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

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
Your views are warped. Rev 20 is so clear. But go ahead and reject the truth.

But you have no excuse.

Revelation 20:1-6 is the Lords spiritual realm, no physical kingdom on this earth, nor mortal humans are seen (Fact)

You deny truth, there is no Millennial Kingdom on this earth seen in Revelation 20:1-6 as you fight against a pre-trib rapture, with your Millennialism being a false teaching in itself, hypocrisy

Your "explanation" is nothing more than a "spiritualizing" of literal Scripture.

When people spiritualize Scripture, they are able to make up whatever they want.

The Bible is full of verses teaching that Jesus comes back and King of kings, and Lord of lords, and will rule the nations with a rod of iron. Yet you seem only capable of thinking that Christ rules His own people with a harsh rule. Ridiculous.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Paul, in v.1, is not speaking of (what we commonly call) "Christ's Second Coming to the earth" [as in, Rev19].

Maybe it hasn't occurred to you, but on a trip from heaven to earth, one has to pass through the atmosphere, where Jesus resurrects all the accompanying dead saints, and gathers up all the living believers and changes them. And THEN He continues on down to earth.

The chink in your theory is that ch 2 is very clear. The beast, aka AC, will be revealed BEFORE Jesus comes. So explain that.

Rather, "the coming of OUR Lord Jesus Christ and [/even] OUR episynagoges UNTO HIM" (that is, "IN THE AIR"... "the meeting of the Lord IN THE AIR").

I'm not arguing against this. So you can save your breath, or typing.

This ^ is CONTRASTED with what v.8b is speaking of: His Second Coming TO THE EARTH, when He will be "OPENLY MANIFEST / [His] MANIFESTATION"... when "EVERY EYE" shall see Him.

No. It's all in the same passage and context.

Between those two distinct items, the "man of sin" will be present on the earth to DO ALL he is slated to DO (IN HIS TIME, the "IN THE NIGHT" time-period)

You have not proven your "2 distinct items" theory. It's all the same thing.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

You have not proven your "2 distinct items" theory. It's all the same thing

Well, let me ask you this... do you believe what you'd put in your Post #1157, or not:

FreeGrace2 said:
Sure. birth pains begin, which signals a birth is coming. Duh. The FIRST group of God's judgment are the seals, followed by the trumpets , and then the bowl judgments. All of the Trib is the DOTL.

[which ^ was a response to...]

TDW (Post #1151): "[re: "the beginning of birth pangS"]--Paul informs us that [as the Thessalonians "KNOW PERFECTLY"] "the DOTL" time-period *ARRIVES* like the INITIAL one that COMES UPON a woman... 1Th5:2-3;"

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

TDW: This ^ is CONTRASTED with what v.8b is speaking of: His Second Coming TO THE EARTH, when He will be "OPENLY MANIFEST / [His] MANIFESTATION"... when "EVERY EYE" shall see Him.

No. It's all in the same passage and context.

Terrible argument.

That's like saying, "the 'parousia [G3952]' of v.9a is the same as the 'parousia [G3952]' of v.1a, BECAUSE they are all in the SAME PASSAGE and CONTEXT [and, further, is even the SAME WORD!]"

Um, no... it matters how this word is used in relation to other words in the text (the context clues, informing us that these are two distinct persons being spoken of, within the same context, not the SAME one "just because 'parousia [G3952]' is used for each).





____________

What PAUL is bringing to the fore (in v.1) is NOT the same item that the false conveyors were "purporting 'IS HERE / IS PRESENT'" (in v.2, i.e. THE JUDGMENTS!)... Paul is CORRECTING such a notion BY MEANS OF his *bringing to the fore* the DISTINCT ITEM (in v.1), and telling how it "FITS" (SEQUENCE-wise / TIME-wise) IN RELATION TO the *other* distinct item that the false conveyors were purporting about as being "HERE / PRESENT" (in v.2)... and he repeats THIS SEQUENCE 3x in the text (btwn v.3 and v.9a)

 

[cv5]

Well, off the top of my head, I know I made at least ONE post in THIS thread, on that Subject (not a thorough treatment, mind you, but brief comments on it):

Post #79 (page 4) - https://christianchat.com/threads/5...ure-by-dr-john-f-walvoord.198357/post-4530368


However, apart from their grasping the "chronology" issues (such as Luke 21:12 saying that the 70ad events must come "BEFORE ALL" of "the beginning of birth pangS" [same point being made in Matt22:7, then v.8 [Rev1:1 / 1:19c / 4:1 (7:3)], etc...], then it can be difficult for a person to see that ALL of Matthew 24 (+) is talking about what FOLLOWS "our Rapture"... but you're welcome to view that post of mine (however brief it was), and see if any of it helps "clear the vision," so to speak...

It's on the topic of the "LAMPS LIT" for the "IN THE NIGHT [/NIGHT WATCHES]" time-period (i.e. trib yrs), and related to the Matt24:14 / 26:13 verses (but if a person is in the mindset that Matt24:14 [/26:13] is what is taking place [/being preached] NOW [rather than IN the FUTURE TRIB yrs, per context], it can be difficult to wrench such a thing from their mindset...)



[I've made many other posts on that Subject you're asking about... will try to Search out some...]

Great thank you. I'm in the process of going through every single one of your posts to find more on the 10 virgins.

On the topic of Luke 21........Chuck Missler does a great job with some excellent graphics to clarify that issue. I know you fully understand the chapter (a fact of which I am positively thrilled to know), so I post for those who have yet failed to comprehend the significant differences. Luke 21 is one of the biggest roadblocks to grasping end time eschatology IMO.

I certainly do not agree with Chuck on everything but he definitely has nailed this issue down...

 

[Absolutely]

Being revealed is being revealed.
opposing everything called god is opposing everything called god.
both these and his sitting in the temple must happen before the Lord comes.

Show me.
You are projecting what you think into that dynamic.

 

[Absolutely]

[plz include reading v.35... as I have done... so you can follow along with what I've put below]



I'm not saying "the wedding" takes place on the earth. I'm saying "when he will RETURN FROM the wedding" as an ALREADY-WED Bridegroom (whose "wedding" ALREADY took place in Heaven), b/c this text (and its parallels) are "Second Coming TO THE EARTH" passages.

And several of those types of contexts speak of the "LAMPS LIT" thing, which in past posts I've explained this speaks to the "IN THE NIGHT" time-period (i.e. the TRIB yrs), aka "the NIGHT WATCHES"... IOW, the "LAMPS LIT" takes place FOLLOWING "our Rapture" and pertains to the "IN THE NIGHT" aspect of "the DOTL" earthly time-period...

And this "LAMPS LIT" issue hails back to references in Scripture such as the following (bearing in mind my posts re: how Matt24:14 / 26:13 speak of that which will be being preached in the future trib years, FOLLOWING "our Rapture" [after the Lord removes all of the "LIGHT BULBS," so to speak [i.e. "our Rapture [IN THE AIR]"], and then the "IN THE NIGHT" [/trib yrs] begins to unfold upon the earth):

[quoting a small portion of those past posts]

[...]
6) Zechariah 4:14 -
"Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth." [SEE Rev11:14 "Lord of the earth"]


7) Zechariah 6:5 -
"And the angel answered and said unto me, These are the four spirits of the heavens, which go forth from standing before the Lord of all the earth." [again, SEE Rev11:14 "Lord of the earth"]

"olive-trees" (one word in Hebrew, in the passages below) -

The same word (singular word in Hebrew) that is used in Zech4:3 and 4:11 (translated there as "olive trees [H2132 - zayith/zê-ṯîm (one word)]") is also used in the following two passages (at bottom):

(which goes along with my posts re: the study of the "[olive] oil" and "the lamps LIT" and "in the night"/"the night watches" [and Matt24:14/26:13 (IN/DURING the trib yrs FOLLOWING "our Rapture"), Matt25:1-13/Matt22:9-14, and Lk12:35,36,37,38,40,42-44,45-48"when he will RETURN FROM the wedding" THEN the meal [G347]; etc...])


Exodus 27:20-21 -

The Oil for the Lamps
(Leviticus 24:1–4)

20 And you are to command the Israelites to bring you pure oil of pressed [/beaten] olives [H2132] for the light, to keep the lamps burning continually.
21 In the Tent of Meeting, outside the veil that is in front of the Testimony, Aaron and his sons are to tend the lamps before the LORD from evening until morning. This is to be a permanent statute for the Israelites for the generations to come.


Leviticus 24:2-3 -

The Oil for the Lamps
(Exodus 27:20–21)

1 Then the LORD said to Moses, 2 “Command the Israelites to bring you pure oil of pressed [/beaten] olives [H2132] for the light, to keep the lamps burning continually.
3 Outside the veil of the Testimony in the Tent of Meeting, Aaron is to tend the lamps continually before the LORD from evening until morning. This is to be a permanent statute for the generations to come. 4 He shall tend the lamps on the pure gold lampstand before the LORD continually.

[end quoting brief excerpts from old post]

____________

I realize you do not agree with me that Jesus is NOT coming to "MARRY" those in these texts (and their parallels) which I've pointed out in that post, but instead will be "RETURNING" to the earth as an ALREADY-WED Bridegroom ("WITH [G4862 - UNIONed-with] His BRIDE/WIFE [SINGULAR]" which pertains to "the MARRIAGE" itself, having ALREADY TAKEN PLACE *in Heaven" at this point in the chronology, which is His Rev19 "RETURN" to the earth point in time. He's ALREADY-WED by that point!

I'm NOT saying He's RETURNING to the EARTH "FOR the wedding/the MARRIAGE"... NO. NOT what I said or pointed out, at all). The ppl in these texts (both the "saved" persons and the "unsaved" persons) will be still-located on the earth UPON His "RETURN" there, and the "saved" ones (having come to faith IN / DURING / WITHIN the trib yrs, FOLLOWING "our Rapture") will ENTER the *earthly* MK age "with [G3326 - accompanying] Him" [not "WITH [G4862 - UNIONed-with] Him" as we are said to be [and will ALREADY B, by that point in the chronology--i.e. Rev19, His "RETURN" to the earth... as ALREADY-WED, not "TO BE wed" at that point ])

Yes
It is clear the wedding is in heaven.

Seems like though, if i remember correctly , you make virgins into bridesmaids???
I cant remember. There are So many views on this board.

 

[Absolutely]

Great thank you. I'm in the process of going through every single one of your posts to find more on the 10 virgins.

On the topic of Luke 21........Chuck Missler does a great job with some excellent graphics to clarify that issue. I know you fully understand the chapter (a fact of which I am positively thrilled to know), so I post for those who have yet failed to comprehend the significant differences. Luke 21 is one of the biggest roadblocks to grasping end time eschatology IMO.

I certainly do not agree with Chuck on everything but he definitely has nailed this issue down...

Where did he touch 0n the 10 virgins being the rapture?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Maybe it hasn't occurred to you, but on a trip from heaven to earth, one has to pass through the atmosphere, where Jesus resurrects all the accompanying dead saints, and gathers up all the living believers and changes them. And THEN He continues on down to earth.

1) to where the "already-just-having-been raised" "dead in Christ" will be "caught up TOGETHER [at the same time" with the "still-living" of us [/'the Church which is His body']...

[...for the PURPOSES of...]

2) "shall CRUSH Satan UNDER YOUR FEET *IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]*" (Rom16:20); SAME time-period that Rev1:1 / 1:19c / 4:1+ refers to (aka "the 7 yr trib" yrs, starting with SEAL #1, when Jesus will 'STAND to JUDGE' Rev5:6, Isa3:13, [2Th2:[7b]-8a parallel to the wording of Lam2:3-4]);
and "...we SHALL JUDGE ANGELS" 1Cor6:3[14] (which seems reasonable that this would connect with "THRONES" for such a "task" [as seen in Rev4:4, in a context where the One on the throne in vv.2-3 is shown "was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone [i.e. the first and the last stones on "the Breastpiece OF JUDGMENT" Ex28:15,30]); ... and just like "the 12" were told that they will "sit on 12 thrones, judgING the 12 tribes of Israel" Lk22:30 / Matt19:28 when He "RETURNS" to the earth, per Matt25:31-34's parallel wording--for THAT "purpose" [re: THEM]... the "thrones," in the various contexts, are for a "PURPOSE");
WE are not just going to "turn right around, and come back down, after having just been "SNATCHED / CAUGHT UP/-AWAY"... no, we got certain stuff to do!

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

It is clear the wedding is in heaven.

that's what I've said.




The PLURAL "virginS" however (who He is NOT "MARRYING"), are NOT "the Bride / Wife [SINGULAR]"

and...

"the wedding FEAST / SUPPER" (filled with "guests [PLURAL]" etc) is NOT "the MARRIAGE" [/'UNIONed-with' - G4862 thing] itself.




[Rev19:7 and Rev19:9 *distinguishes* these items... and the gospels [accounts; (the parables and related/parallel passages)] never mention "the Bride / Wife [SINGULAR]" in their CONTEXTS]

 

[Absolutely]

Apparently missler thinks the 10 virgins are the picture of the rapture.
The 5 wise being. " favored subset" with The foolish being left behind.
Starts around 39:00

 

[cv5]

How do post tribbers reconcile this portion of Scripture to their opinion? Clearly the tribulation has not yet reached its conclusion by this point.

Rev 11:12
And they (the two witnesses) heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, “Come up here.” And they ascended to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies saw them.

The parallelism is quite inescapable......

1 Thes 4:16-17
For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.
Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.

1 Cor 15:23
But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

Jas 1:18
He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we would be a KIND of firstfruits of His creation.

 

[Absolutely]

that's what I've said.




The PLURAL "virginS" however (who He is NOT "MARRYING"), are NOT "the Bride / Wife [SINGULAR]"

and...

"the wedding FEAST / SUPPER" (filled with "guests [PLURAL]" etc) is NOT "the MARRIAGE" [/'UNIONed-with' - G4862 thing] itself.




[Rev19:7 and Rev19:9 *distinguishes* these items... and the gospels [accounts; (the parables and related/parallel passages)] never mention "the Bride / Wife [SINGULAR]" in their CONTEXTS]

Ok you are getting at something here.

I really cant remember your view.
Seems something we clashed at .
Maybe it was Over the virgins not being virgins or the feast/supper not being in heaven.
Cant remember

 

[Absolutely]

Ok you are getting at something here.

I really cant remember your view.
Seems something we clashed at .
Maybe it was Over the virgins not being virgins or the feast/supper not being in heaven.
Cant remember

Ok i do happen to remember i said " chamber" and you proceded to quash that word.

You can call it " room" if you like.
The door was shut.

(Mat 25 gathering of the bride)

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Apparently missler thinks the 10 virgins are the picture of the rapture.
The 5 wise being. " favored subset" with The foolish being left behind.
Starts around 39:00

If this video was recorded AFTER about "2008," then of course that is the era when he began to blur the distinctions and come to his faulty conclusion of "the millennial exclusion theory [for any member of 'the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY']," which is an inaccurate teaching (due to this very "blurring of distinctions" issue).



I *disagree* that the "10 [or even 5] virginS [PLURAL]" is "the Bride / Wife [SINGULAR]"... or the idea that the "weeping and gnashing of teeth" passages pertain IN ANY WAY to "the Church which is His body" (i.e. "saved" persons... or even to "saved" persons of ANY time-period). No!

 

[Absolutely]

Ok @ 29:00 missler is in lock step with the virgin parable and then bizarrely misreads the 5 foolish as not saved.
Bizarre.
I do think he later changed his view.

 

[Absolutely]

If this video was recorded AFTER about "2008," then of course that is the era when he began to blur the distinctions and come to his faulty conclusion of "the millennial exclusion theory [for any member of 'the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY']," which is an inaccurate teaching (due to this very "blurring of distinctions" issue).



I *disagree* that the "10 [or even 5] virginS [PLURAL]" is "the Bride / Wife [SINGULAR]"... or the idea that the "weeping and gnashing of teeth" passages pertain IN ANY WAY to "the Church which is His body" (i.e. "saved" persons... or even to "saved" persons of ANY time-period). No!

Where does it say weeping and gnashing?

 

[cv5]

Apparently missler thinks the 10 virgins are the picture of the rapture.
The 5 wise being. " favored subset" with The foolish being left behind.
Starts around 39:00

Unfortunately Chuck had some errant teachings on these sorts of matters. Bundled together with his theory that there are Christians who are saved but don't get rewards, and that certain Christians are saved but are not allowed entrance to the wedding feast. His commentary on Hebrews was quite frankly a disaster for this very reason.

 

[Absolutely]

If this video was recorded AFTER about "2008," then of course that is the era when he began to blur the distinctions and come to his faulty conclusion of "the millennial exclusion theory [for any member of 'the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY']," which is an inaccurate teaching (due to this very "blurring of distinctions" issue).



I *disagree* that the "10 [or even 5] virginS [PLURAL]" is "the Bride / Wife [SINGULAR]"... or the idea that the "weeping and gnashing of teeth" passages pertain IN ANY WAY to "the Church which is His body" (i.e. "saved" persons... or even to "saved" persons of ANY time-period). No!

It is beyond obvious the 10 virgin parable is the rapture

 

[Absolutely]

Unfortunately Chuck had some errant teachings on these sorts of matters. Bundled together with his theory that there are Christians who are saved but don't get rewards, and that certain Christians are saved but are not allowed entrance to the wedding feast. His commentary on Hebrews was quite frankly a disaster for this very reason.

Favored rewards is solid bible