The tribulation will be world wide

David Kent said:

Most people don't know that the early pretribbers gave a date for when the saints would be "translated" as they put it. The earth would be left without a preacher. I can't find my book at present so I can't give exact dates or quotes. My Grandson came down a couple of months ago and asked if he could have some of my books and may have claimed that one.
The book is Irvingism in its rise and present state, by Robert Baxter 1836, He referred to a letter which he wrote to a Mr Armstrong in 1833,in which he said they had already met on the appointed date on the appointed date. But of course nothing happened, but they were the ancestors of the teaching,

Click to expand...

Thank you for that info D K...........

David Kent said:

Most people don't know that the early pretribbers gave a date for when the saints would be "translated" as they put it. The earth would be left without a preacher. I can't find my book at present so I can't give exact dates or quotes. My Grandson came down a couple of months ago and asked if he could have some of my books and may have claimed that one.
The book is Irvingism in its rise and present state, by Robert Baxter 1836, He referred to a letter which he wrote to a Mr Armstrong in 1833,in which he said they had already met on the appointed date on the appointed date. But of course nothing happened, but they were the ancestors of the teaching,

Click to expand...

LittleLambofJesus said:

Thank you for that info D K...........

Click to expand...

I found the book. The date for the rapture was Sunday
14th July 1833, when the Irvingites were summoned to await the fulfillment of the prophecy.

David Kent said:

I found the book. The date for the rapture was Sunday
14th July 1833, when the Irvingites were summoned to await the fulfillment of the prophecy.

Click to expand...

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418


Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_23.pdf

.

BABerean2 said:

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418


Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_23.pdf

.

Click to expand...

What happened to BABerean, were you banned?
I have rewad about a quarter of the Coad post and a bit about the other one, I think I have read them before.
The Irvingite Morning Watch mag. is avaiable on Google books or Google Play.
In it, Irving says he first preached on dispensationalism on Christmas day 1825, and then the same day, the following year.
I may or may not comment further when or if I have time to read thes long articles,

Quasar92 said:

Review the translation history of 2 Thess.2:3 in the following very carefully to learn the Scriptural truth about it:

2 Thess.2:1-8: The precise timing of the rapture of the Church:
"Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to Him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the Day of the Lord [The 70th and final Week/seven year tribulation of Dan.9:27] has already come." 2 Thes.2:1-2. Which is a direct reference to 1 Thes.4:17 and the theme of Paul's entire pre-trib rapture message in 2 Thes.2:1-8. When we will be CAUGHT UP TOGETHER WITH THEM IN THE CLOUDS TO MEET THE LORD IN THE AIR. [Parenthetics mine].

The "Day of the Lord" Paul refers to in vs 2, alludes to Dan.9:27, when God will intervene into the affairs of man for the last time, culminating in the second coming of Jesus to the earth. In that passage of Scripture, the Day of the Lord is triggered by the "he" who "confirms a covenant [An agreement] for one Week" [The Day of the Lord/ 70th and final Week/seven year tribulation], who is the antichrist. The second, and same "he," who stops Israel from the offerings and sacrificing in the temple of God, and the third, and same "he," who breaks his covenant in the middle of the Week [After 3.5 of the 7 year total], and sets up the abomination of desolation Jesus referred to in Mt.24:15, in His Olivet Discourse, about the sign of His second coming, and of the end of the age.

In vs 3: "Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that Day [The Day of the Lord, the 70th and final Week, the seven year tribulation] will not come, until the "apostasia" [Greek term in which the original translation was "to depart," or "departure," meaning, the rapture of the Church] occurs and the man of lawlessness [The antichrist, and all three of the "he's" in Dan.9:27] is revealed [Who triggers the Day of the Lord/ the 70th and final Week/ the seven year tribulation], the man doomed to destruction." Which reveals the "apostasia" [Departure] will take place before the antichrist is revealed, who triggers the 70th Week/seven year tribulation. Confirmed in verses 7 and 8 below.

Translation History of apostasia and discessio: By Thomas Ice, PhD.
The first seven English translations of apostasia all rendered the noun as either " departure" or " departing." They are as follows: Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible (1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583); Geneva Bible (1608) . This supports the notion that the word truly means " departure." In fact, Jerome' s Latin translation known as the Vulgate from around the time of 325 A.D. renders apostasia with the " word discessio, meaning ' departure.' Why was the King James Version the first to depart from the established translation of "departure" in 1611 A.D.? [It is more than likely due to overzealous RCC scribes who altered the original wording of vs 3. to accommodate their teachings of Amillenialism, which rejects both the pre-trib rapture of the Church as well as Jesus Millennial reign her on earth].

Theodore Beza, the Swiss reformer was the first to transliterate apostasia and create a new word, rather than translate it as others had done. The translators of the King James Version were the first to introduce the new rendering of apostasia as " falling away." Most English translators have followed the KJV and Beza in departing from translating apostasia as " departure." No reason was ever given.

"He [The antichrist] will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God." Vs 4. [The abomination of desolation, confirming Dan.9:27 and Mt.24:15]. See also 2 Thes.2:4.

The rapture of the Church and verse 3 confirmed:
In vs 7: "For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so until he [The saints - Church] is taken out of the way."

The "he" who will be taken out of the way, is the one body of Christ, who bear the Holy Spirit within each of us [Eph.1:13-14], the Church of Jesus Christ. The very same as those who will participate in the "apostasia," the "departure," [the rapture] of the Church, in vs 3. Immediately following that:

In vs 8: "And then the lawless one [The antichrist] will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of His mouth and destroy by the splendor of His coming." Vs 8. [See Rev.19:17-21].


Qusar92

Click to expand...

Archangel Michael is the one who restrains, the 'he', is a singular word, not a 'they' which could describe the body of many beleivers. Michael has always been the restrainer, in OT and NT.

sdowney717 said:

Archangel Michael is the one who restrains, the 'he', is a singular word, not a 'they' which could describe the body of many beleivers. Michael has always been the restrainer, in OT and NT.

Click to expand...

I disagree.
Remember that Paul said "5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?" and "6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time." The Thessolonians woul dhave passed on that message and wed can read what the early church knew from that. Tertullian said "We know."adid they know? That the he who restraineth was the emperor and the what was the Roman empire. It was taken out of the way when Constantine removed the empire from Rome, thus leaving a vacancy for the papacy to fill.

After Constantine left Rome, no one ruled the empire from Rome, except the papacy, the new Caesars.

David Kent said:

After Constantine left Rome, no one ruled the empire from Rome, except the papacy, the new Caesars.

Click to expand...

He who now letteth will let, until he is taken out of the way.

timtams said:

He who now letteth will let, until he is taken out of the way.

Click to expand...

And Caesar and his imperial Roman empire were taken out of the way.

timtams said:

He who now letteth will let, until he is taken out of the way.

Click to expand...

And what do you undestand "let" to mean?

David Kent said:

And what do you undestand "let" to mean?

Click to expand...

Hinder or stand in the way. I take it to mean that the Man of Sin, according to Paul, would be revealed following the removal of the Roman Emperor.

timtams said:

Hinder or stand in the way. I take it to mean that the Man of Sin, according to Paul, would be revealed following the removal of the Roman Emperor.

Click to expand...

Fine. I just needed to know, some people have different ideas.

David Kent said:

Fine. I just needed to know, some people have different ideas.

Click to expand...

What's that a picture of? Allenby?

It might be good to set up a thread for discussing different historicist views on particular prophecies (e.g. the second beast, the vials, the role of Israel). I think the old guard interpretations of the vials (Napoleonic Wars etc), for example, are probably rightly set aside. Even the question of the identification of Mystery Babylon (Rev 17) might be worth discussing, since it is clearly a political and economic entity.

timtams said:

What's that a picture of? Allenby?

Click to expand...

Yes Allenby entereing Jerusalem in 1917. Ending Turkish rule.
At the end of the 1335 days, or years.

timtams said:

It might be good to set up a thread for discussing different historicist views on particular prophecies (e.g. the second beast, the vials, the role of Israel). I think the old guard interpretations of the vials (Napoleonic Wars etc), for example, are probably rightly set aside. Even the question of the identification of Mystery Babylon (Rev 17) might be worth discussing, since it is clearly a political and economic entity.

Click to expand...

There is a thread on that..........

I and some others view the 1st century OC Jews/Jewish circumcision group rulers as the Beast out of the Land
[The Romans/Gentiles could be the Sea beast?]

The wild Beasts from the Sea and from the Land
===================================
Those corrupt murderous Jews were indeed "beastly" and of the Devil.......

Jhn 8:44
“Ye are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.

Jhn 19:12
From then on Pilate sought to release Him, but the Jews cried out, saying, “If you let this Man go, you are not Caesar's friend. Whoever makes himself a king speaks against Caesar.”
Jhn 19:15
But they cried out, “Away with Him, away with Him! Crucify Him!” Pilate said to them, “Shall I crucify your King?”
The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar!”
[Romans/Gentiles Beast from the Sea Revelation 13:1?]

Peter and Jude speak of them.

2Pe 2:12
But these, like natural brute beasts made to be caught and destroyed, speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption,
Jde 1:10
But these speak evil of whatever they do not know; and whatever they know naturally, like brute beasts, in these things they corrupt themselves.
=====================

===================
One clue is the word "lambkin"

721. arnion ar-nee'-on diminutive from 704; a lambkin:--lamb.
G721 ἀρνίον (arnion) occurs 30 times in 28 verses

Used in only 1 verse outside of Revelation........Just thought this was interesting and why I like the Greek..........

John 21:15
When then they dine is saying to the Simon Peter the Jesus , `Simon of Jonas/John, thou are loving/agapaV <25> Me more of these?' He is saying to Him, `Yea Lord! Thou has perceived that I am being-affectionate/filw <5368> of thee;'
He is saying to him, `Be thou grazing/boske <1006>! the Lambkins/ arnia <721> of Me .'
16 He is saying to him again, a second time, `Simon of Jonas, thou are loving/agapaV <25> Me?'
He is saying to him, `Yes, Lord! Thou have perceived that I am being-affection/filw <5368> of Thee;' He is saying to him, `Be thou Shepherding<4165>! the Sheep<4263> of Me .'
=======================
Revelation 13:11 And I saw another wild Beast ascending out of the land,
and it had two horns like a lambkin and it spoke as a Dragon.

We have discussed the first of two beasts, the beast which came up out of the sea. By the spirit of truth we understand that that beast which combined within itself the appearance of a leopard, a bear, and a lion, which had seven heads and ten horns, is the symbol of the BESTIAL WORLD SYSTEM OF MAN.

Now we are presented with a second beast! And to prevent any misunderstanding at all, let me say from the outset that there is a definite relation between the first beast and the second beast. The full picture is just this. The second beast rises up out of the earth.
He is less formidable in appearance. First of all, his origin is not in the depths of the stormy sea, but from the more quiet and more stable earth. He strikes you as looking like a lamb, for he has two horns like lambs’ horns, yet when he speaks, he sounds like the awful red dragon. And there is a very definite connection between these two beasts. Repeatedly this is indicated in the description John gives us. He exercises all his authority in the sight of, in the presence of, and even in behalf of the first beast. All that he does he does both in the presence of, and with the approval of, the first beast. Therefore, one of the functions of this second beast is to collaborate with and augment the agenda of the first beast. And this soon becomes apparent! For the second beast causes the inhabitants of the earth-realm to wonder after the first beast, to admire him, and to pay respect and homage (worship) to him. This second beast inspires men to construct an image of the first beast, in order to pay homage to the first beast through his image. The second beast causes all the admirers of the first beast to receive a mark which distinguishes them from those who refuse to worship this beast and his image, in order that they may be killed.

When John spoke of certain people which were of the spirit of antichrist, he did not refer to all opposers of Christ. Instead, he referred to a certain class of people — apostates who were teaching things contrary to the reality that is in Christ. These were not openly against Christ, they were professing believers and apparent ministers of Christ! These were no longer in accord with those who abode in the truth as it is in Jesus, for John says of these antichrists, “…even now there are many antichrists… they went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be manifest that they were not all of us” (I Jn. 2:18-19). Therefore we find that John’s use of the word “antichrist” signifies not merely one who opposes Christ, but one who sets himself up in the place of Christ, appropriating some of the attributes of Christ, but substituting error in the place of truth, and form in the place of reality. Anything that is placed instead of Christ is literally antichrist. Have we not embraced and practiced a lot of religious attitudes, ideas, beliefs, doctrines, rituals, ceremonies, sacraments, ordinances, traditions, forms, means, and methods which have TAKEN THE PLACE OF TRUTH AND REALITY in our lives! These certainly contained bits and shades of truth and life, but they were NOT THE LIVING REALITY OF CHRIST WITHIN AT ALL! They were shadow, but not substance; form, but not essence; works, but not power. Any little form of substitution that detracts from His indwelling life is indeed ANTICHRIST!
===================================
Kingdom Bible Studies

BEAST OUT OF THE LAND

Kindgdom Bible Studies Revelation Series
Kindgdom Bible Studies Revelation Series
Kindgdom Bible Studies Revelation Series
Kindgdom Bible Studies Revelation Series
Kindgdom Bible Studies Revelation Series
Kindgdom Bible Studies Revelation Series

LittleLambofJesus said:

There is a thread on that..........

I and some others view the 1st century OC Jews/Jewish circumcision group rulers as the Beast out of the Land
[The Romans/Gentiles could be the Sea beast?]

The wild Beasts from the Sea and from the Land
===================================

Click to expand...

I meant historicist, rather than preterist, interpretations of Revelation, as I think there is still a lot of work to be done in that area.