|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Biblical Support for the Pre-Tribulation Rapture | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
But they were spared the trial without being Raptured. And no, reinterpreting prophecies meant for other people as being meant for you is not a valid reading.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: But why would you do so, other than to make it fit the pre-trib rapture?
quote: In other words only them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, can be believers. Really ?
quote: I don’t think it’s a mistake to say that there have been believers who died of natural causes or accident. Why do you disagree? And since the resurrection is a part of the Rapture Jefress’ failure to address it is a weakness in his argument, Your interpretation of Daniel I need not address except to point out that the End Times of Daniel occur while the Diadochi Kingdoms are the do,I ant power in the Middle East - and that the whole notion of a gap has no justification in the text of Daniel at all. Indeed the idea that there is a completely unmentioned pause longer than the entire timeline is more than a little ridiculous.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: Because worshipping false teachers is a great idea ? Jefress’ arguments don’t show any special skill. Or even understanding. They convince you but that’s clearly not for any sensible reason.
quote: The point is to interpret Scripture in the light of Scripture. If Mark (and Matthew) say something very similar to Paul why should they not be talking about the same thing ?
quote: It’s funny then that you would use questionable interpretations instead of those then. The claim that you have good arguments that you aren’t using is not exactly plausible.
quote: Which suggests that Jefress is incompetent since his interpretation makes things worse, not better.
quote: It is a fact that Jefress’ arguments are all questionable inferences and therefore weak. That they convince you speaks more of your desire to believe the pre-trib rapture.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: Which is no objection since if there is no pre-trib Rapture they stay dead and safe from the Tribulation. Or are you really going to invent another resurrection just to protect Jefress’ argument ? And I should repeat that - according to the Revelation - only those who were martyred rise before the Millennium. But that exclusion is not present in 1 Thessalonians 4.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: If the preponderance of scripture added up to that then yes. But it obviously does not. You don’t have one clear reference to a pre-trib rapture at all.
quote: That’s what you say. It isn’t what the Bible says. You know, you could just go back a few posts and read the quote there. It is clear that those raised in the first resurrection are: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 that’s the complete description. quote: Why would I need further references to explain text I have already given ? You have the reference. You just didn’t read it.
quote: Because agreeing with the text over your dogma is ridiculous ? I’m not sweeping parts of the prophecy under the carpet. I’m not the one inventing gaps four times as long as the timeline given. That’s all from your side.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Let’s consider Jeffress four reasons:
quote: It is simply assumption that the multitude do not include the Church. There is no citation of scripture to argue otherwise, or even support the idea that the Tribulation was intended to convert. This is NOT a reason to believe in a pre-Tribulation Rapture.
quote: This is essentially a repeat of the first. There are possible references to the Church - not only the multitude but those who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. in Revelation 12:17 This is not a reason to believe in a pre-Tribulation Rapture
quote: If they do NOT change their ways.But this is a promise to one Church. None of those given this promise is in any danger of the Tribulation. And surely God has other options than the Rapture. This is not as bad as the first two points. But it is still very weak
quote: Even if God's judgement is not directed at Christians it does not mean that they will be moved out of the way. Even for the Tribulation. Indeed the shortening for the sake of the Elect suggests that God protects believers in that way. So, again, this is just a questionable interpretation. So, out of four supposed reasons you only have two, both very weak, based on a few verses. That is not a preponderance of scripture
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Not in that post. I make two points. The first is a simple matter of logic. The second has already been shown in previous messages. Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Only half right. I did mess up the quotes but the answer applies to the correct quote. The second reason is essentially the same as the first.
quote: It is not a fact, as I pointed out.
quote: Not really - and the idea is pretty crazy anyway.
quote: I’ve already shown that those claims are false.
quote: In other words you claim that the first reason is good because you have a better reason that wasn’t mentioned. That is obviously pretty silly. Why not use that reason instead?
quote: But you haven’t produced any scriptures which show that. Why not? Why rely on weak arguments when you claim you have better ones?
quote: Ideas invented to reinterpret inconvenient scripture are not themselves scripture. So obviously you can’t include that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Funny how someone who claims to have good reasons would suddenly introduce another list of bad ones.
Reason 1 just introduces a couple more verses to an existing argument without dealing with the problems. There’s nothing to say that Christians will be Raptured away while the judgement is going on, even if they aren’t themselves targeted. (Indeed, you say that the American Civil War was an example of God’s judgement but if so, it is hard to say even that Christians weren’t targeted by that) Reason 2 is a repeat. Do you really think that God has to Rapture all Christians to protect a small group of people who aren’t even in danger? Reason 3 is a repeat of the Church Age argument, which I have already addressed. Reason 4 is just another questionable interpretation. Luke 21:36 is more naturally read as meaning to pray to live through the events. Reason 5 is really bad. It doesn’t even suggest that the Rapture has already happened. It does not specify that only the dead saints should be judged - just the dead (and if the saints have been resurrected in the Rapture how can they be dead? Obviously they have not yet been resurrected). Indeed the last line indicates that everyone is being judged - living and dead.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Nit-picking. Even if Christians aren’t judged that doesn’t mean that they will be Raptured away.
quote: Oh great, a couple more verses that only repeat a weak point and do nothing to address the weakness. It’s not much.
quote: And those Judgements are instances of God’s wrath. Christians are not immune to being affected by them even if God’s anger is directed at others.
quote: Then you don’t understand your reason.
quote: Which isn’t relevant. The fact that The whole idea of a massive gap is a silly invention and doesn’t give any reason to think that the Church will disappear is relevant.
quote: I very much doubt that that is the case. You may read it that way, but as I said the natural reading is to live through them, avoiding the worst by running to the mountains as Luke 21:21 advises. ABE the following is redundant since you have deleted the assertion.
quote: Revelation 11:18 follows the blowing of the Seventh Trumpet (Revelation 11:15) so at that point the Tribulation is well under way. Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: But their meanings are not contradictory. And why can’t you escape by running to the mountains ?
quote: Yes I do. It’s your deleted comment that the Rapture had not occurred at the point of Revelation 11:18. Since that point follows the blowing of the seventh trumpet it must be after the Tribulation has begun. So a pre-Tribulation Rapture would have had to have happened before then, and the dead saints would have been resurrected. Yet, As I remind you, Revelatiion 20 4:5 says the the first resurrection - of the martyrs - occurs just prior to the Millennium and the remaining Christians must wait until after that. How is this consistent with a mass resurrection of Christians before the Tribulation?
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.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: You should read Luke 21. It very much indicates that the worst is in Judaea and around Jerusalem and explicitly advises fleeing to the mountains.
20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. 22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. 24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: With some significant rewriting of it.
quote: The Tribulation IS the fall of Jerusalem as is quite clear if you compare it with Mark (or Matthew - those two are almost identical). Mark and Matthew do NOT have a shift in time either - that is one of the important changes.
quote: Nope. It is a little clearer in Mark - in that Mark actually mentions the word tribulation but the time jump is to the Second Coming in verse 27. Luke 21
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. 25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. quote: Well, exactly - the jump is to events AFTER the Tribulation. That pretty much kills your whole argument.
quote: The shift in time is not that great. All the events - all of them - must complete within a generation (21:32). Revelation 11:2 suggests that the gap will be only 42 months.
quote: You are suggesting a post-Tribulation Rapture to escape the Second Coming. (The advice to run to the mountains does refer to the actual Tribulation - which you have put in 70AD. I don’t think that the Rapture happened before then.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Luke 21 is not that complex. And it is easy to see where it is not chronological. It is probably much better to read it alongside the original - or at least earlier - version in Mark 13 (which the author of Luke had access to) because the rewriting obscures some points. But - as usual - you don’t deal with my actual points. I am not even claiming that Luke 21 rules out a pre-Tribulation Rapture, only that it does not support it.
quote: However, escaping by taking actions on Earth is clearly present in the text - in the part that actually covers the Tribulation (as I pointed out) There is no equivalent mention of escaping by being absent from the Earth. Speculations unsupported by the text are not great evidence and you are going against the natural reading of 1 Thessalonians and contradicting Revelation 20.
quote: More accurately the Rapture is read into verses which are open to other - and often better - interpretations. Which means that it is not really true to say that there is confirming scripture. Especially as Revelation 20:4-6 contradicts a pre-Tribulation Rapture. Here is is again:
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. 5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. The FIRST resurrection - of Christian martyrs - immediately precedes the Millenium. There will be no general resurrection of Christians until after the Millenium. Since the Rapture includes a general resurrection of Christians it would have to be after the Millenium unless the Revelatiion is wrong.
quote: More accurately it confirms that there is no good evidence for the pre-Tribulation Rapture. Who would use such hopelessly weak arguments if there was a good case for it ?
quote: If he has good arguments why not write them out? If he doesn’t - as seems very likely - watching the video is a waste of time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Which is the Tribulation. You don’t see it because Luke’s rewrite added in a gap between the Tribulation and the Second Coming and you have magnified that gap to around 2000 years to try and fit the text to your beliefs. Even though Luke tells us that the gap can’t be anywhere near that long, as I already pointed out, In reality the Oliver Discourse is primarily about the destruction of Herod’s Temple. The Disciples ask Jesus to tell them when the Temple will be destroyed and Jesus tells them - the idea that he suddenly started talking about something completely unrelated is not justified by anything in the text. It comes from the reality that the Temple was destroyed and the end did not come. But that’s not a valid reason to rewrite the text.
quote: A shame that you didn’t do that, then. I have. That’s how you can see that the fall of Jerusalem is the Tribulation - because the parallel verses in Mark are rather clearer on the subject. And I can tell you that Matthew’s version is pretty much redundant. It’s basically a copy of Mark’s.
quote: That is certainly false - it is not at all clear. Indeed there are pointers in the text that quite strongly suggest otherwise. However, even if that is the meaning it means all the events must occur in the span of a single generation So, no. A span of close to 2000 years is right out.
quote: I certainly know better than you.
quote: And we’ve seen those arguments and they are weak. Are you ever going to deal with Revelation 20:4-6 - apart from ignoring verse 4 and insisting on your own ideas instead ? Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024