Amil or Pretrib - which is biblical?

sovereigngrace · Jan 11, 2022

Rachel20 said:
Hello @sovereigngrace, none of the rapture-timing views are explicitly stated in scripture, which is why we have so many different views. Personally, I've found the arguments for pre-trib more compelling. Your mileage may differ.

But one thing I think most agree on is that the rapture and second coming are two distinct events. And I believe scripture indicates that Paul believed in the imminency of the rapture, but not the second coming. In fact, it's for this very reason that some top Biblical text scholars view 2 Thess as a forgery! They fail to take into account that Paul may have viewed the rapture as distinct in timing from the second coming that occurs at the end of the GT.

As an Amil I strongly disagree with this.

Rachel20 said:
I'll have that debate with you. But the moment it becomes argumentative or insulting, I'm out. I have no interest in converting anyone to pretrib, so have nothing to gain in exchange for the time I'll be putting into it.

I suggest you start a new OP and lay down the ground rules for debate.

The biggest problems I see within Christian circles today is:

· Many have no understanding of the consistent teaching of the Bible. They are not real students of the Word of God. They just believe what they have been taught.
· Many have no safe, solid or consistent interpretive rules to help them understand the Scriptures. They just take a text out of context and make it a pretext.

I am sure we would both agree: biblical hermeneutics are crucial in establishing biblical truth. Holding any position is not about us presenting our own opinions, the opinions of other men or even presenting a list of scriptural references. It is rather about us employing a correct, safe, solid, consistent, and water-tight means of interpretation, (understanding, application and rationale) that accurately reflects the teaching of the inspired text and the meaning the Holy Spirit intended to present.

Here are 16 important rules that I believe should help us navigate the choppy waters of eschatology and other debatable issues, for that matter. I hope you find these fair and agreeable. We basically need to:

1st rule: Have a good overall knowledge of scriptural truth.
2nd rule: Let the Bible speak for itself. The Word of God is the ultimate and final authority.
3rd rule: Pray for the Holy Spirit’s help in understanding God's truth. Ephesians 1:17: “That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints.”
4th rule: Do not add unto the scriptural text.
5th rule: Use Bible terms instead of man-made terms.
6th rule: Scripture is its own best interpreter; we must therefore support Scripture with Scripture. Explore the full gamut of Scripture on a matter. See what other similar Scripture says.
7th rule: Let clear and explicit Scripture interpret obscure and symbolic Scripture, not the other way around.
8th rule: He who alleges must prove! If you claim something as truth – prove it.
9th rule: When studying a given subject, it is always helpful to trace it back to its origin in Scripture. This is called: the law of first mention. This gives us an insight into its roots and development.
10th rule: Note the setting, genre and context of the truth/verse you are studying and establish what the Holy Spirit is actually saying in the overall passage. Context is crucial in biblical interpretation. We need to establish whether it is literal, symbolic or parabolic, and who, what and when it relates to. Is it speaking of the past, present or future? Is it principally speaking to the people receiving it or is it speaking prophetically of an approaching event? Is the sentence a command, a statement of fact or a question? We should always be sensitive to its setting, style of writing, and the respective subject under discussion.
11th rule: The New Testament is the fuller revelation. What is concealed in the Old Testament is revealed in the New Testament. We should interpret Scripture progressively. We all know that the Old Testament prophets looked through a glass darkly. They gave what was revealed to them. The fuller revelation came with Christ. What the Old Testament seers received was often veiled and incomplete. The New Testament is the fuller revelation and sheds light on the Old Testament. New revelation builds upon older revelation, never (at any stage) contradicting it. As Vern Poythress explains: “The significance of a type is not fully discernible until the time of fulfillment … In other words, one must compare later Scripture to earlier Scripture to understand everything.” The New Testament takes precedence because it shines light on the Old Testament and reveals things that were a mystery and hidden to the ancient prophets.
12th rule: Check out the practical outworking of the doctrine in Scripture. See how God’s people lived it out.
13th rule: What has this to do with Jesus? Jesus said in John 5:39: “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.”
14th rule: In disputed texts, examine the usage of key words/phrase elsewhere in Scripture. This can be done by examining the meaning of these in the original language.
15th rule: Establish the grammatical-historical interpretation of a passage. We must employ "an objective procedure for determining the meaning" intended, by the Holy Spirit working through human authors "through an examination of the language of the text and its historical circumstances." (Vern Sheridan Poythress)
16th rule: While we are not led by Church tradition or bound by historic views of a given truth, we should carefully consider what the great Bible scholars over the years have gleaned from their studious in-depth findings.

Rachel20 · Jan 11, 2022

sovereigngrace said:
The biggest problems I see within Christian circles today is:

· Many have no understanding of the consistent teaching of the Bible. They are not real students of the Word of God. They just believe what they have been taught.
· Many have no safe, solid or consistent interpretive rules to help them understand the Scriptures. They just take a text out of context and make it a pretext.

Thanks for creating the new thread. But if the debate devolves into pointing out problems with Christians or disparaging their understanding of scripture, I'm out, as I warned. For now, I need to leave for work, but will check in after. If you have time in the meantime, would appreciate your definition of "Day of the Lord".

sovereigngrace · Jan 11, 2022

Rachel20 said:
Thanks for creating the new thread. But if the debate devolves into pointing out problems with Christians or disparaging their understanding of scripture, I'm out, as I warned. For now, I need to leave for work, but will check in after. If you have time in the meantime, would appreciate your definition of "Day of the Lord".

The day of the Lord is the one and only final future climactic return of Christ.

Rachel20 · Jan 11, 2022

sovereigngrace said:
The day of the Lord is the one and only final future climactic return of Christ.

In terms of time frame - is it 24 hours, 1000 years? What events does it encompass?

Maria Billingsley · Jan 11, 2022

sovereigngrace said:
Of course, as an Amil I strongly disagree with this.

The biggest problems I see within Christian circles today is:

· Many have no understanding of the consistent teaching of the Bible. They are not real students of the Word of God. They just believe what they have been taught.
· Many have no safe, solid or consistent interpretive rules to help them understand the Scriptures. They just take a text out of context and make it a pretext.

Ok. So, I am sure we would both agree: biblical hermeneutics are crucial in establishing biblical truth. Holding any position is not about us presenting our own opinions, the opinions of other men or even presenting a list of scriptural references. It is rather about us employing a correct, safe, solid, consistent, and water-tight means of interpretation, (understanding, application and rationale) that accurately reflects the teaching of the inspired text and the meaning the Holy Spirit intended.

Here are 16 important rules that I believe should help us navigate the choppy waters of eschatology and other debatable issues, for that matter. I hope you find these fair and agreeable. We basically need to:

1st rule: Have a good overall knowledge of scriptural truth.
2nd rule: Let the Bible speak for itself. The Word of God is the ultimate and final authority.
3rd rule: Pray for the Holy Spirit’s help in understanding God's truth. Ephesians 1:17: “That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints.”
4th rule: Do not add unto the scriptural text.
5th rule: Use Bible terms instead of man-made terms.
6th rule: Scripture is its own best interpreter; we must therefore support Scripture with Scripture. Explore the full gamut of Scripture on a matter. See what other similar Scripture says.
7th rule: Let clear and explicit Scripture interpret obscure and symbolic Scripture, not the other way around.
8th rule: He who alleges must prove! If you claim something as truth – prove it.
9th rule: When studying a given subject, it is always helpful to trace it back to its origin in Scripture. This is called: the law of first mention. This gives us an insight into its roots and development.
10th rule: Note the setting, genre and context of the truth/verse you are studying and establish what the Holy Spirit is actually saying in the overall passage. Context is crucial in biblical interpretation. We need to establish whether it is literal, symbolic or parabolic, and who, what and when it relates to. Is it speaking of the past, present or future? Is it principally speaking to the people receiving it or is it speaking prophetically of an approaching event? Is the sentence a command, a statement of fact or a question? We should always be sensitive to its setting, style of writing, and the respective subject under discussion.
11th rule: The New Testament is the fuller revelation. What is concealed in the Old Testament is revealed in the New Testament. We should interpret Scripture progressively. We all know that the Old Testament prophets looked through a glass darkly. They gave what was revealed to them. The fuller revelation came with Christ. What the Old Testament seers received was often veiled and incomplete. The New Testament is the fuller revelation and sheds light on the Old Testament. New revelation builds upon older revelation, never (at any stage) contradicting it. As Vern Poythress explains: “The significance of a type is not fully discernible until the time of fulfillment … In other words, one must compare later Scripture to earlier Scripture to understand everything.” The New Testament takes precedence because it shines light on the Old Testament and reveals things that were a mystery and hidden to the ancient prophets.
12th rule: Check out the practical outworking of the doctrine in Scripture. See how God’s people lived it out.
13th rule: What has this to do with Jesus? Jesus said in John 5:39: “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.”
14th rule: In disputed texts, examine the usage of key words/phrase elsewhere in Scripture. This can be done by examining the meaning of these in the original language.
15th rule: Establish the grammatical-historical interpretation of a passage. As Vern Sheridan Poythress ably explains: “grammatical-historical interpretation means an
objective procedure for determining the meaning intended by the human author through an examination of the language of the text and its historical circumstances.”
16th rule: While we are not led by Church tradition or bound by historic views of a given truth, we should carefully consider what the great Bible scholars over the years have gleaned from their studious in-depth findings.

All these rules are great however many bible schools and seminaries still use the Scofield Reference Bible. This strictly teaches Dispensationalism. This is why it is very difficult to "unlearn". In my case, if anyone cares to know, I begged the Lord for truth. The next day I woke up knowing the entire system was false. I had a miraculous reboot!!From there the Lord directed me to " like minded" Christians.
Blessings

The Narrow Path | Home

sovereigngrace · Jan 11, 2022

Rachel20 said:
In terms of time frame - is it 24 hours, 1000 years? What events does it encompass?

It is the actual day that Jesus returns and ushers in eternity. The thousand years started at the first resurrection of Jesus and finishes at the great white judgment of mankind.

sovereigngrace · Jan 11, 2022

Maria Billingsley said:
All these rules are great however many bible schools and seminaries still use the Scofield Reference Bible. This strictly teaches Dispensationalism. This is why it is very difficult to "unlearn". In my case, if anyone cares to know, I begged the Lord for truth. The next day I woke up knowing the entire system was false. I had a miraculous reboot!!From there the Lord directed me to " like minded" Christians.
Blessings

The Narrow Path | Home

I was also brought up Pretrib/Dispie in Northern Ireland but with God's help He showed me the error of the whole system. Everywhere you go today you encounter many who have went down the same road.

sovereigngrace · Jan 11, 2022

Rachel20 said:
In terms of time frame - is it 24 hours, 1000 years? What events does it encompass?

Let me put more meat on the bones.

The day of salvation has been ongoing since the Fall (Isaiah 49:8 and 2 Corinthians 6:2). It is the “acceptable time” or “acceptable year” (Isaiah 49:8, 61:2, Luke 4:19) to be saved. “Today” is an age of grace the only day to respond to His voice (Hebrews 3:7-8, 4:7). There is no other day of hope after this day for salvation.

The second coming brings a close to the day of salvation. Repeated Scripture shows that now is the only day of salvation. After showing us the destruction of this earth, the works that are in it, the heavens, the elements when Jesus comes, and after describing the longsuffering of God in the days of Noah before the destruction of all the wicked, Peter responds to the mockers scoffing at the apparent delay in Christ's return: “the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation” (2 Peter 3:15). See also Romans 2:4. He was reaffirming that salvation is limited to this side of the second coming. A sign of the end is that the Gospel must “be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come" (Matthew 24:14). The second coming brings the curtain down on the great commission. Once the ark door closes it is too late (Matthew 25:10-13, 28:19-20 and Act 3:19-21).

The age to come has no room for "mortals" (Luke 20:34-36, Romans 8:19-23, 1 Corinthians 15:50-55 and Revelation 21-22) or the unregenerate (Psalms 37:9-11, Luke 17:26-30, 1 Corinthians 6:9, I Thessalonians 5:2-3, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10). This would be a strong argument to me that the second coming is “the end.”

John 6:39-44, 54, John 11:21-27, John 12:48, Ephesians 1:10 and Revelation 10:5-7 would seem to suggest that time reaches its fullness at the climactic return of Christ. This would be a strong argument to me that the second coming is “the end.”

Luke 20:34-36, Acts 3:19-21, Romans 8:19-23, 1 Corinthians 15:50-55 ,1 Peter 1:3-5 and Revelation 21:1-5) all show that the end of the bondage of corruption occurs when Jesus comes. This would be a strong argument to me that the second coming is “the end.”

1 Corinthians 13:12, Ephesians 4:13 and Revelation 10:5-7 show that the curtain coming down on the mystery of God, thus confirming we are at the end of time and entering into eternity when all will finally be revealed. This would be a strong argument to me that the second coming is “the end.”

Repeated Scripture locates the replacement of the current heavens and earth with the new heavens and earth and incorruption at the second coming. Job 14:12-14, Isaiah 13:9-11, Isaiah 34:1-4, 8, Isaiah 65:17-21, Isaiah 66:22-24, Joel 2:3, Joel 2:10-11, Malachi 4:1-3, Matthew 24:29-30, Matthew 24:35-44, Mark 13:24-26, Luke 21:25-27, Romans 8:18-23, 1 Corinthians 15:23-24, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-13, Hebrews 1:10-12, Revelation 6:13-17, Revelation 16:15-20, Revelation 19:11-16 and Revelation 20:11-15 shows us that this occurs at the second coming. This is indeed the end of time, the end of corruption, the end of the wicked, the end of sin, the end of death, the end for the devil. It is the beginning of eternity. It is the beginning of perfection. It is the beginning of incorruption. It is the beginning of a new arrangement.

It seems like whatever angle you examine the second coming it appears to be climactic, final and glorious.

Christian Gedge · Jan 11, 2022

Rachel20 said:
In terms of time frame - is it 24 hours, 1000 years? What events does it encompass?

When Jesus was here he actually said the world would come to an end. (Matthew 24:35) he was IMO referring back to Isaiah 2:12. "The Lord almighty has a day in store ..." and that day is what scripture calls the 'Day of the Lord.' It is spoken about by the prophets and always in terms of dread and awe.

Earth shaken out of orbit. (Isaiah 13:10,13)
Heavens dissolve and collapse. (Isaiah 34:4)
Sky's vanish like smoke. (Isaiah 51:6)
Stars fall to the earth. (Revelation 6:13-14)
Earth destroyed with fire. (2 Peter 3:10)

Acts29 · Jan 11, 2022

sovereigngrace said:
The biggest problems I see within Christian circles today is:

· Many have no understanding of the consistent teaching of the Bible. They are not real students of the Word of God. They just believe what they have been taught.
· Many have no safe, solid or consistent interpretive rules to help them understand the Scriptures. They just take a text out of context and make it a pretext.

Ok. So, I am sure we would both agree: biblical hermeneutics are crucial in establishing biblical truth. Holding any position is not about us presenting our own opinions, the opinions of other men or even presenting a list of scriptural references. It is rather about us employing a correct, safe, solid, consistent, and water-tight means of interpretation, (understanding, application and rationale) that accurately reflects the teaching of the inspired text and the meaning the Holy Spirit intended to present.

Here are 16 important rules that I believe should help us navigate the choppy waters of eschatology and other debatable issues, for that matter. I hope you find these fair and agreeable. We basically need to:

1st rule: Have a good overall knowledge of scriptural truth.

This is putting the cart before the horse. Study and believe the scriptures first and then form understanding of scriptural truth. Always be prepared to learn and adjust as you do. To learn anything means you did not know/understand previously. So, adjusting the framework of scriptural truth in necessary from time to time.

sovereigngrace said:
2nd rule: Let the Bible speak for itself. The Word of God is the ultimate and final authority.

Which is it? God never said He was done speaking to His people, including after the Bible was "finished." His word today is just as authoritative.

sovereigngrace said:
3rd rule: Pray for the Holy Spirit’s help in understanding God's truth. Ephesians 1:17: “That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints.”

Yes, but the kingdom of heaven is not a totalitarian dictatorship. We must co-labor alongside Wisdom and Revelation. The Holy Spirit can only reveal based on one's faith, just as Jesus could not heal in Capernaum because of their unbelief. As faith increases, so does Wisdom and Revelation. We have to do our part and stop blaming God for lack of revelation.

sovereigngrace said:
4th rule: Do not add unto the scriptural text.

Does that mean, do not add to the cannon? What about the books of scripture Protestants discarded? What about the books that both Catholics and Protestants discarded? When did God say to put a cap on His word and confine Him to the pages of a single book?

sovereigngrace said:
5th rule: Use Bible terms instead of man-made terms.

The term "Bible" isn't in the Bible. Language is diverse and well able to understand. For example, "Rapture" isn't in the Bible but people know what it means.

sovereigngrace said:
6th rule: Scripture is its own best interpreter; we must therefore support Scripture with Scripture. Explore the full gamut of Scripture on a matter. See what other similar Scripture says.

This sounds right, but isn't. If the first scripture isn't understood properly, then using it to interpret another scripture doesn't work.

sovereigngrace said:
7th rule: Let clear and explicit Scripture interpret obscure and symbolic Scripture, not the other way around.

There are many "clear and explicit" scriptures that people see as symbolic. Such as, the Day of the Lord having nothing to do with the Day of the Lord's coming. So, if "clear and explicit" is in the eye of the beholder, this doesn't work either.

sovereigngrace said:
8th rule: He who alleges must prove! If you claim something as truth – prove it.

"Proof" in the faith of one is nothing to another of lesser faith. So, again this doesn't work.

sovereigngrace said:
9th rule: When studying a given subject, it is always helpful to trace it back to its origin in Scripture. This is called: the law of first mention. This gives us an insight into its roots and development.

This is a silly theory, imo, that has no practical value. Is the first mention of love greater than the last mention?

sovereigngrace said:
10th rule: Note the setting, genre and context of the truth/verse you are studying and establish what the Holy Spirit is actually saying in the overall passage. Context is crucial in biblical interpretation. We need to establish whether it is literal, symbolic or parabolic, and who, what and when it relates to. Is it speaking of the past, present or future? Is it principally speaking to the people receiving it or is it speaking prophetically of an approaching event? Is the sentence a command, a statement of fact or a question? We should always be sensitive to its setting, style of writing, and the respective subject under discussion.

God is eternal. He is the beginning and the end. He speaks in the past tense often about things far in the future. Psalms 22 for example. Context is important for sure.

sovereigngrace said:
11th rule: The New Testament is the fuller revelation. What is concealed in the Old Testament is revealed in the New Testament. We should interpret Scripture progressively. We all know that the Old Testament prophets looked through a glass darkly. They gave what was revealed to them. The fuller revelation came with Christ. What the Old Testament seers received was often veiled and incomplete. The New Testament is the fuller revelation and sheds light on the Old Testament. New revelation builds upon older revelation, never (at any stage) contradicting it. As Vern Poythress explains: “The significance of a type is not fully discernible until the time of fulfillment … In other words, one must compare later Scripture to earlier Scripture to understand everything.” The New Testament takes precedence because it shines light on the Old Testament and reveals things that were a mystery and hidden to the ancient prophets.

I disagree. This is just another way some try to exalt themselves in the church. Understanding Jesus from the OT only is very easy.

sovereigngrace said:
12th rule: Check out the practical outworking of the doctrine in Scripture. See how God’s people lived it out.

Israel almost never lived it out the right way. So, impractical.

sovereigngrace said:
13th rule: What has this to do with Jesus? Jesus said in John 5:39: “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.”

I finally agree with something. The whole purpose of scripture/prophecy is the revelation of Jesus Christ. I wish more would consider this when they try to shoehorn prophecy into history.

sovereigngrace said:
14th rule: In disputed texts, examine the usage of key words/phrase elsewhere in Scripture. This can be done by examining the meaning of these in the original language.

Contradictory scriptures are given for a reason. Generally, they are prophecies that apply at different times. For example, prophecies of the Messiah coming and Lamb contradict the prophecies of Him coming as a Lion. This contradiction should reveal to us He is coming more than once.

sovereigngrace said:
15th rule: Establish the grammatical-historical interpretation of a passage. As Vern Sheridan Poythress ably explains: “grammatical-historical interpretation means an
objective procedure for determining the meaning intended by the human author through an examination of the language of the text and its historical circumstances.”

This is awful. Humans wrote the scripture by the Spirit, not by their private interpretation.

sovereigngrace said:
16th rule: While we are not led by Church tradition or bound by historic views of a given truth, we should carefully consider what the great Bible scholars over the years have gleaned from their studious in-depth findings.

Scholars, by definition, have little faith, and thus little understanding. Scholar is a title the world came up with. In obtaining it, they disqualified themselves from revelation. God choses the foolish to shame the wise, not the other way around. Whenever I need a good laugh, I pick up Matthew Henry's work. It's so awful, it is hilarious.

sovereigngrace · Jan 11, 2022

Acts29 said:
This is putting the cart before the horse. Study and believe the scriptures first and then form understanding of scriptural truth. Always be prepared to learn and adjust as you do. To learn anything means you did not know/understand previously. So, adjusting the framework of scriptural truth in necessary from time to time..

Did you really read what I said? I said we need an "understanding of the consistent teaching of the Bible."

Which is it? God never said He was done speaking to His people, including after the Bible was "finished." His word today is just as authoritative.

While God still speaks by His Spirit, His written Word is completed. Everything must be tested by the Word of God. 2Pe 1:19 tells us: "We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts."

Yes, but the kingdom of heaven is not a totalitarian dictatorship. We must co-labor alongside Wisdom and Revelation. The Holy Spirit can only reveal based on one's faith, just as Jesus could not heal in Capernaum because of their unbelief. As faith increases, so does Wisdom and Revelation. We have to do our part and stop blaming God for lack of revelation.

What are you talking about? Did you read what I said?

Does that mean, do not add to the cannon? What about the books of scripture Protestants discarded? What about the books that both Catholics and Protestants discarded? When did God say to put a cap on His word and confine Him to the pages of a single book?

You seem to have a problem with the inerrancy of Scripture. You are obviously not fighting with me.

Romans 4:3 instructs us, "For what saith the Scripture?"

We build Scripture upon Scripture in order to piece God’s truth together. We embrace the full gamut of Holy Writ. We do not limit our understanding of a future time-line to one chapter or one book. That would be insane.

Jesus said in Matthew 4:4: “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord.”

The term "Bible" isn't in the Bible. Language is diverse and well able to understand. For example, "Rapture" isn't in the Bible but people know what it means.

Who told you that? The word Bible (biblos) is found throughout the New Testament. In fact, there are 16 references - Mat 1:1, Mar 12:26, Luk 3:4, Luk 20:42, Act 1:20, Act 7:42, Php 4:3, Rev 3:5, Rev 17:8 (2), Rev 20:12 (2), Rev 20:15, Rev 22:19 (2).

This sounds right, but isn't. If the first scripture isn't understood properly, then using it to interpret another scripture doesn't work.

You seem to have a big issue with the Word.

There are many "clear and explicit" scriptures that people see as symbolic. Such as, the Day of the Lord having nothing to do with the Day of the Lord's coming. So, if "clear and explicit" is in the eye of the beholder, this doesn't work either.

Speak for yourself!

"Proof" in the faith of one is nothing to another of lesser faith. So, again this doesn't work..

Only those who advance extra-biblical theories would take issue with this simple sensible principle. That is because it would expose their teaching to biblically scrutiny.

This is a silly theory, imo, that has no practical value. Is the first mention of love greater than the last mention?

Not so. It would force you to actually study the Word instead of promoting what you have been taught.

God is eternal. He is the beginning and the end. He speaks in the past tense often about things far in the future. Psalms 22 for example. Context is important for sure.

Again, you are fighting with the idea of having a system of biblical interpretation. Those who follow man tend to have an issue with that.

I disagree. This is just another way some try to exalt themselves in the church. Understanding Jesus from the OT only is very easy.

Not so. I think most sensible Bible students view the New Testament is the fuller revelation and sheds light on the Old Testament and brings it alive. The OT prophets did not have a full revelation of the whole First Advent / Second Advent dynamic. They did not fully grasp the whole enormity of the new covenant. They clearly looked through a glass darkly. We Christians have the benefit of the NT to explain what is difficult or obscure in the OT. Christ has superseded the old covenant arrangement and now fulfills the new covenant arrangement as predicted. The interpretation placed on the Old Testament by Christ and the New Testament writers override all other opinions and interpretations of man.

All must concede, the Old Testament prophets did not have the depth of revelation of the eternal state that we have today, with the completion of the Canon of Scripture.

Israel almost never lived it out the right way. So, impractical.

You are totally negating the practical outworking of biblical truth. That is insane!

I finally agree with something. The whole purpose of scripture/prophecy is the revelation of Jesus Christ. I wish more would consider this when they try to shoehorn prophecy into history.

Practice what you preach!

Contradictory scriptures are given for a reason. Generally, they are prophecies that apply at different times. For example, prophecies of the Messiah coming and Lamb contradict the prophecies of Him coming as a Lion. This contradiction should reveal to us He is coming more than once.

Really? Instead of your constant avoidance: Can you show us Scripture that clearly describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further coming of Christ?

This is awful. Humans wrote the scripture by the Spirit, not by their private interpretation..

Who said otherwise? It seems like you are trying to be argumentative for the sake of it.

Scholars, by definition, have little faith, and thus little understanding. Scholar is a title the world came up with. In obtaining it, they disqualified themselves from revelation. God choses the foolish to shame the wise, not the other way around. Whenever I need a good laugh, I pick up Matthew Henry's work. It's so awful, it is hilarious.

Yea, right! All scholars are wrong apart from those who agree with you.

Summary

You have essentially attacked the very basics of sensible basic elementary biblical interpretation and rendered it to the garbage heap. All this, while failing to present one single passage that supports your eschatological theory.

Acts29 · Jan 11, 2022

sovereigngrace said:
Did you really read what I said? I said we need an "understanding of the consistent teaching of the Bible."

While God still speaks by His Spirit, His written Word is completed. Everything must be tested by the Word of God. 2Pe 1:19 tells us: "We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts."

What are you talking about? Did you read what I said?

You seem to have a problem with the inerrancy of Scripture. You are obviously not fighting with me.

Romans 4:3 instructs us, "For what saith the Scripture?"

We build Scripture upon Scripture in order to piece God’s truth together. We embrace the full gamut of Holy Writ. We do not limit our understanding of a future time-line to one chapter or one book. That would be insane.

Jesus said in Matthew 4:4: “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord.”

Who told you that? The word Bible (biblos) is found throughout the New Testament. In fact, there are 16 references - Mat 1:1, Mar 12:26, Luk 3:4, Luk 20:42, Act 1:20, Act 7:42, Php 4:3, Rev 3:5, Rev 17:8 (2), Rev 20:12 (2), Rev 20:15, Rev 22:19 (2).

You seem to have a big issue with the Word.

Speak for yourself!

Only those who advance extra-biblical theories would take issue with this simple sensible principle. That is because it would expose their teaching to biblically scrutiny.

Not so. It would force you to actually study the Word instead of promoting what you have been taught.

Again, you are fighting with the idea of having a system of biblical interpretation. Those who follow man tend to have an issue with that.

Not so. I think most sensible Bible students view the New Testament is the fuller revelation and sheds light on the Old Testament and brings it alive. The OT prophets did not have a full revelation of the whole First Advent / Second Advent dynamic. They did not fully grasp the whole enormity of the new covenant. They clearly looked through a glass darkly. We Christians have the benefit of the NT to explain what is difficult or obscure in the OT. Christ has superseded the old covenant arrangement and now fulfills the new covenant arrangement as predicted. The interpretation placed on the Old Testament by Christ and the New Testament writers override all other opinions and interpretations of man.

All must concede, the Old Testament prophets did not have the depth of revelation of the eternal state that we have today, with the completion of the Canon of Scripture.

You are totally negating the practical outworking of biblical truth. That is insane!

Practice what you preach!

Really? Instead of your constant avoidance: Can you show us Scripture that clearly describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further coming of Christ?

Who said otherwise? It seems like you are trying to be argumentative for the sake of it.

Yea, right! All scholars are wrong apart from those who agree with you.

Summary

You have essentially attacked the very basics of sensible basic elementary biblical interpretation and rendered it to the garbage heap. All this, while failing to present one single passage that supports your eschatological theory.

Thanks for your reply. The point wasn't to argue with you. Simply to point flaws with "in the box" thinking. Most claim to agree with those points. However, we still have a church divided and going ten thousand different directions. The conclusion. The points do not work.

sovereigngrace · Jan 11, 2022

Acts29 said:
Thanks for your reply. The point wasn't to argue with you. Simply to point flaws with "in the box" thinking. Most claim to agree with those points. However, we still have a church divided and going ten thousand different directions. The conclusion. The points do not work.

So, can you show us Scripture that clearly describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further coming of Christ?

Acts29 · Jan 11, 2022

sovereigngrace said:
So, can you show us Scripture that clearly describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further coming of Christ?

I only used the word rapture as an example of a word not in the Bible, but people still understand what it means. I will give an answer to your questions, however.

- Show scripture that clearly describes the rapture of the church.

It depends a bit on which direction you seek. One, is there a rapture at all? Or two, is there a rapture into heaven? Some agree with the first point, but not the second. It would be helpful to know what specifically you want to know before listing a bunch of scripture that might not be the direction you are asking about. I'll wait for your reply.

- Scriptures for seven year tribulation.

I can't help you there. There isn't a seven-year tribulation. Daniel 9:27 is about Jesus, not some AC. Jesus is God's sacrifice and drink offering that was taken away in the midst of the seven. After which, an abomination of desolation would be built upon the Temple Mount and remain til the end of time. Exactly as it is today.

- Scriptures on an additional coming of Christ.

There are a bunch of scriptures about this.

2 Thess 1-2 - Chapter one, Paul describes the coming of the Lord to give rest to "us" and repay with tribulation those who troubled us. Chapter two, Paul describes people being told they missed the Day of Christ and he tells them the day will not come until after the man of sin. These two chapters are chronological. Christ comes once to give rest to His church, and then comes again after the man of sin.

Matthew 25 - The coming of the Bridegroom. Jesus describes coming for His bride. Five enter into the wedding. Five do not. He comes and leaves. This implies He is coming again at a later time. Compare this to Daniel 12:1. At that time everyone, all written in the book, will be delivered. Whereas in Matthew 25 only half are delivered. Further, Paul said the time would come when all Israel would be saved. Combined with Matt 25, this can only happen if Jesus comes at least twice.

Revelation - If the text can speak for itself instead of being rearranged, we see three comings of Jesus rather easily. One, sixth seal when the wicked hide from the face of Him that sits on the throne, and the wrath of the Lamb. Two, the 7th Trumpet, Revelation 12, Isaiah 9:6. The son is given to deliver the elect, and then is caught back up. Three, Rev 19, Christ on the white horse.

I can list more if needed.

sovereigngrace · Jan 11, 2022

Acts29 said:
Scriptures on an additional coming of Christ.

There are a bunch of scriptures about this.

2 Thess 1-2 - Chapter one, Paul describes the coming of the Lord to give rest to "us" and repay with tribulation those who troubled us. Chapter two, Paul describes people being told they missed the Day of Christ and he tells them the day will not come until after the man of sin. These two chapters are chronological. Christ comes once to give rest to His church, and then comes again after the man of sin.

You haven't given us anything here. No prior rapture, no prolonged tribulation period. Then you present the one-and-only coming of Jesus to support your 3rd coming theory. This is how ad-hoc and unreliable Pretrib is. It is horrible hermeneutics.

2 Thessalonians 1:4-12, 2:1-4

2 Thessalonians 1:4-5: “we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure: Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer: Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you.”

Basically: the wicked are going to get their just reward when Jesus comes. The tribulation that they will face falls immediate upon the wicked when He appears and is totally destructive.

II Thessalonians 1:6-10 records: “Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.”

The Holy Spirit could hardly have made this more water-tight: men either know God or they don't. To know God is eternal life (John 17:3). This was also the case in Noah and Lot's day. Nothing has changed. If humans know Him, they are rescued at His return, if they do not know Him, they are destroyed. Simple! Premils have no problems with this reality when it comes to Noah and Lot's day. They only get awkward and pedantic when it comes to the second coming, because it negates their doctrine. They feel the need to diminish the scale and timing of the destruction in order to populate their alleged future millennial earth.

Paul is here consoling the believers in his day who were experiencing terrible persecution. He assured them that their current distress would be nothing to the future glory awaiting them. He reminded them that there was a day coming when all the wicked would be destroyed and all the righteous would be marvellously transformed and rewarded.

When Jesus appears the righteous and the wicked will be eternally separated. The righteous will inherit the kingdom of God the wicked will be destroyed “from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.” This reading shows us that men must warrant the kingdom of God; it is not given to everyone. Other clear Scripture tells us that there are but few that will experience the eternal kingdom – only those that are “counted worthy.” It is a meritorious thing, just like the catching away of the saints to escape the wrath of God and the reward of the age to come.

This passage recognizes only two types of person – saved and lost – and conclusively confirms that it is only those that know God and obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ that will survive the second coming. The rest are expressly destroyed. This agrees with Christ’s words in Luke 20:34-36 that the kingdom of God to come which Christ ushers in at His appearing is solely for those that are suitably qualified.

The only other time the Greek word in view is used is in Acts 5:41 where the disciples rejoiced in their persecution and the fact “they were counted worthy (or kataxioō) to suffer shame for his name.”

II Thessalonians 2:1-8

II Thessalonians 2:1-8 says, “Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming [Gr. parousia] of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our ‘gathering together’ [Gr. episunagoge– originating from episunago] unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away [Gr. apostasía or apostasy] first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth (or restraineth) that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth (or restraineth) will let, until he be taken ‘out of the way’ [Gr. ek mesos]. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming [Gr. parousia].”

The Pretribulationalist interpretation of this text is another classic example of how they characteristically force a meaning upon the Scriptures that doesn’t actually exist in the sacred text in an attempt to justify their teaching.

First of all, the ESV (and many of the other English translations) puts this more accurate: “Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come" [Gr. enistēmi] (2 Thessalonians 2:1–2).

(1) We should note, “the day of Christ” mentioned here in 2 Thessalonians 2:2 in the KJV should actually be interpreted "the day of the Lord," as is its normal rendering elsewhere in Scripture.
(2) It is clear from this passage that the coming of the Lord and our gathering together unto Him is synonymous with the day of the Lord.
(3) We need to understand why Paul is writing what he is. He is actually cutting across the idea that "the day of the Lord" (which is "the coming of the Lord and our gathering together unto Him) has already happened and demonstrating that there will be a notable and distinct sign before Christ’s final future return.
(4) It’s important to recognize that the focus and topic of this passage is the coming of the Lord and our gathering together unto Him. This is the only future coming of Christ recognized in Scripture. This coming is depicted as both final and climactic.
(5) There is nowhere in this text that says the Holy Spirit will be removed from the earth. That is a Pretrib innovation.
(6) There is also no mention here of “the Church” being “raptured” before Christ’s coming [Gr. parousia].” There is no intervening 7-years tribulation. There is no 3rd coming taught here. That is all imposed upon the text by Pretribbers. The Church is actually depicted in verse 1 as being gathered to Jesus at His “coming [Gr. parousia].” Paul instructs the church at Thessalonica (as representative of the people of God): “you, brethren … by our gathering together unto him” at “the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” These events are shown to happen at the one time on that singular day of the day of the Lord.
(7) The text makes it explicitly clear that “that day (that one singular climactic “day of Lord”) shall not come, except there come a falling away first.” The notable global spread of evil and the expanse of antichrist is shown to come before the day of the Lord. We are looking at a noteworthy and concluding end-time apostasy before Jesus appears. This tells us that there is going to be a great decline within the outward visible professing Christian Church prior to Jesus return. The last generation is going to be in moral free-fall. Everything that is right will be turned on its head; everything that is wrong will be promoted and demanded. It is a day that precedes the one final future climactic coming of Jesus Christ. But it will only occur when the restraint of the Holy Spirit is taken off mankind, as God steps back in the final days before His return, and let’s Satan, his demons and the wicked have their final display.
(8) The phrase “he who now letteth (or restraineth) will let, until he be taken out of the way has nothing to do with the coming of Christ or a future rapture. It refers to an event that actually precedes the coming of the Lord and allows men to do their evil.
(9) The Greek word ek here means “out of, out from or away from.” But “out of, out from or away from” who or what? The godless antichrist generation on this earth before Jesus comes. There is no mention of this world or this earth in the text, as Pretribulationalists would have us imagine. Jesus made that clear in John 17:15, interestingly using the same Greek word: “I pray not that thou shouldest take them out (ek) of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.” II Thessalonians 2:1-8 is simply telling us that the Holy Spirit will withdraw His godly influence from the midst of the wicked before the end. The common grace and spiritual restrain that has curtailed man from sinking into self-destructive oblivion for 2000 years will be taking the restraint away. Governments throughout the world will dance to the tune of antichrist
(10) Antichrist is not destroyed until the Lord’s coming [Gr. parousia].
(11) Pretribulationalists have to create 2 future comings of Jesus in order to justify their beliefs.

Once again “the coming of our Lord” and “the day of the Lord” are shown to refer to the same concluding day of time. Paul is encouraging the Church here to remain strong and steadfast as they await the coming of the day of the Lord. This day, that comes unexpectedly as a thief in the night, will catch the wicked unprepared. He tells the Thessalonians not to be “soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us.” This would suggest that there would be times of trial and tribulation to endure before this great climactic event. What is more, it is an approaching event that the Church was to prepare for, because: “the day of the Lord is at hand (or enistemi meaning impending).”

We should carefully note that this is the time when the Church is gathered unto the Lord. The coming (parousia) of the Lord witnesses the gathering of the saints – dead and alive. The dead in Christ are resurrected; the alive in Christ are caught up. The phrase “gathering together” is taken from the Greek word episunagoge proving that the Church isn't raptured until the one final coming of Christ at the day of the Lord.

This is sudden, climactic and totally destructive. It sees God rescuing His elect and destroying the wicked.

sovereigngrace · Jan 11, 2022

Acts29 said:
Matthew 25 - The coming of the Bridegroom. Jesus describes coming for His bride. Five enter into the wedding. Five do not. He comes and leaves. This implies He is coming again at a later time. Compare this to Daniel 12:1. At that time everyone, all written in the book, will be delivered. Whereas in Matthew 25 only half are delivered. Further, Paul said the time would come when all Israel would be saved. Combined with Matt 25, this can only happen if Jesus comes at least twice.

There is nothing here in Daniel 12 and Matthew 25 that teaches a rapture of the Church followed by a prolonged tribulation followed by a 3rd coming of Christ, and you know it. This is gerrymandering Scripture to fit your viewpoint.

Jesus said in Matthew 25:1-13: “Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. While the bridegroom tarried (the intra-Advent period), they all slumbered and slept. And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom; ‘go ye out’ [Gr. exerchomai] to meet him. Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came [Gr. erchomai]; and they that were ready ‘went in’ [Gr. eiserchomai] with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not. Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.”

Most end-time commentators correctly relate this passage to the coming of Christ. Whilst we cannot find any mention of phrases like “caught up” or “gathering together” in this text there is broad agreement that there is a definite reference to the catching away or rescue of the saints in the direction “go ye out” and the resulting action – they “went in.”

The command “go ye out”is simply one Greek word exerchomai meaning depart, escape, or get out, go. The phrase describing the response of the faithful “went in” is the single Greek word eiserchomai normally translated in the New Testament as to ‘come in’ or ‘to enter’. It can also be interpreted ‘to arise’. In keeping with many second coming passages there is an allusion to those who escape the judgment of God as being those who made themselves “ready.” This is a common theme found in regard to the catching away. It certainly correlates with the consistent portrayal of this impending climactic event. This passage is basically a call for preparedness for Christ’s coming.

The parable of the virgins actually agrees totally with the climactic nature of the coming of Christ. Men are either caught up or caught on. Being ready means rescue, being locked outside means destruction. Interpreting Scripture with Scripture would assist you here. As in Noah’s day, “the door was shut” – the day of opportunity was final closed – and those left outside were totally destroyed.

The solemn side of this parable is the awful plight of the five foolish virgins who had no oil in their lamps. Like the wicked that were left in Noah’s day, the religious will cry when it is too late: “Lord, Lord, open to us.” The only problem is it is too late. The solemn cry will come from the Master, “Verily I say unto you, I know you not” (vv 11-12). This is exactly what Jesus says to the wicked at the final judgment. He isn't saying: ‘welcome to a 7 year tribulation period’ or ‘welcome to the Premil millennium for another chance’. Sadly, they are damned and doomed for all eternity.

This brings us very ably unto Revelation 19:7-10, which Pretribs attempt to attribute to a so-called third coming of Christ. A close look at this chapter will show it to relate to the one and only coming of Christ for His people. It tells us, “Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come [Gr. erchomai], and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are ‘called’ [Gr. kaleō] unto the marriage supper of the Lamb.”

This word “called” as in “called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb” comes from the Greek word kaleō meaning to be invited or bidden. This refers to the catching away of the saints when those on earth are bidden to meet Christ in the air.

This reading again shows correlates with the consistent catching away passages of Christ rescuing those who are ready: “the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.” This is a common thread that ties all these passages together. Those that are “ready are rescues” those that are caught unexpected are destroyed.

Clearly “the marriage of the Lamb” to “his wife” is referring to the final consummation of the relationship between Christ and His bride – the Church – at the second coming. This woman with her innate purity is such a contrast to the harlot in the introductory verses that is judged. The two women couldn’t be more diverse. One is judged the other is blessed. The status of the Lamb’s wife is outlined in the passage and confirms her honoured status; “And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.” The wife is the body of believers down through the years, which have placed their trust and eternity on the blood of Christ, whether in the old or the new economy.

The marriage union is the glorification feat where we are eternally changed in order to enjoy God forever – this is the final act of redemption. This is the marriage of the Lamb. In short, a prepared bride is made ready to unite with a prepared bridegroom. For this climactic event she is arrayed in the righteousness of Christ. This is her worthiness for marriage.

With the people of God rescued all is left is the fate of the wicked. Revelation 19:11-16 reveals a lot of vivid detail about the glorious coming of Christ. In it we see the heavenly army of God accompany Him as He comes to remove every vestige of rebellion. The seer John explains: “And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS” (11-16).

A plain reading of the passage before us reveals that Christ is actually coming back with wrath to execute judgment and destroy all those left behind. He is not going to reward men for their rebellion by leading them unto the glorified new earth. Neither is Christ coming to engage in some ill-fated war against evil for a thousand years – that is not remotely in the text. The King of kings and Lord of lords will not have to fight for victory. He already won that decisively at the cross.

In this narrative He comes as the Lord of glory and removes all evil with the power of His Word. He returns as a man of war to destroy all those left behind. Revelation 19:11 says, “in righteousness he doth judge and make war.” The imagery surrounding Christ in this reading is that of wrath and judgment. The nations have missed their day of opportunity like the wicked in previous judgments, now they must face their deserved recompense of destruction and eternal punishment. Christ comes in glory and power to pour out wrath, and we learn His eyes were as a flame of fire.” Here we see the indignation that Christ has for these enemies of God upon the earth. Those that are left behind of the nations – without exception – are trampled into a lost eternity on this moment of time.

Christ is seen pouring out His wrath without mixture upon the nations as He smites them in His fury with “a sharp sword” that comes “out of his mouth.” What is the result of this act? It shall “smite the nations” that have missed the catching away. The word for “smite” in this text is the Greek word patasso, which means to strike with a weapon or to smite fatally. The nations left behind are totally destroyed. Christ destroys them by the very utterance of His mouth. He then “treadeth (or tramples) the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.”

This chapter shows Babylon’s fall first and then the marriage union takes place after that, whereupon Christ returns to earth to destroy His enemies. This fits in with repeated Scripture that shows such an order. Revelation 19:15 shows Christ coming in wrath after the catching away: “And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.”

Undoubtedly the Church is Christ’s bride, but in Pretrib thinking the Church has already be removed before the tribulation. Pretrib theology has Christ having 2 brides, something that is absurd, unknown to Scripture, and extra-biblical.

sovereigngrace · Jan 11, 2022

Acts29 said:
Revelation - If the text can speak for itself instead of being rearranged, we see three comings of Jesus rather easily. One, sixth seal when the wicked hide from the face of Him that sits on the throne, and the wrath of the Lamb. Two, the 7th Trumpet, Revelation 12, Isaiah 9:6. The son is given to deliver the elect, and then is caught back up. Three, Rev 19, Christ on the white horse.

I can list more if needed.

LOL. There are not 3 future comings here. These are recaps. There is 7 in total. They all finish with the wholesale rescue of God's elect and the total destruction of the wicked. This is the end. Hello! This fits in with every single coming of Christ passage. These prove that there is one final future coming of Christ that ushers in the end. There are no survivors to populate your so call Pretrib trib. There is no 3rd coming. This is a theory that was invented by the Jesuits in the early 1800s. It is extra-biblical.

Spiritual Jew · Jan 11, 2022

Okay, let's allow @Rachel20 to give some input here since my understanding was that this was intended to be a debate between sovereigngrace and Rachel20. I'd like to know which scriptures that Rachel20 bases her beliefs on.

Rachel20 · Jan 11, 2022

Spiritual Jew said:
Okay, let's allow @Rachel20 to give some input here since my understanding was that this was intended to be a debate between sovereigngrace and Rachel20. I'd like to know which scriptures that Rachel20 bases her beliefs on.

Hello @Spiritual Jew, it's open to all. I just suggested a new OP so we wouldn't take the original too off topic.

Rachel20 · Jan 12, 2022

I thought it would be good to start with a brief contrast of the views. I'll want to expand it, but it's getting late.

Where Amillennialists and Premillennialists agree

1. Moral Decline, Increasing Violence. Both believe the world will grow worse over time (unlike Postmillennialists). Jesus taught this in Matthew 24:12-14:

And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

2. Second Advent. Both believe in the second coming of Christ.

Where Amillennialists and Premillennialists disagree

1. Hermeneutics. Premillennialists interpret scripture more literally. Passages are taken in their plain sense except where context indicates otherwise. Amillennialists tend to interpret scripture symbollically (and in deed must to make their view work). It's from this difference in hermeneutical approach that eschatological differences tend to arise. But there are good reasons to view scripture literally:

All of the prophecies concerning the Lord's first coming were fulfilled literally.
Jesus treated OT events as literal events and likened future events to them (as in the days of Noah, as in the days of Lot).
The return from diaspora, prophesied in scripture, was literal (1948)

2. The Church & Rapture. Premillennialists believe the church started around the time of Jesus first advent, typically given as Pentecost (Acts 2). Ammillennialists believe the church existed since Gen 3 and will be around until the Lord's return. For this reason, they reject a rapture.

The primary rapture passage is 1 Thessalonians 4:17: "Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." The Greek harpazo ("caught up") is rapiemur in the Latin Vulgate and it’s perfect passive form is raptus from which we derive "rapture".

Some other places we see harpazo in scripture:

And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing. Acts 8:39

I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth ) such an one caught up to the third heaven. ... How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. 2 Co 12:2-4

And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. Rev 12:5

3. The Tribulation. Premillennialists believe in a 7-year tribulation, ammillennialists do not.

The 7-year tribulation is based on the 70th week of Daniel 9:27: "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

The second half of that week (or 3 1/2 years, 42 months, 1,260 days, or “time, times and half-time”), is referred to as the "Great Tribulation" (Rev. 11:2; 12:6, 14; 13:5). It will be a time of trouble that the world has never seen before or ever will again:

Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it. Jeremiah 30:7

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

4. The Millennial Kingdom. Premillennialists view it as a literal 1000-year period on earth (Rev 20:2,5) following the Lord's return and subsequent Sheep & Goat judgement (Mat 25). They believe it is an earthly kingdom as people will die (Isaiah 65:17-25) after which the eternal kingdom commences (Revelation 21-22). Amillennialists view it as a present eternal kingdom on earth (Rev 21,25) so the 1000 years isn't literal, but symbolic.

Amil or Pretrib - which is biblical?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads