Pre-Trib Falsity

Echolipse

Watcher and Studier
Nov 17, 2012
371
64
Florida
✟15,946.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I have seen many posts where members have said that pre-trib came about a couple hundred years ago or so. Now isn't it true that in Daniel it says that Daniel and the final events (not sure about other books) will not be understood until the last days?

Since pre-trib didn't come about until technically recently (compared to the rest of our timeline) isn't it safe to say that the belief of pre-trib can be a legit theory?

I have yet to get to this part of my studying and it's been bothering me. So I figure i can take yall's responses including all the refences and add them to my study once i get to that point.
 

baseballgal

Active Member
Apr 12, 2013
117
2
✟325.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Matt 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's (Rev 7 - 144,000 AND the multitude) sake those days shall be shortened.
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.(Rev 7's 144.000)
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: (6th seal)
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect (Rev 7 - 144,000 AND the multitude) from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.




Jesus said the gathering of the elect occurs at the sign of the Son of Man, when the great tribulation is cut short for the sake of the elect before the false christ and false prophet arise to perform their false miracles during the time of wrath.


Tribulation is something we have all endured. It is wrath that we are not appointed to suffer. People refer to the wrath as the tribulation which is scripturally inaccurate.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,782
3,421
Non-dispensationalist
✟359,794.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I have seen many posts where members have said that pre-trib came about a couple hundred years ago or so. Now isn't it true that in Daniel it says that Daniel and the final events (not sure about other books) will not be understood until the last days?

Since pre-trib didn't come about until technically recently (compared to the rest of our timeline) isn't it safe to say that the belief of pre-trib can be a legit theory?

So are you saying your beliefs are recent and therefore legit?

Welcome to the forum. :wave:


Doug
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,782
3,421
Non-dispensationalist
✟359,794.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Allow me to suggest to you another rapture view that allows for the possibility of a pre-trib rapture but doesn't mandate it. It is a view I adopted, formerly pre-trib.

The term for the view I have is the "Anytime Rapture View". It is based upon three verses in Luke 21, Luke 21:34-36 which anytime is Jesus's words in verse 34. This Rapture view only requires that a person be ready, at anytime.

Doug
 
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
Many claim that pre-trib was never taught before about 1830, but that has been thoroughly disproved. It was taught sometime between 186 and 188, and again sometime around 373, although some date this one as late as 627. for documentation of this, see Dispensationalism in Ancient Christian Writings
http://www.christianforums.com/t7703208-2/

Some form of a rapture before the Lord's coming in power and glory was also taught in medieval times, during the enlightenment, and in the 1600's. But all this is beside the point.

The scriptures clearly show that the Lord is going to return more than just one more time. They never state this, just as the Old Testament scriptures never said He would come more than just one time. But the Old Testament scriptures contained numerous mututlly exclusive prophecies that showed He was coming more than just once. Some of them presented him as a suffering servant, and others as a mighty conqueror.

Likewise, the New Testament comments about his return contain numerous mutually exclusive details. the most extreme of these is the fact that in the parable of the ten virgins (Matthew 25:1-12) we read that “the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding; and the door was shut. Afterward the other virgins came also, saying, ‘Lord, Lord, open to us!’ But he answered and said, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, I do not know you.’” (Matthew 25:10-12) here we plainly see the righteous taken into the Lord’s presence while the wicked are left outside a door that remains closed in spite of their pleading. But that is not all that we see here. The word “afterward” in this parable indicates a delay between the time when “they that were ready went in with him” and the time when “other virgins came also.” This is significant because it indicates that the “other virgins” were not removed until after the time when “they that were ready went in with him.”

But in the parable of the wheat and the tares (Matthew 13:24-30) we read that at the time of harvest the owner of the field will say, “First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.” (Matthew 13:30) The word “first” in this command clearly indicates that the wicked are gathered before the righteous. Now this order of events is exactly the opposite of the order indicated in Matthew 25. (And yes, the words “afterward” and “first” are in the Greek text of these parables.) The contrast between these orders of events clearly indicates that the two parables are speaking of two different events that take place at different times.

In the explanation of the parable in Matthew 13, (Matthew 13:37-43) Jesus said this meant that “The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. ” (Matthew 13:41-43) He then added that “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet that was cast into the sea and gathered some of every kind, which, when it was full, they drew to shore; and they sat down and gathered the good into vessels, but threw the bad away. So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come forth, separate the wicked from among the just, and cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 13:47-50)

This is again radically different from the scene presented in Matthew 25. In Matthew 13, the wicked are taken from among the righteous. In Matthew 25, the righteous are taken from among the wicked. In Matthew 13, the wicked are removed and cast into the fire. In Matthew 25, the wicked are left where they are, but are given no further chance to repent.

Some claim to have counted as many as fifty such differences between the comments about the Lord's coming for his own and his coming to judge the world.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

PreachingChristCrucified

Lutheran Church Missouri Synod
Mar 6, 2013
1,041
43
✟1,580.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Since pre-trib didn't come about until technically recently (compared to the rest of our timeline) isn't it safe to say that the belief of pre-trib can be a legit theory?

No, if theology is new and hasn't been taught throughout Church history it is safe to say that it is heresy.
 
Upvote 0

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
PreachingChristCrucified said:
No, if theology is new and hasn't been taught throughout Church history it is safe to say that it is heresy.

So, are you saying Pre-tribulation is false.
 
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
Yes, it's a heresy.

The Church has always taught that the resurrection (rapture) occurs at the last day when Christ returns.

This is most absolutely incorrect. In fact, we have a pre-trib document that is older than any post-trib document. And this pre-trib document was the most widely circulated document, other than the scriptures themselves, in the early church.
 
Upvote 0

PreachingChristCrucified

Lutheran Church Missouri Synod
Mar 6, 2013
1,041
43
✟1,580.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
This is most absolutely incorrect.

Wrong....if Pre-trib is true then why do neither of the creeds; Apostles or Nicene testify that it is true.

Throughout Church history Pre-trib was not the accepted belief.

The Church always taught that the resurrection would occur after the second coming on the last day.

This is why you don't see any Catholics teaching a pre-trib rapture....because it's heresy.
 
Last edited:
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
Wrong....if Pre-trib is true then why do neither of the creeds; Apostles or Nicene testify that it is true.

Throughout Church history Pre-trib was not the accepted belief.

The Church always taught that the resurrection would occur after the second coming on the last day.

This is why you don't see any Catholics teaching a pre-trib rapture....because it's heresy.

The very oldest Christian commentary on Bible prophecy of any significant length that has survived to our day is the last twelve chapters of “Against Heresies,” by Irenaeus. (There were older such commentaries, but all of them were either short or have been lost.) This one is thought to have been published between 186 and 188 A.D., and says:

“Those nations however, who did not of themselves raise up their eyes unto heaven, nor returned thanks to their Maker, nor wished to behold the light of truth, but who were like blind mice concealed in the depths of ignorance, the word justly reckons ‘as waste water from a sink, and as the turning-weight of a balance—in fact, as nothing;’ so far useful and serviceable to the just, as stubble conduces towards the growth of the wheat, and its straw, by means of combustion, serves for working gold. And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, ‘There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.’ For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.” (Against Heresies, Book V, chapter 29, paragraph 1)

This work, Against Heresies, was unquesionably the most widely circulated Christian document in ancient times, other than the scriptures themselves.

Again, there is an ancient sermon titled “On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World.” The age and author of this sermon is unknown, but it is known to have been in Church libraries before the year 800. Most of the surviving copies of this sermon say it was written by Ephraem, but one says its author was Isadore of Sevelle. Based on events the sermon said were impending, various scholars have estimated its date from as early as 373 to as late as 627. Paul J. Alexander gave what seems to be the most satisfactory analysis of its date, concluding that the original had to have been written in or near the fourth century, but that copiers had added other material sometime around the seventh century. As scholars do not believe the unknown author could have been the famous Ephraem the Syrian, (who is also known a Ephraem of Nisbis) they call this unknown author Pseudo-Ephraem. This sermon was divided into ten sections, and said in section 2:

“Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? Believe you me, dearest brother, because the coming (advent) of the Lord is nigh, believe you me, because the end of the world is at hand, believe me, because it is the very last time. Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: ‘Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!’ For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.” (“On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World.” Author unknown, but called pseudo-Ephraem, From “The Byzantine Apocalyptic Tradition,” by Paul J. Alexander, ed. By Dorthy deF. Abrahamse, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985, 2.10. Cited there from “Abhandlungen und Predigten aus den zwei letzten Jahrhunderten des kirchlichen Altertums und dem Anfang des Mittelaters,” C. P. Caspari, ed. Briefe, Christiania, 1890, 208-20.)
 
Upvote 0

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Biblewriter said:
This is most absolutely incorrect. In fact, we have a pre-trib document that is older than any post-trib document. And this pre-trib document was the most widely circulated document, other than the scriptures themselves, in the early church.

Older is not always better. If the book of Matthew was found and was five years older, it could just mean that the one older then it was destroyed, and the one found is a falsified one.

I am not stating pre trib or post trib is the choice either.
 
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
Older is not always better. If the book of Matthew was found and was five years older, it could just mean that the one older then it was destroyed, and the one found is a falsified one.

I am not stating pre trib or post trib is the choice either.

And I am not even hinting at the idea that the antiquity of these documents lends them any authority whatsoever. I am just offering the undeniable proof that the claim that the doctrine of a pre-tribulation rapture is a relatively new concept is simply incorrect.

My evidence for the doctrine comes from scripture, not from other documents.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Biblewriter said:
And I am not even hinting at the idea that the antiquity of these documents lends them any authority whatsoever. I am just offering the undeniable proof that the claim that the doctrine of a pre-tribulation rapture is a relatively new concept is simply incorrect.

My evidence for the doctrine comes rm scripture, not from other documents.

Can I ask you some questions regarding pre-trib doctrine?
 
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

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Biblewriter said:
Go agead, I will try to answer you. But I do not have unlimited time cor CF.

Is it really Pretrib, or pre-wrath that you are stating to be Pre?

Are we not already in tribulation? But, not Great Tribulation.
 
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
Is it really Pretrib, or pre-wrath that you are stating to be Pre?

Are we not already in tribulation? But, not Great Tribulation.

The phrase "the tribulation" has been seriously misused and misapplied. When most people say this, they mean the end times generally. But the end times, as we find them in the scriptures, contain three distinct phases. The first one is the phase in which the existing governments fall and the old order arises. There are two reasons we know about this phase. the first is that the world political situation does not presently match up with the situation described in the end time prophecies. Much of it does not, but the rest must also line up before Daniel's seventieth week can begin. this necessarily involves the fall of numerous governments. The second reason we know about this fall is the symbolic visions in the early chapters of the Revelation. No one can read the seal and trumpet judgments and fail to realize that the subject is mass destruction. the interpretation involves only questions like who or what is destroyed, when, and why. This fall of many world governments, leading to widespread anarchy and finally despotic rule, will indeed be a time of tribulation, but the scriptures do not call it that.

The second phase is the first half of Daniel's seventieth week, This phase will be troublesome only for those few "malcontents" that insist on being faithful to God and refuse to worship the Antichrist. This will again be a time of tribulation for anyone who remains faithful to God. But the scriptures also do not call this a time of tribulation.

The third phase is what the scriptures call the great tribulation. This is the time that will be so bad that Jesus said that except the days were shortened, there should no flesh be saved. When I was young, I pondered long over this statement, saying over and over to myself, "I just can't conceive of a war that would kill evrybody -- and everything!" But that was long ago. Today it is common knowledge that an all out nuclear war would leave no survivors on the planet. I am thoroughly convinced that in these words, Jesus was directly referring to the nuclear threat. In fact, He said that unless He stepped in, it would definitely happen. But He also said He would intervene before it went that far.

We are indeed in tribulation today, some of us far more than others. And it seems that the soft Christians of America and Europe might very well feel the lash relatively soon. But the end times, as described in the scriptures, have not yet begun. What is happening now, or could happen soon, is trivia, compared to what is coming.

Many imagine that the scriptures depict this coming time only in broad generalities, but that is an error. The prophecies concerning what is coming are highly detailed and highly specific. And a great deal is explicitly stated in clear, plain language, not hidden in mysterious symbols. Just as an example, Isaiah 10:28-32 lists ten cities that will be conquered in just three days. Yes, the daily progress of the invader is explicitly stated!

Other prophecies tell the faithful how to know when it is time to run, where to go, and even how many days it will be until it is safe to come out of hiding.

All this is explicitly stated in plain language.
 
Last edited:
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

toolmanjantzi

Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 1, 2013
2,505
28
Sundridge, Ontario
✟49,722.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Biblewriter said:
The phrase "the tribulation" has been seriously misused and misapplied. When most people say this, they mean the end times generally.

We are in the last days; are we not?(since Pentacost)

And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: (Acts 2:17 KJV)

But the end times, as we find them in the scriptures, contain three distinct phases. The first one is the phase in which the existing governments fall and the old order arises. There are two reasons we know about this phase. the first is that the world political situation does not presently match up with the situation described in the end time prophecies. Much of it does not, but the rest must also line up before Daniel's seventieth week can begin. this necessarily involves the fall of numerous governments. The second reason we know about this fall is the symbolic visions in the early chapters of the Revelation. No one can read the seal and trumpet judgments and fail to realize that the subject is mass destruction. the interpretation involves only questions like who or what is destroyed, when, and why. This fall of many world governments, leading to widespread anarchy and finally despotic rule, will indeed be a time of tribulation, but the scriptures do not call it that.

The second phase is the first half of Daniel's seventieth week, This phase will be troublesome only for those few "malcontents" that insist on being faithful to God and refuse to worship the Antichrist. This will again be a time of tribulation for anyone who remains faithful to God. But the scriptures also do not call this a time of tribulation.

The third phase is what the scriptures call the great tribulation. This is the time that will be so bad that Jesus said that except the days were shortened, there should no flesh be saved. When I was young, I pondered long over this statement, saying over and over to myself, "I just can't conceive of a war that would kill evrybody -- and everything!" But that was long ago. Today it is common knowledge that an all out nuclear war would leave no survivors on the planet. I am thoroughly convinced that in these words, Jesus was directly referring to the nuclear threat. In fact, He said that unless He stepped in, it would definitely happen. But He also said He would intervene before it went that far.

We are indeed in tribulation today, some of us far more than others. And it seems that the soft Christians of America and Europe might very well feel the lash relatively soon. But the end times, as described in the scriptures, have not yet begun. What is happening now, or could happen soon, is trivia, compared to what is coming.

What do you tell people that are being martyred? Would they not call this tribulation?
 
Upvote 0