I watched both videos. Spent about an hour. Don’t have time to give the proper feedback it deserves. I’m always interested in hearing the best arguments against my views. I’ve even bought pretrib books on the advice of some Freepers. One makes the case against prewrath based on an apparent distinction between the Day of the Lord and the Great and Terrible Day of the Lord. But the reality of the evidence presented is that even if that distinction exists, it does not add any additional credibility to the pretrib view. The pretrib views relies on ambiguity concerning the Day of the Lord. In the pretrib paradigm, the Day of the Lord must always be adjusted in its definition and timing in relation to the rapture in order to accommodate the pretrib doctrine. It should not work like this. That’s not exegetical.
So far I have never heard any systematic approach to the topic that I find truly persuasive, in support of the pretrib view. Everything is anecdotal and proof texts. The problem is that even cults can force their false doctrines on a passage if they are willing to twist it to their own ends. We must be careful not to do this, but to “rightly divide” the scriptures.
A careful and openminded study of the topic of the Day of the Lord in scripture reveals that this time period is distinct from both the early part of Daniel’s seventieth week and the Great Tribulation. It is clear that Christ’s return happens exactly when the Day of the Lord arrives. Both come like a thief. They both come suddenly. They both come with judgment. It is helpful to realize that there is a difference between God’s loving discipline, His judgments, His anger, and His wrath. Wrath is a boiling over anger. God may be displeased and disappointed with things that believers do or say. He never has wrath toward us. The judgments of Daniel’s seventieth week become progressively intense, but they are contained. They are “tribulation” rather than the wrath of God.
I think the 13 mysteries topic is worth further study. I think the fact that the restrainer in 2 Thessalonians 2 is not part of a mystery being revealed underscores that this person’s identity was already known and is found in the Old Testament scriptures from which Paul instructed the Thessalonians (along with the revelations he received directly from the Lord).
The application of dispensationalism remains the primary source of contention for pretrib proponents. We must allow scriptures to inform us of what constitutes the relationship between Israel and the Church, rather than superimposing our own preconceived notions. I do not believe in replacement theology. I see a clear distinction between the nation of Israel and the Church. But Israel and the Church can and do exist simultaneously. And Jews who currently believe in Christ and are citizens of Israel are part of both.
The argument that we “wait” for Christ’s return for the Church, but tribulation saints will be “watching” for His second coming, is not plausible. The words would be reversed if they meant what Dr. Ice claims. Anamén means to “actively wait with rising intensity and clarity about what is hoped for” according to Strong’s:
http://biblehub.com/greek/362.htm
If Christ’s return for the Church could truly happen at any moment, then we should be constantly looking up for Him to arrive at any moment.
Instead, the angels asked the disciples why they continued to gaze up into the sky. Indeed, Jesus said when it is time to look up: when all of these signs begin to come to pass. In other words, the rapture becomes imminent when the signs happen.
Read carefully Matthew 24:29-44. This is the coming AFTER the Great Tribulation. Yet “no man knows the day or hour” when He is coming AFTER THE GREAT TRIBULATION. And He is coming like a thief AFTER THE GREAT TRIBULATION. These are attributes of the rapture of the Church that pretrib proponents ascribe to imminency.
Yet Dr. Ice contends that it will be possible to know the exact day of the second coming at the end of Daniel’s seventieth week. Which is it? This is a very important question. Is the Olivet discourse describing the rapture of the Church? If not, how is Christ’s coming described in that passage as being like a thief?
The claim is made that there is no judgment language associated with the rapture of the Church. That is incorrect. See James 5:9, 1 Peter 4:17, and 1 Thessalonians 1:8.
Again, in this last passage, is this describing the rapture of the Church? If so, how can it also say that tribulation will be repaid with fire from Heaven on the persecutors of believers at the time of this coming? But if this is not the rapture of the Church, how can believers be finally receiving their respite from persecution at this coming?
I believe that if we come to scripture with an attitude of meekness, set aside our preconceptions, and open our heart to the Holy Spirit on this matter, He will give us clarity and understanding of the things that are important for us to know. And I see a continued and repeated theme of expecting persecution and tribulation. In contrast we are encouraged by the promise to be spared from God’s wrath.
It is in this broader context of the Gospel and pattern of the Christian life that a prewrath rapture makes the most sense. Believe me, I would rather the rapture come sooner than later. But we are called to follow the example of Christ. We are called to enter the kingdom of God through much tribulation and persecution. Since the reformation and the formation of this nation, the west has experienced liberty in an unprecedented way compared with all of church history and the experience of other Christians throughout the world even today. These present hardships are going to be more widespread throughout the world prior to Christ’s return. And when He does rescue His Church from the antichrist, He will pour out His fiery wrath on these persecutors. And we will enter into rest.
I’ve enjoyed our conversation and hope that nothing I’ve said comes through as being contentious or condescending. That would undermine the message. We can both continue to study, pray, and seek the Lord. I am certain that we will come to a consensus by doing so as the final events of history become more near.
I seriously doubt that we will come to a ‘consensus’. It is my opinion that you have imbedded assumptions which are guiding you perceptions on what Dr Ice has said.
One makes the case against prewrath based on an apparent distinction between the Day of the Lord and the Great and Terrible Day of the Lord. But the reality of the evidence presented is that even if that distinction exists, it does not add any additional credibility to the pretrib view.
The Day of The Lord is a period of time which includes all of the seventieth week of Daniel's Prophecy. The Great and terrible Day is a specific segment of that broader Day of The Lord period.
I'm now three plus decades into this study. At 71 I am still learning. But I rejected the notion of post trib / prewarth long ago.
You asserted, The argument that we “wait” for Christ’s return for the Church, but tribulation saints will be “watching” for His second coming, is not plausible." Here again a preconceived notion is guiding your rejection, without understanding the point being made.
The Tribulation Saints are not The Body of Christ / The Bride of Christ. The Tribulation Saints become 'saints' during the Tribulation, mostly right at the start, because of the evidence of Christians having been snatched away from the coming wrath. Since these in many cases have a specific moment when someone they knew disappeared in the Rapture, there is a firm way to count down to the precise day Jesus will be setting foot on the Earth at the end of the two segments of the Tribulation. The beginning of the countdown is hallmarked for ISRAEL by Daniel as the signing of the 'peace compact' with the anti-Christ, who will--in three and one half years-- stand in the Holy Place in the Temple proclaiming himself god. Daniel's prophecy is so powerful because he was given specific numbers of days by Lunar calendar to write down!
As many teach now, there may be an extensive time segment between the Rapture and the beginning of the seventieth week of years. The sudden disappearance of millions of alive members of society will be a cataclysm for the impact it has on the functioning of our electromagnetic world! In countries where lots of society are believers, the impact will be most harsh. In Dubai the event may have to be reported via CNN for the average Arab to even know it happened. ... And don't forget the great lie and strong delusion which will be embraced by those unable to handle the Truth. The world chaos will be horrific, and into this scene will stride the one on the White Horse with a bow but no arrows.
You apparently reject the notion of imminency, yet it is Jesus Who introduced that notion. Tribulation Saints will have 144,000 Jewish evangelists, scattered across the globe, teaching the specifics. The Two witnesses will be giving specific teaching. And Angel will be spreading the news of Jesus's soon return, all during the Tribulation. By the power of the Holy Spirit this will cause a number so great no man could number it in that day to be brought to Heaven out of the Tribulation.
Dr. Ice makes a strong case for the notion that the Tribulation years, for the gentile world, will be a time of testing. Those who have rejected the Gospel of Grace during the Church Age will either suddenly realize the Rapture of believers has occurred and they were not of it and cry out to GOD, or they will swallow the great lie and refuse to trust in the Lord. Dr. Ice calls those who refuse, 'the Earth-dwellers'. The Tribulation for the Jews is of a different perspective, for Jesus said to the Jews they would not see Him again until they call out to Him 'blessed is He Who comes in the name of the Lord.' The Tribulation is already proclaimed, through Daniel, to be GOD putting an end to sin in Israel.
And here is another dissonance caused by preconceived ideas: The application of dispensationalism remains the primary source of contention for pretrib proponents. ... I do not believe in replacement theology. Paul used the word 'dispensation' so I feel it is a valid term. And dispensationalism is not replacement theology, as Daniel's Prophecies indicate. There is an interval between week 69 and week 70, but God is not finished with Israel at the end of week 69, so the Church Age is not a replacement for the work God assigned to Israel. God has no plan "B". The Bible informs us (through Paul) that The Church Age of Grace is to bring jealousy to Israel. Maybe that's why there are 144,000 on fire Jewish evangelists during the Tribulation, giving up their lives gladly to promote The Truth?
You offered, I think the fact that the restrainer in 2 Thessalonians 2 is not part of a mystery being revealed underscores that this person’s identity was already known and is found in the Old Testament scriptures from which Paul instructed the Thessalonians (along with the revelations he received directly from the Lord). Would you like to tell me who / what in your opinion is the Restrainer? I take that to be The Body of Christ represented by the Holy Spirit in believers making up the members of the Body of Christ present on Earth during the Age of Grace. Paul references this Body of Christ in the Corinthian letters. If you have found 'The Body of Christ' indirectly referenced in Jeremiah and Isaiah then you have also found the OT hints at The Age of Grace between the 69th and 70th weeks of Daniel's Prophecy. Read these again.
unlearner: But Israel and the Church can and do exist simultaneously. And Jews who currently believe in Christ and are citizens of Israel are part of both. Paul states categorically that during this Age of Grace, the body of Believers is hallmarked by there being no distinction between Jew and Gentile as fellow believers in Christ, members of His Body, Hs Bride.
You asserted, If Christ’s return for the Church could truly happen at any moment, then we should be constantly looking up for Him to arrive at any moment. And that is exactly what JESUS instructed His Ekklesia to be doing! Hence the doctrine of imminency. But the coming for His Ekklesia is to be in the air, not on the ground. Raed 1 Thess 4:13-'19' again. And John 14 is Jesus affirming His return to take us there where He is during the Tribulation, then returning to the earth with us as His Witnesses at the end of the Tribulation in that Great and Terrible Day of the Lord.
You go on to assert: Instead, the angels asked the disciples why they continued to gaze up into the sky. Indeed, Jesus said when it is time to look up: when all of these signs begin to come to pass. In other words, the rapture becomes imminent when the signs happen. I'm afraid you preconceived notions are getting in the way again, causing you to conflate two distinctly different phenomena. The disciples on the mount of Olives asked for what will be the signs of the end, not the beginning of the Day of The Lord. Indeed, at the end of the Tribulation, Jesus will be descending from the clouds, not to the clouds as at the Rapture of the Believers both dead and still alive. In the arrival in the air, Jesus is coming to take His Bride back tot he Father's House (see John 14 again). There is no hint of Judgment in this arrival. BUT at the end of the Tribulation His descent to the ground is full of Judgment and power exhibited.
You wrest scriptures with strong preconceived notions no doubt brought forward from what you have been taught in the past: Is the Olivet discourse describing the rapture of the Church? If not, how is Christ’s coming described in that passage as being like a thief? Try reading the Luke discourse given to a multitude who would come to hear Him there in The Temple, then read the Olivet Discourse given that evening to the four Disciples on The Mount of Olives. Note carefully the words 'before these things' and 'after these things'. Jesus hints at the Chruch Age interval mystery.
And finally, I would ask you to answer the question central to this issue: "What is the purpose of the Rapture of The Bride of Christ, The Body of Christ?" Did Paul answer this for us in 2Thess2 for the members of the Ekklesia, the Body of Believers? I think he did!