Preaching a Pre-Tribulation Rapture Weakens the Church

ArriveNet ^ | July 7, 2007 | J. Grant Swank, Jr.

[fortheDeclaration]

[When the Church is removed...]

Removed? It's already far gone.

No, it is still here, it is just apostate, just as predicted it would become (Rev.4)

[Thinkin' Gal]

I have 'outed' all of you, Diego, you and 'truth' as British-Israelites, something you were trying to hide and deny, particulary Diego.

What you've done is create your own false reality, tossing us into the pit you've conveniently pre-dug. I've not once claimed nor believed that Jews were replaced by other nations, or that they are not part of the *whole* House of Israel (which includes two sticks, not one). That is the essence of British Israelitism - that the "Christ-killing Jews" were bumped off for that sin, and the only true Israel is mixed/descended from white Europeans.

I've wonder if this really is just a case of projection, and you are the one denying Jews their rightful place in the Kingdom. After all, your post 169 says

The Church must be taken home before the Tribulation begins since the Tribulation is for the Jews, not the Church.

Feel the love for Jews right there... in your doctrine the lilly white church escapes trouble while the Joooos are left behind to take the rap.

If you're gobbling up the Rapture doctrine then you prefer Jezebel's table anyway. It's not the church that has kept, defended, and preserved TORAH. What the church has done is counted it (Torah) as a strange thing.

[fortheDeclaration]

[Ihave 'outed' all of you, Diego, you and 'truth' as British-Israelites, something you were trying to hide and deny, particulary Diego.]

What you've done is create your own false reality, tossing us into the pit you've conveniently pre-dug. I've not once claimed nor believed that Jews were replaced by other nations, or that they are not part of the *whole* House of Israel (which includes two sticks, not one). That is the essence of British Israelitism - that the "Christ-killing Jews" were bumped off for that sin, and the only true Israel is mixed/descended from white Europeans.

Well, it seems that you are as confused about British-Israelism as you are about everything else.

British Israel ism (sometimes called Anglo-Israelism) is a Christian theology essentially based on the premise that most ancient British people, Europeans and/or their royal families were direct lineal descendants of some of the Lost Tribes of Israel and in many cases also of the Tribe of Judah. Most strands of British Israel ism agree that large numbers of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel were deported by Sargon II, king of Assyria, on the fall of Samaria in 721 BC,[1] eventually migrating to Northern Europe, the British Isles, and with European colonization eventually North and South America, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and elsewhere around the globe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism

Now, if you believe that the Gentile nations are from the Israelites, you are a British-Israelite.

Stop trying to deny it.

I've wonder if this really is just a case of projection, and you are the one denying Jews their rightful place in the Kingdom. After all, your post 169 says The Church must be taken home before the Tribulation begins since the Tribulation is for the Jews, not the Church. Feel the love for Jews right there... in your doctrine the lilly white church escapes trouble while the Joooos are left behind to take the rap.

Nothing 'lilly white' about the Church since it is composed of all races and nations.

The Jews (all 12 tribes) then become the focal point of world history again, not the church as seen by the fact that 144,000 Jews from each tribe are sent to evangelize the world.

If you're gobbling up the Rapture doctrine then you prefer Jezebel's table anyway. It's not the church that has kept, defended, and preserved TORAH. What the church has done is counted it (Torah) as a strange thing.

Yea, because the church has nothing to do with 'Torah', we are of grace (Eph.2:8-9)

And the Gospel you are preaching is a false one and Paul put an anathema on it (Gal.1)

[Thinkin' Gal]

Yea, because the church has nothing to do with 'Torah', we are of grace (Eph.2:8-9)

No need to hear Moses, then.

[Quix]

The Nazi holocaust was far worse then the destruction of Jerusalem.

The future will be even worse.

= = =

INDEED.

And I greatly appreciate your fact based, logical, Biblical posts hereon.

Thanks tons.

BTW, this thread on ATS could use some support—the Anti-Christians tend to have a field day with any kosher assertions there.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=290841&page=10#pid3366183

It’s a rich mission field—in the top 10 of viewership on the web—I don’t recall in what classification—supposedly overall somehow.

Yet most posters seem to be of the European, British clueless, atheist-hostile to Christianity sorts . . .

[fortheDeclaration]

Thanks for the link!

[fortheDeclaration]

[Yea, because the church has nothing to do with 'Torah', we are of grace (Eph.2:8-9)]

No need to hear Moses, then.

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ (Jn.1:18).

The Law serves only one purpose, to get us to realize we are sinners and cannot keep it. (Gal.4)

If you are trying to keep the Law you will fail like everyone else who tried since it cannot be kept (1Jn.1:10)

So where do you bring your Peace and Trespass offerings?

[DungeonMaster]

Preaching a Pre-Tribulation Rapture Weakens the Church

To the natural mind that is true, but Christianity isn't a business, we preach the truth even if it doesn't make a good business case.

[Diego1618]

It appears that this date is about 100 years different than the calculation of Archbishop Ussher. I have no problem with it, but it cast doubt an the accuracy of Josephus, whom you have used elsewhere to support your position.

There were two Kings named "Xerxes" and thank you for the correction, as the one I gave you was "Ahasuerus" reigning from 486-465 B.C. The other was called "Artaxerexes Longimanus" and he reigned from 465-424 B.C.

There is some dispute as to which Xerxes is mentioned in the Book of Esther.....but it would still be at least 235 years after the northern tribes were exiled to Assyria and at a minimum....39 years after the return from Babylon of the Jews. If it was the second Xerxes it could have been 100 years after the Jews came back.

[Diego1618]

I have 'outed' all of you, Diego, you and 'truth' as British-Israelites, something you were trying to hide and deny, particularly Diego.

The only thing you have outed, dear friend....is your ignorance of scripture and history. That's alright.....because it's all a learning process....and I can tell you are beginning to scratch the surface. We are all encouraging you in your extreme effort to come to the truth. Eventually, you'll arrive.

[William Terrell]

You know, before the topic has come up on FR several years ago, I had never heard of "British Israelism". Since, I've read quite a bit about it.

I've considered the arguments pro and con, the writings and drawings on the pictures of Assyrian tablets I've seen pictures of, the radical sects of it that claim that the present day Jews are not really Jews, but impostors, and the British Royalty is in their place.

There are radical elements and there are moderate elements. But there does seem to be evidence of Israel heading toward Turkey, according to those Assyrian writings and drawings. I've argued this evidence myself a number of time on this forum.

Of the side against it, I've seen anger and outrage, but little else.

My question is now, and was then, and continues to be, why is it considered bad? I can't claim to be a BI, but I see some of the evidence presented as valid. It would seem that, in past debates, the sum argument against the notion that th e 10 tribes migrated to Europe has been to simply accuse the proponents of "British Israelism".

So, I ask, why is that bad? Have they killed any Jews or advocated killing them (except for a few radicals, of course, there are always radicals in all things)? Have they taken any physical harmful action?

Just what is the hype about?

[Ping-Pong]

FTD, I appreciate what Scubie said but you must realize that it is a two way street.

[Jeremiah Jr]

Yea, because the church has nothing to do with 'Torah', we are of grace (Eph.2:8-9)

“All Christians are merely heretics from Judaism”

David Kimchi

…and I agree.

[Ping-Pong]

You are a voice of reason.

I too feel that valid evidence has been presented as well as many Biblical references. To me, it would seem completely illogical to believe otherwise but that is just my opinion. What I fail to understand is the anger associated with some that chose not to believe it.

[Quix]

but Christianity isn’t a business, we preach the truth even if it doesn’t make a good business case.

= = =

LOL.

I sure hope the Truth is a high priority!

I’m not quite buying that a Pre-Trib Rapture preaching/teaching weakens The Church, at all, however.

[Quix]

I certainly would not consider myself a proponent of British Israelism.

But I find it quite plausible that Denmark was populated by folks from the tribe of Dan. My step-father happens to be full blood Danish.

To contend that the Jews in Israel are not children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is utter nonsense, to me.

[DungeonMaster]

I’m not quite buying that a Pre-Trib Rapture preaching/teaching weakens The Church, at all, however.

I wonder what it means to "weaken the church". That could be a lot of very different things. Less money, fewer people, worse health...

[Ping-Pong]

“All Christians are merely heretics from Judaism” Interesting article - thank you.

[Quix]

Means . . . maybe

that someone disagreed with Pre-trib so fiercely that they groped and groped and groped until they came up with some cockamaymee rationalization to support their hostility.

[Ping-Pong]

First, no one is saying that the nation of Israel is the House of Israel.

Perhaps I'm wrong but it sounded that way when this discussion began. It sounded as if some considered them the same entity. If they now see a difference then our labors have been worth it.

Third, those same tribes, called the house of Israel are referred to by Peter as being responsible for crucifying the Lord. (Acts.2:36)

He is naming the "house of Israel" but in saying that he is saying that all of God's chosen, all of the tribes, as well as Judah, who was there, are responsible and all need to repent and be baptized. He is telling us that Christ died for all of our sins.

No Gentile nations are being blessed as Israel.

Wherever the children of the house of Israel are they are not gentile and they are God's chosen people. It doesn't matter if you do or do not believe it.

The Jews are composed of all 12 tribes, since Christ is King of the Jews, all 12 tribes, not just 3.

No the Jews are not all 12 tribes. Christ is King of the Jews and King of Israel, all 12 tribes. No one said He was king of just 3.

Matt.27:42"He saved others; Himself He cannot save. If He be the King of Israel, let Him now come down from the cross, and we will believe Him.
Mark 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe."....
John 1:49 Nathanael answered and saith unto Him, "Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; Thou art the King of Israel."

He is King of the Jews and of Israel. Remember that the Jews are of Israel but not all of Israel is of Judah.

No one disputes the fact that Israel and Judah divided, but the fact is that when they returned, they returned with members from all 12 tribes, not just 3.

That isn't true. They did not return. Please reread some of the posts and that is explained. The Jewish tribes did return, as shown in Ezra and Nehemiah, but not the northern tribes.

I don't understand why you are not willing to accept this. The tribes will be joined together but that is yet future. If you believe they are together now then you believe God lies. I know you would never believe that so please rethink your arguments and read the scriptures that have been presented.