50 Reasons For a Pretribulational Rapture By Dr. John F. Walvoord

[VCO]

FreeGrace2 said:
Who cares? The only biblical issue between mortality and immortality is being imperishable. Like your views on a pretrib rapture, your claim about "no blood" is without any biblical support. Just another opinion or guess, I would guess.

Can you show me any verse that speaks of this "bloodlessness" that you claim?

No, you did not. The "Saviour" word above includes blood on our behalf. It does NOT speak of a "bloodless body". Just an imagination.


Wow. Really? The words (phrase) "flesh and blood" simply refers to a human body. That's not. It's certainly NOT meaning that there is no blood in heaven.

Whether our changed bodies are bloodless or not is immaterial. Why do you focus on such irrelevant ideas?


How many times must one remind you pretribbers that by the time the Tribulation occurs MOST OF THE church will ALREADY be in heaven. There's been about 2,000 years of the deaths of NT believers, so of course they are already there. And they will be the ones who accompany Jesus to the rapture, along with all the OT saints as well.


Sure. Cherry pick your version. I compare ALL the available translations to see how many translate the various ways. And then look at lexicons to see what fits best.

50 I tell you this, brothers and sisters: Flesh and blood cannot have a part in the kingdom of God. Something that will ruin cannot have a part in something that never ruins.
51 But look! I tell you this secret: We will not all sleep in death, but we will all be changed.
52 It will take only a second -- as quickly as an eye blinks -- when the last trumpet sounds. The trumpet will sound, and those who have died will be raised to live forever, and we will all be changed.
53 This body that can be destroyed must clothe itself with something that can never be destroyed. And this body that dies must clothe itself with something that can never die.

Well, pretty much what I expected. You have misread/understood the verses.

The bolded words say nothing about blood being what "ruins" or "destroys" a body. Which is basically what you are claiming.

The sole issue is that physical bodies were not designed for heaven. Did Jesus eat and drink with the disciples after His resurrection? Of course. That requires metabolism. Would you like a short course on metabolism and how blood is required for metabolism to occur?

So, back to the drawing board for you.

Believe what you want to believe, and I will believe what the Holy Spirit has put on my heart to believe.

Titus 3:9-10 (NIV)
9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.
10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.


We are finished with this debate.

 

[ewq1938]

Wow. Really? The words (phrase) "flesh and blood" simply refers to a human body.

Correct. If the other poster is using that verse to say there is no blood in the glorified body, then that body also cannot have a glorified flesh yet the risen Christ did have glorified flesh. If there is no flesh inheriting the kingdom of God then where will Christ be?

 

[FreeGrace2]

So tell us exactly what kind of metabolism did Jesus use when he walked through walls.......twice?

Are you actually denying that Jesus ate fish with His 11 disciples after His resurrection? Since the Bible is SILENT on the subject of the metabolism of a resurrection body, I suggest that you do as well.

But then, you keep claiming that Jesus takes resurrected and raptured saints to heaven when the Bible is just as SILENT about that.

Did the angels use the heavenly or earthly bathroom after they had a feast with Abraham?

I really don't care. Why do you? When the Bible is SILENT about a subject, means that WE should be SILENT.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The only biblical issue between mortality and immortality is being imperishable. Like your views on a pretrib rapture, your claim about "no blood" is without any biblical support. Just another opinion or guess, I would guess.

Can you show me any verse that speaks of this "bloodlessness" that you claim?

Believe what you want to believe, and I will believe what the Holy Spirit has put on my heart to believe.

Exactly! WHen you have no evidence, make up stuff.

In fact, by believing ONLY WHAT the Bible speaks about, one IS believing what the Holy Spirit has written.

The fact is, the Holy Spirit DOESN'T put on one's heart what the Bible is SILENT about.

Titus 3:9-10 (NIV)
9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.
10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.

How come you haven't taken this to heart? Arguments about what the Bible DOESN'T SAY is a foolish controversy.

We are finished with this debate.

Well, sure. You haven't even started with any evidence for your side.

 

[VCO]

The only biblical issue between mortality and immortality is being imperishable. Like your views on a pretrib rapture, your claim about "no blood" is without any biblical support. Just another opinion or guess, I would guess.

Can you show me any verse that speaks of this "bloodlessness" that you claim?

Exactly! WHen you have no evidence, make up stuff.

In fact, by believing ONLY WHAT the Bible speaks about, one IS believing what the Holy Spirit has written.

The fact is, the Holy Spirit DOESN'T put on one's heart what the Bible is SILENT about.


How come you haven't taken this to heart? Arguments about what the Bible DOESN'T SAY is a foolish controversy.


Well, sure. You haven't even started with any evidence for your side.

Someone does not LEARN.


Titus 3:9-11 (NJB)
9 But avoid foolish speculations, and those genealogies, and the quibbles and disputes about the Law—they are useless and futile.
10 If someone disputes what you teach, then after a first and a second warning, have no more to do with him:
11 you will know that anyone of that sort is warped and is self-condemned as a sinner.

THIS IS YOUR FIRST OFFICIAL WARNING.

I will give you a Second Warning.

Then I put you on my IGNORE LIST.

 

[ewq1938]

Someone does not LEARN.

Yeah, you. The verse you posted says, "have no more to do with him" yet you still continue "warning" him when YOU are supposed to cease all contact. Learn to READ the verses you post!

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
The only biblical issue between mortality and immortality is being imperishable. Like your views on a pretrib rapture, your claim about "no blood" is without any biblical support. Just another opinion or guess, I would guess.

Can you show me any verse that speaks of this "bloodlessness" that you claim?

Exactly! WHen you have no evidence, make up stuff.

In fact, by believing ONLY WHAT the Bible speaks about, one IS believing what the Holy Spirit has written.

The fact is, the Holy Spirit DOESN'T put on one's heart what the Bible is SILENT about.

How come you haven't taken this to heart? Arguments about what the Bible DOESN'T SAY is a foolish controversy.

Someone does not LEARN.

I have noticed that.

Titus 3:9-11 (NJB)
9 But avoid foolish speculations, and those genealogies, and the quibbles and disputes about the Law—they are useless and futile.
10 If someone disputes what you teach, then after a first and a second warning, have no more to do with him:
11 you will know that anyone of that sort is warped and is self-condemned as a sinner.

THIS IS YOUR FIRST OFFICIAL WARNING.

I will give you a Second Warning.

Then I put you on my IGNORE LIST.

Please feel free to do what you want whenever you want. Just curious, how are your warnings "official"?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yeah, you. The verse you posted says, "have no more to do with him" yet you still continue "warning" him when YOU are supposed to cease all contact. Learn to READ the verses you post!

I would add this: when the Bible is SILENT about something, it is best to stay SILENT yourself about it, rather than claiming what the Bible doesn't say.

 

[GaryA]

If it actually says [1260] 'days' - it is 1260 days.

If it says [1260-day equivalent] in months, time/times, etc. - it is 1260 years.

And, yes - that means Revelation 11:2 is referring to 1260 years while Revelation 11:3 is referring to 1260 days.

"My apologies..."

In my apparent haste to get this posted, I added the 'time/times' part of it when I should not have.

I believe the 'time, times, and a half' phrase is referring to a 3.5 year span of time.

Daniel 12:7
Revelation 12:14

I believe the 'forty and two months' phrase is referring to a 1260 year span of time.

Revelation 11:2, 13:5

 

[cv5]

Are you actually denying that Jesus ate fish with His 11 disciples after His resurrection? Since the Bible is SILENT on the subject of the metabolism of a resurrection body, I suggest that you do as well.

But then, you keep claiming that Jesus takes resurrected and raptured saints to heaven when the Bible is just as SILENT about that.


I really don't care. Why do you? When the Bible is SILENT about a subject, means that WE should be SILENT.

I don't take suggestions or orders from you. Now or ever. So don't even bother trying.

 

[GaryA]

Albeit, in Daniel 7:25, the phrase 'a time and times and the dividing of time' seems to be referring to a 1260 year span of time...

Been a while since I studied all of the passages in detail where all of these phrases are found --- time for a new study...

 

[cv5]

Someone does not LEARN.


Titus 3:9-11 (NJB)
9 But avoid foolish speculations, and those genealogies, and the quibbles and disputes about the Law—they are useless and futile.
10 If someone disputes what you teach, then after a first and a second warning, have no more to do with him:
11 you will know that anyone of that sort is warped and is self-condemned as a sinner.

THIS IS YOUR FIRST OFFICIAL WARNING.

I will give you a Second Warning.

Then I put you on my IGNORE LIST.

I have had that character on and off ignore many times.
I am just about ready to pull the trigger again.......

 

[VCO]

Correct. If the other poster is using that verse to say there is no blood in the glorified body, then that body also cannot have a glorified flesh yet the risen Christ did have glorified flesh. If there is no flesh inheriting the kingdom of God then where will Christ be?

You forget!

JESUS IS OUR HIGH PRIEST. As such HE as a Lamb of Sacrifice, has go to HEAVEN, and Pour out HIS BLOOD around the BASE of the ALTER in HEAVEN.

John 20:15-18 (NJB)
15 Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, why are you weeping? Who are you looking for?' Supposing him to be the gardener, she said, ‘Sir, if you have taken him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will go and remove him.'
16 Jesus said, ‘Mary!' She turned round then and said to him in Hebrew, ‘Rabbuni!'—which means Master.
17 Jesus said to her, ‘Do not cling to me, because I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to the brothers, and tell them: I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.' {Primary purposes on WHY HE HAD TO GO TO HEAVEN, is He has to first act as our HIGH PRIEST, and pour out HIS BLOOD around the Base of the Alter in Heaven. AND THEN start the construction of OUR NEW DWELLING PLACE IN HEAVEN.}
18 So Mary of Magdala told the disciples, ‘I have seen the Lord,' and that he had said these things to her.

Exodus 29:6-12 (NIV)
6 Put the turban on his head and attach the sacred diadem to the turban.
7 Take the anointing oil and anoint him by pouring it on his head.
8 Bring his sons and dress them in tunics
9 and put headbands on them. Then tie sashes on Aaron and his sons. The priesthood is theirs by a lasting ordinance. In this way you shall ordain Aaron and his sons.
10 "Bring the bull to the front of the Tent of Meeting, and Aaron and his sons shall lay their hands on its head.
11 Slaughter it in the LORD's presence at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting.
12 Take some of the bull's blood and put it on the horns of the altar with your finger, and pour out the rest of it at the base of the altar.

NO BLOOD IN JESUS, and WE SHALL BE LIKE HIM.


Romans 6:5 (ESV)
5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.

1 John 3:2 (ESV)
2 Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is.


NOTICE, the Portal to Heaven is under the ALTAR, therefore everyone who comes that was Comes TROUGH THE BLOOD OF JESUS.

Revelation 6:9-11 (ESV)
9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne.
10 They cried out with a loud voice, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?”
11 Then they were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been.

 

[VCO]

"My apologies..."

In my apparent haste to get this posted, I added the 'time/times' part of it when I should not have.

. . .

Welcome to my world.

 

[VCO]

Yeah, you. The verse you posted says, "have no more to do with him" yet you still continue "warning" him when YOU are supposed to cease all contact. Learn to READ the verses you post!

Have I warned him before ? ? ? I have had 8 Strokes in the last 6 years, and now I find it is hard to remember things.

 

[OldSage]

Read carefully. I said "in chapter 2" (the chapter)



V.3 does not have the words "that day" (recall, they are in italics in some versions, indicating that they are added--IOW, not present in the TEXT in the Greek); however, v.3 does have the negation, referring specifically to the Subject of v.2, which DOES speak of a "spans of time" that it was claimed to be "ALREADY HERE / ALREADY PRESENT [PERFECT indicative]".

The phrase "the DOTL" speaks of an earthly-located time-period... as you know... and 1Th5:2-3 tells of its ARRIVAL... which is LIKE the INITIAL "birth pang [singular]" that COMES UPON and woman... of the ones Jesus Himself spoke of, which are also parallel the SEALS at the START of the "IN QUICKNESS [NOUN; Rev1:1 / 4:1 / 1:19c]" time period (i.e. 7-yr Trib, so at the START of that), in every way consistent...

An interesting point TDW - but is it relevant?
Again - how can you gainsay the scholars?
e.g.
Robertsons Word pictures:
For it will not be (οτ). There is an ellipse here of ουκ εστα (or γενησετα) to be supplied after οτ. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 2 Thessalonians 2:4. The meaning is clear. Hοτ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2 Thessalonians 2:2.

 

[OldSage]

Let's see what the Bible says about it.

1 Thess 4- {the FAMOUS rapture passage}
14 For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him.

15 According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.

16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.

17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.

1 Cot 15- {another FAMOUS rapture verse}
51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed—

52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.

Red words refer to the dead saints who come with Jesus, and their physical bodies resurrected into imperishable bodies.

Blue words refer to the living saints who will "meet the dead saints in the air".

Note from 1 Thess 4:16 that the dead will be resurrected BEFORE the living will be changed.

There is nothing about action taking place ON EARTH. It all occurs IN THE AIR and IN THE CLOUDS. 1 Thess 4:17 says so.

I see your point FG

Very good. Thank you.

 

[OldSage]

FreeGrace2 said:
There is nothing about action taking place ON EARTH. It all occurs IN THE AIR and IN THE CLOUDS. 1 Thess 4:17 says so.

I proved the opposite by comparing 2 passages; 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15. You didn't address them. Looks like you are ignoring them.

Some people just won't be convinced by facts.


Do you really think they were raptured into imperishable bodies? Why?

Of course - how else do you understand redemption?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Albeit, in Daniel 7:25, the phrase 'a time and times and the dividing of time' seems to be referring to a 1260 year span of time...

Been a while since I studied all of the passages in detail where all of these phrases are found --- time for a new study...

While you're viewing this section of scripture again, please also take note of what I pointed out in a previous post (somewhere, I think, in this thread), about how verse 20 is describing the "individual-person" aspect of the beast (i.e. the "another horn/king" vv.8,20-21,24)... "whose look was more stout than his fellows"... which, to me, shows that these day-amounts supplied in this context span only within what an individual-person's life-span would be, rather than considering this to be speaking of the "governmental-aspect" said beast (which could feasibly span the longer time-frame). Make sense? = )

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

An interesting point TDW - but is it relevant?
Again - how can you gainsay the scholars?
e.g. Robertsons Word pictures:
For it will not be (οτ). There is an ellipse here of ουκ εστα (or γενησετα) to be supplied after οτ. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 2 Thessalonians 2:4. The meaning is clear. Hοτ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2 Thessalonians 2:2.

I don't really "gainsay" the scholar's point regarding the "grammar," but only the "definition" he is assuming re: what v.2 tells us is the content of the false claim... it's not that the false claim consists of it being said "that THE SECOND COMING is already here / is already present [perfect indicative]"; rather, that the false claim, according to what Paul in v.2 informs of its content, is "that THE DAY OF THE LORD is already here / is already present [perfect indicative]"...

...so I think I can say I AGREE (and that's exactly what I'VE been SAYING) about the "grammar" issue he's pointing out (if I'm understanding him correctly, and I think I am)...

...however, it's not the "grammar" issue I see a problem with in his words ^ , it's the "definition" of the phrase (v.2) in what the false claim consists of ("that THE DAY OF THE LORD is already here / is already present [perfect indicative]"--not "THE SECOND COMING" that he assumes the phrase refers to--but I find that all kinds of ppl inject that "idea" into that phrase... but I've already explained in past posts why I believe "the DOTL" commences PRIOR TO the point in time of His "RETURN" to the earth at Rev19, commencing rather at the START of the 7-Trib yrs [aka the "IN THE NIGHT" aspect 1Th5:2-3 (also involving the "NIGHT WATCHES"), which PRECEDES the point in time of His Second Coming to the earth, as I've mentioned and explained elsewhere...). "Day," esp in time-prophecies regarding Israel, always start at DARK / SUNDOWN and run through DAYLIGHT of the following portion... This is how I see this long spans of time also (Trib AND MK age)