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 ...
I know what it is. That's why I asked if you knew, and what bearing it had on the subject matter we were discussing. Or if you were just spouting off.
... perform the homework of spiritual sanctification
Now you are babbling. Is this your attempt to get out of answering the hard questions from the Bible. Or do you just believe the Holy Spirit will mystically "lay it on your heart" like the gnostics.
I was mistaken about the Lake of Fire, as I had recalled from memory the four compartments which are better described as Abraham’s Bosom (Paradise), the Torments, Tartarus, and the Abyss (not the lake of Fire).
I still haven't seen any interpretation of specific Bible texts to support your theory. Specifically, without regurgitating the dispensational party line, I'd like you to demonstrate that these are all different "compartments" rather than merely being different names for the same concept/place.
Then please explain this passage:
"Then Jesus said to his disciples, 'I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven (basileian twn ouranwn). Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God (basileian tou qeou).' " (Matt. 19:23,24)
How is it that Jesus was not confusing people by using two different realities (according to your view) in the exact same context to highlight the exact same kingdom concept?
The actualy text of the Bible does not at all support this theory.
No, the two kingdom phrases describe the exact same reality in any "plain sense" reading of the Scripture.
No, I believe Revelation was written just prior to the events of AD70.
I believe the "time times and half a time" or latter half of the "70th week" is either a) the period of time immediately after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, during which time the early church began to be greatly persecuted by the apostate Jews and Romans (e.g., the inprisonment of Peter, the stoning of Stephen, see Acts 8:1), or b) is symbolically the time from the resurrection/ascension until the Jewish War in AD70. I lean towards the first view, but I'm not settled at this point.
Well, that a different explanation than I've seen before. I can think of some problems off the top of my head, but I'll have to give it some thought.
BTW, Blogger's given up on the thread.
I don't know whether the Jews Jesus was talking to were confused or not...I'm not confused by it...
But then, James was written to the 12 tribes of Israel and Christians aren't confused by it but they ought to be...
Can you please point of the Greek word I'm supposed to be looking at in each of these passages. E.g., John 3:18 reads:
"He who believes in Him is not condemned (krinetai); but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
There is no place or "compartment" identified in that passage. I don't see any reference to "torments". Perhaps it's a translation difference. The Greek would help.
(Where did you copy this list from?)
Looking at another of these passages, Romans 10:6,7, the idea there is that "abyss" is merely a reference to the place of the dead (hades) is apparent. In fact Paul gives the correct interpretation for us.
"But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way, "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?' " (that is, to bring Christ down from above) or, " 'Who will descend into the abyss?' " (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead)."
BTW, there is no Matt. 9:48 in my Bible.
Apparently you are because you cannot explain Matt. 19:23,24 in support of your theory.
Compare also the different gospels. Some use "kingdom of heaven' and some "kingdom of God" to reference the exact same thing. E.g.,
"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!" (Matt. 3:2)
"The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel." (Mark 1:15)
"Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." (Matt. 11:11)
"For I say to you, among those born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he." (Luke 7:28)
"And as you go, preach, saying, 'The kingdom of heaven is at hand.'" (Matt. 10:7)
"And heal the sick there, and say to them, 'The kingdom of God has come near to you.'" (Luke 10:9)
"Another parable He put forth to them, saying: 'The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field, which indeed is the least of all the seeds; but when it is grown it is greater than the herbs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches.' " (Matt. 13:31,32)
"Then He said, 'What is the kingdom of God like? And to what shall I compare it? It is like a mustard seed, which a man took and put in his garden; and it grew and became a large tree, and the birds of the air nested in its branches.' " (Luke 13:18,19)
The examples are almost endless, and they demonstrate why almost all dispensationalists have given up on this tired old theory.
You failed the pop quiz on Mark 9:48.
And it looks to me like the church has dressed him up in a clown outfit to amuse children.
While I’m not saying you don’t possess Chokmah Binah or Da’at, I am saying I’ve yet to see you display any.
You possess doctrine, anything else?
I wouldn't mention that you believe "Jesus Christ" is derived from "Julius Caesar" in public though, esp. among those who know better. It might prove embarrassing.
Using this "sounds like" theory, I suppose you also believe Meshech and Tubal are really references to Moscow and Tobolsk.
I may have missed the extra credit, but I get a 100% on the rest. No?
Why is Mark 9:47,48 (" ... to be cast into hell fire-- where 'Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'") not simply a reference to the lake of Fire, rather than some invented compartment of Hades?
The compartments of Hades or Sheol are simply a discernment of their use in Scripture and also confirmed by ancient historical writings which make reference to the same places in basis of their accounts. Mythology happens to be consistent with the Christian perspective of the four compartments, indicating its basis was in substance, although perhaps twisted in approach.
There may be even more advanced doctrine regarding their relationships, but it is obvious the Torments are discernible from Paradise, and Tartarus is explicitly mentioned where the Torments are not. The Abyss is also referenced with respect to the imprisonment of Satan and demon armies yet to have been released.
BTW, are you really Jewish or are you one of those Christian messianic wannabes that feels a need to transliterate all things understandable into faux Hebrew gobbledygook?
Good reading. I find no need to read more into Scripture than what is there. Four compartments are referenced. Maybe there is more or overlapping, but it appears Paradise and Torments are separated by a vast gulf fixed from Luke 16, while the other compartments are explicitly referenced with respect to fallen angels and chained imprisonment which they seek desperately to avoid.
"For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell (tartaroo ) and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment;" (2 Peter 2:4)
And if God sent the fallen angel to tartaroo how did they get out, and why would they be afraid of going to the abussos rather than back to tartaroo?
"And they begged Him that He would not command them to go out into the abyss (abussos)." (Luke 8:31)
Something about all these compartments is not adding up.
I don't care for all this slicing and dicing of Scripture.
Seems much simplier to see two aspects to Hades (the place of the dead prior to the general resurrection) one for the righteous and one for the unrighteous. After the resurrection, the righteous inhabit the new heavens and new earth and the unrighteous enter into the lake of fire.
The doctrine of the Hypostatic Union was first formulated by the Catholic Church and later included in some reformed and dispensational systematic theologies.
Our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus was the first fruits. First human to be resurrected. He also provided for man a perfect example of how a human is to approach God and the persons of the Godhead are probably best studied from what God has provided us in Him.
It is an important study because it provides insight through faith in Him how each person of the Godhead works and to which person of the Godhead we emulate in our thinking.
During this period of time, the Holy Spirit indwells each and every believer. This is discernible from all past ages. No other period of human history had this unique power experiment placed on human beings. The Holy Spirit covered and embued believers in the Old Testament, but not an indwelling.
Additionally, after the Restrainer is removed, we do not find the Holy Spirit to be indwelling believers or the Church after the second Advent.
There is a tremendous testing ongoing which touches upon the angelic conflict, Satan’s counterfeit cosmic or worldly system, and the power of God provided to those faithful to Him. Those who study the relationships in the dispensations are able to be further prepared in Spiritual Warfare with this doctrine, again a doctrine only available through the Holy Spirit.
There may be confusion amongst those who associate such studies independent of what the Holy Spirit provides and are well justified in not agreeing with such study (independent of Him). There are studies, though, of dispensations, ages, and times which assist the believer who remains in faith to be further sanctified with Bible doctrine circulating in their thinking processes, again as faith only provided by the ministry of the Holy Spirit.
The Reformed theologies are correct in that ALL faith is from God. This includes true faith as Bible doctrine circulating in the soul of the believer in fellowship with God through faith in Christ.
Yes, but what is it??!!
You still have not told me what it is, or what it has to do with the subject we have been discussing. How do I know you understand the doctrine and are properly applying it?
I don't get your point.
Where in the world would an uneducated buffoon come up with this phrase?
Thankfully, most of Christendom correctly understands dispensationalism to be a recent fad based on geopolitics and not on Scripture.
discernible ... embued ... I think you mean "distinguishable" and "imbued" .
"im·bue (tr.v.), -bued, -bu·ing, -bues.
1. To inspire or influence thoroughly; pervade:
2. To permeate or saturate.
3. To stain or dye deeply."
If the Holy Spirit did not indwell OT saints, how were they saved? Who moved them to embrace the salvation of the Lord offered in the covenant Hew established?
"Then he remembered the days of old, Moses and his people, saying: "Where is He who brought them up out of the sea With the shepherd of His flock? Where is He who put His Holy Spirit within them," (Isa. 63:11)
Why the dispensational need to distinguish between "coming upon" and indwelling? According to the BIble what would be the practical difference between the two?
Of course the "kingdom of God" and the "kingdom of Heaven" are the same thing. People love puzzles and so they often will create them out of thin air hoping to justify some goofy preconception. But...
"God is not the author of confusion." -- 1 Corinthians 14:33
Soon, and sadly, we'll probably see people saying there's a difference between the Holy Ghost and the Holy Spirit.
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.