Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

called to Postrib?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: called to Postrib?

    Originally posted by thecrossonmypath View Post
    Hi randy k. thanks for sharing yourpost on the post trib.


    I started out as a pre trib rapturebeliever in 1997. It was the only view I know. I had read JohnHagee's book The coming of the antichrist teaching the pre tribrapture. I also read Pat Robertson's book the new order. This wasabout how quickly the world is getting globalized and how banks worketc.


    I also read end times for dummies. Thatsupports pre trib rapture. Then I was following Ed Hindson and TimLaHayes on the program Christ is coming and was getting their weeklyor monthly letters. I was following Jack van Impe too. All of themare all pre trib rapture believers and also teach it.


    On one Christian forum called JILGJesus is Lord God (not open anymore) I was challenged by the members.I wrote to Tim LaHayes to ask for help. He said he does not getinvolve with forums. So I was on my own . . one member named Billsent me links for post trib. I deleted them thinking that Tim LaHayesand Hal Lyndsay etc can't be wrong.


    It was a couple of years later I alsoread 2nd Thess. chapter 2. and then I realized the pretrib rapture is not the true teaching. I was now from there a posttrib believer.


    By knowing then post trib now I feel Iam set free. To know truth is better to believe an answer that soundmore appealing . .


    I have been witnessing to friends aboutpost trib. Some believe and others had run off or don't want to hearpost trib at all. .


    There is no such teaching in the bibleof a pre trib rapture. That is all assumptions and speculation. Plusextrapolations and analogies they use . . However the bible saysplainly that the church and or ekklesia God's people will go throughthe trib. Who is being persecuted? The saints. It never has anothermeaning to saints or the church. . Don't say we are leaving and itwill be other saints. No exclamation. It is you not anyone else. Thatis if you are one of God's people. This is the days of Jacobstroubles and the days of great testing.


    God is testing your faith whom, willyou follow the Antichrist beast or Jesus as your Lord and Savior?
    If God allows Satan now to tests youGod will also allow then for Satan to test you on a greater scalethough .


    The wrath will not fall upon you. AsGod spared his people in the 10 plagues of Egypt even in the greattrib the bowls and trumpets will only be poured out on non believersand the wicked.


    Put all your trust and faith in God. Heknows how to direct his judgment. He did this in Egypt thousands ofyears ago. Were they out of Egypt when the10 plagues were there. Seethey were in the same land because God is able do all things.


    You don't worry about God. But only thebeast system and the Antichrist and false prophet only. .


    Also I am going to share a link of thepre trib rapture history. When you read how it actually developed youwill realize it cant' be true after all. . The pre trib is a teachingof apostasy the falling away. Post trib has always been taught everysingle century until the 19th. Read this link and find more. If thislink isn't working let let me know . And I will send to your box ifyou have any problems seeing this sermon of pretrib history.


    If you are waiting for a rapture beforethe trib then you are waiting for nothing at all. The very proof isthe bible and what God really says on this . I have more good linksif you want more detail on post trib rapture teaching. . The Lordwants you to know the truth and not to be deceived. They are falseprophets Tim LaHayes etc. You thought as I did genuinely. Well itseemed that way for years. Now I know better. I hope other Christianswill now understand Christians will go through the trib.


    Thanks again Randy k for starting thisgood post to make awareness for other Christian believers. I am alsogoing to order one of those books you have mentioned. .
    Randy k may I ask what church you goto? Send a pm if you need. I like reading church statement of faithetc . As for me I only do home studies the bible and Christian books.


    http://www.posttribpeople.com/Post-T...on-Belief.html'
    I will check out your link--thanks. I always like to read more about this. I do know the history, but I always like more--not less.

    You are right. The Scriptures are all about the teaching of the Cross. We don't like suffering and death--these are negatives. But in Christianity, the Cross is a beautiful system that brings us the Holy Spirit, power to be righteous, and the love God has for us. We *need* the Cross!

    Although I have lots of friends who are pretrib, like you they don't want to talk about postrib vs pretrib. They are happy believing together with their nest of co-believers in Rapture Doctrine. It's like a spirit, a group-think, a cult. I hate to say it, but it is what it is. I can't explain otherwise why there is such resistance to simple facts.

    You're right that the history of Postrib goes back to the beginning, but the history of Pretrib is relatively recent in history. Everything we may say on this will, however, be disputed by pretribbers. For them, a single believer in something akin to pretrib in the early church represents an age-long history of pretrib!

    But it isn't so. The Early Church looked at the Roman Empire as a forerunner to the Antichrist, and prepared for preliminary antichrists. They were to prepare for it, to endure in it, and to stay awake against its lies. Never were they to escape from it, with the exception that they were to avoid any judgments from God that were designed strictly for unbelievers. The ultimate example of this was the invasion of the Romans in 70 AD to destroy the Jewish temple. Jesus warned believers to flee from that, since they were given to escape that.

    But Revelation was written to encourage Christians to stand fast in times of persecution. And we were warned to not change the words or teaching regarding the Revelation. Clearly, pretrib removes the whole teaching of the book, which is to prepare Christians to endure in great persecution.

    Pretrib is a shame. But I won't fault those who were raised up in it. I only fault those who won't change, when presented with the facts, just as I changed, when presented with the facts. Pride should never get in the way of considering truth. We all have errors in our lives. We need to be prepared to change when confronted with the truth.

    Incidentally, I used to go to Melodyland Christian Center in Anaheim, CA. Sunday mornings 2 famous Christians taught there, Walter Martin and Hal Lindsey. Martin was a Postrib, and Lindsey was a Pretrib. They were friends with each other. Martin was also friends with Chuck Smith, another ardent pretrib. But Paul Crouch, a Pretrib, did not seem to like Martin. Crouch was also based in Orange County. FYI...

    I long ago read the history regarding Irving, Darby, and Margaret McDonald, and recognize there is some dispute about how pretrib got started. Though Darby initiated the pretrib theology, I think Irving contributed to it by his focus on endtimes prophecy. He studied a Catholic book that laid out arguments for a future Antichrist.

    And I don't dislike Darby's introduction of a new premillennialism, complete with a future Antichrist and a future Israel. This is the aspect of Dispensationalism I like--a focus on a future Israel.

    However, the Secret Rapture theory seems to have found its way into this theology, and provided a convenient demarcation between Israel and the Church. It is not, however, Scriptural.

    There is no explicit doctrine of a Pretrib Rapture anywhere in the Bible. There is escape from tribulation in some respects. But in others, there is no escape from persecution overall for believers. The Revelation was written *to the Church.* And in that book we were warned to not just prepare for Antichrist but to also prepare for preliminary antichrists, in the mold of the Roman Empire.

    We must be taught to endure in our faith, because there will be hard times. A "soft" Gospel will make us weak and more susceptible to error, I believe.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: called to Postrib?

      Originally posted by randyk View Post
      This subject could easily have its own thread. I partly agree and partly disagree. I do distinguish Israel from the Church, and that's because any nation would be distinguished from the Church. For example, the US would be distinguished from the Church. The Church is not strictly a "nation." Rather, it consists of a group of all believing nations and of all believers within unbelieving nations. Israel is not presently a believing nation, but will be, one day, a believing nation. For the present, there are believers within the "nation" Israel.

      When we're talking about "cutting believers off," this applied to Israel as a believing nation and applies to any nation of believers and to any individual believer. When they do not walk by the rules that define Christianity, they are cut off.

      In the same way, those who refused to abide by the Law of Moses in ancient Israel were cut off from the community. Being cut off did not infer "damnation," but it certainly could. Paul's argument was that no matter how many in Israel were cut off for not living by the rules of God, a new nation of believers would be established, just as any repentant backslider could be reinstated in the community of believers.
      Reading over your response somewhat quickly here (and not recalling you stance on the following, from previous posts [tho I think I MIGHT recall]), are you saying that you believe a passage such as this supports a "lose [or forfeit] your salvation" doctrine?? (sorry I forget your stance, exactly, on this). I don't believe that.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: called to Postrib?

        Originally posted by TheDivineWatermark View Post
        First let me say that I agree with Pesachpup's point (in Post #8, last paragraph) about the word in 2Th2:2 being "IS PRESENT" (however, I disagree that the phrase there is "the day of Christ," but instead is "the day of the Lord"... tho I agree that it is speaking of a PERIOD OF TIME). Just thought I'd mention that, before I post what I really came on here to put
        Commenting a little further on the bolded point I put earlier (above), here's another excerpt from Paul Wilson's article with which I agree (on this point also), and which I believe is commonly conflated by many:

        [quoting that excerpt from same article]

        "Notice too that it is the "day of the Lord" which so comes, not the coming of the Lord for His own, or the day of Christ which has a heavenly aspect. But the book which we have reviewed [Ladd's book, I think he means] more or less confuses the "day of the Lord" and the "day of Christ." They are not the same and never approximate each other. Even men do not confuse differing terms; is God less accurate than men?"

        --Paul Wilson (Bible Truth Publishers), [same source as previous posted link; bracketed comment mine]

        [end quoting]


        Again, I believe the phrase in 2Th2:2 is: "[purporting] that the day of the Lord IS PRESENT" ("the Day of the Lord" being a TIME PERIOD involving "judgments" and other "negatives" followed by "blessing"... it consists of ALL THREE ASPECTS: the 7-yr trib, His Second Coming to the earth, AND the entire earthly MK age--ALL THREE!) It ARRIVES *when* the "man of sin" ARRIVES (at the same point in time!)

        When scripture speaks of Jesus' OWN *arrival* (His "RETURN"), the phrase is only: "come AS A THIEF. [period!]". NO "IN THE NIGHT" phrase is added to the phrase when speaking of HIM [HIMSELF]! It is only added when referring to the TIME PERIOD which PRECEDES Jesus' [HIMSELF] OWN arrival (I.e. His "RETURN" to the earth). Rev16:15-16, etc...

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: called to Postrib?

          Originally posted by Slug1 View Post
          Randy,

          Taking this as just an opportunity to subscribe (instead of using the menu way). Read you post and will address parts later.

          Here is my discussion item: The Bible informs us that we don't know the time of Jesus' return, "like a thief in the night" style of covertly returning. But based on prophecy, we know the exact length of the period that is called the Tribulation. Once that period begins, like a countdown clock... we KNOW the time Jesus returns. So when Jesus returns at the end of the Tribulation, this will NOT be covertly like a thief in the night.

          So what event is Jesus involved with that is "like a thief in the night?"
          In my view this is the very best question to answer on this matter. Thanks for asking it. I cannot be sure, but here is how I deal with it. I believe that the time Antichrist reigns is 1260 days. That is the time God gives him authority to triumph over his enemies.

          But what this does *not* say is how long *after* the 1260 days the Antichrist rules, when God has taken away his authority to reign and to persecute the Church. We read that after the 2nd Woe there will be an *indeterminate time* before the 3rd Woe, which is the advent of the Kingdom of God. This *indeterminate time* renders it impossible for unbelievers to know that this is biblical prophecy until Christ actually comes to judge them.

          Rev 11.14 The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon.

          The 1260 days are also the time the 2 Witnesses prophesy. Clearly, since they lay in the street another 3.5 days, Christ does not come to destroy Antichrist on the 1260th day!

          No, the reign of Antichrist ends with the beginning of a period designed to encourage nations to go to Armageddon for international battle. This period only begins on the 1261st day.

          Rev 16.12 The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up to prepare the way for the kings from the East. 13 Then I saw three impure spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14 They are demonic spirits that perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty.
          15 “Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.”
          16 Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.


          No, what causes all of the confusion is that we think the 1260 days is the mark of time between the coronation of Antichrist and the return of Christ. In reality, this is just the period of time in which God grants Antichrist the authority to do the harm that he will be judged for. After that period will be a time in which the nations will prepare for war, when the Antichrist has lost his immunity from attack.

          Rev 16.5 The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise its authority for forty-two months.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: called to Postrib?

            Originally posted by TheDivineWatermark View Post
            Reading over your response somewhat quickly here (and not recalling you stance on the following, from previous posts [tho I think I MIGHT recall]), are you saying that you believe a passage such as this supports a "lose [or forfeit] your salvation" doctrine?? (sorry I forget your stance, exactly, on this). I don't believe that.
            There is no determinate position on this whatsoever, except that I don't believe being "cut off" technically refers to "losing your Salvation." We would agree on that apparently.

            To be "cut off from God's People" is simply an excommunication, whether someone completely apostacizes or only temporarily apostacizes. Paul's point in the readmission of a fallen member was that they *can be restored.* But of course, if a person refuses to return, they will be lost.

            This ultimate example of this is Israel, in the case of the Babylonian Judgment. All Israel was "cut off" from the Promised Land. But ultimately, they were allowed to return. They were obviously not "damned," or cut off forever.

            This part of Dispensationalism I agree with, namely the ultimate Salvation of National Israel. Many in Israel will be cut off and die. But a nation will be restored and established along the line of the believing remnant of Jews.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: called to Postrib?

              Originally posted by divaD View Post
              If in Rev 19:11 that is not depicting Christ descending from heaven, what is it depicting then? Does Christ descend from heaven more than one time?
              Why would it be a problem for Jesus to descend for "the meeting [noun] of the Lord IN THE AIR" involving "the Church which is His body" (to whom "the Rapture/Departure" SOLELY pertains [Eph1:20-23 WHEN]; not to all other saints of all OTHER time periods); I don't believe anyone on the earth [unsaved at the point in time of our Rapture] will *SEE* anything, and this is part of why the 2Th2:10-12 "strong delusion" will be so effective, if you will, during the time period [trib] which follows.

              Since [as I believe] Jesus "[actively] ASCENDED" on the very day of His resurrection [per what He said to MM in John 20:17] (that is, ON "FIRSTFRUIT," thus fulfilling Lev23:10-12 [see also 1Cor15:20!]) and only some "40-days" later "went up into Heaven" VISIBLY (and that no one except carefully chosen witnesses SAW Him during those "40 days") in the Acts 1 passage (reflective of His VISIBLE "RETURN" to the earth [Rev19 (Rev1:7 also)]), then I'm not sure what problem there would be with Him descending for "the meeting [noun] of the Lord IN THE AIR" at one point in time, and then having His "RETURN" to the earth at a separate point in time. In fact, I see this [what I just pointed out] as the template, or "pattern" (of that future time-frame), with "40" often meaning "testing/trial/judgment"-type things... so the pattern holds!

              See what I'm getting at?


              Acts 3:21 just says, "whom indeed it behooves heaven to receive until the times of restoration of all things of which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from the age." [THIS is referring to the OT prophets who'd prophesied of the promised and prophesied EARTHLY Millennial Kingdom, as well as His first advent (His first advent, like what is said in Acts 3:22,26,etc)]

              …it doesn't say He cannot accomplish more than one thing during the "timeS of restoration of all things of which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from the age."

              "The Church which is His body" will "judge angels" (and I've made a post in the past that shows how Rev19:19,21/16:14-16/20:5 parallels time-wise the FIRST of TWO "PUNISH" words in Isaiah 24:21-22[23], which involves "the host of the high ones that are on high" being punished... "as prisoners are gathered in the pit"..."and shut up in the prison" (that is, at His Second Coming to the earth point in time)… and don't forget what also takes place at the Rev12:12 point in time, which I believe also fits in the category of his/satan's [and his angels'] judgment, being at that point "limited" to sphere of the earth... so much more could be said... lol

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: called to Postrib?

                Meant to say:

                Why would it be a problem for Jesus to descend for "the meeting [noun] of the Lord IN THE AIR" involving "the Church which is His body" […] AND at His Second Coming to the earth, both?? [TDW: then I gave the example of what took place during the 40-day interval from His "Resurrection Day [ON FIRSTFRUIT/Lev23:10-12 (His 'ACTIVE ascension' Jn20:17)]" and His later VISIBLE going up into Heaven in Acts 1 (THIS to be like His RETURN to the earth)]…

                Make sense?

                [keep in mind that I believe 2Th2 is showing the ENTIRE 7-yr period, just like Dan9:27[26] is! rather that speaking of only 3.5yrs or merely the END of it]

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: called to Postrib?

                  To all who hold to the belief of a 'rapture to heaven' of the Church:
                  Have you really considered any alternative to a 'rapture'? Because there are viable and scriptural end times scenarios where God's people remain on earth.
                  You need to know that many respected Bible scholars cast doubts on a rapture, if not actively refute that theory.

                  So the attitude of some 'rapture to heaven' believers, how they hold the moral high ground, is unwarranted and in some cases, amounts to a very judgmental and sometimes rude response to their fellow Christians.
                  This is a serious indictment against all who have strong beliefs but fail to really study to ascertain the truth, or comprehend any alternatives.

                  Is it really God's Plan to remove His people, so they avoid the tough times prophesied to come?
                  Why should He do that for this generation, when all the previous generations have faced persecutions?
                  'Rapture' believers say it is a secret thing, therefore it’s not clearly stated in the Bible. Not in the Bible? So it is in fact, unbiblical and comes under the category of mankinds teachings. 2 Timothy 4:3-4

                  Jesus warned us against being deceived; Paul said; that ravening wolves would deceive the flock, even from among the Christians men will distort the truth to get people to follow them. Acts 20:29-30
                  So, plainly; some are deceived and even if they may be in a majority, that does not mean their beliefs are true.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: called to Postrib?

                    Originally posted by Keraz View Post
                    'Rapture' believers say it is a secret thing, therefore it’s not clearly stated in the Bible. Not in the Bible? So it is in fact, unbiblical and comes under the category of mankinds teachings. 2 Timothy 4:3-4
                    Allow me to make clear my intentions in my previous posts, lest you are "hearing" ME (a pre-tribber) suggest such a thing. I am not suggesting that scripture doesn't speak of it (i.e. that it is only derived via some sort of "secret code" type thing, or merely via "TYPES" and so forth). No. This is not what I am saying. I'm saying that 2Th2 is providing a SEQUENCE; and that by "biblically" defining the words found there, and by paying heed to its grammar [things OFT misconstrued in this passage], and so forth, one can see that Paul was conveying the point regarding "ONE THING *FIRST*" must happen BEFORE "the Day of the Lord" (with its "man of sin" and ALL he will DO "IN HIS TIME") can be present to unfold upon the earth, and that that one thing is "OUR RAPTURE/THE DEPARTURE/our episynagoges [noun] UNTO HIM (that is, IN THE AIR). [Paul speaks of our Rapture-event something like TEN TIMES in these 2 epistles to the Thessalonians, NOT JUST in 1Th4:17! ]

                    And that THIS SEQUENCE is REPEATED 3x in this text, and is exactly the same sequence as found in 1Th4-5, not to mention how "Enoch" was a "TYPE" of this event, which event (for him, a SINGULAR man) took place BEFORE the flood-judgment came upon the earth

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: called to Postrib?

                      Originally posted by TheDivineWatermark View Post
                      Allow me to make clear my intentions in my previous posts, lest you are "hearing" ME (a pre-tribber) suggest such a thing. I am not suggesting that scripture doesn't speak of it (i.e. that it is only derived via some sort of "secret code" type thing, or merely via "TYPES" and so forth). No. This is not what I am saying. I'm saying that 2Th2 is providing a SEQUENCE; and that by "biblically" defining the words found there, and by paying heed to its grammar [things OFT misconstrued in this passage], and so forth, one can see that Paul was conveying the point regarding "ONE THING *FIRST*" must happen BEFORE "the Day of the Lord" (with its "man of sin" and ALL he will DO "IN HIS TIME") can be present to unfold upon the earth, and that that one thing is "OUR RAPTURE/THE DEPARTURE/our episynagoges [noun] UNTO HIM (that is, IN THE AIR). [Paul speaks of our Rapture-event something like TEN TIMES in these 2 epistles to the Thessalonians, NOT JUST in 1Th4:17! ]

                      And that THIS SEQUENCE is REPEATED 3x in this text, and is exactly the same sequence as found in 1Th4-5, not to mention how "Enoch" was a "TYPE" of this event, which event (for him, a SINGULAR man) took place BEFORE the flood-judgment came upon the earth
                      A literal reading of the face value interpretation of 2 Thess 2:1-3 says that the man of sin must be revealed first, then only we will be gathered.

                      A literal face value interpretation of 1 Thess 4:17-5:4 is that we will be raptured at the time and date of the day of the Lord, the thief in the night. A day of wrath and destruction.

                      1 Thess 4:15 and 1 Cor 15:23 place the rapture at the second coming.

                      Rev 16:15 places the thief and our preparedness at the 6th bowl of wrath (Armageddon)

                      2 Thess 1 places the relief of the saints at the second coming.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: called to Postrib?

                        Originally posted by DurbanDude View Post
                        A literal reading of the face value interpretation of 2 Thess 2:1-3 says that the man of sin must be revealed first, then only we will be gathered.
                        Let me start with just this one ^ .

                        This is a common misunderstanding of what Paul is conveying in this passage.

                        Paul, in verse 2, is basically telling them, don't allow anyone to convince you that "the Day of the Lord IS PRESENT". [see also the other end of the bracketed-section, verse 15--believe US, not THEM!]

                        This would be a PERFECTLY *REASONABLE* thing for them to be CONVINCED of, because of their PRESENT, ONGOING, VERY NEGATIVE circumstances they were [for a lengthy time-period] EXPERIENCING (2Th1:4, etc). They were not being convinced [or at risk of being (wrongly-) convinced] that "the LORD HIMSELF *is present*," nor that "the RAPTURE *is present*" nor that "HIS KINGDOM AGE *is present*" (etc)... but that "the DAY OF THE LORD *is present*" [recall, "defining" this phrase "biblically" means that we understand that it is an EARTHLY time period which includes "judgments" (and other "negatives") FOLLOWED by "blessing"). Paul is telling them WHY this is NOT SO (why it is indeed NOT PRESENT).

                        So then when we come to verse 3 and what IT is conveying, "grammatically" we must not JUMP [clear back past and] OVER verse 2 in order to grab verse 1, to ascertain what verse 3 is saying. This IS KEY!

                        Verse 3 is saying that the TIME PERIOD from VERSE 2 "will not be present if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE *FIRST*…" [<--HERE is where the EVENT of verse 1 comes in!... NOT in the first part of the verse which says "[that day] will not be present until/unless/if not shall..." (in the bold; THAT part was about what was JUST SAID in VERSE 2! "the Day of the Lord [TIME PERIOD]").

                        Jumbling these DISTINCT THINGS (as most ppl tend to do) results in completely missing what Paul is conveying here.

                        He repeats this SEQUENCE *THREE TIMES* in this context (which agrees with the SEQUENCE elsewhere), so as to make it unmistakable to the reader who doesn't simply gloss past and inject pre-conceived [unbiblical] "definitions" and poor grammar, and wrong assumptions that the verse 1 and verse 2 SUBJECTS are INDISTINCT/IDENTICAL (they are NOT!), and other ideas foreign to what the text is actually saying.

                        The sentence Paul is conveying IS indeed straightforward, but wrenching the INCORRECT NOTIONS out from ppl's minds first, I've found to be not such an easy task.


                        Verse 3, "that day [the DOTL EARTHLY time-period, v.2] will not be present if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE [the EVENT of v.1!] *FIRST*, AND the man of sin be revealed..."

                        (he is REVEALED at the START of the 7-yr period [v.8a/9a], NOT at its MIDDLE/1260-days-remaining [v.4], NOR at its END/2nd-Coming-to-the-earth point in time [v.8b], when he is "destroyed")

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: called to Postrib?

                          Originally posted by TheDivineWatermark View Post
                          Let me start with just this one ^ .

                          This is a common misunderstanding of what Paul is conveying in this passage.

                          Paul, in verse 2, is basically telling them, don't allow anyone to convince you that "the Day of the Lord IS PRESENT". [see also the other end of the bracketed-section, verse 15--believe US, not THEM!]

                          This would be a PERFECTLY *REASONABLE* thing for them to be CONVINCED of, because of their PRESENT, ONGOING, VERY NEGATIVE circumstances they were [for a lengthy time-period] EXPERIENCING (2Th1:4, etc). They were not being convinced [or at risk of being (wrongly-) convinced] that "the LORD HIMSELF *is present*," nor that "the RAPTURE *is present*" nor that "HIS KINGDOM AGE *is present*" (etc)... but that "the DAY OF THE LORD *is present*" [recall, "defining" this phrase "biblically" means that we understand that it is an EARTHLY time period which includes "judgments" (and other "negatives") FOLLOWED by "blessing"). Paul is telling them WHY this is NOT SO (why it is indeed NOT PRESENT).

                          So then when we come to verse 3 and what IT is conveying, "grammatically" we must not JUMP [clear back past and] OVER verse 2 in order to grab verse 1, to ascertain what verse 3 is saying. This IS KEY!

                          Verse 3 is saying that the TIME PERIOD from VERSE 2 "will not be present if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE *FIRST*…" [<--HERE is where the EVENT of verse 1 comes in!... NOT in the first part of the verse which says "[that day] will not be present until/unless/if not shall..." (in the bold; THAT part was about what was JUST SAID in VERSE 2! "the Day of the Lord [TIME PERIOD]").

                          Jumbling these DISTINCT THINGS (as most ppl tend to do) results in completely missing what Paul is conveying here.

                          He repeats this SEQUENCE *THREE TIMES* in this context (which agrees with the SEQUENCE elsewhere), so as to make it unmistakable to the reader who doesn't simply gloss past and inject pre-conceived [unbiblical] "definitions" and poor grammar, and wrong assumptions that the verse 1 and verse 2 SUBJECTS are INDISTINCT/IDENTICAL (they are NOT!), and other ideas foreign to what the text is actually saying.

                          The sentence Paul is conveying IS indeed straightforward, but wrenching the INCORRECT NOTIONS out from ppl's minds first, I've found to be not such an easy task.


                          Verse 3, "that day [the DOTL EARTHLY time-period, v.2] will not be present if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE [the EVENT of v.1!] *FIRST*, AND the man of sin be revealed..."

                          (he is REVEALED at the START of the 7-yr period [v.8a/9a], NOT at its MIDDLE/1260-days-remaining [v.4], NOR at its END/2nd-Coming-to-the-earth point in time [v.8b], when he is "destroyed")
                          I dont see it as "wrenching the incorrect notions" when the text is pretty clear:
                          "that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed"

                          The revealing occurs 3.5 years before the end, because the revealing is associated with deceiving signs and wonders, which in Rev 13 are associated with the 42 months of the beast. The rapture therefore occurs within that final 42 months.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: called to Postrib?

                            Originally posted by DurbanDude View Post
                            I dont see it as "wrenching the incorrect notions" when the text is pretty clear:
                            "that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed"
                            what day?

                            The DOTL from *VERSE 2* (NOT the Subject from *VERSE 1*! )

                            The revealing occurs 3.5 years before the end, because the revealing is associated with deceiving signs and wonders, which in Rev 13 are associated with the 42 months of the beast. The rapture therefore occurs within that final 42 months.
                            It is a common belief that the "revealing" (of the man of sin) has to do with VERSE 4 (which is associated time-wise with both Matt24:15,21 AND Rev13:5-7 [and other mentions of the second half of the trib, aka "the GREAT tribulation"]), but when we view the THREE mentions of "revealed" (regarding the man of sin), we can see this is not the case; that, in fact, 2Th2 is covering ALL SEVEN YEARS, its "BEGINNING," its "MIDDLE," AND its "END" (just like does:

                            --Daniel 9:27a,b,c[26]'s "BEGINNING, MIDDLE, END" of the "ONE WEEK [7-yrs]"; and

                            --the "BEGINNING, MIDDLE, END" of the "chronology" of The Revelation [Rev6:2, Rev13:5-7, Rev19]; and

                            --the "BEGINNING, MIDDLE, END" of the Olivet Discourse [Matt24:4/Mk13:5 "G5100 - tis - 'A CERTAIN ONE'," Matt24:15,21, and Matt24:29-31(etc) [ALL of which FOLLOWS our Rapture] )


                            I've posted before, the color-coded grammar chart showing the THREE TIMES in this 2Th2 context that the SEQUENCE of our Rapture/The Departure *FIRST* takes place BEFORE "the DOTL" (all of the above-mentioned "BEGINNING, MIDDLE, END" [of the 7-yrs]) "IN THE NIGHT" aspect covers; the DOTL goes on to encompass His 2nd Coming to the earth AND the 1000-yr reign as well! ALL of that! (Its ARRIVAL is at the START of the 7-yr trib, tho, which involves the "whose coming" [i.e. ARRIVAL] of the "man of sin" and then also ALL he will DO throughout those 7 yrs, as well!)

                            It's getting late, so I won't bother to post the color-coded grammar chart I've posted before, here.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: called to Postrib?

                              Oh, and you clearly left out the word (in that verse) "FIRST* (ONE THING *FIRST*)

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: called to Postrib?

                                Originally posted by TheDivineWatermark View Post
                                Commenting a little further on the bolded point I put earlier (above), here's another excerpt from Paul Wilson's article with which I agree (on this point also), and which I believe is commonly conflated by many:

                                [quoting that excerpt from same article]

                                "Notice too that it is the "day of the Lord" which so comes, not the coming of the Lord for His own, or the day of Christ which has a heavenly aspect. But the book which we have reviewed [Ladd's book, I think he means] more or less confuses the "day of the Lord" and the "day of Christ." They are not the same and never approximate each other. Even men do not confuse differing terms; is God less accurate than men?"

                                --Paul Wilson (Bible Truth Publishers), [same source as previous posted link; bracketed comment mine]

                                [end quoting]


                                Again, I believe the phrase in 2Th2:2 is: "[purporting] that the day of the Lord IS PRESENT" ("the Day of the Lord" being a TIME PERIOD involving "judgments" and other "negatives" followed by "blessing"... it consists of ALL THREE ASPECTS: the 7-yr trib, His Second Coming to the earth, AND the entire earthly MK age--ALL THREE!) It ARRIVES *when* the "man of sin" ARRIVES (at the same point in time!)

                                When scripture speaks of Jesus' OWN *arrival* (His "RETURN"), the phrase is only: "come AS A THIEF. [period!]". NO "IN THE NIGHT" phrase is added to the phrase when speaking of HIM [HIMSELF]! It is only added when referring to the TIME PERIOD which PRECEDES Jesus' [HIMSELF] OWN arrival (I.e. His "RETURN" to the earth). Rev16:15-16, etc...
                                I note that you select whichever phrase you want to fit wherever. A "day" becomes a "time period." A "coming" must only be a "thief." The "day of Christ" can only refer to Christ's coming, but not to the Day of the Lord, which means something else. The positioning of each phrase is purely arbitrary. There is nothing in the way of context that requires this positioning of phrases to only mean what you would have them to mean!

                                By contrast, I begin to fashion the endtimes scenario where the Bible fashions it--in Dan 7 . It is there that we learn what the coming of the Lord is. It is all the same--the Day of the Lord, the Day of Christ's Coming, the coming to destroy the Antichrist, the coming with the clouds, etc. To divvy up these words and phrases into separate categories is being done in a purely arbitrary way, assuming in advance some kind of strange theology that *is not there!*

                                Worst of all, the very passage that declares the fact of Postribulationism is carved up and divided into purely arbitrary nodes, in which the Pretribber attaches his own logical construction of his theology. If things remain simple, and true to their origin in Dan 7, it makes perfect sense *as is,* and does not need to be carved up and applied in a way that is completely outside the context of what is being said. You would have to invent your own context to make sense of it in this way!

                                In the simplest possible sense, the message is that Christians should not expect Christ to come back for them until he actually arrives to destroy the Antichrist. Until that time we need to be on guard against evil deceptions that would distract us from our righteous mission.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X