Posted on 03/28/2019 2:51:44 PM PDT by pastorbillrandles
Quote~ “The “times of the Gentiles” is distinct from the church age. It may represents the time during which the temple mount is not under the control of the nation of Israel and the Jewish people. This has been the case since 70 A.D. until now. However, it might be more specific in the context of the 42 months that Gentiles will trample Jerusalem under foot and also when the courtyard of the temple remains under Gentile control.”
“It is opposite in nature compared with the church age and the time during which the “fullness of the Gentiles” come into the kingdom. The church age began on Pentecost and will be complete when all who will be saved are saved.”
-I would agree with that. It makes sense and also brings clarity to the overlapping periods.
_Notice how John describes the Second Coming:
Rev 19:11-13
11 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.
(and in particular, the next verse describing those that return with Christ)
Rev 19:14
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
These being all the saints of God who from the time of Genesis to Revelation, were Raptured/Resurrected having the Hope instilled in us through the effectual Word of God.
-Yes, this being the first and initial Rapture-1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 (I believe to be pretrib.)
Following that will be further Resurrections.
~quoting myself from previous post: ““We know that the 144,000 Jews are separate from the Gentile church.”
-What I meant, and should have clarified better, was a separate Rapture/Resurrection from the Thessalonians reference, but of course, members of the same body. I think if we were to decipher the events described in Revelations in chronological order, we could see multiple Resurrections at varying times.
-On this, I think we agree completely. As you have previously stated: Reference the grafting process described in Romans 11.
I don’t have the time right now to respond point for point. But I think in general, I would say, refer to the previous comments regarding the seven churches (some will be left, some will be raptured)as well as the likelihood of multiple Raptures/Resurrections. All within the framework of the Tribulation period known as Daniels Seventieth Week. Soon to be fulfilled.
“You are desperate to live ‘up’ to your chosen handle.”
Turning a debate about Biblical doctrine into something personal is bad form—something I’ve been trying to learn to avoid myself. A person might have the greatest book knowledge of the Bible, but if it is expressed in divisiveness between true followers of Christ, what good is it?
“If you look at what the Jews believed would be ‘coming of the Messiah’, they did not perceive two or three events as ‘the coming of Messiah’.”
True. But the question is fairly simple. Are there supposed to be three comings of Christ? After all, the event we both agree to being the rapture is called “coming” in more than one passage. My reason for addressing this is because the rapture describes something that takes place Biblically in the twinkling of an eye. It happens in a moment. The second coming refers to many events of which the rapture is just a part. Being caught up in the air to meet Christ and His arrival on the earth are both events which are part of His second coming. Compare this with the many events which took place during His first coming. The difference in the position I hold is that these two events are bookends to the Day of the Lord rather than bookends to Daniel’s seventieth week.
“The chart is not mine, it was drawn up by Tommy Ice and I find it fits the differentiating of the Raptur event from the touch down event at the end of the Great Tribulation.”
I understand. I actually made a copy because I try to consider carefully other views on this subject. I would actually much rather that the pre-trib view was correct. I truly wish I could be convinced by someone, anyone, that the Bible actually supports this view. I’ve bought and read multiple books supporting it and those who supposedly had a rebuttal to the pre-wrath rapture position, but none have been successful. I don’t pretend that pre-wrath provides all of the answers, but the paradigm is far more consistent with the Biblical passages on the subject. I’d rather accept an unpleasant truth on the matter than depend on a faulty position which has a practical implication: not being ready for Christ’s return due to failing to watch.
Can anyone truly say they are always ready? We should watch AND be ready, but it does not say only to be ready but also to watch. The author of Hebrews says “so much the more”. Can we be more ready? I think so. Being born again is the most essential aspect, obviously. But John warns that we don’t want to be ashamed when He arrives. This entails the reminder of watchfulness. And I don’t see how this is possible without any signs.
“Pardon me but I haven’t the time to dissect your misdirections fully.”
Well, I do appreciate that you chose to reply at all. Honestly, I haven’t found anyone yet with either the time or ability to refute these basic challenges to the pre-trib paradigm. I’ve heard some good anecdotal evidence. I consider dispensationalism itself to be the best argument FOR pre-trib. And I do agree that dispensations are Biblical. However, we must only view such theology as a lens with which to contextualize scripture rather than as the equivalent of scripture. That is, the complexities of dispensations may entail nuances of God’s operation that can only be clarified by scripture. For example, the relationship between Israel and the church requires the studied application of many passages.
“Preterists tend to like the obfuscating using massive utterances.”
I have no idea where you would get the idea that I am a preterist. I am pre-millenial. I believe in the literal, bodily return of Christ, who will first gather His church to Himself, and will subsequently come to the earth and establish His kingdom. I believe these things are future events.
I think you may be confusing me with another FReeper who often joins in these discussions and is a preterist. Quite frankly I can tolerate being part of local churches that teach pre-trib (many of the ones I’ve been a part of include in their statement of faith, which is disappointing). I do not attempt to undermine the leadership of my church by debating the topic with anyone except members of my own family. However, I don’t think I would be comfortable being part of a congregation where preterism is taught. I’m afraid there would be many other false teachings that would accompany such a view. Anyone who claims the second coming or rapture has already taken place is in danger of severe judgment based on 2 Timothy 2:18.
Perhaps you are basing this on my comments on what happened in 70 A.D. Clearly the abomination of desolation did not happen in 70 A.D. but Jerusalem was ransacked, the temple was destroyed, and not one stone was left on another due to the reclamation of gold among other things. And this means that part of the conversation leading to and including the Olivet discourse contains prophecies that were fulfilled in 70 A.D. The Jewish believers who were living in Jerusalem escaped this destruction because they followed Christ’s instructions, while hundreds of thousands of non-Christian Jews perished because they did not watch for the signs Jesus gave.
Anyway, thanks for the discussion. You usually have some valuable contributions to make on Biblical topics, and even when we disagree it forces me to study more.
“I still maintain that PreTrib is correct. One thing is for sure, we are soon to find out.”
Agreed. I’d be happy to be proven wrong. Unfortunately, if not, there will be many who will become disillusioned with all of the Gospel message when they discover they were misled about having to face anti-christ and endure the hardships that come during the Great Tribulation.
“I’ve spoken with others who are end-trib, or post-trib. And I have been told the reason is that God’s purpose for this is that they must go through the tribulation for purification reasons. But when I ask, if that is so, then how did those before you, who died with the same hope, become purified? I never seem to get an answer.”
Only the blood of Christ washes away our sins. However, trials do purify us in the sense that our faith is more refined, like gold is refined by fire.
1 Peter 1:7
The genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Acts 14:22b
We must through many tribulations enter the kingdom of God.
Daniel 11:35
And some of those of understanding shall fall, to refine them, purify them, and make them white, until the time of the end; because it is still for the appointed time.
“The Evangelism during these times is [the two witnesses] witnessing the Word of God continually. And when attempts are made upon their lives, their enemies will suffer Divine Judgement. When it is appointed unto them to die, then the entirety of the world will witness their Resurrection. Again, this is why I don’t believe the church will be required during the time of the great tribulation to remain in order to Evangelize. God is not dependent upon us, but rather we upon Him.”
I think this is the only reasonable and satisfactory answer from a pre-trib view. If pre-trib turns out to be correct, the two witnesses would be the primary and initial source of world evangelism. Excellent point.
Some pre-trib proponents (the pastor of my church, for example) believe the two witnesses prophecy during the second half of Daniel’s seventieth week. I do not think this is supported by the passages very well.
“So in this respect, we can say that “part” of the “church” will surely enter into the tribulation hour, (he that hath an ear, let him hear......)but those that maintain Victory by the Blood of the Lamb will be snatched away.”
You are the first person I’ve discussed Biblical prophecy with who believes in a partial rapture. I think it is an interesting proposition. However, at this time I am not persuaded because I do not see it as being necessary. I think those who are truly born again will be watchful and ready when Christ returns. Those who are left behind may be part of the visible church, but are not truly born again. It might be possible that some of these will turn to Christ after the rapture, but I think this would be a huge exception as 2 Thessalonians describes those left behind as receiving strong delusion to believe the lie.
You’ve brought up some excellent points worthy of further study and examination.
You cited:
Rev 19:14
And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
“These being all the saints of God who from the time of Genesis to Revelation, were Raptured/Resurrected having the Hope instilled in us through the effectual Word of God.”
Interesting observation. Hebrews does talk about a great “cloud” of witnesses. So, I suppose this view is worthy of consideration. I’ve thought the cloud reference is about the glory of God as the Lord appeared to Israel. But a cloud of saints is not out of the question.
“What I meant, and should have clarified better, was a separate Rapture/Resurrection from the Thessalonians reference, but of course, members of the same body.”
Well, there certainly is a reasonable question about how the 144,000 enter into the presence of God. Likewise, those who “come out of the Great Tribulation” in chapter 7 somehow appear before the throne of God as well. (My view is this represents the rapture of the church from a Heavenly perspective.)
Thanks for the discussion.
As Paul wrote in 1 Thess 1:10, Jesus delivers us from the coming wrath. As Paul writes in 1 Thess 4:18, the rescue from the coming wrath is to be a comfort to us, not a 'finally you rescue us'. We are the Bride of Christ, The Body of Christ. God is not going to put the Bride, the Body of Christ through HIS wrath.
As to signs, do you think the disappearance of multi-millions from the Earth in the twinkling of an eye would be a powerful sign to authenticate there is now important prophecies which are about to be fulfilled? But since we have been instructed as His Body with His Holy Spirit in our human spirit to be ready at any moment to be snatched away implies signs will get us ready?
When Jesus told the crowd what God requires for Salvation, do you recall what the crowd wanted then? A sign to authenticate His assertion! They had just witnessed signs of God with us in the healings and the feeding of thousands with a hew loaves and a couple of sardines! Yet they still wanted a sign.
Jesus actually gave an address regarding sings, relating the seasons to the harvesting of fruit. There are many signs that the season is upon us. Jesus told you even He did not know the exact day or hour, but instructed us to be ready, to prepare for sudden departure. Imminence does not mean immediately.
As to many Raptures during the Tribulation, every time someone is beheaded for not taking the mark, that soul arrives at the Throne Room in Heaven. But that soul is not a member of the body of the Bride. Why? Because for some of those martyrs the Bema Seat of Christ has ended for all those who were caught up into the clouds to meet the Lord int he air. All the burning away of wood hay and stubble will have happened by the time some of the martyrs arrive from the guillotines.
Finally, nut not the last , we Bride returns with the Lord when He comes to set foot on the Mount of Olives, after the Bema seat in Heaven has finished, so either we are in a completely different time Universe or the cleansing has happened and the Bride is perfected for the marriage feast.
In John 14, when Jesus assured His closest friends that He was going away to prepare a place for them, he had to re-emphasize to them that He was going to come and take them to himself IN THE FATHER'S HOUSE where the many rooms are. The word for rooms, translated flowweringly as mansions by the King James translators is actually the same Greek word which would describe a room at a lodging place, a pub hostel, etc., a temporary lodging.
One very important point regarding the necessity of the Rapture coming before the seventieth week of Daniel begins is the ending of the Church Age and beginning of the seventieth week when it will be Jewish believers who will be doing the evangelizing! Will the Holy Spirit be 'doing' during the Tribulation? Never doubt it, for there will be literally a number coming out of the Tribulation that was so big the men of the Biblical times could not number them ,,, and Revelations numbers a 200,000,000 man army coming to Meggido!
Tim Lahaye's books give a frightening picture of what happens to Earth when the Rapture happens. Believe it and more. The twinkling of an eye is an instant during which an unbelievable amount of energy will be transformed into matter that will be unseeable to the survivors of the Rapture event left behind. We who are transformed will be made in an instant to be like JESUS is now for we will see Him as He really is, not like viewing a photo or a holograph, see Him in spacewtime as He is now, able to appear in a locked and shuttered room, and the human who wrote on the wall at Palace Party Central in Daniel 5.
A video you may want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLWMOdLlSiI
Oops, forgot to post the link: https://www.pre-trib.org/
“Please accept my sincere apology. I get the same list of objections to the pre-trib perspective from preterists. The following website has a large archive of material on the doctrine of imminence, the pre-trib rapture and several other topics. I particularly note the offerings of Andy Woods, Thomas Ice, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, J.B. Hixson, and Mark Hitchcock.”
I watched the whole, pre-wrath vs. pre-trib debate between Thomas Ice and Alan Kurschner—the nearly three hours worth. It does get to the heart of the difference for the most part.
I think Dr. Ice is better at debating over all, though Kurschner had strong opening and closing arguments.
I believe Dr. Ice’s argument about the linguistics of the word “come” in Revelation 6 is very weak. The fifth use was on earth by unbelievers, but he tried to make the case that it alludes back to the word being used by the four beasts in Heaven to summon the four horsemen of the first four seals. These events presumably happen over a period of years. This attributes the statement of those saying, “The great day if His wrath has come...” to mean they suddenly became aware, after years of God’s wrath, that this was indeed God’s wrath and they had just gone through it. Plus, before they realized it was God’s wrath, they set out to persecute God’s people (whether church-age or not). This stretches credulity. The case for the seven seals being God’s wrath will need other support than this. My position is that the people who say this after the signs in the heavens are clearly talking about what either has just happened or what they believe is about to happen, but not what has happened for the previous few years.
I think his argument on 2 Thessalonians 2 was a fairly good defense of the pre-trib interpretation of the passage. However, it sort of retreats into a corner in a way because it appears to require some very narrow meanings of the passage in order to work. It would not only require that the restrainer be referring to the Holy Spirit, but also that what has been traditionally interpreted as an apostasy to be a reference to the rapture. It would require the revealing of antichrist to come before the “falling away” (i.e. rapture as Dr. Rice interprets it), even though these two events which come prior to the Day of the Lord are presented in the opposite order. Additionally, it would require the “revealing” of antichrist is NOT at the abomination of desolation but some other event such as the signing of the seven-year treaty. However, there may be many potential candidates who sign seven-year treaties / agreements / covenants. How would this be enough? The passage also strongly implies the revelation of his identity is through the fact that he is the one who carries out the abomination of desolation. I think such an approach to the passage leads to a highly-improbable interpretation, however, Dr. Rice did create a defensible position.
You’ve provided a treasure trove of pre-trib articles which I have only begun to scratch the surface in reviewing. So far, some of the arguments are very enlightening and deserve careful review. As I suspected, they rely heavily on dispensational perspective, which is not a bad thing. It is very important for our dispensational views to be molded by scripture, rather than forcing any texts to fit within our own preconceived ideas of dispensational principles.
“As Paul wrote in 1 Thess 1:10, Jesus delivers us from the coming wrath. As Paul writes in 1 Thess 4:18, the rescue from the coming wrath is to be a comfort to us, not a ‘finally you rescue us’. We are the Bride of Christ, The Body of Christ. God is not going to put the Bride, the Body of Christ through HIS wrath.”
I think all premilinealists agree to this presupposition. The disagreements arise from determining how the Church is saved from His coming wrath. Part of this is being delivered from the wrath of Hell and the Lake of Fire. But clearly part also pertains to the wraththat God will pour out on the earth. I contend that no one who has trusted in Christ for salvation, whether before, after, or during the tribulation or Day of the Lord, will undergo God’s wrath. The 144,000 do not. They are on the earth, though they are not “of the earth” so-to-speak. Some judgements in this time are poured out only on those with the mark of the beast. Some are much broader.
But Christians have endured ALL of the same things depicted in the first five seals, down through the centuries. It can be reasonably argued that these instances will be more severe. Yet, that alone does not make them the wrath of God. If the synoptic relationship with the Olivet signs is accurate, the first four seals are probably not even the Great Tribulation but are the “beginning of sorrows”. And consider the incredibly severity of persecution that has happened before and is happening now against the Church, Christ’s bride. ISIS has taken children from Christian homes and forced their parents to watch them be tortured if they do not renounce Christ. Same thing has happened under NAZI and Communist rule in recent times. The first four seals depict antichrist deception and power consolidation (through military strength and probably disarmament and gun control), war, famine, natural disasters such as earthquakes, and disease. God has preserved believers through all of these things. He has also allowed believers to suffer and even die as a result of all of these things. Doing so during this period does not constitute Christ abusing His bride any more than the sufferings of church-age believers ever has. There may be strong and valid arguments for including the seal judgments in the Day of the Lord’s wrath, but the bride argument does not hold up, in my opinion.
“As to signs, do you think the disappearance of multi-millions from the Earth in the twinkling of an eye would be a powerful sign to authenticate there is now important prophecies which are about to be fulfilled? But since we have been instructed as His Body with His Holy Spirit in our human spirit to be ready at any moment to be snatched away implies signs will get us ready?”
It’s funny because I think whether the rapture was visible or not (as some pre-trib advocates claim), the removal of masses of believers would be impossible to be “secret”. The reality of this has generated a lot of speculation as to how the unbelieving world might react. I think the idea that the world will mourn, with either dread over what is about to happen or with repentant grief over such horrific error in having persecuted believers, that the response at the end of Revelation 6 seems perfect. I also think the national repentance of Israel fits perfectly as well. When will they “look on Him whom they have pierce” AND grieve like for a lost son? When will the purpose of Daniel’s seventieth week be accomplished when it comes to “making an end of sins” for the nation of Israel? Remember, this is one of the purposes. Paul also talks about the veil over the eyes of Israel as a nation and it being removed at some point. He says “all Israel will be saved. This clearly does not happen at the beginning of the seventieth week because Israel will receive antichrist as their Messiah, that is, until he is revealed to be a false Messiah at the abomination of desolation. I don’t see how any other timeline than pre-wrath works when it comes to Israel’s national repentance. Pre-trib requires the followers of Christ being persecuted in the fifth seal to be “tribulation saints.” But Paul says God is going to send strong delusion. Christ also said the deception will be very great.
Under the pre-trib view, how can uncountable multitudes be saved AFTER rejecting the Gospel, missing the rapture AND following anti-christ? What event greater than the return of Christ is going to cause them to escape deception and trust Christ?
To put it another way and simplify my argument: I believe the Revelation multitude that comes out of the Great Tribulation cannot be those saved AFTER the rapture because the strong delusion is going to mean fewer are saved, not more. These are saved before and during the Great Tribulation and come out by the rapture. I think the strong delusion probably happens starting in the middle at the abomination of desolation and the world being forced to receive the mark of the beast. (There are some things that are difficult to sort out in the Revelation timeline because they are presented in interludes rather than as part of the 7 seals, trumpets, and bowls.) Once anyone receives the mark, it is too late for their salvation. So, if I am correct, many will have received the mark during the persecution of the fifth seal, and when the Lord returns after this and the signs of the sixth seal, those who have received the mark can only mourn in regret. They will try to fight Christ under the leadership of antichrist, but it will be totally fruitless. However, there will be Jews and Gentiles who do not receive the mark. Some will be beheaded and have a special resurrection. Some will be preserved. Only these will have the possibility of being saved after the rapture, and they will be few in number.
Luke 18:7-8
And shall God not avenge His own elect who cry out day and night to Him, though He bears long with them? I tell you that He will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He really find faith on the earth?
If these (i.e. those who come out of the Great Tribulation) believe at the beginning of Daniel’s seventieth week and are the ones persecuted during the fifth seal, then in what sense do they not undergo the wrath of God in seals 1-4?
“Jesus actually gave an address regarding sings, relating the seasons to the harvesting of fruit. There are many signs that the season is upon us. Jesus told you even He did not know the exact day or hour, but instructed us to be ready, to prepare for sudden departure. “
I have heard godly pre-trib teachers say we do not know the day or hour, but we can know the seasons. But Christ said something similar about the seasons:
Acts 1:7
And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority.”
To me, it is a contradiction to claim there is no event that must happen before Christ returns for the Church, but to also believe we can tell we are in the season of His return for the Church based on signs. I do agree about the command to be ready and this does include a sudden departure.
Think of it like this. Suppose a father told his son he would be returning from a business trip at some undetermined time over the next several days or weeks and that they would immediately leave to go on a vacation. The father instructs his son to get packed and then work on a list of jobs he wants to be done. He is going to pay his son well for the jobs if he does them properly and thoroughly as described. Now the son must first get ready. And, if during the course of time he unpacks something from his bags that is needed for vacation (such as toiletries, for example) then he needs to put those things back or replace them in order to remain ready to leave immediately. Otherwise, his father might arrive and he would not be ready. Ideally, whatever time the father arrives, the son can grab his bags and load them in the car to leave without delay. He could hear the car pull into the driveway. There might even be a honk of the horn. But being ready is crucial even though the time is undetermined. Now, this analogy could be deconstructed, obviously, but it shows that a person can wait and watch at the same time.
I believe the pre-trib position adequately advocates being ready and even eager for the Lord’s return. I think the post-trib position advocates the importance of patiently waiting and even enduring to the end. But I think that only pre-wrath provides the balance of giving both the importance they deserve. The pre-trib view does not seem to advocate what all Christians instinctively do anyway, and that is watch for His return by paying attention to what is happening in the world.
“As to many Raptures during the Tribulation, every time someone is beheaded for not taking the mark, that soul arrives at the Throne Room in Heaven. But that soul is not a member of the body of the Bride. Why? Because for some of those martyrs the Bema Seat of Christ has ended for all those who were caught up into the clouds to meet the Lord int he air. All the burning away of wood hay and stubble will have happened by the time some of the martyrs arrive from the guillotines.”
Clearly there is a special resurrection of those so beheaded. It is mentioned specifically in Revelation. Oddly, the description of the rapture we are all familiar with is not plainly depicted in Revelation. We know this was no oversight on God’s part. There must be a reason for it being left out. But one consequence of this is that here we are discussing and debating the timing of the rapture.
“In John 14, when Jesus assured His closest friends that He was going away to prepare a place for them, he had to re-emphasize to them that He was going to come and take them to himself IN THE FATHER’S HOUSE where the many rooms are. The word for rooms, translated flowweringly as mansions by the King James translators is actually the same Greek word which would describe a room at a lodging place, a pub hostel, etc., a temporary lodging.”
Clearly, the time in which the Church is removed from the earth is limited to the time from the rapture to the time when Christ comes to the earth and sets up His kingdom. I don’t think the status of the rooms makes a difference between the pre-trib and pre-wrath views, unless I’m overlooking some detail.
“One very important point regarding the necessity of the Rapture coming before the seventieth week of Daniel begins is the ending of the Church Age and beginning of the seventieth week when it will be Jewish believers who will be doing the evangelizing!”
That the repentant Jews may evangelize the world after their repentance could very well be. However, I think this is highly unlikely BEFORE Israel’s national repentance, as I mentioned above. To me, the sealing of the 144,000 in chapter 7 is a much more realistic timing of this national repentance and removal of the blindness national Israel currently experiences. So, I see an overlap between the Church age dispensation and Daniel’s seventieth week. Remember, the Church is NOT a replacement of Israel. These are two independent programs (i.e. dispensations) of God. For example, human government is also a dispensation, but we still have human government as well. And consider that one of the purposes of God blessing and using the Church is to provoke Israel to jealousy. The continuation of the Church during Daniel’s seventieth week could serve this ultimate purpose in bringing Israel to national repentance. I believe that the rapture must occur in conjunction with (and leading to) Israel’s repentance. This is confirmed by the timing of Pentecost being decades before the 2nd temple was destroyed and Israel ceased to be a nation. Likewise, Israel became a nation again, but the Church is still here. God can carry out His plans and purposes for Israel while the Church remains. Before the Church is taken out, Jews who believe are part of the Church just as any Gentile.
Thanks for the links. It will take me quite some time to explore that website and the articles. I will continue as time permits. I have bookmarked the site and the article pages of Andy Woods, Thomas Ice, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, J.B. Hixson, and Mark Hitchcock. I’ve only had time to read a few by Dr. Woods at this point. I’d say so far these are more substantive than most of the arguments I’ve heard put forward.
“It would require the revealing of antichrist to come before the “falling away” (i.e. rapture as Dr. Rice interprets it)” ... Sorry, you read it wrong. PAUL is telling the readers that SINCE the antichrist has not been revealed, the Rapture could not yet have happened.
The passage in Luke which is often conflated witrh the Olivet Discourse happened in the Temple where a crowd heard the warning prophecies of Jesus. After leaving the Temple and walking down the mount and over to the Mount of Olives, the disciples prompted the deeper revelations of the actual end times given in the Olivet Discourse recorded for us in Matthew.
There are many instances of a snatching away in the Old and New Testament. Elijah and Philip being two of them.
The strong delusion fools so many, but scriptures says it almost fools 'the elect'. The elect refers to those who will find salvation in Christ even though there was/is a strong delusion. They are the tribulation saints.
“Sorry, you read it wrong. PAUL is telling the readers that SINCE the antichrist has not been revealed, the Rapture could not yet have happened.”
This is the passage under discussion:
2 Thessalonians 2:1-12
Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
The coming of the Lord AND OUR gathering to Him (i.e. the rapture) is the subject under discussion. The Day of the Lord is a time period. Our gathering to Him is NOT a time period. It is an event, in fact THE event that marks the beginning of the time period known as the Day of the Lord. The Day of the Lord is bookended by the rapture (at the onset) and Christ’s return to earth (at the conclusion).
Paul says two things must happen before the Day of the Lord: the “apostasia”, usually translated as “apostasy”, and the revealing of antichrist. Paul also mentions the “coming” of antichrist, which may either be synonymous with his revealing or it may come before it.
I know Dr. Rice argues that apostasia is a “departure” that he attributes to the rapture. However, there is no contextual reason for thinking so. In fact, Paul has already described the rapture as a “gathering” to Christ as opposed to a “departure” from the earth.
Apostosia is only used twice in the New Testament. Here it is in the nominative form. In Acts 21:21, it is in the accusative form (”apostasian”). In Acts, it clearly means apostasy, as we typically understand. And translating it as something other than this requires justification rather than just assertion because it fits better with a particular paradigm. Paul (and God who inspired him to write) could have used many other word choices here. He used one that other scriptures support to mean apostasy. The meaning is not up to our preferences. Here is the Acts use:
Acts 21:21
They have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.
Apostasia is used four times in the Septuagint, which the apostles quote from, taught from, and was used heavily in the early church: Joshua 22:22; 2 Chronicles 29:19; 1 Maccabees 2:15; Jeremiah 2:19. In each case it is talking about apostasy or rebellion. Why would Paul pick this random word out of the air and expect us to attribute it to the rapture rather than what we commonly think of as apostasy?
Next, even IF (and that’s a big IF) apostasia referred to the rapture, Paul does not, as you assert, say the antichrist must be revealed first. He says the antichrist must be revealed before the Day of the Lord. That’s a very big difference.
It is true that I believe that the rapture will occur at the onset of the Day of the Lord. However, what you are asserting Paul means is not what the passage says. He is assuring them that the Day of the Lord had not arrived.
It has been popularly asserted that the Thessalonians here were afraid they had missed the rapture, or Christ had forgotten or failed to return, and the Day of the Lord had begun without the rapture. And this might be the case. But Paul strings together words in a way that would seem quite contorted if all he is wanting to tell them is the antichrist must be revealed before the rapture. That’s not at all what he says. He says the apostasia must come FIRST and the antichrist must be revealed.
But you are asserting that the rapture could not have happened because the antichrist had not been revealed. The absence of this revelation is supposed to prove the rapture hasn’t happened? Why would it? Why would Paul cite the revealing of the antichrist?
In fact, I’m wondering if you made a typo and intended something else. Because the pre-trib position, as far as I’ve ever heard, does not assert that antichrist must be revealed before the rapture because this would be a sign and also means there is a prophetic event that must happen prior to the rapture. So, I actually do agree that antichrist will be revealed prior to the rapture, but I’m doubtful you meant to say so.
If so, I’m wondering how that can work in a pre-trib view. How will antichrist be revealed? I think, and the passage strongly suggests, that he is revealed at the abomination of desolation. If so, that does not allow him to be revealed BEFORE the rapture in a pre-trib paradigm. It does, however, fit just fine in a pre-wrath paradigm.
It is clear that the Thessalonians were suffering severe persecution, as is mentioned in both epistles to them. The forged letter claimed that the Day of the Lord had arrived. Paul is assuring them it has not.
Even IF all of the assertions you and Dr. Rice made about the passage were true, it would not contradict a pre-wrath rapture view because it is asserted (by those of the pre-wrath view) that the Day of the Lord is distinguished clearly from Daniel’s seventieth week. (That is, the Day of the Lord is contained within the latter part of Daniel’s seventieth week. And though the Great Tribulation begins in the middle of the “tribulation period” / Daniel’s seventieth week, it does not extend all of the way to the end and is thus, not the “second half” of this time period.)
Christ said the Law and Prophets were until John. That dispensation is bookended by Moses and John.
Christ’s first coming is bookended by the incarnation and the ascension. It also contained heavenly signs marking His birth and death.
The dispensation of the church age is bookended by the coming of the Holy Spirit and the signs and wonders in the heavens prophesied in the same passage in Joel.
The Day of the Lord is bookended by the rapture and the return of Christ to the earth. I believe this also is what the second coming or advent of Christ refers to. It is synonymous with the Day of the Lord, Day of Christ, Day of Wrath, Day of God. I have found no evidence to the contrary.
“The passage in Luke which is often conflated witrh the Olivet Discourse happened in the Temple where a crowd heard the warning prophecies of Jesus. After leaving the Temple and walking down the mount and over to the Mount of Olives, the disciples prompted the deeper revelations of the actual end times given in the Olivet Discourse recorded for us in Matthew.”
I think the differences between the passages have to do with the things that happen “before” and the things that happen “after”. Where He said them is less relevant than what He said. All three of the synoptic Gospels have essentially the same content. And though John does not include this in his Gospel, it does match generally with the sequence of events in Revelation 6. This is very significant because it is the this exact sequence of events that Christ gives in reply to the disciples’ question about the signs of His coming. If they happen multiple times they would not be a unique set of signs to alert that His coming is about to take place. (Look up and lift up your heads, when these things happen.)
“I have not a clue where you got the idea of a ‘partial Rapture’. “
I don’t believe in a partial rapture. #44 was to ‘patriot torch’ because he asserted a partial rapture. What he may mean is that those who believe after the rapture are still part of the church. I think this issue is less problematic when considering that the masses saved in Revelation 7 come out of the Great Tribulation when it ends and they do so by the rapture. This may be very hard for a pre-trib person to wrap their heads around because they have trouble even contemplating a rapture that follows the Great Tribulation but NOT Daniel’s seventieth week.
My point is that, if the four horsemen judgments of chapter 6 are considered God’s wrath, wouldn’t this mean that the great multitude in chapter 7 must have experienced God’s wrath even after believing on Christ and calling on the name of the Lord for salvation? If not, how are they exempted in a way that the Church could not be exempted?
“[My earlier quote you referenced: ‘These are saved before and during the Great Tribulation and come out by the rapture.’] Did you misstate thjis? Those in the Church who are in Christ are snatched away before the Tribulation seven years begin. Those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb of God DURING the Tribulation are not among the Raptured. They are martyred for their testimony or for calling upon the Lord when the anti-Christ is ruling the Earth dwellers.”
No. I don’t think I misstated my position. I believe the uncountable multitude of all nations and languages in Revelation 7 represents the final generation of Church-age believers who are raptured at the end of the “cut-short” Great Tribulation, just prior to the outpouring of God’s “Day of the Lord” wrath in the trumpet and bowl judgments. In other words, chapter 7 is a description of the rapture from the perspective of Heaven.
If the rapture does not occur prior to the first six seals being opened, as the pre-wrath position asserts, then the saints persecuted in the fifth seal are Church-age believers. Some of these will be those saved (i.e. born again) during that time, and some will have already been saved prior to that time. Many will be martyred, as chapter six indicates. But many will “come out of the Great Tribulation” in the chapter 7 interlude. The angel identifies who they are but not how they got there. I think the pre-trib view holds that all of them died, but the passage does not say so. They are also not called “souls” in chapter 7, as those in chapter 6 under the altar are called.
The Rapture of the Church is the end of the Church Age. Perhaps harvesting in Jewish tradition can help here. The Barley harvest happened first, and the fruit from the stalks was released by just waving the stalk bundles in the breeze, whereas the harvesting of wheat (a much more entrapped fruit in a hard case) needed the use of the Tribulum to crush the fruit out of the husks. To get the juice from the grapes required a stomping, crushing, mashing almost destroying of the grapes. The Ekklesia are representative of the Barley harvest. The Tribulation is aking to the wheat harvest, and the Great Tribulation is akin to the grape harvesting for wine.
The content is not essentially the same regarding the end times. In Luke’s Gospel is related the prophecies Jesus made while teaching in the Temple. The Olivet Discourse is what Jesus taught His few disciples on the Mount of Olives, after Peter says in essence ‘ Look at the majesty of the Temple over there. And then asks sp0ecifically about the end of the Age. History records that more than a million Jews died in the razing of Jerusalem, but that many many escaped prior to Romans assaulting the city because they took Jesus’s prophecy regarding imminent destruction hallmarked by armies surrounding the city as their cue to get out immediately.
I wrote, “Sorry, you read it wrong. PAUL is telling the readers that SINCE the antichrist has not been revealed, the Rapture could not yet have happened.” Let me state it more precisely: if the antichrist is revealed the Rapture has already happened because He Who retrains has been taken out of the way so the antichrist can be revealed. The seventieth week of Daniel is about Israel and time of Jacob’s Trouble, and it is Jews who will be doing the evangelizing, not ‘the Church’.
The Church, the Bride of Christ, the Body of Christ leaves the Earth at the start of chapter four in The Revelation. It doesn’t appear again until very late in The Revelation, chapter nineteen IMS..
“The Church, the Bride of Christ, the Body of Christ leaves the Earth at the start of chapter four in The Revelation.”
That is an assertion, no different than the pre-wrath assertion that the church is gathered between the sixth and seventh seal. Obviously, the Church includes those present with the Lord NOW. Any vision of saints in Heaven could reasonably include these saints. Since John’s vision was of future things (symbolically) those who are in Heaven in addition to the angels certainly are at least part of the church, but what indication is there that this is the whole church?
“It doesn’t appear again until very late in The Revelation, chapter nineteen...”
Clearly there are divisions in the book of Revelation. The letters to the seven churches in Asia are from a separate vision than what follows. Certainly there is symbolism in the divisions, what is included, what is absent, etc. But we have to be careful about elevating inferences to the same level as the doctrine, reproofs, correction, instruction, etc. of scripture.
Systematic theology is a useful tool to get an overall picture of the contents of the Bible, including prophecy. It is useful for learning and even memorization, or at least strong familiarity with large portions of scripture. It is not, however, a Protestant catechism.
I can also point out that the name of Jesus is used repeatedly in the first three chapters, but many chapters go by with His name absent. Striking for a book that is the revelation of Jesus Christ. He is referred to as the Lamb 28 times. In chapter 5, He is the worthy Lamb. In chapter 6, He is described as wrathful. But there are many chapters with no specific reference to Him at all. Of course the whole book is about Him, but the absence of any overt reference is no different than no overt reference to the Church. In fact, much of Revelation is from the vantage point of Heaven, so we should expect to see the Church in Heaven after the rapture. But the Church or Bride are not so named during much of the interim and during the parts under dispute regarding the location of the Church.
There is no mention of the Church in chapters 4 or 5 either.
“The content is not essentially the same regarding the end times. History records that more than a million Jews died in the razing of Jerusalem, but that many many escaped prior to Romans assaulting the city because they took Jesus’s prophecy regarding imminent destruction hallmarked by armies surrounding the city as their cue to get out immediately.”
Yes, Luke addresses some aspects of the church age that happen earlier:
Luke 21:12
But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons. You will be brought before kings and rulers for My name’s sake.
These things come BEFORE the “beginning of sorrows.” These include persecution during the early days of the church, the destruction of the temple, and the scattering of the Jews. The things that happened to Jerusalem and the temple happened in 70 A.D. but are connected to the church age because that is the persecution Luke addresses. And that passage ties back to end times events as well. Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles all of the way through the beginning of sorrows and the abomination of desolation.
Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21, Revelation 6 all contain:
1. antichrist deception
2. war
3. famines
4. death by natural disasters and disease
5. persecution / tribulation of the saints
6. signs in the sun, moon, and stars
7. sign of Christ coming in the sky with clouds, power, and glory
(The seventh sign is specifically so named in the synoptic Gospels only.)
There are many other things these passages share in common but are not in ALL four passages. However, this particular sequence is found nowhere else in prophecy. It cannot be placed anywhere else in the book of Revelation, certainly.
There is specifically a gathering of the elect in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Revelation 7. Luke 21 refers to this same event as “your redemption”.
There is a description of the world responding with fear and mourning in Matthew 24, Luke 13 and, Revelation 6. These same passages also reference the “four winds of Heaven” symbolically.
The disciples asked what are the signs of Christ’s coming. He gave them these six. Further, in answer to their question about “the end” His coming is the seventh sign that indicates the end has arrived.
The language in the synoptic Gospels indicates the Great Tribulation will be brought to an end with the cataclysmic signs in the heavens (#6 above). Christ says “THEN” He will come and gather His elect. He also says, “Look up.” We are not looking up at the sky constantly now because these signs have not occurred. When they do occur, we are told to look up.
Based on Matthew, Mark, and Luke, there must be a coming of Christ immediately following the cataclysmic signs in the heavens. This matches with Revelation 7 in which millions, if not billions, of believers appear before God’s throne, coming “out of the Great Tribulation”.
If this is not the correct sequence of events, I’d like to see anything that even remotely comes close to matching. We have no specific rapture of the church in Revelation. Nor do we have a specific gathering of the elect, whether or not this is the same as the rapture. So, just like studies are done to help us sort the order of the synoptic Gospels (which is sometimes difficult), this is the best order I can see between these passages. I have not heard anyone make the case that these are different sequences of events that occur at different times.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.