Is the Pretribulation Rapture Biblical?

Well stated.

The other verse which often accompanies the doctrine refers to how nothing can keep the believer from the love of God, neither depth nor authorities, nor principalities, etc. I’ll search it again.

Now prior to the Cross, believers descended into Hades to the compartment known as Paradise or Abraham’s Bosom after they died in the body. After the payment for sin, nothing kept those whom God loved from being in His presence.

With respect to our Lord and Savior, while on the cross, He was judged by the Father for the sins of all mankind, past, present, and future. Then when found accountable for those sins, was separated from God the Father in the spirit, i.e. died spiritually, as testified by Christ Himself while on the cross (Eli, Eli, ...why have you forsaken me?) At this point, our Lord and Savior was still alive in the soul and in the body.

He later committed his spirit (human spirit) to the Father (indicating his soul was still alive at that point. Then hung his head forward and breathed his last(bodily death).

(aside)An interesting point made by some is that the natural anatomical position for the head to have rested for those being crucified was to lay to the side, but not thrust out to the front. The hung head to the front indicates to some that it was an intentional act which resulted in the settlement of bodily fluids lower in the abdomen upon death. As the specific gravity of the blood settling in the abdomen caused the blood serum and clotting to separate out, upon being pierced in the side, the fluid pouring out would appear as blood and water. There are indications in the gospels that this account is consistent, but probably not with sufficient accuracy to prove against other plausible accounts consistent with Scripture. Nevertheless, I’ve found the report of the head being thrust foward and anatomical consequences to be an interesting perspective of the Cross.

His soul descended into Hades, which has 4 compartments, Paradise(Abraham’s Bosom), the Torments, Tartarus, and the lake of Fire. I haven’t seen the argument which describes which compartment he descended into, although we know that He did descend into Abraham’s Bosom from the prophecy on the Cross with the thief. Some have argued he also descended into the Torments, but I have not seen the full doctrine of such and my recall with Bible doctrine indicates His descent was into paradise.

His spirit ascended to the Father from the Cross when he relinguished it. His body, was later taken to the grave in the tomb.

Three days later, the soul was returned by the power of God the Holy Spirit. His human spirit was returned from heaven to the body by the power of God, the Father. And His body was raised again a resurrection body, united with his soul and spirit.

An enjoyable and fruitful study is to follow which person of the Godhead participated in each role of His resurrection.

Whereas sin has been paid for on the cross, we today may in an instant return to fellowship with God by simply turning to Him, and confessing our sins, because we know that they have been paid. This places us back into a sure fellowship with Him by His grace.

This is not the case with good and evil. The consequences of which must flow from time, not resolved by us today in an instant. Although we might return to God and be forgiven our sins in an instant, the consequences of those sins in good and evil are not resolved in an instant.

Perhaps the most dubious of all activity is human good, independent of faith through Christ, because such good when seen from a divine perspective of perfect righteousness will be judged as good for nothingness, because it was performed while in a state of sin.

I’ll try to come back in a little with some explicit Scriptural references to accompany this.

BTW, Happy Resurrection Day (Happy Easter). He is alive today in heaven.

BTW, the Catholic doctrines on the Hypostatic Union help develop the understanding of spiritual death and resurrection.

I'm not sure we are disagreeing except perhaps on an appropriate definition of Hades.

Just so I understand clearly, what is the present state of those who have died physically.

We got started down this path when the dispensational subject of multiple gospels was mentioned.

You asserted that the gospel of the kingdom was non-salvific while the gospel of grace was.

Peter's reaction has nothing to do with the objectivity of that statement.

I'd just like s to get back on track and have some Scripture to back up your assertion.

Still waiting.

the Catholic doctrines on the Hypostatic Union

Not sure I follow. Can you please tell us what "the Catholic doctrines on the Hypostatic Union" is exactly and how it relates to this subject?

Thanks.

I’ll try to come back in a little with some explicit Scriptural references to accompany this.

Please do, esp. the part about all these "compartments" in Hades. E.g., if the lake of fire is a compartment of Hades, how can Hades be thrown into the lake of fire at the judgment?

The rapture and the second coming are the same event. The Great Tribulation happened in AD70.

I agree with the first part of your statement - what people call rapture is the second advent. It will not happen until after Satan stands in Jerusalem pretending to be Christ. We will experience Satan's tribulation of lies and deceit which cause the apostasy.

What I don't understand is the second part - why do you believe the Great Tribulation has already happened?

Forgive me. I expected that Dr. Eckleburg was your actual name and that perhaps you had earned a doctorate of theology. You made no attempt to dissuade me of that view.

Yet, a google search of the name Dr. Eckleburg showed that it is from a character in the novel, The Great Gatsby.

Even when it was obvious that that was the impression I held, when I went so far as to mention it in my posts, you made no attempt at all in clarification. In fact, you encouraged that misconception.

If so, that's fine. I'm just gullible enough to believe that you would act truthfully while dealing with the Sacred Text, the Word of God. On the other hand, if you make no attempt to clarify a misunderstanding and do all you can to foster a mistaken notion, what does that reveal about your true character?

If you indeed hold a doctorate in theology, then I offer you my sincerest apology for thinking this was a deliberate lie.

Some of us were in church this morning and not anxiously sitting here waiting to jump on the internet to face a hostile audience.

The Kingdom which Christ preached about was first prophesied in the Old Testament. It was the promise that out of the lineage of David would come One who would rule and reign forever.

Here are some associated prophecies, though it is not limited to just these:

2 Samuel 7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.

1 Kings 9:5
then I will establish the throne of your kingdom over Israel forever, just as I promised to your father David, saying, ‘You shall not lack a man on the throne of Israel.’

1 Chronicles 17:12
“He shall build for Me a house, and I will establish his throne forever.

1 Chronicles 17:14
“But I will settle him in My house and in My kingdom forever, and his throne shall be established forever.”’”

Daniel 2:44 “In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever.

The theme is continued in the New Testament:
Luke 1:33
and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.”

Hebrews 1:8
But of the Son He says,” YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER,AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM.

From these passages, we see the Kingdom of God is something in which the Son of God reigns. Thus far, none of the Scriptures mentioned stated that such a kingdom is salvific. Rather, they are indications of the promise of God that through a Son of David, an everlasting Kingdom will be established for the good of Israel and the world.

Next, we turn to
Revelation 12:10
Then I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, “Now the salvation, and the power, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down, he who accuses them before our God day and night.

Here we see the kingdom of God distinguished from salvation and power. We also see it as something which has come when the accuser of the bretheren no longer has access to the throne room of God. Since during Paul’s day, and since Satan’s accusations against us continue to this day, this is a future event. The kingdom, in this way, is future.

Lets look at a few more verses:
Colossians 4:11
and also Jesus who is called Justus; these are the only fellow workers for the kingdom of God who are from the circumcision, and they have proved to be an encouragement to me.

Here, the kingdom of God is something to be worked for. We don’t work for salvation.

1 Corinthians 15:24
then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power.

Here it is seen as something in the future that Christ will hand over to the Father when He has abolished all rule but His own.

Acts 14:22
strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying, “ Through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God.”
Here it appears to be something that one enters into after salvation.

Acts 1: 6When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

Does Jesus say, “no, you idiots! Don’t you realize that the kingdom of God is your salvation?” No. He replies” ...It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.”

But wait:
Jesus also says: Luke 17:19-21
19And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath made thee whole. 20And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
Here it appears to be something internal within the individual and not physical and something that is there right now. Other versions say “the kingdom of God is in your midst.”

But wait again:
Luke 21:31
“So you also, when you see these things happening, recognize that the kingdom of God is near.”
Well, now here it is still something in the future that has signs as to its fulfillment.

So.... what exactly IS the Kingdom of God.

First, it is not salvific. There is only one way that man is saved, by grace through faith in Christ (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Second, it is physical: Luke 22:30
that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

and again, the verses from above:Acts 1: 6When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? 7And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

Third, it is spiritual: Luke 18:17
“Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.”

Wow! Lots of hard to sort out data here.

Here is what I would submit.

The gospel of the kingdom is the good news that Jesus reigns. The devil can believe Jesus reigns and not be saved. So, it is not salvific. However, it is entered into in the spiritual sense when one is saved. Christ is already ruling and reigning in the hearts of His children right NOW.

Nevertheless, the gospel of the kingdom also proclaims the establishment of a physical kingdom in which Christ sits in Jerusalem and reigns over the world, and His children with Him.

Isaiah 24:23
Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the LORD of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously.

Ezekiel 37:21And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land: 22And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all. 23Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God. 24And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them. 25And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children’s children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever. 26Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore. 27My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 28And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.

Revelation 20: 4And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

The good news of the gospel of God’s grace is evident throughout Scripture and IS salvific. It is synonymous with the gospel of Salvation, the gospel of Christ, and the gospel of God.
Ephesians 1:13In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise

Romans 1:16
16For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

And it is contrasted with “another” or “perverted” gospel of Galatians
Galatians 1:6
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:7Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

It is not specifically about Christ’s rule. It is about Christ’s redemption and the person of Christ Himself.

One can believe in the coming kingdom of the Messiah without being saved. Many believe in a coming Messiah. Some even believe in a twisted version of Jesus the Messiah’s coming kingdom while yet rejecting key elements of His person (I’m thinking of cultists here and we know who they are). One can not reject who Christ is and what He did for us and be saved.

That is the difference between the two gospels spoken of here. One is attained through salvation. The other is salvation.

... if the lake of fire is a compartment of Hades, how can Hades be thrown into the lake of fire at the judgment?

Have you ever turned a sock inside-out?

Well stated. I concur.

Biblical doctrines which have been presented in the context of dispensations are only considered tedious and counter-productive for those lacking patience to remain in fellowship with God through faith in Christ.

Many believers have found that by remaining in fellowship with God through faith in Christ, God the Holy Spirit is able to minister to them in their human spirit when the Word of God is taught to them categorized in terms of dispensations.

Interestingly, much Bible doctrine categorized dispensationally in our hearts as provided by the Holy Spirit reaffirms many Bible doctrines from Reformed theology. Placing Reformed theology ahead of faith in Christ, though, quenches the Holy Spirit, precluding His active continuing ministry in our spirit, mind, and hearts.

Believers physical body is on earth and their spirit is with Christ

Unbelievers body is on earth and spirit is not with Christ.

Now if you want to discuss outer darkness that is another subject all together.

Both of our statements stand on all of these subjects. Consider the subject closed.

That is the difference between the two gospels spoken of here. One is attained through salvation. The other is salvation.

Frankly, I don't see that distinction clearly in any of the verses you cited. It sounds like a straining at gnats because of the underlying dispensational presuppositions.

The notions of remission from sins is central to the gospel. The "kingdom" vs "grace" makes no difference.

What gospel did John come preaching as the herald of Jesus? The gospel of the kingdom or the gospel of grace? Was not repentance from sin a key part of his message (Mark 1:4)? Why did they come to John to confess their sins and be baptized is the kingdom gospel was not salvific.

Where in the Bible does it separate the kingly work of Christ from the working out of salvation for the people? I'm not talking about verse A highlights one part of Christ's work and verse B highlights another. (Not every passage can possibly say everything about the work of Messiah at once.) I mean where are the verses that intentionally make a radical distinction between what Jesus did in coming as the king of His people and coming to save them from their sin?

From the very beginning, Jesus preached but one message, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel." (Mark 1:15) He never changed His tune midstream because the Jews rejected Him. He never switched from a kingdom message to a "salvific" message. They were one and the same. There never was any distinction.

None of your verses refute that position.

You quoted Dan. 2:44 and Luke 1:33 on the establishment of the kingdom. When was this fulfilled?

Matthew 1:21 says that Jesus came "to save His people from their sins". Was that a kingdom gospel message or grace gospel message?

In Luke 1:69,77 the prophecy of John's father Zechariah was that the Salvation of Israel was about to appear. Was that a kingdom gospel message or grace gospel message?

If the gospel of the kingdom was non-salvific, why is it this gospel that is being preached to all the nations (Matt. 24:14)?

You verses seem selective and your analysis a bit arbitrary. E.g., regarding Col 4:11, you say, "Here, the kingdom of God is something to be worked for. We don’t work for salvation." I can only assume you are reacting to the phrase "fellow worker" in those verses. Is it really teaching the kingdom is non-salvific because it is based on works? Is it really speaking of works-righteousness at all? Actually it not. Again, you are misreading and being arbitrary.

Bottom line here seems to be that you have a theory and are prooftexting the Bible to fit that reality. There are many verses that refute your claims as I have demonstrated.

There is only one gospel in the Bible. It is full-orbed and includes our personal salvation as well as the salvation of the world under the kingship of Christ (Is John 3:16 about kingdom gospel o grace gospel?). He is both our High Priest and our King.

Believers physical body is on earth and their spirit is with Christ

When Jesus was physically on earth, where was His spirit?

Unbelievers body is on earth and spirit is not with Christ.

Where is their spirit?

What I don't understand is the second part - why do you believe the Great Tribulation has already happened?

The prophecy Jesus gave at Olivet was, in the main, about the destruction of the temple that happened in AD70. The Great Tribulation had to do with events of that day.

"My soteriology"?? I don't know what you mean. Jesus Christ is the focus of the entire Scripture. Is He not? All of the OT pointed forward to His coming. All the NT speaks of what He has accomplised in bring salvation to His people, Jews and gentiles, just as Abraham was promised.
Your soteriology specifically includes the provision that all promises made the the Jews are null and void with their rejection of Christ at His first coming. The only way they can participate in any promises hereafter are the supposed new ones that they get when they become Christians. But all that stuff about them getting land (which we do not tie to soteriology but you do), is moot. As such, Zechariah 12-14 is once again spiritualized and made to be symbolic when it is not necessary to do so.

Zechariah was a prophet and his words reflect prophetic forms of speech. There are many images and symbols in the prophecies.

Let's look at some of the language, and you tell me what it means.

"'In that day,' says the Lord, 'I will strike every horse with confusion, and its rider with madness; I will open My eyes on the house of Judah, and will strike every horse of the peoples with blindness.'" (12:4)
Has it ever occurred to you that the world in the tribulation will literally be Hell on earth? Half of the population will be dead. Disaster everywhere. Ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, horseback may be the only way they can get around? Today, they still use horseback in certain armies, particularly when you are dealing with certain terrain. It is only the voice of your particular eschatological and soteriological reference that colors this passage symbolic.

Horses and riders and Judah. Sounds like it could fit with the 1st century AD. So you think it fits better far in the future when armies no longer use horses? When "Judah" no longer exists?
First, do not twist the text. It says the house of Judah. The house of Judah most certainly does exist. The people of Judah are alive today. The fact that we don't know who most of them are does not mean that God doesn't. Second, as stated above, NOTHING necessitates that horses will not be in use. Third, no the passage doesn't fit the 1st century at all. Your soteriology and eschatology place it there, but even in that aspect such a view fails - for the passage goes on to say that Jesus will defend Jerusalem. Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD as you are fond of pointing out. Zechariah 12-14 has NOTHING to do with 70 AD.

"And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn. In that day there shall be a great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning at Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. And the land shall mourn, every family by itself: the family of the house of David by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself, and their wives by themselves;" (12:10-12)

Does ths not sound like the mourning of Jerusalem and Judah when the nations came up against it, the days of vengeance mentioned in Luke 21?
Did the people of Jerusalem mourn for Christ then? No. Again, the passage does not fit 70 AD. No matter how much you try to force it into the passage.

"In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness." (13:1)

Does this not speak of the Lord Jesus, the true foundation of life, who brought salvation to His people so the renmant was saved?
It speaks of the grace of God as shown the the salvation of Christ. But note, it speaks of the inhabitants of Jerusalem as well. Specific place. The verse you skipped which follows reads " 2And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land." To date, idols are still in the land. In the least you have Islam. This prophecy has never been fulfilled. And note, it revolves around what is happening in the land of Israel.

"It shall come to pass that if anyone still prophesies, then his father and mother who begot him will say to him, 'You shall not live, because you have spoken lies in the name of the Lord.' And his father and mother who begot him shall thrust him through when he prophesies." (13:3)

The true Prophet has come, The Lord Jesus Christ. All other prophets will be put to shame. We are not to go after them.
Now you go skipping verses again. Lets look at what it really says and the reason they are saying it.

3And it shall come to pass, that when any shall yet prophesy, then his father and his mother that begat him shall say unto him, Thou shalt not live; for thou speakest lies in the name of the LORD: and his father and his mother that begat him shall thrust him through when he prophesieth.

4And it shall come to pass in that day, that the prophets shall be ashamed every one of his vision, when he hath prophesied; neither shall they wear a rough garment to deceive:

5But he shall say, I am no prophet, I am an husbandman; for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.

6And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
True, the prophets prophecy no more. Why? Because they are ashamed of their old prophecies, which were deceptions, because now they are face to face with the one whom they have pierced. Israel has exhibited no such recognition of Christ to this day. They didn't do it in 70 AD. They haven't done it yet. They will do it in the future.

"'Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd, Against the Man who is My Companion,' Says the Lord of hosts. 'Strike the Shepherd, And the sheep will be scattered; Then I will turn My hand against the little ones.'" (13:7)

We know that this was fulilled at Christ's coming (Matt. 26:31)

"For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem; The city shall be taken, The houses rifled, And the women ravished. Half of the city shall go into captivity, But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city." (14:1)

Anyone familiar with the history of AD70 realizes this is an accurate description of the great desolation that fell upon the city.
No, it isn't. The nations were not to battle against Jerusalem. Rome was. The city did not go into captivity. It was destroyed. It is not an accurate description of what happened in 70 AD.

"And in that day it shall be That living waters shall flow from Jerusalem, Half of them toward the eastern sea And half of them toward the western sea; In both summer and winter it shall occur." (14:8)

Read John 4 and Jesus' description of living waters, esp. v. 14.
Talk about jumping around. First we are in 70 AD. Now we are back with Jesus' description of Himself to the woman at Samaria. Complete with a geographical and calendrical description.

"In that day 'HOLINESS TO THE LORD' shall be engraved on the bells of the horses. The pots in the Lord's house shall be like the bowls before the altar." (14:20)

Bells and horses. fulfilled or future?
Jesus comes back on a white horse. Fulfilled or future?

I could go on. I realize you do not find this satisfying, and I also realize that you have somehat of an advantage because in your system everything is still in the future so you can just say all will happen precisely as it is written, no matter how anachronistic it sounds (horses and riders, etc). That's really not an answer as much as an excuse for not having to do any interpretation of the text.

No, it is letting the text interpret itself. It is going with the most natural meaning of the text and allowing God to fulfill His prophecies exactly as He said they would occur rather than adopting an allegorical stance where allegory is not required. God said that Jesus would be born in Bethlehem. He was. God said he would be from the line of David. He was. God said he would be of the tribe of Judah. He was. God said he would be crucified. He was. God said He would be rejected by His own. He was. Prophecies tend to not be allegorical. They tend to have literal fulfillments. I believe that God had the prophets write what He planned to do and will fulfill these prophecies just as He said He would.

But the fact remains that there is no confirmation anywhere in the NT that these events are still to be fulfilled far, far in the future from the 1st century.
Argument from silence. Most of the prophecy was still future when the writers were writing their epistles and gospels. John was told in 90 AD to "Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later." We can argue that about what parts of Revelation fall into what categories, but based upon the precise fulfillment of Scripture in the past I expect the prophecies of the Old and New Testaments to be precisely fulfilled in the future as well. They have not bee precisely fulfilled to date.

Before you start in with all the charges, give us your view and tell us which portion of this prophecy speaks of Jesus first coming only.
None of it took place in the 1st century. It is all future. As to my view on it, I have discussed what I believe Zechariah 12-14 means in the Zionism thread. I will not discuss it any more. Repeating myself will merit nothing.

We are talking about death, that was your original question. What happens when our physical bodies cease to be.

Forgive me. I expected that Dr. Eckleburg was your actual name and that perhaps you had earned a doctorate of theology. You made no attempt to dissuade me of that view.

Safe to assume that most are using pseudonyms. Just so you don't think "Lee N. Field" is my real name...

(This ugly and awkward looking piece of British engineering is a Lee-Enfield 2A.)

Now, back to our regularly scheduled roast-counterroast.