christ comes both with and for His saints when He comes at the rapture, why can't Revelation 19 be speaking of the souls of the dead in Christ that come with Him at the time when the rapture occurs?

Tspark
Jun 11th 2008, 09:15 PM
difficult? Funny, we post tribbers find the pre-trib theory to be difficult, since most of us came out of the pre-trib theology.;)

Amen to that, i was taught Pretrib when i was a kid, then 15 yrs later i started reading for my self....without the Pretrib filter