Posted on 05/09/2004 8:35:19 AM PDT by TaxRelief
Ironically, you cite Jimmy Akin, a converted Catholic who has done more to create controversy within the church than most (proving my point, perfectly).
Jimmy Akin may have some good points, but he relies on defamation and name-calling (liberal-left techniques) to defend his case. He avoids moderated debate and hides behind the guise of intellectual snobbery to avoid the checks and balances that would route out the errors in his theology.
He may be generally right in his biblical analyses or he may be generally wrong, but because he rejects peer review and because he sidesteps priestly intercession, his followers will never know how accurate his commentary is or is not.
BTW, Wohlberg is a pussy-cat compared to Akin.
Why are you so sure?
Your view doesn't square with scripture. The Jews were delivered from Egypt until after Egypt was judged. Jesus wasn't raptured from the cross. Nor was Peter or the other apostles.
We are not destined for wrath, but God's wrath doesn't begin until the last (7th) trumpet.
Plus it's not based firmly in scripture, it's an obscure reference that I believe, and many others believe, has been taken out of context with scriptural evidence to show otherwise.
Proponents of the rapture can't even agree at what period of the tribulation that it's going to take place in.
I find it interesting that Christians who believe in the rapture and commit all kinds of sin think that Jesus is just going to take them out of this world when things get tough.
If you had read it at least once, you would know the word is singular not plural.
NAsbU Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John,
a bondslave to the Christ
chuck
That is where I agree with you. I am concerned also that rapture believers will not recognize the real signs and think it can't be happening because they are still here. Other than that, It doesn't matter much what you believe about it. As another poster said, if it happens, I am out of here, if it doesn't, I am still out of here later in effect.
Some students of Bible prophecy today insist Christians should not have any immediate expectation of Christ’s return. Instead, they say, we should be looking for the beginning of the seven-year Tribulation period, the fulfillment of certain judgments and preliminary signs, the rise of the Antichrist—or all of the above. When they talk about future things, the emphasis is heavily weighted toward dread and disaster for the people of God. As far as they are concerned, “the blessed hope” becomes relevant only after the church has gone through the Tribulation.
At first glance, this position seems not altogether devoid of biblical support. After all, when Christ outlined the events of the last days, He included many prophecies about tribulation and hardship, and He said these signs would precede and point to His return (Matt 24:21, 30).
The epistles also contain prophecies about apostasy and persecution in the last days preceding Christ’s return. For example, the apostle Paul forewarned Timothy of perilous times that would come (2 Tim 3:1-3). He told the younger pastor, “The Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith”(1 Tim 4:1)— and he went on to describe an apostasy that would precede and signify Christ’s return to earth.
Those who believe the church must suffer through the hardships of the Tribulation period invariably cite 2 Thess 2:1-3 as proof:
Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition (emphasis added).
So on the one hand, the NT is permeated with an eager sense of expectancy and conviction that the blessed hope of Christ’s return is imminent. On the other hand, we are warned about trouble and affliction that will precede Christ’s return. How can we reconcile these two threads of prophecy? How can we cultivate a daily expectation of Christ’s return if these preliminary signs must yet be fulfilled before He returns?
Several points must be borne in mind. First, all the general “signs of the times” given in the NT have been fulfilled—and are being fulfilled before our eyes. They are, in fact, characteristics of the entire church age. Apostasy and unbelief, self-love and sin, wars, rumors of wars, and natural disasters have all been common throughout the church age. Practically every generation of Christians since the time of Christ has believed they were seeing the end-times signs fulfilled before their very eyes. So how are we to know whether our own time is the true “last days” of Bible prophecy—or just more of the same general apostasy and calamity that have characterized the entire Christian era?
The apostle John settled that question under the Holy Spirit’s inspiration when he wrote, “Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour” (1 John 2:18). The church was already in “the last days” even before the apostolic era ended. In fact, “last days” is a biblical term for the Christian era itself (Heb 1:1-2). This entire age is a prelude to the final culmination of human history. These are the last days—and so was the early church era.
Second, nothing in the NT ever suggests we should defer our expectation of Christ’s appearing until other preliminary events can occur. The one apparent exception is 2 Thess 2:1-3 (quoted in full above), which says, “that Day [the day of the Lord] will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed.” That is obviously a key text for those who believe the Tribulation is next on the prophetic agenda, and that the church should be expecting the reign of Antichrist rather than the return of Christ. Indeed, if 2 Thess 2:1-3 actually means Christ’s coming for the church cannot occur until after seven years of Tribulation, it nullifies everything the NT teaches about the imminence of Christ’s return.
But look carefully at the context of 2 Thessalonians 2. The Thessalonian Christians had been confused and upset by some false teachers (possibly people pretending to speak for the apostle) who were teaching that the persecutions and sufferings they were currently experiencing were the very judgments associated with the day of the Lord. (The expression always refers to judgment and usually to a time of apocalyptic judgment—cf. Isaiah 13:9-11; Amos 5:18-20; 1 Thess 5:2-3; 2 Pet 3:10; Rev 6:17; 16:14.) Many in the Thessalonian church, in the midst of their own severe hardship and distress, had evidently believed that lie, and they believed it meant they themselves had become objects of God’s final apocalyptic wrath. Obviously, they were deeply troubled by this, for in his earlier epistle, Paul had encouraged them by telling them of the rapture (1 Thess 4:14-17)—the coming of Christ for his church. Paul had even instructed them to comfort one another with the promise of Christ’s coming for them (v. 18).
But now, in a time of severe persecution and trial, the Christians at Thessalonica had fallen prey to the false idea that God was already pouring out His final wrath—and they were among the objects of that wrath. They obviously feared they had missed the rapture and were about to be swept away in the final and epochal judgments of the Day of the Lord. So Paul wrote, “Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come” (1 Thess 2:1-2). “The coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him” is a clear reference to the rapture. “The day of Christ” is the day of the Lord (in fact, the older manuscripts use the expression “day of the Lord” in this verse).
There were two aspects of the error troubling the Thessalonian church: one was the notion that they had missed the rapture. The other was the accompanying fear that they had already entered into the apocalyptic judgment that signaled the day of the Lord had arrived already.
And so when Paul says, “that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition” (2 Thess 2:3, emphasis added)—he is talking about the day of the Lord and its apocalyptic judgment, not the rapture. He was not suggesting that the coming of Christ for the church would be delayed until after the Tribulation events had all played out. He was certainly not suggesting that the Thessalonians should defer their hope of Christ’s coming for them until the end of the Tribulation. He had spent his entire first epistle urging them to be watchful and expectant and to encourage one another with the news of Christ’s imminent return (cf. 1 Thess 1:19; 4:15-18; 5:6, 9, 11). If the apostle now meant to teach them that all the events of the Tribulation must be fulfilled before Christ could return for them, that would be scant “comfort” indeed. In fact, it would overturn everything the NT has to say about Christ’s return being imminent, comforting, and hopeful.
So the consistent teaching of the NT is that Christians should be looking for the imminent coming of Christ for His church, and 2 Thess 2:1-4 is no exception.
Is the rapture before or after the seven-year tribulation?
Answer
It's become kind of popular today, in the last two or three years, to believe in the rapture occurring at the end of the tribulation. There has been three positions, historically, "pre-trib," "mid-trib," and "post-trib." What that means is the rapture occurs at the end of the tribulation: "post-tribulation;" the middle of the tribulation: "mid-tribulation;" the beginning of the tribulation: "pre-tribulation." Now if you wanted to catalog me I would have to claim to be a "pre-tribulationist"--I believe the Church will be taken out before the tribulation.
Now if you would like a full-length answer on that we have a series of tapes on that very subject, so I am not going into that other than to just give you two reasons, that I believe, are the most difficult arguments for a "post-tribulationalist" to deal with. If a person comes along, and this is popular today, there are a lot of people who want to go through the tribulation. We have got some sort of a martyr-complex. You know in a mechanized society, and a very high-powered society, and a very easy kind of existence, a lot of people kind of think that it is neat to go through the tribulation. They see the movie about "A Thief in the Night" and they can see themselves running from the beast and all this intrigue. Now I am saying this truly, because this is happening in the minds of--not the educational people, not the theology people, so much as it is a popular kind of a thing. I think Hal Lindsey's books, which took a firm pre-tribulational stand, forced some theologians out of the woodwork to write on a post-tribulational position. So you have the theological battle, and it is going on, on those two positions, but you have this new popular thing, and sometimes I will listen to those Christian television programs and they are talking about, "Well, you know I am not convinced that we are going to be taken out. I think we may go through....oh......." And it is all very dramatic.
There are two primary things that you have to deal with if you are going to take a post-tribulation position:
1. The sheep and goat judgment. In Matthew, chapter 25, at the end of the tribulation period--Matthew 25, you have a judgment occurring. We know that it is at the end of the tribulation because it discusses the tribulation period in chapter 24. We know that the "abomination of desolation" occurs in the tribulation (24:15 and all these things and so forth), and then verse 31 of Chapter 25, "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory." Now what's that? That's not the rapture is it? That has got to be the Second Coming to set up the Kingdom--"when he comes in His glory to sit on His throne."
Now the post-tribulation position says this--watch--that at the end of the seven years there is a quick rapture and a quick return--you go through the tribulation and then "up and back." There is a big problem with that and it is this: if all the regenerate people go up and come back, then how come when Christ comes back the first thing He does is separate the sheep from the goats--who are the sheep? See? who are the sheep? They can't be Christians because there aren't any left--they all got raptured. But if you move the rapture to the beginning of the seven years, then you have a seven year period in which people will be saved that will constitute the sheep at the end of the tribulation--understand?
So if you jam it all at the end--I see that as the major problem of the post-tribulational view--where do you get the sheep for the sheep and goat judgment, because if Christ takes all of us up and comes right back, then there aren't any sheep left--it's not going to be a problem to say, "You sheep come over and go into my kingdom, and you goats here..."--there aren't any sheep left, they have already been raptured and glorified and all set. That's the first problem.
2. 2 Thessalonians 2:1. The second problem, and I think that they have to face if they take a post-tribulation view is 2 Thessalonians 2:1--these are primary arguments--there are many others, but these are just ones that I'll give you quickly. 2 Thessalonians 2:1, and I think maybe that these are the two best arguments against a post-tribulation position. Some of you don't even know what I'm talking about--you just relax and do whatever you want and we will be back in a minute.
2 Thessalonians 2:1, "Now we beseech you brethren,” now listen, “By the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him.” "Jesus is coming,” says Paul to the Thessalonians, “and we will be gathered together unto him.” Episunagoge, gathering together. Its used one other time in the New Testament, that’s Hebrews 10:25. And in Hebrews 10:25 it says “forsake not the sunagogoge, the assembling of yourselves together.” It is a word reserved in the New Testament for gathering together of believers. So, the Thessalonians Christians were saying, "Oh, are we already in the time of trouble, is it already too late. And he says Now wait a minute, we beseech you brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus and our, our specific gathering together to him, don’t be shaking let no man deceive you." And then he says, "I believe that after will come the day of the Lord. And then the falling away and the man of sin is revealed and all of that." But I see is the primary event the gathering together, a special gathering together, a special coming together of the church, a unique one separate from anything else. And I think Thessalonians 2:1 has a great amount of weight towards that end.
So, my belief is that the church does not go through the tribulation. And again I I would say that that’s just putting it together the best way I can, it’s a very difficult problem. There are many other reasons that I have tried to share with you and I stand on that ground and we’ll find out sooner or later. And I feel like Dr. Saucy who said, “I know there are some errors in my Theology, I just wish I knew where they were.” And there will be some somewhere and we’ll see whether that works out.
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.