Revelation in chart form

[Truth7t7]

T

Thank you for informing us of your own research. In my opinion, the false rapture teaching was introduced and promoted by Zionists/Freemasons in order to deceive the church. The Lotus Club to which you referenced was/is composed of Freemasons. On pgs. 14-15 of "A Brief History of the Lotus Club, Cornell University Library, we find this quote:
There were now many distinguished names on
the roll of membership. The parlors of the modest
house on Irving Place on the occasions of enter-
tainments were crowded with men whose presence
would lend distinction to any company. The club
house had become the common meeting ground in
the city for journalists, actors, artists and authors.
Distinguished foreigners and non-resident Ameri-
cans were welcomed to its privileges and courte-
sies. There was a prevalent Freemasonry and
camaraderie which made every one who entered
its hospitable doors at home ; and with all the rol-
licking humor and banter, there were seldom any
breaches of the rules of good fellowship and good
manners.
Full text of "A brief history of the Lotos Club"

After Scofield was introduced to the club, he traveled to Europe where he met with Henry Frowde, publisher of the Oxford University Press who later published the Scofield Bible. Where did Scofield who was not a rich man get his money to travel to Europe? His connections in the Lotus Club? Frowde was a member of the Exclusive Brethren which Scofield founded after his departure from the Plymouth (Open) Brethren.
The Scofield Bible--The Book That Made Zionists of America’s Evangelical Christians - WRMEA

I agree my research finds the same.

Scofield was surrounded by Zionist, just as the movement is surrounded by them today.

 

[Oldmantook]

Marvin said: Giving consideration to the length of time between his life and mine, the possible and even likely prejudice of those reporting on him at the time, and the unreliability of the internet as our main source at this time - I am quite capable and have done so.
There it all is. You seem to see exactly what you want to see whether it is in this thread or in the scriptures themselves as you showed in the Revelation 16 fiasco.

If you read carefully, I have quoted primary source information and multiple citations from different sources which all confirm the the same thing regarding Scofield's shenanigans. You manufacture your own reasons to deny the historical facts to suit your imagination - which is your prerogative.

Where did I write that their position was out of the norm? I simply claimed that Scofield's character warranted further scrutiny based on the facts I presented and thus his interpretation of the "rapture" was suspect.
Like I said - their position was out of the norm. Thank you for the confirmation.

If I understand you correctly, yes their rapture position was out of the norm at the time it was introduced so we do not disagree on this item.

I wrote about taking to task someone who accused me of something I never said. I did not comment on taking Darby and Schofield to task. Neither did I say anything about taking to task those who are critical of them.

Again - you see what you want to see and not what I actually say. Either that or you are being purposefully obtuse (i.e. lying).

You specifically wrote requesting me to provide evidence regarding my claims of Scofield so that you could "take them to task." In plain English, this entails that you would "take to task" the evidence I would provide and prove them to be false.

I do not "follow" or "adhere" to the teachings of Darby and Schofield. We just hold some of the same positions. There is a world of difference.

We don't base our theology on the character of other theologians. The whole idea is ridiculous. We base our theology on what we find in the scriptures. If, in between sins, a scoundrel happened to find the same things as we have found it doesn't invalidate our findings.

I do not reject the findings of Schofield simply because he appears to have been a sinner. If I did that I would have to reject the findings of most theologians including myself (as ridiculous as that would be).

And just what are "some of the same positions?" The pretrib-rapture perhaps? Feel free to be more explicit Marvin. Bad character leads to suspicion of Scofield's teaching which thus demands further scrutiny. We are all sinners, but your argument is utterly ridiculous in that not all Christians continue to engage in habitual sin and develop an ungodly reputation as Scofield did after his conversion.

I don't discount what Jesus said in Revelation. Rather I discount your insistence that He said things He did not say.

Jesus stated he's coming as a thief...then Armageddon. I ask you, do you prefer He would have said that he's coming as a thief...then the pretrib rapture??

Jesus stated that He is coming like a thief some 2000 year ago now.

There is not sequence and proximity of time betwden what He said 2000 years ago and the battle of Armageddon which will take place in the end times.

Again - you see what you want to see. In this case what you see is clearly wrong.

Yes Jesus did say it some 2,000 years ago. He predicted it 2,000 years ago and its relevance is still applicable today is it not? He warned he's coming as a thief....THEN Armageddon. NOT, then pretrib rapture. If He comes as a thief at the pretrib rapture, how can He come as a thief AGAIN at Armageddon?

Nor did I say that it did.

Please show me where I said that and I will recant it or defend it. Of course, we know by now that it is only you saying that I have said certain things and not actual words written by me.

Please stop lying about what I have said.

If you didn't say it or mean it, what exactly did you mean Marvin? Please inform me accordingly; no need for further obfuscation.

You have indeed purposefully maligned, vilified and defamed Schofield.

And this - in the mistaken assumption that his being of less than stellar character makes his theological findings invalid and, by extension. the findings of anyone who happens to have found the same things he did in the scriptures are also invalid.

All of us have sinned since becoming Christians. Some have sinned more than others. That does not make the studies we accomplished in our times of holy living invalid.

The whole idea is even more ridiculous than your illogical assumptions concerning the Revelation 16 passage.

Yes all of us has sinned and Scofield did sin a lot - to which he did not repent of. No repentance = no forgiveness. The NT repeatedly warns against false teachers who infiltrate the the church and warns that we can recognize them by the bad fruit. You choose to ignore or minimize that warning concerning Scofield's bad fruit. It's your choice.

("Now as to the times and the epochs, brethren, you have no need of anything to be written to you. For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night. While they are saying, “Peace and safety!” then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape." 1 Thessalonians 5:1-3)

You really see those people on earth in Revelation 16 as saying "peace and safety"? I see them suffering everything but those things.

I see them suffering loathsome and malignant sores, living with a sea and rivers and springs which had become blood and in which everything was dead, a sun which scorches men as with fire, gnawing their tongues in pain, nations being drawn to battle by demons, and the greatest earthquakes in the history of the earth - not "peace and safety" as the Lord says will be taking place when He comes like a thief in the night.

I see peace and safety at the time of the (pre-wrath of God) rapture of the church just as the scriptures (and Darby and Schofield and Dallas Seminary and I) teach.

What Bible are you reading anyway? Or is it just that you are reading the Word of God with preconceived notions through anti-Darby/Schofield tinted glasses?

Good bye for sure on this thread now. You have misrepresented what I have said once too often for my taste - besides that your theological train has most definitely jumped the track.

Don't bother replying to me on any thread from now on Marvin as unfortunately I find your responses to be less than open and adequate. It's not productive for me to reply to you (probably the same for you too). I believe what I've written about Scofield's character and bad reputation is historical fact. If you disagree, feel free to historically show me otherwise. The only person responsible for bringing shame upon Scofield is Scofield himself. The Apostle Paul once referred to himself as the chief of sinners, however he repented and he went on to live a sanctified life. If you can find any reference to verify that Scofield repented of lying and having a doctorate, not being a forgerer and thief, etc. - then please feel free to inform me.

I read though various Bible translations including parsing the Greek so I don't rely on the English alone. Correct me if I'm wrong but in the past, I've challenged you on the Greek which may affect interpretation but you've declined to engage using the original Greek.

Your reference to "peace and safety" demonstrates your unfamiliarity with the Greek in 1 Thess 5:3
Whenhotan they are sayinglegōsin, “Peaceeirēnē andkai securityasphaleia,” it is thentote that suddenaiphnidios destructionolethros will comeephistēmi upon themautos, likehōsper ·ho labor painsōdin uponho a woman with childen, andkai they will notou mē escapeekpheugō

The Greek word legōsin translated as "saying" is a present, active, subjunctive verb. If you are unaware, the subjunctive mood in the Greek indicates doubt, probability or possibility. The subjunctive mood presents the action or the event as something wanted or expected. The action is not considered as an objective fact by the speaker. In other words the subjunctive indicates what the subject of the verb wants, can, may, must do or is expecting to do.
Therefore in 1 Thess 5:3, the people are in want of, or are crying out for peace and safety - not that they are already in a state of peace and safety as you mistakenly presume. If in fact, they were in a state of peace and safety, this verb would have been rendered in the indicative mood which is a statement of fact or occurrence. As I have advised you several times before in other threads, examine the Greek before forming your doctrine.

 

[Truth7t7]

Oldmantook said: ↑

Are you not capable of verifying whether or not my claims of Scofield's integrity or lack thereof, are accurate or not?
Marvin said: Giving consideration to the length of time between his life and mine, the possible and even likely prejudice of those reporting on him at the time, and the unreliability of the internet as our main source at this time - I am quite capable and have done so.
There it all is. You seem to see exactly what you want to see whether it is in this thread or in the scriptures themselves as you showed in the Revelation 16 fiasco.

Oldmantook said: ↑

Where did I write that their position was out of the norm? I simply claimed that Scofield's character warranted further scrutiny based on the facts I presented and thus his interpretation of the "rapture" was suspect.
Like I said - their position was out of the norm. Thank you for the confirmation.

I wrote about taking to task someone who accused me of something I never said. I did not comment on taking Darby and Schofield to task. Neither did I say anything about taking to task those who are critical of them.

Again - you see what you want to see and not what I actually say. Either that or you are being purposefully obtuse (i.e. lying).

I do not "follow" or "adhere" to the teachings of Darby and Schofield. We just hold some of the same positions. There is a world of difference.

We don't base our theology on the character of other theologians. The whole idea is ridiculous. We base our theology on what we find in the scriptures. If, in between sins, a scoundrel happened to find the same things as we have found it doesn't invalidate our findings.

I do not reject the findings of Schofield simply because he appears to have been a sinner. If I did that I would have to reject the findings of most theologians including myself (as ridiculous as that would be).

I don't discount what Jesus said in Revelation. Rather I discount your insistence that He said things He did not say.

I said nothing about taking your references to task. I said that I would take those who claim I said something I did not say to task. It now appears that you are the only one misrepresenting what I have said.

Jesus stated that He is coming like a thief some 2000 year ago now.

There is not sequence and proximity of time betwden what He said 2000 years ago and the battle of Armageddon which will take place in the end times.

Again - you see what you want to see. In this case what you see is clearly wrong.

Nor did I say that it did.

Please show me where I said that and I will recant it or defend it. Of course, we know by now that it is only you saying that I have said certain things and not actual words written by me.

Please stop lying about what I have said.

You seem to be mistaken about my use of the verb form of the word slander.

It means to malign, vilify, or defame a person.

It does not necessarily imply that your charges are false.

1. Malign suggests specific and often subtle misrepresentation but may not always imply deliberate lying.

2. Vilify implies attempting to destroy a reputation by open and direct abuse.

3. Defame stresses injury to one's reputation.

You have indeed purposefully maligned, vilified and defamed Schofield.

And this - in the mistaken assumption that his being of less than stellar character makes his theological findings invalid and, by extension. the findings of anyone who happens to have found the same things he did in the scriptures are also invalid.

All of us have sinned since becoming Christians. Some have sinned more than others. That does not make the studies we accomplished in our times of holy living invalid.

The whole idea is even more ridiculous than your illogical assumptions concerning the Revelation 16 passage.

P.S. Concerning what the Lord said in that passage and elsewhere:

("Now as to the times and the epochs, brethren, you have no need of anything to be written to you. For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night. While they are saying, “Peace and safety!” then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape." 1 Thessalonians 5:1-3)

You really see those people on earth in Revelation 16 as saying "peace and safety"? I see them suffering everything but those things.

I see them suffering loathsome and malignant sores, living with a sea and rivers and springs which had become blood and in which everything was dead, a sun which scorches men as with fire, gnawing their tongues in pain, nations being drawn to battle by demons, and the greatest earthquakes in the history of the earth - not "peace and safety" as the Lord says will be taking place when He comes like a thief in the night.

I see peace and safety at the time of the (pre-wrath of God) rapture of the church just as the scriptures (and Darby and Schofield and Dallas Seminary and I) teach.

What Bible are you reading anyway? Or is it just that you are reading the Word of God with preconceived notions through anti-Darby/Schofield tinted glasses?

Good bye for sure on this thread now. You have misrepresented what I have said once too often for my taste - besides that your theological train has most definitely jumped the track.

Scofield was the foundation of "Dallas Theological" as Lewis S. Chafer was his pupil, bringing forth the teachings of Scofield in this seminary in Texas.

Scofield in his reference notes of 1909 is the greatest impetus in planting the dispensational views "In The World"!

Marv you try to push Scofield off as a nobody in your foundational system of belief, Scofield is the dirt and your belief is the tree, no the pre-trib rapture isn't found in the scripture, but you can find this in the notes of Scofield.

Does a Christian have a duty to research a teaching and belief, and it's foundation 100% yes.

My research finds Scofield abandoned his family, Scofield died while being married to Hettie Van Wart while his wife Leotine and two daughters lived, Adultery!
His body is buried next to Hettie Van Wart at Flushing Cemetery Flushing, Queens County, New York, US

It also finds he deceived his Dallas church on his marriage, while actively pursuing Hettie in his Sunday school class 17 years older than her, just to mention a few.

Scofield is a "Corrupt Tree" and his teachings in dispensationalism are "Corrupt Fruit".

Matthew 7:18
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

 

[BABerean2]

T

Thank you for informing us of your own research. In my opinion, the false rapture teaching was introduced and promoted by Zionists/Freemasons in order to deceive the church. The Lotus Club to which you referenced was/is composed of Freemasons. On pgs. 14-15 of "A Brief History of the Lotus Club, Cornell University Library, we find this quote:
There were now many distinguished names on
the roll of membership. The parlors of the modest
house on Irving Place on the occasions of enter-
tainments were crowded with men whose presence
would lend distinction to any company. The club
house had become the common meeting ground in
the city for journalists, actors, artists and authors.
Distinguished foreigners and non-resident Ameri-
cans were welcomed to its privileges and courte-
sies. There was a prevalent Freemasonry and
camaraderie which made every one who entered
its hospitable doors at home ; and with all the rol-
licking humor and banter, there were seldom any
breaches of the rules of good fellowship and good
manners.
Full text of "A brief history of the Lotos Club"

After Scofield was introduced to the club, he traveled to Europe where he met with Henry Frowde, publisher of the Oxford University Press who later published the Scofield Bible. Where did Scofield who was not a rich man get his money to travel to Europe? His connections in the Lotus Club? Frowde was a member of the Exclusive Brethren which Scofield founded after his departure from the Plymouth (Open) Brethren.
The Scofield Bible--The Book That Made Zionists of America’s Evangelical Christians - WRMEA

If you have not read it I would highly recommend "Against Our Better Judgment, The hidden history of how the U.S. was used to create Israel", by Alison Weir.

Thousands of American boys died during WWI, in order to get the Balfour Declaration into existence.

A young man I knew is buried at a local Baptist church, because of the "Greater Israel Project'.


.

 

[Marvin Knox]

If you read carefully, I have quoted primary source information and multiple citations from different sources which all confirm the the same thing regarding Scofield's shenanigans. You manufacture your own reasons to deny the historical facts to suit your imagination - which is your prerogative.
If I understand you correctly, yes their rapture position was out of the norm at the time it was introduced so we do not disagree on this item.

I have never denied what you consider historical facts concerning Scofield.

You do understand correctly it being out of the norm. Now if you would just understand correctly the other things I have said and stop misrepresenting me - we'd be able to have a simple conversation on the merits of the rapture teaching.

You specifically wrote requesting me to provide evidence regarding my claims of Scofield so that you could "take them to task." In plain English, this entails that you would "take to task" the evidence I would provide and prove them to be false.

Listen carefully now. This is very important. it is so important in fact that I have repeated it several times now.

I have never once asked you for evidence regarding your claims about Scofield. However I have asked you where, in the forum, I have said certain things you claim I have said and you fail to provide it.

Now - start with the statement above where you claim that I asked you for your evidence. That is an example. If you cannot find the place where I asked you for evidence - there is a reason for that. I never did.

You seem to hear what you want to hear and not what is said.

Any "taking to task" I mentioned had to do with whoever says I said things I did not say - not your evidence.

There now - kapeesh???

And just what are "some of the same positions?" The pretrib-rapture perhaps? Feel free to be more explicit Marvin.

Yes of course. What do you you think we have been discussing here?

Although - come to think of it - with one exception - you have only talked about the character on one man who taught it.

The one exception where you ventured into scripture itself - you stepped in with your claim about Jesus saying in Revelation 16 that He would come as a thief just before the battle of Armageddon.

Bad character leads to suspicion of Scofield's teaching which thus demands further scrutiny. We are all sinners, but your argument is utterly ridiculous in that not all Christians continue to engage in habitual sin and develop an ungodly reputation as Scofield did after his conversion.

You and I agree that that suspicion demands further scrutiny just as I have agreed. Did you even read the post where I agreed with you on that?

Please provide for me where I said that all Christians who sin continue to engage in habitual sin and develop an ungodly reputation. You cannot because I did not. Again you hear what you want to hear and not what is said.

Next you'll be telling me that I just asked you evidence that Scofield sinned habitually. Please don't do that.

Jesus stated he's coming as a thief...then Armageddon. I ask you, do you prefer He would have said that he's coming as a thief...then the pretrib rapture??

Jesus did not say that in Revelation 16 as anyone with eyes can see.

But, even if He had said that there, I believe that He will come before Armageddon. That's the pre-trib rapture which we have been talking about - in between periods of your hearing loss and my correction.

No - He would not have said that He's coming as a thief ... then the pretrib rapture".

I and Scofield believe that to be the pretrib rapture.

I don't mean this as argumentative only - but you really need to get it together. You are all over the map.

Yes Jesus did say it some 2,000 years ago. He predicted it 2,000 years ago and its relevance is still applicable today is it not? He warned he's coming as a thief....THEN Armageddon. NOT, then pretrib rapture. If He comes as a thief at the pretrib rapture, how can He come as a thief AGAIN at Armageddon?

Of course He said that He's coming as a thief...THEN Armageddon.

However He did not say that He was coming as a thief AT Armageddon.

If you didn't say it or mean it, what exactly did you mean Marvin? Please inform me accordingly; no need for further obfuscation.

I have told you. I told you, in this post alone, so clearly that Ray Charles could see it.

Yes all of us has sinned and Scofield did sin a lot - to which he did not repent of. No repentance = no forgiveness. The NT repeatedly warns against false teachers who infiltrate the the church and warns that we can recognize them by the bad fruit. You choose to ignore or minimize that warning concerning Scofield's bad fruit. It's your choice.

No - I chose to study the rapture on my own and come to my own conclusions as have the likes of the seminary profs at Dallas. I doubt that you would hear them even mention Darby or Scofield in one of their lectures. I have saver books by people who taught or were taught at Dallas and they never once mention those guys you put so much stock in by way of arguing against the pretrib rapture of the church.

Don't bother replying to me on any thread from now on Marvin as unfortunately I find your responses to be less than open and adequate. It's not productive for me to reply to you (probably the same for you too).

You simply refuse to reread my posts or even read them carefully in the first place. If you reread this one alone it should give you enough to repent of and apologize to me for misrepresenting what I have and have not said.

IIf you can find any reference to verify that Scofield repented of lying and having a doctorate, not being a forgerer and thief, etc. - then please feel free to inform me.

Why would I do that even if I could provide it? It has no bearing what so ever on the scriptural basis for the doctrine we are supposedly studying.

............ in 1 Thess 5:3, the people are in want of, or are crying out for peace and safety - not that they are already in a state of peace and safety as you mistakenly presume. If in fact, they were in a state of peace and safety, this verb would have been rendered in the indicative mood which is a statement of fact or occurrence. As I have advised you several times before in other threads, examine the Greek before forming your doctrine.

I'll have to stick with the English I'm familiar with except with the occasional use of a lexicon.

In the English Jesus says that His coming will be as in the days of Noah where men will be eating, drinking, marrying and giving in marriage up until He takes His people into the ark. The people will be oblivious until the flood came and swept them all away. (I.e. "peace and safety".)

Yours is some of the most tortured use of the Greek to support a preconceived doctrine I have seen lately. Go ahead on, oh great scholar. I'll just let scripture interpret scripture.

Please don't respond to me again. Thank you.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Marv you try to push Scofield off as a nobody in your foundational system of belief, Scofield is the dirt and your belief is the tree, no the pre-trib rapture isn't found in the scripture, but you can find this in the notes of Scofield.

Scofield is not the dirt - even those who don't see him as a scoundrel don't believe that. Most believe that Darby was the dirt and Scofield's belief is the tree.

Pre trib rapture is found in the scriptures. Whether it is also found in the writings of Scofield is immaterial to the discussion of the doctrine on it's scriptural merits.

as I have done with Oldmantook for sever page now - I ask you to argue the doctrine of or lack of it on it's merits without reference to Darby or Scofield - just as I and others here do and just as most all of the Dallas professors do so far as I have seen in my studies of the subject.

 

[Truth7t7]

Scofield is not the dirt - even those who don't see him as a scoundrel don't believe that. Most believe that Darby was the dirt and Scofield's belief is the tree.

Pre trib rapture is found in the scriptures. Whether it is also found in the writings of Scofield is immaterial to the discussion of the doctrine on it's scriptural merits.

as I have done with Oldmantook for sever page now - I ask you to argue the doctrine of or lack of it on it's merits without reference to Darby or Scofield - just as I and others here do and just as most all of the Dallas professors do so far as I have seen in my studies of the subject.

1. Do you see the scripture presented below as being the same event?

2. Does this scripture represent your pre-tribulation rapture?

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17KJV
15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 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.

1 Corinthians 15:51-52KJV
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

 

[BABerean2]

However He did not say that He was coming as a thief AT Armageddon.

Rev 16:15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
Rev 16:16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.
(KJV)


(GW) The spirits gathered the kings at the place which is called Armageddon in Hebrew.

.

 

[Marvin Knox]

1. Do you see the scripture presented below as being the same event?

2. Does this scripture represent your pre-tribulation rapture?

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17KJV
15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 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.

1 Corinthians 15:51-52KJV
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

They could well be the same. They have many of the same elements.

However, they do not in themselves prove the secret rapture doctrine nor does anyone I know of say that they do.

Nor should the "trump of God" and the "last trump" be considered the same as the angelic trumpets in the book of Revelation.

Now you tell me what you think.

 

[Truth7t7]

They could well be the same. They have many of the same elements.

However, they do not in themselves prove the secret rapture doctrine nor does anyone I know of say that they do.

Nor should the "trump of God" and the "last trump" be considered the same as the angelic trumpets in the book of Revelation.

Now you tell me what you think.

Marv the scripture provided below is the "Accepted" foundational scripture for the pre-tribulation rapture, I'm trying to establish "Common Ground" you have not given agreement. If we can't establish this fundamental fact, then where will any future discussion stand?

Marv I followed the teachings of dispensationalism for 20 years, I never questioned the teaching, nor did I seek it's foundation or test it by the Holy scripture.

I was bound by conforming to the social group around myself, to question or deny this teaching meant instant separation.

I talked to a Baptist pastor for 1 hr+ concerning this teaching, it's foundation, scriptural reference. At the conclusion he openly stated "He Agreed" the pre-tribulation rapture isn't found in scripture, as he stated he couldn't openly teach this because his provided home, income, and pension, were tied to the Baptist Denomination, and doing so would see him looking for new employment.

Marv this is pretty much the standard case as I see it.

Hopefully we can establish common ground in agreement?

1. Do you see the scripture presented below as being the same event?

2. Does this scripture represent your pre-tribulation rapture?

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17KJV
15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 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.

1 Corinthians 15:51-52KJV
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

 

[Oldmantook]

I have never denied what you consider historical facts concerning Scofield.

You do understand correctly it being out of the norm. Now if you would just understand correctly the other things I have said and stop misrepresenting me - we'd be able to have a simple conversation on the merits of the rapture teaching.

Listen carefully now. This is very important. it is so important in fact that I have repeated it several times now.

I have never once asked you for evidence regarding your claims about Scofield. However I have asked you where, in the forum, I have said certain things you claim I have said and you fail to provide it.

Now - start with the statement above where you claim that I asked you for your evidence. That is an example. If you cannot find the place where I asked you for evidence - there is a reason for that. I never did.

You seem to hear what you want to hear and not what is said.

Any "taking to task" I mentioned had to do with whoever says I said things I did not say - not your evidence.

There now - kapeesh???

Yes of course. What do you you think we have been discussing here?

Although - come to think of it - with one exception - you have only talked about the character on one man who taught it.

The one exception where you ventured into scripture itself - you stepped in with your claim about Jesus saying in Revelation 16 that He would come as a thief just before the battle of Armageddon.

You and I agree that that suspicion demands further scrutiny just as I have agreed. Did you even read the post where I agreed with you on that?

Please provide for me where I said that all Christians who sin continue to engage in habitual sin and develop an ungodly reputation. You cannot because I did not. Again you hear what you want to hear and not what is said.

Next you'll be telling me that I just asked you evidence that Scofield sinned habitually. Please don't do that.

Jesus did not say that in Revelation 16 as anyone with eyes can see.

But, even if He had said that there, I believe that He will come before Armageddon. That's the pre-trib rapture which we have been talking about - in between periods of your hearing loss and my correction.

No - He would not have said that He's coming as a thief ... then the pretrib rapture".

I and Scofield believe that to be the pretrib rapture.

I don't mean this as argumentative only - but you really need to get it together. You are all over the map.

Of course He said that He's coming as a thief...THEN Armageddon.

However He did not say that He was coming as a thief AT Armageddon.

I have told you. I told you, in this post alone, so clearly that Ray Charles could see it.

No - I chose to study the rapture on my own and come to my own conclusions as have the likes of the seminary profs at Dallas. I doubt that you would hear them even mention Darby or Scofield in one of their lectures. I have saver books by people who taught or were taught at Dallas and they never once mention those guys you put so much stock in by way of arguing against the pretrib rapture of the church.

You simply refuse to reread my posts or even read them carefully in the first place. If you reread this one alone it should give you enough to repent of and apologize to me for misrepresenting what I have and have not said.
Why would I do that even if I could provide it? It has no bearing what so ever on the scriptural basis for the doctrine we are supposedly studying.

I'll have to stick with the English I'm familiar with except with the occasional use of a lexicon.

In the English Jesus says that His coming will be as in the days of Noah where men will be eating, drinking, marrying and giving in marriage up until He takes His people into the ark. The people will be oblivious until the flood came and swept them all away. (I.e. "peace and safety".)

Yours is some of the most tortured use of the Greek to support a preconceived doctrine I have seen lately. Go ahead on, oh great scholar. I'll just let scripture interpret scripture.

Please don't respond to me again. Thank you.

We finally have agreement on one thing Marvin - you won't respond to me and I won't respond to you!

 

[Marvin Knox]

Marv the scripture provided below is the "Accepted" foundational scripture for the pre-tribulation rapture, I'm trying to establish "Common Ground" you have not given agreement. If we can't establish this fundamental fact, then where will any future discussion stand?

I believe in a pre-tribulation rapture and you do not. Therefore we will not find "common ground" on that point.

I also believe in a literal millennial reign and I don't know if you do or not. I don't believe you do. But you tell me.

It is difficult to see how anyone who believes what the scriptures say about the millennnial reign could believe in a post tribulation rapture since there would be no one left in an unchanged body to populate it.

Among those who are of the pre trib group there are those who reject a literal millennial reign. They are not the norn among pre tribs. But there are many.

They believe that the two passages you reference could well describe raptures at the beginning and the end of the tribulation. As I said - one would have to reject a literal millennial reign to hold that position.

What may have appeared as "waffling" on your question was merely a nod to the different millennial positions among pre tribs.

As for me - believing in a literal millennial reign as I do - I see those events as likely the same - although one may well be at the end of the millennium.

That's probably about as clear as mud. But there you go.

Hopefully we can establish common ground in agreement?.

I hope my statements above create better understanding of the issues even if they don't establish common ground agreement.

Marv I followed the teachings of dispensationalism for 20 years, I never questioned the teaching, nor did I seek it's foundation or test it by the Holy scripture.............
Marv this is pretty much the standard case as I see it.

I have never attended a church where I was not welcome to question any view about the end times so long as basic salvation principles were not clouded by a position.

I'm sorry to hear about your experience.

My coming to the Lord after being for many years a rabid and vocal critic of Christianity - is likely why I have always been one to read and believe as I saw fit and not just nod to any one group.

I am what I would have to call a Reformed, dispensational, evangelical charismatic - and that puts me at odds with many ammillennials and many premillennials as well on some issues.

Any waffling you note in my positions is because I don't want anyone to assume anything about my beliefs unless I tell them myself. That includes things related to the so called Calvinist/Arminian controversy.

Now - if that gets us to common ground for a fruitful discussion - count me in.

I'm not what I would call an expert on end times theology. But I have my opinions on some things.

One of those things is the ridiculous position of some here in the forum that pre trib rapture theology should be rejected just because Scofield's character seems to have left much to be desired.

I don't base my theology on experience - either mine or someone else. Wherever possible no one else should either - IMO.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Rev 16:15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.
Rev 16:16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.
(KJV) (GW) The spirits gathered the kings at the place which is called Armageddon in Hebrew.

I'm hoping you don't mean by this post the same error Oldmantook holds.

Because it doesn't say that the Lord is coming as a thief "AT" Armageddon - as he claims it does.

 

[Marvin Knox]

We finally have agreement on one thing Marvin - you won't respond to me and I won't respond to you!

I spelled out your error concerning what you thought I said very clearly.

If you would have simply admitted that you had misunderstood what I said - we could have continued.

But you dug in out of pride and will not. That's your choice.

 

[Oldmantook]

I spelled out your error concerning what you thought I said very clearly.

If you would have simply admitted that you had misunderstood what I said - we could have continued.

But you dug in out of pride and will not. That's your choice.

No, you called me a liar despite all the references I cited. Nuff said. You can stick with your dearth of knowledge of Koine Greek which causes you to follow false teaching and doctrines. It's your choice.

 

[BABerean2]

I'm hoping you don't mean by this post the same error Oldmantook holds.

Because it doesn't say that the Lord is coming as a thief "AT" Armageddon - as he claims it does.

Rev 16:13 Then I saw three evil spirits like frogs come out of the mouths of the serpent, the beast, and the false prophet.
Rev 16:14 They are spirits of demons that do miracles. These spirits go to the kings of the whole world and gather them for the war on the frightening day of God Almighty.
Rev 16:15 "See, I am coming like a thief. Blessed is the one who remains alert and doesn't lose his clothes. He will not have to go naked and let others see his shame."
Rev 16:16 The spirits gathered the kings at the place which is called Armageddon in Hebrew.
(GW)

Yes, it does.

To claim otherwise would be error.

.

 

[Truth7t7]

I believe in a pre-tribulation rapture and you do not. Therefore we will not find "common ground" on that point.

I also believe in a literal millennial reign and I don't know if you do or not. I don't believe you do. But you tell me.

It is difficult to see how anyone who believes what the scriptures say about the millennnial reign could believe in a post tribulation rapture since there would be no one left in an unchanged body to populate it.

Among those who are of the pre trib group there are those who reject a literal millennial reign. They are not the norn among pre tribs. But there are many.

They believe that the two passages you reference could well describe raptures at the beginning and the end of the tribulation. As I said - one would have to reject a literal millennial reign to hold that position.

What may have appeared as "waffling" on your question was merely a nod to the different millennial positions among pre tribs.

As for me - believing in a literal millennial reign as I do - I see those events as likely the same - although one may well be at the end of the millennium.

That's probably about as clear as mud. But there you go.

I hope my statements above create better understanding of the issues even if they don't establish common ground agreement.

I have never attended a church where I was not welcome to question any view about the end times so long as basic salvation principles were not clouded by a position.

I'm sorry to hear about your experience.

My coming to the Lord after being for many years a rabid and vocal critic of Christianity - is likely why I have always been one to read and believe as I saw fit and not just nod to any one group.

I am what I would have to call a Reformed, dispensational, evangelical charismatic - and that puts me at odds with many ammillennials and many premillennials as well on some issues.

Any waffling you note in my positions is because I don't want anyone to assume anything about my beliefs unless I tell them myself. That includes things related to the so called Calvinist/Arminian controversy.

Now - if that gets us to common ground for a fruitful discussion - count me in.

I'm not what I would call an expert on end times theology. But I have my opinions on some things.

One of those things is the ridiculous position of some here in the forum that pre trib rapture theology should be rejected just because Scofield's character seems to have left much to be desired.

I don't base my theology on experience - either mine or someone else. Wherever possible no one else should either - IMO.

Were getting closer hopefully?

Which scripture below do you believe references the pre-trib rapture?

I'm trying to establish the "common" scripture used by pre-tribbers to start discussion.

You still have not answered the direct question, why?

I do not see a literal 1000 year kingdom on this earth in scripture.

I believe Jesus Christ Returns Immediately after the future tribulation in fire and final judgment.

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17KJV
15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 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.

1 Corinthians 15:51-52KJV
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

 

[Marvin Knox]

I do not see a literal 1000 year kingdom on this earth in scripture.

Then we would be wasting each other's time to continue.

If you don't believe a direct statement about the coming 1000 year kingdom - you will not believe a doctrine (the pretrib rapture) which requires you to look at several scriptures and concepts in a combined and systematic way to understand.

I believe Jesus Christ Returns Immediately after the future tribulation in fire and final judgment.

That isn't what the scriptures teach.

It's the revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must take place.

It is not the obscurance of Jesus Christ which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants the things which will not really take place.

 

[Douggg]

I talked to a Baptist pastor for 1 hr+ concerning this teaching, it's foundation, scriptural reference. At the conclusion he openly stated "He Agreed" the pre-tribulation rapture isn't found in scripture, as he stated he couldn't openly teach this because his provided home, income, and pension, were tied to the Baptist Denomination, and doing so would see him looking for new employment.

Okay, that is a side human interest story. Regardless, there is nothing in the bible that prevents the rapture from taking place this very second. On the other hand, there is nothing in the bible that mandates the rapture must happen pre-70th week.

Scofield, dispensationalism - is really a side show, and an irrelevant argument to when the rapture will actually take place.

 

[BABerean2]

On the other hand, there is nothing in the bible that mandates the rapture must happen pre-70th week.

Since the 70th week of Daniel occurred during the first century, based on Matthew 10:5-7, and Acts 10:38, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and Galatians 1:14-18, it will not happen "pre-70th week".

It was the time the Gospel was taken "first" to Daniel's people, before Paul began his ministry to the Gentiles.

.