10 Top Errors of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture View

Super Kal

the goal is to be more like You, and less like me
Nov 3, 2008
3,695
273
Mankato
✟25,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
the interesting thing I see, happy hearts club, is that he used scripture to back up his claim...
you didn't. you simply used personal opinion... and when we compare personal opinion to scripture... well, scripture is always going to be more credible than personal opinions
 
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works
Dec 17, 2010
8,306
1,735
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟142,779.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married

Let us promote the truth in scriptures filled with love and understanding, and do it in an intelligent manner... and not cling to flagrant, blind, arrogant, biased, baseless interpretations. This is not Biblical at all, it's just a load of garbage in its entirety.

It's hard to 'promote the truth in scriptures' when you don't present any scriptures yourself, and just assert stuff without showing why you assert it?
 
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟7,803.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
the interesting thing I see, happy hearts club, is that he used scripture to back up his claim...
you didn't. you simply used personal opinion... and when we compare personal opinion to scripture... well, scripture is always going to be more credible than personal opinions

Did you notice I placed two posts? One was directed to pre-trib and the scripture for it, while the second larger one was directed to discussing his points. It was a large post and I focused more on pinpointing his method of handling scripture, that was the goal. I can very well make another post going in detail of those passages
 
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟7,803.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
It's hard to 'promote the truth in scriptures' when you don't present any scriptures yourself, and just assert stuff without showing why you assert it?

The whole point of my second post was not about trying to prove I was right, but rather to show the OP how he was handling the scriptures and to express the right way to expound it to others. This is not some gladiators arena where people are watching for who is "more right" and has the most potential to "win". I'd gladly go more in depth if needed, it was simply a large post and I wanted to briefly pinpoint some basic issues.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟7,803.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The central error of the OP is in assuming that the scriptures only speak of one future coming of Christ.

This is the error that the Jewish leaders made when studying the Old Testament prophecies concerning the coming of their Messiah. They concentrated on the prophecies that spoke of Him as the conquering warier, and simply ignored other prophecies that spoke of Him as the suffering sacrifice.

Now that His first coming is past, we realize that the answer to this apparent contradiction was that He was coming more than one more time.

In the same way, many modern scholars concentrate of some of the prophecies of His coming, and fail to realize that these prophecies contain many details that would be contradictions if He were only coming one more time. The OP lists some of these that speak of His future coming to judge the world, and pretends that the other prophecies that speak of him coming to remove his own simply do not exist.

Actually some have cataloged more than fifty apparent contradictions between details of prophecies concerning these future comings. All of these apparent contradictions disappear when we realize that He is still coming more than one more time.

Not even one of the claims he so easily dismisses is even an error, much less a lie. And understanding the simple fact in this post will explain all his objections except those about the seven years.

In regard to the seven years, he should notice that two halves make a whole. Some of the three and a half year periods he mentions are the first half of Daniel's seventieth week, others are the second half.

This post on page 1 gets at the heart of the issue, it is irrelevant if the OP listed pages of "scriptural" evidence. It's a matter of knowing what they mean and knowing how to handle them in relation to what is being discussed -->and I was explaining exactly that, how the OP barely proved to be able to do either.
 
Upvote 0

Super Kal

the goal is to be more like You, and less like me
Nov 3, 2008
3,695
273
Mankato
✟25,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
the problem with biblewriter's perspective, HHC, is that he is asserting his belief from the dispensational view, which is, in it of itself, unbiblical, and where the pre-tribulation rapture comes from
 
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟7,803.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
the problem with biblewriter's perspective, HHC, is that he is asserting his belief from the dispensational view, which is, in it of itself, unbiblical, and where the pre-tribulation rapture comes from

Pre-tribulation is not somehow automatically unbiblical because it has ties with dispensationalism. It's a matter of scripture, not the ideas men introduce. There is nothing "unbiblical" about pre-trib, and everything is unbiblical in regards to post.
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Pre-tribulation is not somehow automatically unbiblical because it has ties with dispensationalism. It's a matter of scripture, not the ideas men introduce. There is nothing "unbiblical" about pre-trib, and everything is unbiblical in regards to post.

They "prove" this by making unprovable assumptions about the meanings of various scriptural terms. And they consider their interpretations of the meanings of a few New Testament scriptures more solid evidence that the explicit statements of a great many Old Testament scriptures.
 
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works
Dec 17, 2010
8,306
1,735
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟142,779.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
They "prove" this by making unprovable assumptions about the meanings of various scriptural terms. And they consider their interpretations of the meanings of a few New Testament scriptures more solid evidence that the explicit statements of a great many Old Testament scriptures.

The OT verses are ripped out of context of the Biblical Theology of the whole bible.

Literal restoration

For example, some people just refuse to see some prophecies as applying to Israel's literal restoration after exile which was then literally fulfilled to prepare the way for Jesus. The Jews returned and built the temple and built the wall and restored their land. Prophecy fulfilled.

New Jerusalem
and Mount Zion
Then, they refuse to see the eschatological hopes of Israel being transformed. That is, instead of a literal land and a literal Jerusalem and a literal Mount Zion, we have Isaiah starting to transform the eschatological hope into a more cosmic 'NEW JERUSALEM' and cosmic 'Mount Zion' that towers over the world. The idea of a New Jerusalem is picked up by the New Testament in Revelation and Hebrews, as is Mount Zion. Isaiah's Mount Zion really plays on the 'cosmic mountain' ideas of ancient Middle East mythology.

The 'cosmic mountain' narrative is truly fulfilled in Christ — with eschatological tension, with a now but not yet sense of fulfilment and yet further hope for that final day. Yes we are already seated in heaven (Eph 2) but no, this is not a physically manifest reality in the New Heaven and New Earth.

The cosmic mountain in Isaiah is both the national security of JERUSALEM writ large across global, cosmic dimensions, that John picks up in Revelation as the NEW JERUSALEM.

Hebrews 12

22 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect,

We have it all now — but not yet.

TEMPLE
And of course there is the temple narrative which is 'upgraded' and spiritualised in the New Testament. I really don't understand why Dispensationalists and other 'Left Behind' types stubbornly cling to their hope of a new Temple, especially when Jesus has done away with the need for a temple.
In Hebrews 6 we see Abraham's promises to Israel fulfilled in JESUS becoming the great High Priest.
It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, 20 where our forerunner, Jesus, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.
...
22 Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant.
23 Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; 24 but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25 Therefore he is able to save completely[c] those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.
26 Such a high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. 27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. 28 For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.

So if Jesus has done this once for all, why exactly do we need a temple? So that some loose imagery from Thessalonian's 'man of lawlessness' can be fulfilled? Pull the other one, it plays jingle bells!

Hebrews 9 blows all that away. The Old Testament physical temple "is an illustration for the present time" — just picture language for the spiritual reality we have today.

11 But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here,[a] he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. 12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining[b] eternal redemption. 13
15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance
(This is why Amils cling to 'Covenant theology')

23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.



The end of the Old Covenant of the law was so traumatic that often passages like the Olivet discourse are mistaken for Judgement Day language. This leads to a confused eschatology. Only reading Joel 2 in context can help fix the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 and Luke to their correct eschatological outlook. The end of the physical temple was of COSMIC significance, as Isaiah shows, as the people of God were moving into permanent LARGER SPIRITUAL REALITIES.


This is why as a Christian I can only recommend that we read the Old Testament through the clarifying lens of the New Testament, and never try to OVERLAY the Old Testament onto the New Testament. The New interprets the Old via the power of the Holy Spirit's God-breathed word through Jesus and the Apostles, not the other way around by some Dispensationalist in 1830!
 
Upvote 0

Super Kal

the goal is to be more like You, and less like me
Nov 3, 2008
3,695
273
Mankato
✟25,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Pre-tribulation is not somehow automatically unbiblical because it has ties with dispensationalism. It's a matter of scripture, not the ideas men introduce. There is nothing "unbiblical" about pre-trib, and everything is unbiblical in regards to post.
seeing how men first introduced pre-trib into doctrine, it then becomes "unbiblical", for Christ tells us when He returns... and He never says before the great tribulation. He always says "after the tribulation" (Matthew 24:29-31, Mark 13:24-27)

the bible tells us again and again that we will face tribulation (Acts 14:22, John 16:33, etc)... never once does it say we escape tribulation, or persecution. In all matters of scripture, it has no foundation... only assertions and false assumptions based in dispensational theology, for you cannot have a pre-trib rapture unless you have a forced dispensational perspective.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
The OT verses are ripped out of context of the Biblical Theology of the whole bible.

Literal restoration

For example, some people just refuse to see some prophecies as applying to Israel's literal restoration after exile which was then literally fulfilled to prepare the way for Jesus. The Jews returned and built the temple and built the wall and restored their land. Prophecy fulfilled.

This is absolutely incorrect.

In the first place. A "literal" fulfillment of the prophecies requires a return of "all Israel, even all of it." This is prophesied in many places, but the most explicit one is the one I quoted here, which is Ezekiel 36:10. Nothing even approximately like this has ever happened.

In the second place, a literal fulfillment requires that this return takes place after the Lord comes "with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire. For by fire and by his sword the Lord will plead with all flesh: and the slain of the Lord shall be many." (Isaiah 66:15-16)

After the Lord has thus gathered "all nations and tongues" and they have come, and seen his glory" (Isaiah 66:18) we read:"And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that escape of them unto the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow, to Tubal, and Javan, to the isles afar off, that have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles. And they shall bring all your brethren for an offering unto the LORD out of all nations upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, and upon swift beasts, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, saith the LORD, as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the LORD. And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith the LORD. For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD. And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." (Isaiah 66:19-24)
Again a "literal" fulfillment requires that the borders and division of the land be according to Ezekiel 47:13-48:30. Nothing even approximately resembling this has ever happened.

New Jerusalem
and Mount Zion
Then, they refuse to see the eschatological hopes of Israel being transformed. That is, instead of a literal land and a literal Jerusalem and a literal Mount Zion, we have Isaiah starting to transform the eschatological hope into a more cosmic 'NEW JERUSALEM' and cosmic 'Mount Zion' that towers over the world. The idea of a New Jerusalem is picked up by the New Testament in Revelation and Hebrews, as is Mount Zion. Isaiah's Mount Zion really plays on the 'cosmic mountain' ideas of ancient Middle East mythology.

The 'cosmic mountain' narrative is truly fulfilled in Christ — with eschatological tension, with a now but not yet sense of fulfilment and yet further hope for that final day. Yes we are already seated in heaven (Eph 2) but no, this is not a physically manifest reality in the New Heaven and New Earth.

The cosmic mountain in Isaiah is both the national security of JERUSALEM writ large across global, cosmic dimensions, that John picks up in Revelation as the NEW JERUSALEM.

Hebrews 12

22 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect,

We have it all now — but not yet.

TEMPLE
And of course there is the temple narrative which is 'upgraded' and spiritualised in the New Testament. I really don't understand why Dispensationalists and other 'Left Behind' types stubbornly cling to their hope of a new Temple, especially when Jesus has done away with the need for a temple.
In Hebrews 6 we see Abraham's promises to Israel fulfilled in JESUS becoming the great High Priest.
It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, 20 where our forerunner, Jesus, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.
...
22 Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant.
23 Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; 24 but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25 Therefore he is able to save completely[c] those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.
26 Such a high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. 27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. 28 For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.

So if Jesus has done this once for all, why exactly do we need a temple? So that some loose imagery from Thessalonian's 'man of lawlessness' can be fulfilled? Pull the other one, it plays jingle bells!

Hebrews 9 blows all that away. The Old Testament physical temple "is an illustration for the present time" — just picture language for the spiritual reality we have today.

11 But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here,[a] he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. 12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining[b] eternal redemption. 13
15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance
(This is why Amils cling to 'Covenant theology')

23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.



The end of the Old Covenant of the law was so traumatic that often passages like the Olivet discourse are mistaken for Judgement Day language. This leads to a confused eschatology. Only reading Joel 2 in context can help fix the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 and Luke to their correct eschatological outlook. The end of the physical temple was of COSMIC significance, as Isaiah shows, as the people of God were moving into permanent LARGER SPIRITUAL REALITIES.


This is why as a Christian I can only recommend that we read the Old Testament through the clarifying lens of the New Testament, and never try to OVERLAY the Old Testament onto the New Testament. The New interprets the Old via the power of the Holy Spirit's God-breathed word through Jesus and the Apostles, not the other way around by some Dispensationalist in 1830!
You claim a literal fulfillment, which most unquestionably has not happened. And then you claim that God either changed his mind and turned all the prophecies over to the church, or that He never intended to do as He had so explicitly promised. Either interpretation of this is unacceptable in Christian doctrine.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

dpbrock

Newbie
Jan 15, 2011
1
0
✟15,111.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Let me see will you! Whose God is in the right, or for that matter whose Bible is right, and which is to come first! Lets see, one Bible says Jesus comes back only one time eh? So true Christians are here through a 7 year time period and suffer Gods wrath. During this time Satan reveals himself as God in the temple proclaiming he is God, and then true Christians are still here when Jesus Christ returns as King of Kings and Lord of Lords, and puts his foot on the Mount of Olives and the Mountain splits in two. Then Jesus sets up his Kingdom on earth to rule and rein. huh? Have I got some blinds on or something?? The other Bible reveals first, Christs' return in the clouds and the the dead in Christ shall rise to meet him, and then those which are alive shall be caught up to meet him in the air. Hmm Then there is a 7 year period in which the time on earth will never be known before to man or thereafter. On earth there will be no believers at this time, but yet their will be multitudes who will believe in Jesus as their Lord and personal savior. Next, the end of the great Tribulation period with all the saints of God called up hither to be with God. Then the defeat of the devil and all those who chose to stand by him. Then Jesus Christ who is the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords will come in all his Glory with his saints to rule and to rein. Ahhh lets see, is not God capable of delivering his saints from his wrath. Shall we disregard Christ Jesus coming again in the clouds, and the dead in Christ rising to meet him, and those which remain are caught into the air to meet him? Shall we disregard Gods promise to keep us from the time of great tribulation? So which Bible tells us the truth? If you are using the KJV, keep on still! To use otherwise, what God does that Bible espouse? Or if you use the correct Bible but your interpretation of what the Word of God says is your own, then it is yours and not Gods. Now there is one scripture, and two men. They both claim that God revealed to them the true meaning of that scripture. Yet, to speak to them both, you suddenly have opposite meanings. Simply, one is of God and one is not, one is false, and one is true, for God is not a God of confusion. Be careful then, for you will have to stand before God alone, one day and to face his judgement. David +
 
Upvote 0

B1inHim

LOVE one another
Nov 27, 2004
2,697
80
67
Cucamonga, Ca
✟10,781.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
In Relationship
TWO SWINGS
ONE here;
Rev. 14:14-20 (KJV)
And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle. [15] And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe. [16] And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.

Another Here
[17] And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle. [18] And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe. [19] And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God. [20] And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.

The first swing begins from a cloud which is documented as that this harvest ends among the clouds right here;
1 Thes. 4:16-17 (KJV)
For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: [17] Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

There is absolutely NO biblical explanation for this that happens DURING the GT in that HOW they got here, but here they are non-the-less;
Rev. 7:9-14 (KJV)
After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; [10] And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb. [11] And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God, [12] Saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen. [13] And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they? [14] And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Therefore it stands to simple reasoning that we are part of this Great Multitude.

And that this is the end result of the first swing.
A harpazo, defined and singular.

This is the end result of the second swing which can clearly be defined as the "Second Coming" right here;

Rev. 14:[17] And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle. [18] And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe. [19] And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God. [20] And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.

Which is where we can equate this as being part of this "Second Coming" here;
Rev. 19:11-16 (KJV)
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. [12] 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. [13] And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. [14] And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. [15] 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. [16] And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

This of which is clearly defined in the OT here;
Zech. 14:1-4 (KJV)
Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee. [2] For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. [3] Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
[4] And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.


The "second coming" defined and singular.

Here is the Word without a formula, just plain, simple understanding, unadulterated by the theology of men.

There MAY be more than one "rapture", one in Rev. 7 for those in the GT and another in Rev. 20 for those who are the faithful during the entire GT.

But we cannot discount the Great Multitude as just happening without applying some sort of means of how they got to where they are.

There is NO mention of "Death" as a reason for the Great Multitude getting to where they are.

And Great Multitude is not defined as being part of them who were martyred in Rev. 6 at the 5th seal, only that the "dress code" is "white robes".

Albeit, those in Rev. 6 can most definitely be part of those in Rev. 7 as well as being part of those in Rev. 20.

However, ALL of those in Revelation 7 cannot ALL be part of Rev.6 nor Rev 20 unless they meet the PRE-REQUISITE of martyredome.

No where, in any situation can a person get a position without meeting the qualifying PRE-REQUISITE.

Unless we use a formula.

Are all Apostles, are all Pastors... no.
Each part of the Body performs it's qualified position, that the whole Body can grow and become fully mature, in LOVE.
This applies to all of the operations of God in serving Him.
Be it an angel or a man, now or later.
The same yesterday, today and forever, I change not.


AND, NO... the harvest in Rev 14:14-16 is NOT talking about the people that are being warned by the angel in the previous verse'. The warnings are for everybody to hear and does not imply that they are the ONLY ones who are being harvested in the next few verses.

That is an assumption.

Unless we use a formula.

Just plain and simple.

By His Love,
Brother Jerry
 
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works
Dec 17, 2010
8,306
1,735
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟142,779.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married

This is absolutely incorrect.

In the first place. A "literal" fulfillment of the prophecies requires a return of "all Israel, even all of it." This is prophesied in many places, but the most explicit one is the one I quoted here, which is Ezekiel 36:10. Nothing even approximately like this has ever happened.

In the second place, a literal fulfillment requires that this return takes place after the Lord comes "with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire. For by fire and by his sword the Lord will plead with all flesh: and the slain of the Lord shall be many." (Isaiah 66:15-16)

After the Lord has thus gathered "all nations and tongues" and they have come, and seen his glory" (Isaiah 66:18) we read:"And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that escape of them unto the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow, to Tubal, and Javan, to the isles afar off, that have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles. And they shall bring all your brethren for an offering unto the LORD out of all nations upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, and upon swift beasts, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, saith the LORD, as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the LORD. And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith the LORD. For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD. And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." (Isaiah 66:19-24)
Again a "literal" fulfillment requires that the borders and division of the land be according to Ezekiel 47:13-48:30. Nothing even approximately resembling this has ever happened.



You claim a literal fulfillment, which most unquestionably has not happened. And then you claim that God either changed his mind and turned all the prophecies oover to the church, or that He never intended to do as He had so explicitly promised. Either interpretation of this is unacceptable in Christian doctrine.


All out of context my friend. You're mixing and matching to suit your Dispensational purposes and not doing the Biblical Theology work to place each passage in the right context, in the right part of the story. Prophecies about the Day of the Lord are being mixed in with the restoration of literal Israel. That won't do. Some of the "Day of the Lord" language you quote looks forward to Judgement Day when ALL Israel — as Paul uses the word with both Jew and Gentile believers in the church — will stand triumphant before God on the day of our ultimate salvation in the New Heavens and New Earth.

It's time to get back to Biblical theology 101 and start placing things in their context, and doing the language and cultural work required of each text!

For example, your Ezekiel 36 reference follows chapter 33 which explicitly details that Israel can ONLY return to the land if they have been obedient. Now in God's grace He did restore Israel to the land for the time of the Messiah, but then were they obedient? What do you think Jesus weeping over Jerusalem was all about? That Covenant is over, it is fulfilled in the NEW Kingdom of God, full of both Jewish and Gentile believers. See Romans and Hebrews and Galations (and even Revelation — and the entire NT!) for more.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟7,803.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
seeing how men first introduced pre-trib into doctrine, it then becomes "unbiblical", for Christ tells us when He returns... and He never says before the great tribulation. He always says "after the tribulation" (Matthew 24:29-31, Mark 13:24-27)

Jesus establishes His return to Earth will be after the great tribulation. This is not evidence against the rapture event, and this is what post-tribbers cannot seem to process.

the bible tells us again and again that we will face tribulation (Acts 14:22, John 16:33, etc)... never once does it say we escape tribulation, or persecution.

Except that when the Bible speaks of tribulation, it is never in the context of what is formally known as the great tribulation of revelations (except when it is mentionned in revelations). Meaning the evidence you (and most post-tribbers) propose for us being here for the duration of the "tribulation period" is not evidence at all. It was a reference to the life of every believer; past, present, and future, and the tribulation that he/she would experience throughout that time. In other words, it becomes evidence only after being taken out of context.

In all matters of scripture, it has no foundation... only assertions and false assumptions based in dispensational theology,

I am sorry but this is nothing but a lie, nothing but assertions and false assumptions? I think not

for you cannot have a pre-trib rapture unless you have a forced dispensational perspective.

Absolutely not.

Like I have been saying, post-trib really so incredibly non-biblical for a very big reason, how it completely contradicts the basic doctrine of salvation.

I will simply repost the first post I put in this thread...

[ God’s Wrath Against Sinful Humanity ] The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness," Romans 1:18

"But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger." Romans 2:7-9

"Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient." Ephesians 5:6

"Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming" Colossians 3:5-6

This is a fundamental, Biblical truth. Paul understood that the wrath of God is something that is inescapably due, it cannot be prevented from coming, but that it is absolutely reserved for the wicked and unrighteous. Scripture is crystal clear in revealing the end result of salvation in Christ, that it not only reconciles us to God but also exempts us from all wrath.

"Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him!" Romans 5:8-10

"For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ." 1 thessalonians 5:9

"for they themselves report what kind of reception you gave us. They tell how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead—Jesus, who rescues us from the coming wrath." 1 Thessalonians1:9-10

Scripture itself reveals post-trib as the only true lie, as it tells us God's chosen elect will be subjected to His awesome wrath which scripture identifies incontrovertibly as being reserved for the "sons of disobedience", i.e. the sinful and unrepentant. In regards to this basic theological truth, post-trib theory is in direct contradiction.

Not only that, but there are passages that not only point to pre-trib rapture, but also cause post-trib rapture to be compeltely untenable.

"Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. 12 His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had[k] a name written that no one knew except Himself. 13 He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean,[l] followed Him on white horses. 15 Now out of His mouth goes a sharp[m] sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron. He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16 And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written:

KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS."

Revelations 19:13-15

This is the Second Advent that does take place after the tribulation, Christ arrives to both defeat His enemies and realise the Kingdom of God on Earth. But note that He is followed by an army of individuals who are clothed in garments that are "white and clean". Just the word "clean" automatically identifies these people as His church, these are not angelic hosts.


"Reaping the Earth’s Harvest


14 Then I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and on the cloud sat One like the Son of Man, having on His head a golden crown, and in His hand a sharp sickle. 15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to Him who sat on the cloud, “Thrust in Your sickle and reap, for the time has come for You[i] to reap, for the harvest of the earth is ripe.” 16 So He who sat on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped.
Reaping the Grapes of Wrath


17 Then another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.
18 And another angel came out from the altar, who had power over fire, and he cried with a loud cry to him who had the sharp sickle, saying, “Thrust in your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, for her grapes are fully ripe.” 19 So the angel thrust his sickle into the earth and gathered the vine of the earth, and threw it into the great winepress of the wrath of God. 20 And the winepress was trampled outside the city, and blood came out of the winepress, up to the horses’ bridles, for one thousand six hundred furlongs. "

Revelations 14:14-20

The grapevine is only gathered and thrown into the winepress of God's wrath once the Earth has been "reaped" by Christ. This is not any sort of "entry" or "arrival", we are told that Christ is standing on a cloud while He reaps those who are "His". This is confirmed by what we read in Thessalonians...

"For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words."

"Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left. "(Matthew 24)

“At that time Michael shall stand up,
The great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people;
And there shall be a time of trouble,
Such as never was since there was a nation,
Even to that time.
And at that time your people shall be delivered,
Every one who is found written in the book. "(Daniel 12)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

eclipsenow

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works
Dec 17, 2010
8,306
1,735
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟142,779.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Like I have been saying, post-trib really so incredibly non-biblical for a very big reason, how it completely contradicts the basic doctrine of salvation.

I'm so glad you pointed that out for us. I was really concerned that we might have to go through some kind of tribulation or suffering for being Christians.

So can I rewrite some of the Sermon on the Mount?

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the (kingdom of heaven) immediate rescue and rapture up to heaven,
“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward (in heaven) right now when you get raptured, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you and they got raptured as well, didn’t they?

I’m so glad that you’ve shown we don’t have to go through tribulation, as that 20th Century business was a nasty affair. Except they didn’t get raptured but got slaughtered for being Christian… oh wait...
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
All out of context my friend. You're mixing and matching to suit your Dispensational purposes and not doing the Biblical Theology work to place each passage in the right context, in the right part of the story. Prophecies about the Day of the Lord are being mixed in with the restoration of literal Israel. That won't do. Some of the "Day of the Lord" language you quote looks forward to Judgement Day when ALL Israel — as Paul uses the word with both Jew and Gentile believers in the church — will stand triumphant before God on the day of our ultimate salvation in the New Heavens and New Earth.

But that is not what the text says. it explicitly says that at that time all Israel will be brought back to he land.

It's time to get back to Biblical theology 101 and start placing things in their context, and doing the language and cultural work required of each text!
To use your analogy, you missed the most important point on page 1 of the course notes for day 1 of Biblical Studies 101. "If a proposed interpretation of the meaning of any passage of scripture contradicts the explicit statement of any other passage of scripture, the proposed interpretation is incorrect."

For example, your Ezekiel 36 reference follows chapter 33 which explicitly details that Israel can ONLY return to the land if they have been obedient.
Actually, Ezekiel 33 say no such thing. The first part of that chapter is discussing individuals, not the nation. The last portion says that they will be cast out because of their wickedness, which actually happened, as we all know. But a prerequisite for a national return is never even mentioned in that chapter.

The condition for a national return was repentance, not obedience. And the scriptures very explicitly say that in the end times God will bring them through suffering so great that it will finally bring them to that requisite repentance.

Now in God's grace He did restore Israel to the land for the time of the Messiah, but then were they obedient? What do you think Jesus weeping over Jerusalem was all about? That Covenant is over, it is fulfilled in the NEW Kingdom of God, full of both Jewish and Gentile believers. See Romans and Hebrews and Galations (and even Revelation — and the entire NT!) for more.
But he scriptures very explicitly say that they will eventually repent and become obedient.
 
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works
Dec 17, 2010
8,306
1,735
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟142,779.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
But that is not what the text says. it explicitly says that at that time all Israel will be brought back to he land.

To use your analogy, you missed the most important point on page 1 of the course notes for day 1 of Biblical Studies 101. "If a proposed interpretation of the meaning of any passage of scripture contradicts the explicit statement of any other passage of scripture, the proposed interpretation is incorrect."

Actually, Ezekiel 33 say no such thing. The first part of that chapter is discussing individuals, not the nation. The last portion says that they will be cast out because of their wickedness, which actually happened, as we all know. But a prerequisite for a national return is never even mentioned in that chapter.

The condition for a national return was repentance, not obedience. And the scriptures very explicitly say that in the end times God will bring them through suffering so great that it will finally bring them to that requisite repentance.

But he scriptures very explicitly say that they will eventually repent and become obedient.

OK, I'll have to drop this here as we're not discussing specific enough verses, just making huge generalisations, and I don't have time right now to do the intensive OT study I need to if I am going to properly represent what the scholars I know actually say. I don't want to sell their arguments short — especially as they have won me over. I'll try and work though some of the OT verses you left me in another thread, maybe in my quiet times, but my career change is at hand! Alas! Maybe the Lord will return in 3 seconds and sort it all out for us — but that will be the sheep separated from the goats in judgement day, us saved, sin, Satan, and death defeated, and us all living in a New Heavens and New Earth. Then I will say "I told you so" in the most sanctified way I can, and you'll laugh along with me in the most sanctified way you can. And we'll even get along! Won't that be something! ;)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟7,803.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
your problem, HHC, is you're still convinced that God's Wrath is persecution

You must be confused or just not following, or both. God's wrath is going to fall onto humanity during the GT, God's wrath is not persecution at all, I never implied that anywhere even remotely. There is absolutely no problem on my side. Moreover, if one hopes to understand the basic theology of Biblical doctrine properly, one must understand what the wrath of God entails and who it is designated to fall on. It doesn't require much more than reading a few simple passages and understanding them. Post-tribbers need to wake up in regards to this basic, obvious truth...honestly

the bible tells us again and again that we will face tribulation (Acts 14:22, John 16:33, etc)... never once does it say we escape tribulation, or persecution.

The error I was pointing out is how the verses you mentionned are taken out of context in order to fit as evidence for "post-trib". People do not understand the difference between the tribulations any one saint (past, present, and future) will experience in life (of which one is persecution) and the Great Tribulation which is specifically God's Wrath. It is a faulty understanding of scripture that causes these two concepts to be mixed up. Acts 14:22, John 16:33, and all similar verses reveal the nature of the life of a believer, they are not references to the GT i.e. the outpouring of God's wrath.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0