Thief in the Night-- Pretrib or Second Coming?

[GaryA]

Since you are a hard-boiled full preterist, pray tell me:
Does Dan 9 have any relation to Dan 12? And do both have anything to do with the Second Coming?

Now, you know I am not a preterist - much less a full preterist - and a joke to even consider a "hard-boiled full preterist"...

A more accurate term would be 'historicist' - some prophecy is past, some is future - not all has been fulfilled.

(Just more than you think has been fulfilled.)

 

[GaryA]

So....post-trib ladies and gentlemen, I beg and implore you once again to please answer:
1) who are these 24 Elders?
2) does their appearance in Rev 4 & 5 precede chronologically the opening of the seals so described in Rev 6?

Any takers? Lucy? Presidente? Runningman? GaryA?

The reason that no one wants to bother with answering any of your questions is the way you are going about taking part in the conversation.

I for one am not going to spend the time and effort chasing your petty whims. When your attitude changes - and, you show everyone you are actually willing to have a more give-and-take approach to the conversation - well - then, it might be different...

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Thanks Runningman. And I agree with what you (and Presidente) are trying to communicate, that being:

Valid post-tribber biblical arguments are running dry, and we are at that stage of ad hominem attacks and denials which is the bunker to which post-tribbers inevitably retreat when debating with pre-tribbers.

But the fact remains....not ONE post-tribber can (or has) answered the straightforward question of who these 24 Elders actually are. Despite the fact that Scripture delineates, describes and identifies them in abundantly lush and descriptive language all of which is beyond all refutation.

So....post-trib ladies and gentlemen, I beg and implore you once again to please answer:
1) who are these 24 Elders?
2) does their appearance in Rev 4 & 5 precede chronologically the opening of the seals so described in Rev 6?

Any takers? Lucy? Presidente? Runningman? GaryA?

Rev 1:6
And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

Rev 4:1
After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.

Rev 4:4
And round about the throne were four and twenty seats (Strong's G2362: throne): and upon the seats (Strong's G2362: throne) I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.

Rev 5:8
And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

Rev 5:9
And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;

Rev 5:10
And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

I've answered that question in a previous thread where you were being as rude & abrasive as you are now.
As I remember it, you actually agreed with me. But the 24 elders are not indicitive of a PTR. On that we do not agree.

 

[GaryA]

@cv5 - at this point (in this thread) - if I answer any of your questions, it will be only because I truly think it may help someone else in some way.

For as long as your mind is 'closed' - I don't think anything I have to say will be [truly] beneficial to you at all...

 

[Runningman]

Thanks Runningman. And I agree with what you (and Presidente) are trying to communicate, that being:

Valid post-tribber biblical arguments are running dry, and we are at that stage of ad hominem attacks and denials which is the bunker to which post-tribbers inevitably retreat when debating with pre-tribbers.

But the fact remains....not ONE post-tribber can (or has) answered the straightforward question of who these 24 Elders actually are. Despite the fact that Scripture delineates, describes and identifies them in abundantly lush and descriptive language all of which is beyond all refutation.

No you definitely didn't catch the point of what I had said and you definitely misrepresented it. No problem. You're free to interpret it any way you want.

So....post-trib ladies and gentlemen, I beg and implore you once again to please answer:

1) who are these 24 Elders?
2) does their appearance in Rev 4 & 5 precede chronologically the opening of the seals so described in Rev 6?

1. The Bible doesn't name who they are other than they rule with Christ.
2. Those in the white robes, possibly the elders too, are those from the great tribulation.

Revelation 7
13Then one of the elders asked me, “These in white robes—who are they, and where did they come from?”
14I answered, “Sir, you know.”
And he said, “These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Let's just cut to the chase. The angle you are working from is you're trying to prove the pre-trib rapture. Revelation 7:13,14 proves that the saints in white robes came from the great tribulation. That's the church. They were raptured or martyred, either way, the church is going through the great tribulation. Revelation isn't 100% chronological and I don't want to hash out where it all fits or which parts are symbolic or not. If you believe it's 100% chronological, fine, but Revelation 7:13,14 disproves the pre-trib.

 

[Runningman]

The reason that no one wants to bother with answering any of your questions is the way you are going about taking part in the conversation.

I for one am not going to spend the time and effort chasing your petty whims. When your attitude changes - and, you show everyone you are actually willing to have a more give-and-take approach to the conversation - well - then, it might be different...

I replied, but I've already played this song and dange more times than I can remember. That's my last reply here.

 

[GaryA]

I replied, but I've already played this song and dange more times than I can remember. That's my last reply here.

So many times that your 'dance' has turned into 'dange' - whatever that is...

Just teasing you...

 

[GaryA]

I replied, but I've already played this song and dange more times than I can remember. That's my last reply here.

The answer is to not dance to the song.

song: someone comes into a thread - having an "attitude" - tries to "steal the show" and "lead everyone around" for as long as possible

dance: people go along with it

That is not having a [give-and-take] conversation.

 

[ZNP]

My comment was a criticism of your "doctrine of ripening before salvation" bro.
Nothing to do with being raptured.

The rapture is our blessed hope, that is what I was talking about. The word salvation is far bigger than a single event 50 years ago. Paul said to work out your salvation with fear and trembling.

 

[cv5]

petty whims

OK bro. BTW....we pre-tribbers don't blow a fuse when dealing with those verses. In fact they dovetail with sublime perfection into our eschatology.

Sublime perfection. Good place to be bro.

 

[cv5]

No you definitely didn't catch the point of what I had said and you definitely misrepresented it. No problem. You're free to interpret it any way you want.



1. The Bible doesn't name who they are other than they rule with Christ.
2. Those in the white robes, possibly the elders too, are those from the great tribulation.

Revelation 7
13Then one of the elders asked me, “These in white robes—who are they, and where did they come from?”
14I answered, “Sir, you know.”
And he said, “These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Let's just cut to the chase. The angle you are working from is you're trying to prove the pre-trib rapture. Revelation 7:13,14 proves that the saints in white robes came from the great tribulation. That's the church. They were raptured or martyred, either way, the church is going through the great tribulation. Revelation isn't 100% chronological and I don't want to hash out where it all fits or which parts are symbolic or not. If you believe it's 100% chronological, fine, but Revelation 7:13,14 disproves the pre-trib.

The elders "name" aka identify themselves bro. With infallible accuracy. So does John in Rev 1.....same group. Obviously.

Rev 7.....these are undoubtedly tribulation saints. We pre-tribbers have that worked out to sublime perfection as well bro

 

[cv5]

The elders "name" aka identify themselves bro. With infallible accuracy. So does John in Rev 1.....same group. Obviously.

Rev 7.....these are undoubtedly tribulation saints. We pre-tribbers have that worked out to sublime perfection as well bro

Whoops....almost forgot....and Jesus Himself identifies these Elders as well in Rev 3 and 4.

All in all.....as solid as biblical doctrine gets bro.

I cannot fathom these persistent denials. I mean what more proof do you want?

 

[Runningman]

The answer is to not dance to the song.

song: someone comes into a thread - having an "attitude" - tries to "steal the show" and "lead everyone around" for as long as possible

dance: people go along with it

That is not having a [give-and-take] conversation.

Well that’s not what I had in mind when I talked about a song and dange… err I mean dance. I just mean it’s the same discussion every time. For example, I said the 24 elders aren’t identified. Their names aren’t given anywhere in the Bible yet he responded and said I’m wrong. 🤷‍♂️

seems like the same ole song and dance to me, but point taken.

 

[GaryA]

Let's just cut to the chase. The angle you are working from is you're trying to prove the pre-trib rapture. Revelation 7:13,14 proves that the saints in white robes came from the great tribulation. That's the church. They were raptured or martyred, either way, the church is going through the great tribulation. Revelation isn't 100% chronological and I don't want to hash out where it all fits or which parts are symbolic or not. If you believe it's 100% chronological, fine, but Revelation 7:13,14 disproves the pre-trib.

Of course, you know he is going to tell you that those saints are [just] the "gleenings" - right?

Interesting how 'pretrib' folks take it upon themselves to relegate [those who are not 'pretrib'] from "main harvest" to "gleenings"...

Interesting how the multitude in Revelation 7:9 seems to have such a far greater number than the "main harvest" would seem to have...

Is the 2000-year-old 'church' estimated to have anywhere even close to that many members so far...?

Why would the "gleenings" number be orders-of-magnitude greater than the "main harvest" number...?

Of course, we do not know the actual numbers; however, it seems like an accurate relative comparison.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Scriptures speak of Christ coming FOR His saints, and a coming WITH His saints. One is the Rapture , the other His Second Advent.

The problem with this view is that 1 Cor 15:23 says exactly when the singular resurrection occurs: "when He comes". So where do you fit this singular resurrection on the timeline of history?

If you say "pre-trib", then none of the tribulation martyrs will be in it, and Rev 20:4,5 says the trib martyrs will be resurrected and reign with Christ for 1,000 years.

Actually, there are several verses that use words like "when He comes", "the coming of the Lord", "at His coming", etc. The OT had 21 prophecies regarding Jesus coming to earth; the first advent as a baby to become the Suffering Servant, and the second advent as the King of kings to reign on earth for 1,000 years.

So every mention of "coming" of Jesus is a direct reference to the second advent.

12 Cor 15:23 - But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

2 Thess 2:1 - Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters,

2 Thess 1:10 - on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed. This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you.

These verses are about His second advent. 2 Thess 2:1 even mentions the so-called "rapture" with "our being gathered to Him".

 

[cv5]

Now, you know I am not a preterist - much less a full preterist - and a joke to even consider a "hard-boiled full preterist"...

A more accurate term would be 'historicist' - some prophecy is past, some is future - not all has been fulfilled.

(Just more than you think has been fulfilled.)

Sorry about that bro. When you get a chance let us know how you think Dan 9 and 12 relate to the SC.

 

[GaryA]

Well that’s not what I had in mind when I talked about a song and dange… err I mean dance. I just mean it’s the same discussion every time. For example, I said the 24 elders aren’t identified. Their names aren’t given anywhere in the Bible yet he responded and said I’m wrong. 🤷‍♂️

seems like the same ole song and dance to me, but point taken.

I know what you meant - I was just "borrowing from it" to make a point... (it seemed appropriate; sorry for the confusion)

 

[cv5]

If you say "pre-trib", then none of the tribulation martyrs will be in it

Correct. Tribulation Saints are not the Church bro. Pre-tribbers suffer zero coflicts, zero dilemmas and zero loose ends.

In other words sublime eschatological perfection.

 

[presidente]

Was that rant and rambling a form of running interference to avoid a confrontation?

Still waiting for your astute opinion on my questions (which you went to extraordinary lengths to avoid answering):

You can be quite obnoxious you know. If you would try to communicate and not diss other posters posts, and actually listen to what we are saying maybe other posters wouldn't perceive you as prideful and condescending. That wasn't a rant. I was communicating something to you. Go back and read it and pay attention.

I don't consider you my teacher. Your posts where you want to 'riddle me' something isn't a communication method I want to engage in. If you think there is some pattern in the Old Testament related to eschatology, just post it. I have limited time, and sometimes I might be here for back and forth and sometimes not, so asking riddles or questions and waiting on me to read your mind is a waste of time.

That's not a rant. You should listen to what I am saying if you want to communicate with me instead of dissing me.

"What do you think of the 7 feasts of Moses? Merely harvest festivals?

There are a lot of types and shadows in scripture. I am aware that Christ died at Passover, at least one of the two nights the Sanhedrin extracted from 'between the evenings.' I suppose was debated in ancient as to when it fell, but as Christians we know it makes sense that the interpretation of when the Feast of Firsfruits fell is the first day after the Sabbath after Passover, which is the day of Christ's resurrection. Christ is the firstfruits of the resurrection. I could go on and mention other feasts like Shavuot on Pentecost.

I am aware that pre-tribbers who are into feasts try to interpret them through a pre-trib grid. If you want to share your version of this, go ahead. I am not going to share your version of this so don't ask me to read your mind as some kind of 'riddle', as if you have the truth on the matter. Obviously, I don't think you do so I don't think you are an expert.

I appreciate types and shadows in the Old Testament. But when someone comes up with an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament.... or a thousand of them... that contradict the straightforward teachings of the apostles, I don't accept it. I think you are comfortable basing your eschatology on allegorical interpretations of dozens of Old Testament and New Testament passages. People who don't accept the pre-trib assumptions won't see those allegories, at least not the way you do.

Dividing Paul's references to the coming of the Lord (he doesn't say one of multiple comings of the Lord) based on an allegorical interpretation made based on an assumption of a pre-trib framework isn't a hermeneutical method that appeals to me.

Don't ask me questions to try to get me to guess whatever version of pre-trib allegorical methods you want.

I don't want to go down rabbit trails. The feasts are worthy of discussion, of course. But books can be written on this. The topic here has to do with eschatology, not all the thousands of points that one could bring out regarding the feasts. So if you want to talk about something specific, go ahead, but don't try to get me to guess what pre-trib pattern you think you see in some broad topic like the feasts.

Riddle me this: is the cleansing ritual of a leper nothing but a bizarre aggregate of nonsensical doings....or much MUCH more?

Lev 14:14
And the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and the priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot:
Lev 14:17
And of the rest of the oil that is in his hand shall the priest put upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the blood of the trespass offering:"

I'll answer your questions. Much more. I could post a couple of paragraphs on this here, but it wouldn't have to do with pre-trib or post-trib. If you think there is a pre-trib interpretation of this, feel free to post it yourself, but don't ask me 'riddle me this' questions to try to get me to guess what pre-trib idea you think is in this passage.

 

[cv5]

You can be quite obnoxious you know. If you would try to communicate and not diss other posters posts, and actually listen to what we are saying maybe other posters wouldn't perceive you as prideful and condescending. That wasn't a rant. I was communicating something to you. Go back and read it and pay attention.

I don't consider you my teacher. Your posts where you want to 'riddle me' something isn't a communication method I want to engage in. If you think there is some pattern in the Old Testament related to eschatology, just post it. I have limited time, and sometimes I might be here for back and forth and sometimes not, so asking riddles or questions and waiting on me to read your mind is a waste of time.

That's not a rant. You should listen to what I am saying if you want to communicate with me instead of dissing me.



There are a lot of types and shadows in scripture. I am aware that Christ died at Passover, at least one of the two nights the Sanhedrin extracted from 'between the evenings.' I suppose was debated in ancient as to when it fell, but as Christians we know it makes sense that the interpretation of when the Feast of Firsfruits fell is the first day after the Sabbath after Passover, which is the day of Christ's resurrection. Christ is the firstfruits of the resurrection. I could go on and mention other feasts like Shavuot on Pentecost.

I am aware that pre-tribbers who are into feasts try to interpret them through a pre-trib grid. If you want to share your version of this, go ahead. I am not going to share your version of this so don't ask me to read your mind as some kind of 'riddle', as if you have the truth on the matter. Obviously, I don't think you do so I don't think you are an expert.

I appreciate types and shadows in the Old Testament. But when someone comes up with an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament.... or a thousand of them... that contradict the straightforward teachings of the apostles, I don't accept it. I think you are comfortable basing your eschatology on allegorical interpretations of dozens of Old Testament and New Testament passages. People who don't accept the pre-trib assumptions won't see those allegories, at least not the way you do.

Dividing Paul's references to the coming of the Lord (he doesn't say one of multiple comings of the Lord) based on an allegorical interpretation made based on an assumption of a pre-trib framework isn't a hermeneutical method that appeals to me.

Don't ask me questions to try to get me to guess whatever version of pre-trib allegorical methods you want.

I don't want to go down rabbit trails. The feasts are worthy of discussion, of course. But books can be written on this. The topic here has to do with eschatology, not all the thousands of points that one could bring out regarding the feasts. So if you want to talk about something specific, go ahead, but don't try to get me to guess what pre-trib pattern you think you see in some broad topic like the feasts.



I'll answer your questions. Much more. I could post a couple of paragraphs on this here, but it wouldn't have to do with pre-trib or post-trib. If you think there is a pre-trib interpretation of this, feel free to post it yourself, but don't ask me 'riddle me this' questions to try to get me to guess what pre-trib idea you think is in this passage.

Precocious bro. No problema if you are right though.