Debating the Existence of the Pre-Trib Rapture

mark kennedy said:

There is one good reason there is no pretibulation rapture, it's because such an event would have been mentioned, at least in passing, in the opening passages describing the Tribulation in Revelations. Instead after the first four seals are opened what is revealed is a host of martyrs complaining about they way they were persecuted. This indicates the church is still active in the world after the rise of the Antichrist. With the opening of the sixth seal they are cowering in caves and dens of the rocks (bunkers perhaps) saying hide us from the wrath of the Lamb. How did they know who was doing this to them? It's because the martyrs told them before they were murdered and now it's happening just as they said.

Click to expand...

Actually, it was mentioned in the opening chapters of the Revelation.

“Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.” (Revelation 3:10) The Greek word translated from in this verse is ek, (word number 1537 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) which indeed means from, but in the sense of away from or out of.

Some imagine that this only means out of after being in the “hour of trial.” But Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament defines ek, as it is used in Revelation 3:10, to mean “to keep one at a distance from.” Indeed, this becomes obvious when we consider the word “keep” in this phrase. This word is translated from the Greek word tereo. (word number 5083 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) It literally means to guard, but in the scriptures was usually used in the sense of our English word keep, and is so translated more than two-thirds of the times tero occurs in the Greek text of the New Testament. So it is clear that the real meaning of this promise is to be kept out of “the hour of trial.”

To really understand this, we need to consider another promise made concerning a part of the same time period. The Lord said to Israel, “Ask now, and see, Whether a man is ever in labor with child? So why do I see every man with his hands on his loins Like a woman in labor, And all faces turned pale? Alas! For that day is great, So that none is like it; And it is the time of ·Jacob's trouble, But he shall be saved out of it.” (Jeremiah 30:6-7) In this case, the Hebrew word translated saved is yasha’. (word number 3467 in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary) This Hebrew word means saved in the sense of succor. In the KJV, this Hebrew word is rendered save 149 times, deliver 13 times, help 12 times, and once as rescue. We notice this to clearly understand that this Hebrew word carries an entirely different sense from the Greek word tereo used in Revelation 3:10. In one case, the Lord promised to help some of His own get through a time of trouble designed for themselves. In the other, He promised to keep others of His own out of a time of testing designed for others.


But what is this “the hour of trial” that they will be kept out of? The Greek word translated hour in this passage is hora. (word number 5610 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) This Greek word literally means hour, but is often used figuratively for a period of time. But what hour are they promised to be kept out of? It is not just some general period of time. It is a specific one. It is “the hour of trial.” It is specifically called “the hour,” for the word “the” is in the Greek text, as the word ho. (word number 3588 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) But what “hour of trial” is this specific time that they are they promised to be kept out of? It is “the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.”

There is a specific “hour of trial” coming “to test those who dwell on the earth.” When we see the reason this hour is coming we understand the term “hour of trial.” For the Greek word here translated to test is peirasi. (an active infinitive of peirazo, word number 3985 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) This literally means exactly as it is translated, to test. So we see that this scripture explicitly tells us that there is a particular time of testing coming, and that the purpose of that time is “to test those who dwell on the earth.” Its purpose is not to test the saints of God, but “those who dwell on the earth.” This is a moral class, those whose hearts are on the earth, rather than in heaven. This moral class is named in these words eight times in the Revelation, and always in a negative light.

But we are also told where this time of testing will come. It “shall come upon the whole world.” The Greek word translated whole in this clause is holos. (word number 3650 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) This Greek word literally means whole, or all, that is, complete. That is, there is no part of the world that will be exempted from this time of testing. So there is coming a specific time of testing, and it is coming upon the whole world. But the Lord’s own are promised that they will be kept out of that time of testing. Now if this time is coming upon the whole world, but the Lord’s own will be kept out of it, they cannot be in the world during that time of testing. So we see that Revelation 3:10 says the Lord’s own will be removed from the earth before this time of testing begins.

We see this again in a passage about Noah and Lot. “For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly; and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds)—then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment.” (2 Peter 2:4-9)

Here the Holy Spirit gives us two specific examples, Noah and Lot, both of whom were physically removed from the scene of judgment before it took place. Then, in the context of these two examples, the Holy Spirit said, “then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment.” (2 Peter 2:9)

Thus the Holy Spirit showed His intention to “deliver the godly out of temptations” by physically removing them from the scene “of temptations” before they take place, just as He did for Noah and Lot. The Greek word here translated from is the same ek used in Revelation 3:10, which, as we saw on page 104, normally means from in the sense of away from or out of. And the Greek word translated temptations is peirasmon, the same word that, as we saw on page 106, was used in Revelation 3:10. There are no accidents in the precise wording of scripture. The fact that the Holy Spirit used these same two words in these two parallel passages is highly significant.

Biblewriter said:

None of them escaped the darkness of Rome on that subject.

Click to expand...

They were Reformers. They fearlessly exposed and proclaimed the doctrinal apostasy of Rome, often to the death. Their prophetic faith and sacrifice liberated the world of their day from spiritual darkness.

The counterfeit futurized doctrines arising out of the darkness of Rome are essential to dispensationalism's existence. Pretribulationism is a perfect fit.

They didn't only escape it. They shone the beacon of truth on it for all to see.

jgr said:

They were Reformers. They fearlessly exposed and proclaimed the doctrinal apostasy of Rome, often to the death. Their prophetic faith and sacrifice liberated the world of their day from spiritual darkness.

The counterfeit futurized doctrines arising out of the darkness of Rome are essential to dispensationalism's existence. Pretribulationism is a perfect fit.

They didn't only escape it. They shone the beacon of truth on it for all to see.

Click to expand...

Futurism most certainly did not arise out of the darkness of Rome. It was taught, and very clearly taught, by all the earliest "Apostolic Fathers," and was clearly spelled out in England before any Catholic took up the idea.

Biblewriter said:

I have not posted on the history of the PTR doctrine because I imagine that its age lends anything to its credibility, but ony for the purpose of disproving the attack that it cannot be true because it is a relatively new doctrine.

But as to the scriptural basis of the doctrine, I contend that any real understanding of end time prophecy makes the PTR not just an option, but an absolutely necessary conclusion.

Almost all the arguments against the PTR are centered around one of two errors. They are based either on a false assumption that the Lord is only coming back one time. Or they are based on an assumption that every scriptural reference to "the saints, " "the righteous," or "the elect," mean "the church."

Although no New Testament scripture states that Jesus will return more than just one time, we need to remember that also, no Old Testament scripture said He would come more than just one time. But the Old Testament prophecies contained numerous apparent contradictions. Some described the great promised Messiah as a great conqueroring hero King who would live forever. But others presented Him as a meek and humble servant who would die for His people. Nw that we have the New Testament, we know that these apparent contradictions spoke of the same Messiah, but at different times.

But we find similar apparent contradictions about the return of Jesus. Some scriptures say that no one can know when He is coming, and others precisely date His coming. Some have cataloged over fifty such differences, but most of these are only differences, and not apparent contradictions. But there are a number of passages that cannot ALL be precisely correct unless He is returning more than a single time.

And the Bible, in several places, clearly calls Israel God's elect, and calls its true believers righteous men.

These two facts simply destroy almost all anti-PTR arguments.

Click to expand...

The teachings of the PTR come directly from Jesus, Matthew, Luke, John and Paul, as recorded in my posts #119 and #120, that refute you. See also posts #121 and 122.

The term "falling away," in 2 Thess.2:3, comes from a miss-translation of the Greek and Latin terms "apostasia," and "discessio," that both mean "departure." That Paul confirmed in verse 7, where he wrote: "he who restrains lawlessness, "will be taken out of the way." Both verses 3 and 7 specifically pertain the the rapture of the Church. Review post 119 for the translation history of it, by Thomas Ice, PhD.


Quasar92

Biblewriter said:

Actually, it was mentioned in the opening chapters of the Revelation.

“Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.” (Revelation 3:10) The Greek word translated from in this verse is ek, (word number 1537 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) which indeed means from, but in the sense of away from or out of.

Click to expand...

Of course, out of and away from the tribulation that is coming upon the world. There is no promise that you will be taken out of the world away from the persecution that happens in the wake of the rise of the Antichrist. There is every indication that there is a witness on earth that confronts him, and even with the trumpets, there is a censor which is the prayers of the saints. Before the vials of wrath there is no such preamble. I think that's because the church is gone sometime between the midtribulation abomination that causes desolation and before the vials of wrath.

Some imagine that this only means out of after being in the “hour of trial.” But Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament defines ek, as it is used in Revelation 3:10, to mean “to keep one at a distance from.” Indeed, this becomes obvious when we consider the word “keep” in this phrase. This word is translated from the Greek word tereo. (word number 5083 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) It literally means to guard, but in the scriptures was usually used in the sense of our English word keep, and is so translated more than two-thirds of the times tero occurs in the Greek text of the New Testament. So it is clear that the real meaning of this promise is to be kept out of “the hour of trial.”

Click to expand...

The vials of wrath come quickly, I get the distinct impression they are over pretty quickly. The final battle of Armageddon where the enemies of God are destroyed happens in an instant. I can see that happening in an hour.

To really understand this, we need to consider another promise made concerning a part of the same time period. The Lord said to Israel, “Ask now, and see, Whether a man is ever in labor with child? So why do I see every man with his hands on his loins Like a woman in labor, And all faces turned pale? Alas! For that day is great, So that none is like it; And it is the time of ·Jacob's trouble, But he shall be saved out of it.” (Jeremiah 30:6-7) In this case, the Hebrew word translated saved is yasha’. (word number 3467 in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary) This Hebrew word means saved in the sense of succor. In the KJV, this Hebrew word is rendered save 149 times, deliver 13 times, help 12 times, and once as rescue. We notice this to clearly understand that this Hebrew word carries an entirely different sense from the Greek word tereo used in Revelation 3:10. In one case, the Lord promised to help some of His own get through a time of trouble designed for themselves. In the other, He promised to keep others of His own out of a time of testing designed for others.

Click to expand...

Jacob will be saved out of the time of trial, which fits perfectly fine. When the Devil attempts to destroy Israel after the abomination that causes desolation Jacob will be saved out of this mess.

But what is this “the hour of trial” that they will be kept out of? The Greek word translated hour in this passage is hora. (word number 5610 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) This Greek word literally means hour, but is often used figuratively for a period of time. But what hour are they promised to be kept out of? It is not just some general period of time. It is a specific one. It is “the hour of trial.” It is specifically called “the hour,” for the word “the” is in the Greek text, as the word ho. (word number 3588 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) But what “hour of trial” is this specific time that they are they promised to be kept out of? It is “the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.”

Click to expand...

Which is all very true and still rather general. In Greek the context guides the meaning and the hour of tribulation that is coming upon the world isn't all that specific. It's a close approximate time but the context is just too ambiquise to conclude a pretribulation rapture.

There is a specific “hour of trial” coming “to test those who dwell on the earth.” When we see the reason this hour is coming we understand the term “hour of trial.” For the Greek word here translated to test is peirasi. (an active infinitive of peirazo, word number 3985 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) This literally means exactly as it is translated, to test. So we see that this scripture explicitly tells us that there is a particular time of testing coming, and that the purpose of that time is “to test those who dwell on the earth.” Its purpose is not to test the saints of God, but “those who dwell on the earth.” This is a moral class, those whose hearts are on the earth, rather than in heaven. This moral class is named in these words eight times in the Revelation, and always in a negative light.

Click to expand...

To test, sometimes to tempt, it's used of Jesus being tempted before the start of his ministry. It does mean tested but how this translates into a rapture eludes me.

But we are also told where this time of testing will come. It “shall come upon the whole world.” The Greek word translated whole in this clause is holos. (word number 3650 in Strong’s Greek Dictionary) This Greek word literally means whole, or all, that is, complete. That is, there is no part of the world that will be exempted from this time of testing. So there is coming a specific time of testing, and it is coming upon the whole world. But the Lord’s own are promised that they will be kept out of that time of testing. Now if this time is coming upon the whole world, but the Lord’s own will be kept out of it, they cannot be in the world during that time of testing. So we see that Revelation 3:10 says the Lord’s own will be removed from the earth before this time of testing begins.

Click to expand...

Then who are these people:

So there are one, two, three, four horsemen which coincide with the opening of the fifth seal. So what is that doing there if they didn't die in the wake of the rise of the Antichrist? The martyrs are a witness during the tribulation, the church is gone and the nation of Israel hasn't repented yet, so who are these witnesses?

We see this again in a passage about Noah and Lot. “For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly; and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds)—then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment.” (2 Peter 2:4-9)

Click to expand...

Jesus speaks of this, this is an event during the midtribulation period, Revelations 11 actually:


Then this is describe later:


I just don't get how this is described after the abomination that causes desolation, which all dispensationalists agree is a midtribulation event. But the rapture is described as subsequent to the abomination that causes desolation.

Here the Holy Spirit gives us two specific examples, Noah and Lot, both of whom were physically removed from the scene of judgment before it took place. Then, in the context of these two examples, the Holy Spirit said, “then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment.” (2 Peter 2:9)

Click to expand...

The trumpets do not effect the entire earth and some are sealed. The vials of wrath on the other hand effect the whole earth even though the judgments are following a similar pattern.

Thus the Holy Spirit showed His intention to “deliver the godly out of temptations” by physically removing them from the scene “of temptations” before they take place, just as He did for Noah and Lot. The Greek word here translated from is the same ek used in Revelation 3:10, which, as we saw on page 104, normally means from in the sense of away from or out of. And the Greek word translated temptations is peirasmon, the same word that, as we saw on page 106, was used in Revelation 3:10. There are no accidents in the precise wording of scripture. The fact that the Holy Spirit used these same two words in these two parallel passages is highly significant.

Click to expand...

An interesting collection of word searches that don't follow the narrative of Matthew or Revelations. Not really seeing anything conclusive but thanks just the same.

Grace and peace,
Mark

Biblewriter said:

Futurism most certainly did not arise out of the darkness of Rome. It was taught, and very clearly taught, by all the earliest "Apostolic Fathers," and was clearly spelled out in England before any Catholic took up the idea.

Click to expand...

Also by the Jews from their Chiliasm, before that.


Quasar92

Quasar92 said:

The teachings of the PTR come directly from Jesus, Matthew, Luke, John and Paul, as recorded in my posts #119 and #120, that refute you. See also posts #121 and 122.

The term "falling away," in 2 Thess.2:3, comes from a miss-translation of the Greek and Latin terms "apostasia," and "discessio," that both mean "departure." That Paul confirmed in verse 7, where he wrote: "he who restrains lawlessness, "will be taken out of the way." Both verses 3 and 7 specifically pertain the the rapture of the Church. Review post 119 for the translation history of it, by Thomas Ice, PhD.


Quasar92

Click to expand...

Debunked.

Biblewriter said:

Futurism most certainly did not arise out of the darkness of Rome. It was taught, and very clearly taught, by all the earliest "Apostolic Fathers," and was clearly spelled out in England before any Catholic took up the idea.

Click to expand...

Francisco Ribera - Wikipedia
Francisco Ribera (1537–1591) was a Spanish Jesuit theologian, identified with the Futurist Christian eschatological view.

Quasar92 said:

Also ne the Jews from their Chiliasm, before that.


Quasar92

Click to expand...

Right. Jewish Talmudic fables are our omniscient prophetic oracles.

Acts 13
27 For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him.

jgr said:

Francisco Ribera - Wikipedia
Francisco Ribera (1537–1591) was a Spanish Jesuit theologian, identified with the Futurist Christian eschatological view.

Click to expand...

This is unquestionably true. But Francisco Riberra was not it source.

Futurism was so prevalent in the early church that in the fifth century, Jerome called it "the traditional interpretation of all the commentators of the Christian Church." (Jerome’s comments on Daniel 7:8, as found in “Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel,” pg. 77, translated by Gleason L. Archer, Jr., published by Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1958.)

And in the time shortly after the reformation, Futurism had already been taught by the French Calvanist Theodore Beza, the English churchman Edmond Bunny, and the English Dissenter Francis Kett by 1585, the year Francisco STARTED to write his book on futurism.

So it is total nonsense to even pretend that Francisco was the originator, either of futurism at all, or of its modern version.

Biblewriter said:

This is unquestionably true. But futurism was around long before the time of Francisco Ribera. So he was unquestionably not its source.

Click to expand...

There have been two historical "waves" of futurism, as it relates to antichrist, in the Church. The first, from the early post-apostolic period, was correctly identified by the Reformers, beginning with Wycliffe in the 14th century, as fulfilled in the papacy. The second wave was that spawned in the papacy's counter-reformation of the 16th century, by Ribera, to counter the Reformers' proclamations. The second wave is the primary source of contemporary dispensationalism's futurism.

jgr said:

Debunked.

Click to expand...

The Scripture in my post #118 and #120 not only refute you, but rebuke you as well. Your meaningless opinion needs Scriptural support in order to debunk it. So have at it and let me see you try.


Quasar92

jgr said:

There have been two historical "waves" of futurism, as it relates to antichrist, in the Church. The first, from the early post-apostolic period, was correctly identified by the Reformers, beginning with Wycliffe in the 14th century, as fulfilled in the papacy. The second wave was that spawned in the papacy's counter-reformation of the 16th century, by Ribera, to counter the Reformers' proclamations. The second wave is the primary source of contemporary dispensationalism's futurism.

Click to expand...

I am quite aware that this is a widely reported claim. But it is simply, absolutely, and completely, false.

In the first place, the Biblical end time prophecies have never been even approximately fulfilled. They are filled with specific details which do not even approximately resemble the details of end time prophecy.

And in the second place, even if Riberra was indeed the earliest person to again advance these ideas after the reformation, which he was not, modern dispensationalism is not based on what he, or any other man, said.

In actual fact, Darby and his associates agreed with the ancient writers instead of with Riberra, that the Antichrist would be a Jew.

But they did not simply base their doctrines on what the ancient writers said. For as Darby pointed out certain things the Bible clearly teaches, he commented that not even one of the Apostolic Fathers had ever noticed this.

Dispensationalism is not based on what Riberra, Darby, or anyone else said. It is based purely on scripture.

Biblewriter said:

Dispensationalism is not based on what Riberra, Darby, or anyone else said. It is based purely on scripture.

Click to expand...

It is based on ignoring the fact that the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is found fulfilled word-for-word by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, which is specifically applied to the Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8.

It is based on replacing the One Seed in Galatians 3:16, with the many seeds.

It must ignore the fact that the early Church was made up almost entirely of Israelites as found in Acts 2:36, and Romans 11:1, and James 1:1-3.


Its greatest error is the claim that modern Jews will come to salvation outside of the Church, which is an idea not found in earlier Christian sources.

It is based at least partially on race, instead of Grace by ignoring the following verses about genealogy.

1Ti_1:4　 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.


Tit_3:9　 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.


Some of its proponents have claimed to promote the New Covenant and then failed to produce anything in their writtings about the New Covenant.

Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant modern Dispensational Theology falls apart.

The following series of sermons were given by David Gay, who is one of the most prolific modern authors of material on the New Covenant of Christ.
His book "Christ is All", is an excellent resource.

Overview of Covenants Abraham to Christ: David H J Gay


.

Biblewriter said:

But they did not simply base their doctrines on what the ancient writers said. For as Darby pointed out certain things the Bible clearly teaches, he commented that not even one of the Apostolic Fathers had ever noticed this.

Click to expand...

Couldn't have expressed it better myself. The trademarks and hallmarks of cultism. "Not even one of the Apostolic Fathers had ever noticed this." Undoubtedly the Reformers could be included as well. For 1800 years, not even one had noticed what Darby suddenly noticed. New truth suddenly appears from a self-appointed oracle to titillate adoring followers and ensnare the undiscerning.

It is improbable that Darby knew anything of significance about what the Apostolic Fathers had not noticed, for he was openly disdainful of history:
"I do not admit history to be, in any sense, necessary to the understanding of prophecy."

Such is the nucleus of cultism.

jgr said:

Couldn't have expressed it better myself. The trademarks and hallmarks of cultism. "Not even one of the Apostolic Fathers had ever noticed this." Undoubtedly the Reformers could be included as well. For 1800 years, not even one had noticed what Darby suddenly noticed. New truth suddenly appears from a self-appointed oracle to titillate adoring followers and ensnare the undiscerning.

It is improbable that Darby knew anything of significance about what the Apostolic Fathers had not noticed, for he was openly disdainful of history:
"I do not admit history to be, in any sense, necessary to the understanding of prophecy."

Such is the nucleus of cultism.

Click to expand...

So - which is it? Is Dispensationalism descended from Riberra or from Darby? In your attempts to disparage it, you have now made both claims. But the actual fact is, that the chief elements of Dispensationalism are clearly laid out in the very oldest Christian documents on the end time prophecy that have survived to the present day.

Irenaeus used
the word dispensation, or its plural form dispensations, well over eighty times. He explicitly named a few of these dispensations, namely “the dispensation of the law,” (book III, chapter XI, section 7, and again in book III, chapter XV, section 3) which he also called “the Levitical Dispensation,” (book IV, Title of chapter XVII.) “the Mosaic dispensation,” (book IV, chapter XXXVI, section 2.) and “the legal dispensation.” (book III, chapter X, section 2 and the title of book V, chapter VIII.) He used this last term a third time, contrasting it with “the new dispensation of liberty” in book III, chapter X, section 4. Finally, he referred to “the future dispensation of the human race.” (book III, chapter XXII, section 3.) We should also note that he used the term the “dispensations of God,” eight times, in book I, chapter X, section 1, book I, chapter XVI, section 3, book II, chapter XXV, section 3, book III, chapter XI, section 9, book IV, chapter XX, section 10, book IV, chapter XXI, section 3, book IV, chapter XXIII, section 1, and book IV, chapter XXXIII, section 1.

Irenaeus insisted that his doctrine of the dispensations was what the church had always taught, saying, ““The Church, though dispersed through our the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents...” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book I, chapter X, section 1.) He said again that “Where, therefore, the gifts of the Lord have been placed, there it behoves us to learn the truth, [namely,] from those who possess that succession of the Church which is from the apostles, and among whom exists that which is sound and blameless in conduct, as well as that which is unadulterated and incorrupt in speech. For these also preserve this faith of ours in one God who created all things; and they increase that love [which we have] for the Son of God, who accomplished such marvellous dispensations for our sake: and they expound the Scriptures to us without danger, neither blaspheming God, nor dishonouring the patriarchs, nor despising the prophets.” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book IV, chapter XXVI, section 5.)

We know from the writings of John Nelson Darby that he read the early church fathers, so is it any surprise, then, that when he began to write about how God works in various ways at different times, he should have chosen the word “dispensations” to describe these various periods of time? In so doing, he was not only using the very words of scripture, but the same word used by Irenaeus to describe these same ideas.

And Hyppolytus very clearly and explicitly taught that the seventieth week of Daniel's prophecy remained to be fulfilled in the future.

These two writers are respectively the authors of the very oldest Christian commentary on Bible prophecy (of any significant length) that has survived to the present day, and the very oldest Christian commentary on scripture that has survived to the present day.

Biblewriter said:

So - which is it? Is Dispensationalism descended from Riberra or from Darby? In your attempts to disparage it, you have now made both claims. But the actual fact is, that the chief elements of Dispensationalism are clearly laid out in the very oldest Christian documents on the end time prophecy that have survived to the present day.

Irenaeus used
the word dispensation, or its plural form dispensations, well over eighty times. He explicitly named a few of these dispensations, namely “the dispensation of the law,” (book III, chapter XI, section 7, and again in book III, chapter XV, section 3) which he also called “the Levitical Dispensation,” (book IV, Title of chapter XVII.) “the Mosaic dispensation,” (book IV, chapter XXXVI, section 2.) and “the legal dispensation.” (book III, chapter X, section 2 and the title of book V, chapter VIII.) He used this last term a third time, contrasting it with “the new dispensation of liberty” in book III, chapter X, section 4. Finally, he referred to “the future dispensation of the human race.” (book III, chapter XXII, section 3.) We should also note that he used the term the “dispensations of God,” eight times, in book I, chapter X, section 1, book I, chapter XVI, section 3, book II, chapter XXV, section 3, book III, chapter XI, section 9, book IV, chapter XX, section 10, book IV, chapter XXI, section 3, book IV, chapter XXIII, section 1, and book IV, chapter XXXIII, section 1.

Irenaeus insisted that his doctrine of the dispensations was what the church had always taught, saying, ““The Church, though dispersed through our the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents...” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book I, chapter X, section 1.) He said again that “Where, therefore, the gifts of the Lord have been placed, there it behoves us to learn the truth, [namely,] from those who possess that succession of the Church which is from the apostles, and among whom exists that which is sound and blameless in conduct, as well as that which is unadulterated and incorrupt in speech. For these also preserve this faith of ours in one God who created all things; and they increase that love [which we have] for the Son of God, who accomplished such marvellous dispensations for our sake: and they expound the Scriptures to us without danger, neither blaspheming God, nor dishonouring the patriarchs, nor despising the prophets.” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book IV, chapter XXVI, section 5.)

We know from the writings of John Nelson Darby that he read the early church fathers, so is it any surprise, then, that when he began to write about how God works in various ways at different times, he should have chosen the word “dispensations” to describe these various periods of time? In so doing, he was not only using the very words of scripture, but the same word used by Irenaeus to describe these same ideas.

And Hyppolytus very clearly and explicitly taught that the seventieth week of Daniel's prophecy remained to be fulfilled in the future.

These two writers are respectively the authors of the very oldest Christian commentary on Bible prophecy (of any significant length) that has survived to the present day, and the very oldest Christian commentary on scripture that has survived to the present day.

Click to expand...

Here's a list of 33 Church Fathers or their writings. The list includes Irenaeus and Hippolytus.
Of those who wrote on these subjects, which of them espoused a disembodied 70th week or a pretrib rapture?

Didache
Epistle of Barnabas
Clement of Rome
2 Clement
The Shepherd of Hermas
Ignatius of Antioch
Polycarp
The Martyrdom of Polycarp
Epistle to Diognetus
Fragments of Papias
Quadratus of Athens
Aristides
Justin Martyr
Claudius Apollinaris
Minucius Felix
Melito of Sardis
Hegesippus
Dionysius of Corinth
Athenagoras of Athens
Irenaeus of Lyons
Rhodon
Theophilus of Caesarea
Theophilus of Antioch
Maximus of Jerusalem
Polycrates of Ephesus
Pantaenus
Clement of Alexandria
Tertullian
Serapion of Antioch
Apollonius
Caius
Hippolytus of Rome
Origen

Here is a list of 44 Reformers.
All were historicists.
As such, none subscribed to a disembodied 70th week or a pretrib rapture.

John Wycliffe
John Hus
Jerome of Prague
Savonarola
Peter Waldo
Wessel Harmenz Gansfort
Theodore Beza
Martin Bucer
Heinrich Bullinger
Johannes Hus
John Calvin
Andreas von Carlstadt
Wolfgang Fabricius Capito
Martin Chemnitz
Thomas Cranmer
William Farel
Matthias Flacius
Caspar Hedio
Justus Jonas
John Knox
Jan Laski
Martin Luther
Philipp Melanchthon
Johannes Oecolampadius
Peter Martyr
Aonio Paleario
Laurentius Petri
Olaus Petri
John Wycliffe
Jirí Tranovský
William Tyndale
Joachim Vadian
Pierre Viret
Primož Trubar
Huldrych Zwingli
John of Leiden
Thomas Müntzer
Kaspar Schwenkfeld
Sebastian Franck
Menno Simons
Hans Denck
Conrad Grebel
Balthasar Hubmaier
Felix Manz

Matisyahu8898 said:

Hello, I am a 19-year-old fellow Christian, and I have plenty of concerns regarding the Pre-Tribulation Rapture (PTR).

Scroll down for TL;DR.

Some of my favorite bible teachers, and preachers believe in the PTR. I never had a strong belief in it, but always kind of assumed it did exist, mostly because of the Left Behind movies/books, and the people I listened to. I like studying end times prophecy, and so, upon doing my own research, I started to doubt it's existence. I think that PTR believers' interpretation of Revelation is fairly accurate, with the coming Beast and tribulation (however, I'm not sure it's going to be exactly seven years long, because Revelation isn't specific enough), but I don't see any evidence that Christians will be raptured out to avoid it.

Anyways, let's get to the point...
I have seen many people argue for, and against the PTR, but I think that most people just bicker, and I have yet to see any intelligent debate concerning the PTR. Most people from both sides seem to have their go-to questions that just get annoying, and no question from either side seem to bring anything valuable into question. I personally don't believe in the PTR. I don't think that there is near enough evidence for it, and think that it's illogical to believe in it. I, however, may be missing something that most people don't mention, and so that's why I want to debate it here. I am very open to the idea of it, but can't find evidence myself.

The things I hear the most are as follows:

Those against the PTR (here after referred to as, "anti-PTRs") say,
"The word, 'Rapture' is never in the bible."
"The Rapture doctrine has only been around for a few hundred years."

Those who believe in the PTR (here after referred to as, "PTRs") quote,
1 Thessalonians 4:16, 17
1 Corinthians 15:51-53

I, someone who is open to both sides, see these arguments and my problems with this are as follows:

The anti-PTRs shouldn't care about the word itself. Who cares if it is ever mentioned by name or not? Question what the bible says about it. Most PTRs openly say that 'rapture' is a man given name that comes from Greek and Latin words that are in the bible. The word, "Trinity" is never in the bible, but the bible is very explicit about the existence of it, and the word,
"Godhead" is in the bible. 'Trinity' is a man given word that explains the split person of God.
Since the rapture is recent doctrine, one should look at it very skeptically, but it doesn't mean you should just toss it out immediately! You're saying that every mystery of the bible has already been revealed, and anyone who finds something new is making something up? It may be likely, but it isn't a sure thing. Just look at the sign of Revelation 12 that took place in the sky last September. No one ever thought that that was referring to the stars until they looked up and saw what was going on (I'm not saying that the Sept 23rd sign is definitely of sure significance, but I do think that Jesus wants our attention. It's a little hard to completely dismiss). A lot of the anti-PTRs are Calvanists, at least most I know, and Calvanism introduced tons of doctrines just a few hundreds years before the rapture doctrine. (I don't personally believe in Calvanism, but we'll talk about that another day.)

The PTRs can't use just those two verse, because they don't explicitly say anything about the tribulation. Both refer to the second coming of Jesus Christ, but neither say that their will be a rapture before the Beast's appearance, or that Christians will be spared from God's wrath. 1 Thess. refers to going up to meet God, but never mentions that we will be caught up before the tribulation. It only says that being caught up will be involved when Jesus comes back. 1 Cor. says that we will have to be changed in order to enter Heaven. Paul is saying that our bodies aren't just going to stop aging, but instead our bodies will have to be changed in order to be 'imperishable', and 'immortal'. This happens to the dead bodies as well. The souls of the dead will come back to claim their bodies once again, but before going back into Heaven they will have to be perfect bodies, not piles of dust, or half-decomposed skeletons. It makes no sense to me that people take these verses in 1 Cor., and say that this means that every Christian on earth will all of the sudden disappear leaving behind their clothes (some say blood as well), and everyone left on earth is going to be stuck dodging empty cars. I mean, come on...where are you getting that from?!

Too Long; Didn't Read:
Those for, and those against the Pre-Trib Rapture, just seem to bicker, and never any intelligent debate. They both seem to be very stubborn, and those for the PTR, don't provide any logical evidence.

So, my request for you, is that can you please tell me why people believe in the PTR, and allow me to possibly debate you? Or, if you are anti-PTR, like me, if there is any scripture that sheds a little extra light on the situation that I don't know, that would be greatly appreciated, or if you have anything else you'd like to add about why the PTR is false.
I'm open to any other debate about anything else you have to say regarding the rapture. Maybe I'm missing something obvious, and you'd like to point it out to me, or maybe you have a view that disagrees with both sides (I know that are a lot of different theories about the end times, so let's constrict this to viewpoints concerning the PTR, not the second coming in general).

Thanks in advance for your replies! I appreciate your opinion.
In Christ, Matt

Click to expand...

What does the Word say? God can talk to you just as easily as to anyone else.

jgr said:

Here's a list of 33 Church Fathers or their writings. The list includes Irenaeus and Hippolytus.
Of those who wrote on these subjects, which of them espoused a disembodied 70th week or a pretrib rapture?

Didache
Epistle of Barnabas
Clement of Rome
2 Clement
The Shepherd of Hermas
Ignatius of Antioch
Polycarp
The Martyrdom of Polycarp
Epistle to Diognetus
Fragments of Papias
Quadratus of Athens
Aristides
Justin Martyr
Claudius Apollinaris
Minucius Felix
Melito of Sardis
Hegesippus
Dionysius of Corinth
Athenagoras of Athens
Irenaeus of Lyons
Rhodon
Theophilus of Caesarea
Theophilus of Antioch
Maximus of Jerusalem
Polycrates of Ephesus
Pantaenus
Clement of Alexandria
Tertullian
Serapion of Antioch
Apollonius
Caius
Hippolytus of Rome
Origen

Here is a list of 44 Reformers.
All were historicists.
As such, none subscribed to a disembodied 70th week or a pretrib rapture.

John Wycliffe
John Hus
Jerome of Prague
Savonarola
Peter Waldo
Wessel Harmenz Gansfort
Theodore Beza
Martin Bucer
Heinrich Bullinger
Johannes Hus
John Calvin
Andreas von Carlstadt
Wolfgang Fabricius Capito
Martin Chemnitz
Thomas Cranmer
William Farel
Matthias Flacius
Caspar Hedio
Justus Jonas
John Knox
Jan Laski
Martin Luther
Philipp Melanchthon
Johannes Oecolampadius
Peter Martyr
Aonio Paleario
Laurentius Petri
Olaus Petri
John Wycliffe
Jirí Tranovský
William Tyndale
Joachim Vadian
Pierre Viret
Primož Trubar
Huldrych Zwingli
John of Leiden
Thomas Müntzer
Kaspar Schwenkfeld
Sebastian Franck
Menno Simons
Hans Denck
Conrad Grebel
Balthasar Hubmaier
Felix Manz

Click to expand...

Daniel does not teach any such thing as a disembodiment of anyone in Dan.9:27, the 70th week.

As for the teachings of the pre-trib rapture of the church, as recorded by Jesus, Matthew, Luke, John and Paul, precedence is theirs, well over that of any of the Church fathers, as recorded in the following four post link:

The Biblical teaching of the pre-trib rapture of the Church - a deeper walk...


Quasar92

Quasar92 said:

Daniel does not teach any such thing as a disembodiment of anyone in Dan.9:27, the 70th week.

As for the teachings of the pre-trib rapture of the church, as recorded by Jesus, Matthew, Luke, John and Paul, precedence is theirs, well over that of any of the Church fathers, as recorded in the following four post link:

The Biblical teaching of the pre-trib rapture of the Church - a deeper walk...


Quasar92

Click to expand...

You or someone else will have to do better than that.