Posted on 04/02/2007 8:40:21 AM PDT by topcat54
Conclusion
Although the pretribulation rapture theory is very popular today, given arguments that are offered in support of this doctrine we must declare Pretribulationalism to be contrary to the clear teachings of Scripture. Simply put, there is not one shred of evidence that can be found in the Bible to support the pretribulation rapture. The typical Pretribulational arguments offered reveal a pattern: of imposing one’s presuppositions onto a text without any exegetical justification whatsoever; of finding subtle meaning between words and/or phrases that were never intended by the author; of spiritualizing or ignoring passages that contradict the Pretribulational paradigm; and, of imposing Pretribulationalism upon passages that actually teach the unity of the eschatological complex (i.e., the rapture, second coming, general resurrection, and general judgment all occur on the same day—the day of the Lord). It is our hope and prayer that professing Christians would cast off this escapist fantasy and return to the task of personal sanctification and godly dominion.
(Excerpt) Read more at reformedonline.com ...
In Zech. 14:4, "And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, Which faces Jerusalem on the east. And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two, From east to west, Making a very large valley; Half of the mountain shall move toward the north And half of it toward the south."
Some folks see this as a prophecy yet to be literally fulfilled at Christ's second coming. They say the language is so clear that it cannot be spiritualized.
But consider Luke 3:3-6:
"And [John] went into all the region around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, as it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying: 'The voice of one crying in the wilderness: "Prepare the way of the Lord; Make His paths straight. Every valley shall be filled And every mountain and hill brought low; The crooked places shall be made straight And the rough ways smooth; And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." ' "
Now, consider the words of Isaiah quoted here and compare them in their style of language to Zech. 14. Isaiah prophesized about what sounds like great upheavals in the physical earth as the herald of Messiah was to appear. Should one have expected the appearance of John to be accompanied by a massive public works program in the 1st century with tons of earth being relocated from the high mountains to the deepest valleys? Perhaps some folks thought that way. In fact I’m sure it got some of the more carnal minded Jews in trouble with recognizing the Messiah.
But, nevertheless, we are told the prophecy was fulfilled. Not in the way any literalist would have us believe, but it was fulfilled, as Luke confirms.
Now, I submit that verses like Zech. 14:4 are to be taken in much the same way. The prophecy was fulfilled by Christ just as it was intended. The cleaving of the mountain was for the purpose of the salvation of the people (v. 5). It was done in exactly the same was as the “mountain and hills were brought low” in Isaiah’s prophecy. It was done by the preaching of the good news, the gospel of Christ’s kingdom come near to the world for the salvation of His people.
Next time you object that a prophecy has not been “literally” fulfilled, remember Luke 3:3-6.
I was thinking that you might have played infield for Lee High School. And may I say, that is one heck of a weapon that I would love to own.
Thanks.
I did not immediately dismiss all. I pointed out verses that you overlooked and have not addressed. I pointed out that perhaps the verses are not saying what you think they are saying, or that all taken together they paint another picture. I asked some very important questions about your presuppositions.
That's the form that Bible interpretation sometimes needs to take.
I'm sorry if my probing offended you.
Madame, maybe it’s time to ping your friends? Call “Dr. E.” and the rest.
Good thing my wife is not reading this. I'd have some explaining. Or perhaps you got that from Scofield's Notes?
If you have something positive to contribute to this discussion, please share it. Otherwise, perhaps a pre-FReeper rapture on your part is in order.
Thats a good one everyone knows that topcat was one of the coolest slickest dudes of his time.
I take it that the 54 is your birth year?
Question for you “Dr.” Topcat. Using your interpretation of Scripture, can’t we say that Christ’s feet are on the Mount of Olives and His elbows are in another geographical area.
“Dr.” John, let’s go to “Dr.” Topcat’s ping list and wake up the troops. Raw meat here, guys.
;)
The John 6:66 refers to the Gospel of John read it from about 6:60 to 6:66. Is it not rather coincidental that the verse is 666 and the book was written prior to Revelations where the number of the man is 666.
Glad to see you got here so quick without being pinged.
You’re no doctor either? My, my. But, you see, you could pretend to be a doctor of theology, just adopt a “Dr” title, like others. We could call you “Dr. Phil.” This is kind of fun trying to guess who is who on this ping list.
The oaks of Bashan giggled, I heard it.
Good to have yo aboard. I like your wit -- it sounds honest and original.
"Close friends get to call him T.C."
I take it that the 54 is your birth year?
Very good.
WATCH OUT FOR LOW BRANCES AND EVERYONE HAS THEIR UP COMINGS TOO.
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.
A misinterpretation.
The only way they can participate in any promises hereafter are the supposed new ones that they get when they become Christians.
A couple of points to be made with regard to the land promise, from a couple different directions.
1)If the Jews are apart from Christ, they are lost. Judgment, lake 'o fire, all that. The land promises don't mean squat in the long term if they are not Christian.
Let them have their little postage stamp country, because "The church will outlive the universe." (C. S. Lewis, somewhere.)
2)How did Paul treat the promise to Abraham of land? "For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith." Romans 4. Of the world? How does that fit the dispensational model? How does Paul read that out of the Genesis account?
How did the author of Hebrews treat the promise to Abraham of land? "By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. ...But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city. "
The ultimate fulfillment of the promise is not terrestrial Canaan.
And, by the way, we are in on the promise to Abraham: "And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise. " Galatians 3.
Exactly.
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.