Posted on 04/01/2015 10:22:59 AM PDT by amessenger4god
We have addressed the accusation before that the pre-trib rapture theory was invented by a Scottish girl named Margaret MacDonald in the early 19th century. This is now widely known to be factually incorrect and in fact there are numerous references to a pre-trib rapture in late 18th century American writing, as well as contemporary (at that time) Catholic writings such as Manuel Lacunza's The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty.
Additionally, Chuck Missler has brought to light a writing from "Ephraem the Syrian" (b. 306; d. 373 AD) where this early Church deacon wrote in unequivocal language the following:
"For all the saints and Elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins."
"We who see that terrible things have begun, and know that still more terrible things are imminent, may regard it as the greatest advantage to depart from it as quickly as possible... And do you not give God thanks, do you not congratulate yourself, that by an earlier departure you are taken away, and delivered from the shipwrecks and disasters that are imminent... Let us greet the day which assigns each of us to his own home, which snatches us hence, and sets us free from the snares of the world, and restores us to paradise and the kingdom."
"And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, There shall [then] be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be. [Matthew 24:21] For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption. [1 Corinthians 15]"
Prove that verse to be about the coming of Jesus at the end of the tribulation.
Pre-Trip people scoff at Mid-Trib people and Post-Trib people scoff at the other two ... so who is right? And does it matter for salvation?
Nope, but it does matter to know what to expect so we don't get deceived by false teaching. If we know for instance that the next peace treaty with Israel is not going to be a good thing we can be vigilant.
First prove there is some other coming of Jesus that is promised...
We have. Some simply refuse to acknowledge that fact. It's not something to get to wrapped up in Boogieman. Faithful believers have been promised they will be kept from the wrath to come. Suffice it to say that the first consideration then is to be a faithful believer.
“We have. Some simply refuse to acknowledge that fact.”
You’ve proved it to yourselves, because that is what you wanted to believe all along. That is not really proof, just confirming your own biases.
“Faithful believers have been promised they will be kept from the wrath to come.”
As I demonstrated to you, though you failed to respond to it, wrath is not the same thing as tribulation, and tribulation was promised us by Christ himself.
“Suffice it to say that the first consideration then is to be a faithful believer.”
Agreed, but if you succumb to the delusions of false teachers willingly, despite their errors being proved to you from Scripture, then you are not really a faithful believer, are you?
If you want to rely on your assumptions I can't stop you but I didn't believe in the rapture before I started study.
>>As I demonstrated to you, though you failed to respond to it, wrath is not the same thing as tribulation, and tribulation was promised us by Christ himself.<<
The "tribulation" coming is God's wrath. Of course we are told we will suffer tribulation. If you re read my post you will notice I said "wrath to come". I didn't say "tribulation to come". If you read Revelation it's talking about God's wrath.
Revelation 6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?
>>Agreed, but if you succumb to the delusions of false teachers willingly, despite their errors being proved to you from Scripture, then you are not really a faithful believer, are you?<<
So you are claiming that not fully understanding prophesies would indicate someone is not a true believer? Really? So to you salvation would depend on someone fully understanding prophesies?
You and me both. We are ripe for Judgement. Come what may, in the end all the Glory belongs to Him who’s worthy—Jesus Messiah!
Where in Revelation do you think the Millenium begins and ends?
Why would Christ invite evil doers & the A/C’s henchmen into the Millenium?
There are 3 parts to the first resurrection...The Firstfruits, the (main) Harvest and the Gleanings...It's good to study up on those...
“The “tribulation” coming is God’s wrath.”
Then why is called the great tribulation and not the great wrath? Why would God pick the wrong word? Do you think He wants to deceive us?
“If you read Revelation it’s talking about God’s wrath.
Revelation 6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?”
The day of wrath is one day. The tribulation lasts for years, so they cannot be the same thing. Plus, those words are spoken while the tribulation has already been underway for years, and only then do the people of earth realize that God’s wrath is imminent.
“So you are claiming that not fully understanding prophesies would indicate someone is not a true believer?”
No, that’s not what I said. I am saying that if you willfully believe a false teaching, even after it has been proved false from Scripture, then that shows you don’t have a love of the truth, while faithful believers do have a love of the truth. So how faithful of a believer can one be if they are clinging to false doctrines in spite of all the evidence?
“So to you salvation would depend on someone fully understanding prophesies?”
No, but salvation is dependent on belief, not just in Jesus, but in what Jesus taught.
“Where in Revelation do you think the Millenium begins and ends?”
The millenium begins in Rev. 20:4:
“4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”
then it ends in Rev. 20:7:
“7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,”
“Why would Christ invite evil doers & the A/C’s henchmen into the Millenium?”
I try to avoid questioning the mind of the Lord God, so if you want to, you’re going to have to do that on your own. He does what He wills, and that is good enough for me.
“There are 3 parts to the first resurrection...The Firstfruits, the (main) Harvest and the Gleanings...It’s good to study up on those...”
The Scriptures talk about one singular “first resurrection” and pinpoint it in the chronology in one place, so that is all we need to know to rule out these silly pre-trib or mid-trib “rapture” theories.
Sure...Just throw away all that scripture that explains them and go on your merry way...Whatever floats your boat...
Tribulation is tribulation. Surely you understand that there are different levels and intensities of tribulation. The Greek word translated "tribulation" is also translated "distress" and persecution and affliction. That can come from many sources including oneself.
>>The day of wrath is one day.<<
No, it's not. I can't imagine how anyone would think the wrath of God evidenced by the events described in Revelation would all happen in one day.
>>Plus, those words are spoken while the tribulation has already been underway for years<<
Post your evidence for that please.
“Tribulation is tribulation. Surely you understand that there are different levels and intensities of tribulation. The Greek word translated “tribulation” is also translated “distress” and persecution and affliction. That can come from many sources including oneself.”
Yet it is never translated as wrath, which is what you are asking us to conflate it with. If that is the length that you have to twist Scripture to justify your doctrine, that should be a clue that your doctrine is not supportable.
“No, it’s not. I can’t imagine how anyone would think the wrath of God evidenced by the events described in Revelation would all happen in one day.”
God called it a day, and why shouldn’t we believe it is one day? He calls it a day, not just in Revelation, but throughout the Old and New Testaments, for example, Zechariah 14 is very clear that this is one day, although it may not be a typical 24 hour day, since it is said to be “neither day nor night”, as if the normal illumination of the heavens is changed for this day:
“1 Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
3 Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
6 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the Lord, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.
8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.
9 And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.”
As you can see, verse 7 clearly tells us this “will be one day”, so the onus is on you to prove that what God says about this day is incorrect and your interpretation is better.
“Post your evidence for that please.”
Certainly. The same signs mentioned in Rev. 6 are also mentioned in other descriptions of the tribulation period, which pinpoint exactly when it occurs:
“24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.
26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.”
Matthew 13:24-26
So, the day when the sun is darkened and the moon gives no light, and the world sees Christ in his glory in the clouds is AFTER the tribulation.
We can also see that the great earthquake mentioned in Rev. 6 is mentioned in more detail in Rev. 16:
“18 And there were voices, and thunders, and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great.
19 And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath.”
This chapter clearly places the earthquake at Christ’s return, when he destroys the armies of the Earth gathered near Jerusalem. It matches up well with Zech. 14 that I cited above, which tells us that it is Christ himself touching his foot on the Mount of Olives which causes the earthquake and the division of Jerusalem:
“4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.”
“Sure...Just throw away all that scripture that explains them and go on your merry way...Whatever floats your boat...”
Not throwing anything away, I’m just explaining that, since Scripture can’t contradict itself, any interpretation that tries to stretch the first resurrection out into multiple events separated by some period of time is not compatible with Scripture, and therefore, not worthy of consideration. If your interpretation creates contradictions, then clearly your interpretation is wrong, because Scripture is not self-contradictory.
Ok, I think we're done. If you view this subject as a "doctrine" then you've made it way more important then is justified. I'll not discuss it with you further.
Well of course it is a doctrine:
“A belief or set of beliefs held and taught by a church, political party, or other group: the doctrine of predestination”
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/doctrine
It’s a set of beliefs that is held and taught by various churches and groups within Protestantism.
See ya.
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.