Pre-Trib Rapture and Premillennialism are False Doctrines

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

delirious

Junior Member
Mar 16, 2017
490
97
28
#1
I believe in this post that I can disprove the pre-trib rapture and premillennialism using only the Scriptures. Proverbs 18: 13 says that, “He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and shame to him.” So I ask you humbly, as a fellow servant in the kingdom of our Lord and Savior, please consider this post with an open heart and mind.



North American churches are overrun with dispensational premillennialism and its eschatology. Its teachings about a seven-year treaty between Antichrist and Israel, a secret pre-trib rapture, and a 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth can be very exciting to the Christian.



Opening your newspaper to find out that Iran is calling for the destruction of Israel once again, or Russia and Turkey are becoming buddies and appear ready to strike the Jews, can be addicting to those that think events like these are signaling the soon coming of Christ. It is no wonder this view of eschatology is so popular in churches in the west.



Sadly, I don’t believe the Scripture supports any of these ideas and so I am concerned for my brothers and sisters in Christ who I believe to be looking for the wrong thing.



I wanted to put forth some Scriptures in this post to show why I think the two-age model (amillennialism) is correct and why the three-age model of premillennialism and a pre-trib rapture does not fit the Scriptures.



I am writing this post primarily for those who are undecided on this topic or for those who may have never been introduced to amillennial eschatology. I find that most Christians I speak with, especially in North America, have never heard of anything other than premillenialism.



First off, what do I mean by two-ages and three-ages?



The amillennialist believes that the Bible only describes two ages after the cross. The church age which we are currently in, and the age to come which happens with Christ’s second coming and the immediate creation of the New Heavens and Earth when he returns.



The premillennialist believes in three ages after the cross. The church age that we are currently in, the 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth (the millennium), and the New Heavens and Earth after the 1,000 years are over.



So which one is correct? Let us start by looking at some Scriptures and see how Jesus Himself and Paul viewed this.



Matthew 12: 32, “Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.”



Luke 18: 29-30, “Truly, truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or parents or brothers or wife or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, who shall not receive many times more in this present time, and in the age to come eternal life.”



Luke 20: 34-35, Jesus said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage but those that are accounted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage.”



Ephesians 1: 21, “far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but in the age to come.”



So Jesus and Paul only knew of two ages.



I think by looking at some further Scriptures to see how this current age ends, we can rule out any possibility of a 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth and therefore disprove premillennialism. Let us proceed and take a look at the next set of Scriptures.



Matthew 13: 47-50, “The kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet that was cast into the sea and gathered some of every kind, which, when it was full, they drew to shore; and they sat down and gathered the good into vessels, but threw the bad away. So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come forth, separate the wicked from the just, and cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.”



2 Peter 3: 10-13, “But the Day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. Therefore, since all these things are to be dissolved, what manner of person ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.”



2 Thessalonians 1: 7-10, “And to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, when he comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints…”



Some premillennialists will say that they only believe in two ages just like the amillennialist, and not three, by saying that the 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth begins “the age to come” and continues on into the new heavens and new earth and they are both part of the same age.



But is this true from Scripture? Is the millennium and the new heavens and earth both part of the same age to come? Scripture says no and here is why:



What did the last Scripture I quoted in 2 Thess mean by “in that Day”?



John 6: 39, “This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.”



John 6: 44, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.”



John 6: 54, “Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”



John 11: 24, Martha said to Him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day.”



So we know “in that Day” in 2 Thess is the “last day” when saints are resurrected. The last day can only mean the last day of our current age.



The premillennialist will say that the “last day” happens at the end of the church age although some will say it happens 7 years later at the end of the tribulation. By saying this they can still have the “age to come” beginning with the 1,000 year reign of Christ and continuing into the new heavens and new earth.



SO IN ORDER TO MAKE PREMILLENNIALISM WORK THEY MUST SAY THAT THE LAST DAY IS BEFORE THE 1,000 YEAR REIGN OF CHRIST ON EARTH.



So if we can prove that the “last day” is not before the 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth then premillennialism is proven false. What does the Scripture say?



From the Scriptures I have already quoted in this post we know that the good and bad are gathered together on the same day (Matt 13). The bad are thrown in the Lake of Fire.



2 Thess and 2 Peter say that the earth is burned up with flaming fire and the heavens are dissolved when the Lord returns.



Where do we find similar language in the Bible? The Great White Throne Judgment.



Revelation 20: 11, “Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them.”



There is no more place for the heaven and earth because they were dissolved with flaming fire at Christ’s return just like 2 Thess and 2 Peter describe.



The premillennialist says the Great White Throne judgment is only for the wicked because the righteous were raised a 1,000 years earlier at the beginning of the millennium. But does the Scripture say this?



We know from John 6:39, John 6:44, John 6:54, and John 11: 24, that I quoted earlier, the righteous are raised on the last day. So is the last day of this age really the end of the church age and the beginning of the 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth like the premillennialist claims?



When are the wicked raised and judged?



John 12: 48, “He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him; the word that I have spoken will judge him IN THE LAST DAY.”



WE HAVE THE WICKED BEING RAISED AND JUDGED ON THE LAST DAY. THE SAME DAY THE RIGHTEOUS ARE RESURRECTED. Are there two last days? Logic says no.



We have proven using Scripture that premillennialism is false. The last day can only be the Great White Throne Judgment. There is no 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth. Do we have even more Scriptures to support this? Yes we do.



Job 14: 12, “So man lies down and does not rise till the heavens are no more. They will not awake nor be roused from their sleep.” When are the heavens no more? Hint: Rev 20: 11



Daniel 12: 2, “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.”



John 5: 28-29, “Do not marvel at this; for the HOUR is coming in which ALL who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth. Those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of condemnation.”



All of these things happen on the last day. That day is the Great White Throne Judgment. When both the righteous and wicked are raised and judged. The wicked are thrown into the Lake of Fire (Matt 13 quoted earlier also Rev 20: 15) and the righteous go into the new heavens and earth.


POST CONTINUED IN FIRST REPLY (only a little bit left)
 

delirious

Junior Member
Mar 16, 2017
490
97
28
#2
So we see just from the Scripture that I have used in this post (and there are many more I did not use) that it is impossible to have a 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth. The last day happens after the 1,000 years and not before like the premillennialist claims. This current age we are living in consists of the 1,000 years and little season of Satan in Rev 20. This period in Revelation 20 is symbolic. It comprises the entire time from the cross to His return. Then the heavens and earth are dissolved the same day he returns, which is the last day, and both wicked and righteous are raised on that day and judged at the Great White Throne judgment.



Once again, just to remind everyone reading this, and thank you for reading, I have posted this because I believe amillennialism to be correct biblically and premillennialism to be a dangerous lie.



People are looking for a pre-trib rapture, a seven year treaty between antichrist and Israel and a millennial kingdom of Christ on earth reigning from Jerusalem that are never coming. The devil has tricked much of the church to look for the wrong thing.



I have heard Christians say, “I will just get right with the Lord if I miss the rapture since I got 7 years.” But sadly they are deceived.



The Scripture says that day “comes as a thief” and “let him who is just be just still and him who is wicked be wicked still”. There will be no second chance.



Our God is holy and a consuming fire. Thankfully He is also rich in mercy and grace.



I hope this post is a blessing to someone. God bless.
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,402
113
#3
Not everyone believes in a pre-trib ingathering.....me for one.....
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#4
I believe in this post that I can disprove the pre-trib rapture and premillennialism using only the Scriptures. Proverbs 18: 13 says that, “He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and shame to him.” So I ask you humbly, as a fellow servant in the kingdom of our Lord and Savior, please consider this post with an open heart and mind.
I could see where you would come to that conclusion, but you did not rightly divide Israel and the body of Christ. You lump all Jesus' teachings to Israel and Paul's teachings to the body of Christ. The body of Christ, the church, was in mystery form until after the resurrection. If Israel received their Messiah and King, then the age of the Gentile would have come during the Millennium during the kingdom of Heaven, but since Israel rejected Jesus, the Millennium was put on hold (as well as the KOH) and the gospel of the d,b,r, was preached to the Gentiles.
 

BaptistBibleBeliever

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2018
2,244
1,032
113
71
Illinois
#5
Biblical eschatology is not an absolute, essential of the faith. I have no problem with someone holding to a different end-times scenario as it effects not one iota on the doctrine of salvation (such as Calvinism does) or eternal security.

I would say that the idea that somehow man is going to usher in a utopian society through making the world a little better day by day was crushed by the World Wars, and watching AntiFa thugs and rioting blacks burn down cities does not tell me that society is getting better by any means.

At any rate, if one prefers to believe on non-essential over another my only reply is "One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind" (Romans 14:5).

On occasion I'll present what I believe and offer liberty to another to present what he believes . . . and the jury (the readers) will decide for themselves.
 

BaptistBibleBeliever

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2018
2,244
1,032
113
71
Illinois
#7
I could see where you would come to that conclusion, but you did not rightly divide Israel and the body of Christ. You lump all Jesus' teachings to Israel and Paul's teachings to the body of Christ. The body of Christ, the church, was in mystery form until after the resurrection. If Israel received their Messiah and King, then the age of the Gentile would have come during the Millennium during the kingdom of Heaven, but since Israel rejected Jesus, the Millennium was put on hold (as well as the KOH) and the gospel of the d,b,r, was preached to the Gentiles.
I think by looking at some further Scriptures to see how this current age ends, we can rule out any possibility of a 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth and therefore disprove premillennialism. Let us proceed and take a look at the next set of Scriptures.

The essential disagreement I would have with this is the use of the Gospels to disprove a Millennial kingdom. Jesus constantly taught about a coming Kingdom where He would sit upon the throne of David. The Gospel of Matthew presents Jesus Christ as the 'King of the Jews' including his kingly lineage. When was Jesus ever a King on earth? Certainly not prior to His death. The people were looking for a ruler to defeat Rome, not a Lamb that would die for the sins of the world.

When does Jesus establish His throne on the earth if not during the 1,000 year reign mentioned six times in Revelation 20.
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,586
9,104
113
#8
Sorry to throw cold water on the Amillennialists, but can you tell me When Jesus sat on King David's EARTHLY political throne, as promised by the Angel Gabriel?
Luke 1:
26 Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And having come in, the angel said to her, “Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; [e]blessed are you among women!”

29 But [f]when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and considered what manner of greeting this was. 30 Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.”

Unless of course, we are allowed to allegorize whatever Scripture we like.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
#9
Sorry to throw cold water on the Amillennialists, but can you tell me When Jesus sat on King David's EARTHLY political throne, as promised by the Angel Gabriel?
Luke 1:
26 Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And having come in, the angel said to her, “Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; [e]blessed are you among women!”

29 But [f]when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and considered what manner of greeting this was. 30 Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.”

Unless of course, we are allowed to allegorize whatever Scripture we like.
I can answer this.

Amills believe Jesus went to the throne of David at the ascension, they use these verses in Acts 2 to prove it:


30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
#10
I have been thrown from one end to teh other in eschatology. its a complicated subject.

But I have locked in my position now officially and have stuck with it and will stick with it, immovable. Because I believe that ALL scripture must be taken into account, and I also dislike spiritualizing the scriptures.
This is a flaw very common in bible commentaries from days gone by. You can be reading about Jerusalem being surrounded and the commentators will say "Here we have the Gospel Church being surrounded by the Papist religion". Or something like that. Its absurd really.

The pre-trib rapture is not as hard to prove as you think OP. I prayed and fasted about it, it all makes sense when you match all the scriptures together and cross-reference things. It takes time but its worth it.
In revelation 5:10 you got the church in heaven before the first seal is opened, how did they get there?

But im happy to say that I know many post-tribbers on this forum who do NOT believe in replacement theology and believe in a future revival of Israel as a nation, I think bro dcontroversal is one of them. (post trib, but no replacement theology)

Me coming from a judaizer background I can say that amillennialism is a HARD SELL for Jews. As is replacement theology. "YOu mean to tell me, we were scattered, but a DIFFERENT group is being regathered, AND its spiritual, while the scattering was physical? Seriously?"
^As you can see, it doesnt work lol.

The reason why amillennialism is such a hard sell for Jews is because they have read the prophecies of a rebuilt Jerusalem over and over and over again, and therefore expect the LORD to come through on those promises.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#11
Biblical eschatology is not an absolute, essential of the faith. I have no problem with someone holding to a different end-times scenario as it effects not one iota on the doctrine of salvation (such as Calvinism does) or eternal security.

I would say that the idea that somehow man is going to usher in a utopian society through making the world a little better day by day was crushed by the World Wars, and watching AntiFa thugs and rioting blacks burn down cities does not tell me that society is getting better by any means.

At any rate, if one prefers to believe on non-essential over another my only reply is "One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind" (Romans 14:5).

On occasion I'll present what I believe and offer liberty to another to present what he believes . . . and the jury (the readers) will decide for themselves.
I think it does matter. Are we commanded to avoid the mark of the beast? If anyone takes the mark, they are condemned in hell fire. Is this meant for the body of Christ? It turns it into a works based salvation, does it not?
 

BaptistBibleBeliever

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2018
2,244
1,032
113
71
Illinois
#12
I can answer this.

Amills believe Jesus went to the throne of David at the ascension, they use these verses in Acts 2 to prove it:


30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
There is a throne in heaven, certainly. But Scripture speaks of a throne on earth - the literal throne of David.

How is it that the people expected a king - because of the prophecies which went before.

"And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon. And a very great multitude spread their garments in the way; others cut down branches from the trees, and strawed them in the way. And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest" (Matthew 21:7-9).

Except that Jesus coming as the Lamb of God did not fit into their thinking. True, their Messiah is coming, and had they received Him the Millennium would have started at the Resurrection -- but we know the story. God knew what Israel would do, he foresaw it, foreknew it, and knew that the Gentiles would be saved after Israel's rejection of their King.
 

BaptistBibleBeliever

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2018
2,244
1,032
113
71
Illinois
#13
I think it does matter. Are we commanded to avoid the mark of the beast? If anyone takes the mark, they are condemned in hell fire. Is this meant for the body of Christ? It turns it into a works based salvation, does it not?
As one that believes in a premillennial rapture, I have no concern about a mark. If a man is saved and holds to an amillennial view - he is going to be raptured with the rest of the church--even if it is against his wishes.

The only ones to be concerned are the lost that will enter into the Tribulation, but eschatology is not the doctrine we need to be showing them. They need to know how to get saved.

The unsaved is not going to understand the Bible at any rate until he receives the Holy Spirit as Teacher.
 

BaptistBibleBeliever

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2018
2,244
1,032
113
71
Illinois
#14
But im happy to say that I know many post-tribbers on this forum who do NOT believe in replacement theology and believe in a future revival of Israel as a nation, I think bro dcontroversal is one of them. (post trib, but no replacement theology)
Yes, I agree. That's why we let him live.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
#15
I think it does matter. Are we commanded to avoid the mark of the beast? If anyone takes the mark, they are condemned in hell fire. Is this meant for the body of Christ? It turns it into a works based salvation, does it not?
It would not turn into that even if the church was to go through that, and here is why:
Those who are written in the Lamb's book of life would not worship the beast, nor take his mark.

Rev 13:8 and one other verse that i cant remember now show that.

Also it wouldnt really be WORKS salvation it would be "lack of works" salvation, since taking the mark is a work. :D
Nah but all jokes aside, thats how post-tribbers often explain that question you had. That the ones that are truly saved wouldnt take the mark
 

BaptistBibleBeliever

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2018
2,244
1,032
113
71
Illinois
#16
It would not turn into that even if the church was to go through that, and here is why:
Those who are written in the Lamb's book of life would not worship the beast, nor take his mark.

Rev 13:8 and one other verse that i cant remember now show that.
I remember a huge flame war I was involved with in the old defunct 'Left Behind Message Board.' One of the character was drugged and forced to take the Mark of the Beast while unconscious. The big deal was that some of the posters there insisted that the character was now damned because he had the 'mark.'

Well, no way. It was forced on him and he certainly wasn't doing the main element which would damn him, and that was to worship the beast.

This probably has nothing to do with anything, but you comment reminded me of it.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
#17
I remember a huge flame war I was involved with in the old defunct 'Left Behind Message Board.' One of the character was drugged and forced to take the Mark of the Beast while unconscious. The big deal was that some of the posters there insisted that the character was now damned because he had the 'mark.'

Well, no way. It was forced on him and he certainly wasn't doing the main element which would damn him, and that was to worship the beast.

This probably has nothing to do with anything, but you comment reminded me of it.
I have thought about that too. Thats probably the best argument for taking the mark symbolically. Because the antichrist could just go around chipping people and BAM everyone is damned.

But I believe it can still be a literal mark, but that it would be like a credit card today. Nobody is FORCING you physically to get a credit card, or an ATM Card, but good luck buying stuff without it!
It says CAUSETH all, not FORCETH all!

Btw have you noticed the KJV says "IN" the right hand or forehead. The new versions say "ON"?
 

BaptistBibleBeliever

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2018
2,244
1,032
113
71
Illinois
#18
Btw have you noticed the KJV says "IN" the right hand or forehead. The new versions say "ON"?
We got the best one . . . everything else are just imitations.

The word "IN" would speak of a chip, perhaps. The word "ON" would suggest a tattoo. But I don't see a tattoo speaking to an ATM machine.
 

BaptistBibleBeliever

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2018
2,244
1,032
113
71
Illinois
#19
It would not turn into that even if the church was to go through that, and here is why:
Those who are written in the Lamb's book of life would not worship the beast, nor take his mark.

Rev 13:8 and one other verse that i cant remember now show that.

Also it wouldnt really be WORKS salvation it would be "lack of works" salvation, since taking the mark is a work. :D
Nah but all jokes aside, thats how post-tribbers often explain that question you had. That the ones that are truly saved wouldnt take the mark
In the classic passage which premillennialists believe to be about the rapture (I Thessalonians 4:13-18), the last verse says, "comfort one another with these words."

Any idea that a Christian might have to suffer along with the rejecting Jewish nation during the Tribulation, even half of it, is NOT a very comforting thought.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
#20
In the classic passage which premillennialists believe to be about the rapture (I Thessalonians 4:13-18), the last verse says, "comfort one another with these words."

Any idea that a Christian might have to suffer along with the rejecting Jewish nation during the Tribulation, even half of it, is NOT a very comforting thought.
What about the fact that Paul writes all his epistles with a promise of PEACE from God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, or something to that effect.

Yet during the seals it says peace was TAKEN from the earth.

I realized that the strongest proof text for pre-trib rapture is we are not appointed to wrath. I used to discount that and say "well christians in middle-east are persecuted right now, so clearly that just means hell in the afterlife"
But then I think it was Ahwatukee who posted about it and I realized that the difference is: Its the LAMB opening the seals! Whats happening now in the middle-east is the devil and world working against Christians, but in the time of Jacob's trouble its the wrath of the Lamb, to which the church is not appointed to!