M
Re: PreTrib is invalidated because it does not uphold "no one knows the day or hour"
I didn't know there was a "rule". It's just a device. I understand you to be saying Jesus is describing two different "raptures" in the space of a few verses in Matthew 24. I'm trying to get you to see this passage needs to be viewed in its context of reality. Jesus was speaking to real people who needed to go away from that lesson hour with a realistic, practical understanding. How in the world should they proceed if your idea that Jesus was teaching two conflicting ideas were actually true? Makes no sense.
You seem real preoccupied with labels. I'm more of a "let's look at a given passage of Scripture and let the passage speak for itself" kind of a guy.
You say "the hated Zionist" position? No, Zionism is wildly popular in the mainstream conservative Christian crowd. I'm the one on the outside looking in. I'm the one who has to take all the guff. Just notice this Popeye guy right here, with all the sneering snarking unpleasantness. Just a 'day in the life' for me.
Bro, I don't know "the exact timing". Where do you get that? "...no one knows the day or hour".
I've slam-dunked "imminency" twice now. When did you want to address the evidence I have presented about Peter's prophesied martyrdom? And there are OTHER problems with "imminency":
Because PreTrib believes the "day of the Lord" is identical to the 70th Week...there are any number of events which the Bible says occur BEFORE the "day of the Lord" and which then also negate "imminency".
For example, Malachi 4:5 states -- "Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet BEFORE the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord."
So now, PreTrib needs to belatedly and arbitrarily revise their position and claim their "rapture" occurs not only before the 70th Week...but now also before this appearance of Elijah. The problem is...PreTrib is actually so sloppy and has sooo many unresolved loose ends, no one has even bothered to make an argument about this. Not MacArthur, not LaHaye, not Hal Lindsey. Nobody.
You have put words into my mouth and the worst thing someone can do when discussing theological points with someone else is to directly and personally insult them or put words into their mouths pretending to be an expert at what they may say.
Yes, I am going to say this whether you like it or not. Pre-mil, A-mil, Post-mil, pre-trib, pre-wrath, post trib, mid-trip, and pan - mill ---> they **all** have their faults as a system. The one I think is least problematic is the hated (in your opinion) Zionist Pre-trib or pre-wrath position, with strong deference to imminent rapture.
You say "the hated Zionist" position? No, Zionism is wildly popular in the mainstream conservative Christian crowd. I'm the one on the outside looking in. I'm the one who has to take all the guff. Just notice this Popeye guy right here, with all the sneering snarking unpleasantness. Just a 'day in the life' for me.
your belief that all Christians will know the exact timing of the rapture
- at least it recognizes that the Scripture teaches imminency.
Because PreTrib believes the "day of the Lord" is identical to the 70th Week...there are any number of events which the Bible says occur BEFORE the "day of the Lord" and which then also negate "imminency".
For example, Malachi 4:5 states -- "Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet BEFORE the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord."
So now, PreTrib needs to belatedly and arbitrarily revise their position and claim their "rapture" occurs not only before the 70th Week...but now also before this appearance of Elijah. The problem is...PreTrib is actually so sloppy and has sooo many unresolved loose ends, no one has even bothered to make an argument about this. Not MacArthur, not LaHaye, not Hal Lindsey. Nobody.