What is your BEST PROOF for a pre-trib Rapture?

[Hevosmies]

I would wager you had no idea of the many church fathers that agreed with immenency.
....and postrib at the same time.

This is the truth here. This is what i've found too, the early church fathers seemed to got NO CLUE about eschatology, im SORRY to sound so harsh. Maybe its cause we got the whole bible in one single book form complete with chapters and verses that we got the ADVANTAGE when mapping our eschatology as compared to those guys who didnt necessarily even HAVE all the books, let alone chapters and verses and cross-references, maps, historical data, wikipedia to look back on history, etc.

This is found in the earliest Christian document outside the Bible what brother Absolutely just described (YES i called him a brother, lets not get TOO FIRED UP about eschatology guys):

Didache, chapter 16
16:1 Watch concerning your life; let not your lamps be quenched or your loins be loosed, but be ye ready, for ye know not the hour at which our Lord cometh. [IMMINENCY, DONT KNOW WHEN HE RETURNS]

16:4 and because iniquity aboundeth they shall hate each other, and persecute each other, and deliver each other up; and then shall the Deceiver of the world appear as the Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders, and the earth shall be delivered into his hands;
and he shall do unlawful things, such as have never happened since the beginning of the world.
16:5 Then shall the creation of man come to the fiery trial of proof, and many shall be offended and shall perish; but they who remain in their faith shall be saved by the rock of offence itself.
16:6 And then shall appear the signs of the truth; first the sign of the appearance in heaven, then the sign of the sound of the trumpet, and thirdly the resurrection of the dead [EVERYONE CAN TELL BY THESE SIGNS PRECEDING IT]

THANKS didache........ FOR NOTHIN!

 

[Hevosmies]

P.S. and I've not said that it consists ONLY of the 1000-yr reign (but that it also INCLUDES it)



[I'm convinced of one thing... that people don't read thoroughly through posts these days. ]

We do its just that your posts are hard to follow sometimes because of the: the DAY(singular) as opposed to DAYS[PLURAL] and initial birthpang[SINGULAR] as opposed to the sequence of birth pangs [PLURAL] on the this[As you can see] many of these THINGS make POSTS sometimes [DIFFICULT] TO read. But you are still our dear brother [AND WE APPRECIATE YOU]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

i dont know what makes pre-tribbers believe that these guys in revelation 5 have already their resurrection bodies

Did you happen to see my post about the "was found" wording in v.4, that indicates the a "searching judgment" has taken place (LIKE the same way that same word is used pertaining to Paul's trials in the latter parts of Acts, in several verses, when Paul is being brought before trials, as in Acts 23:9 , 29, 24:5, 12, 18, 20 - G2147 - heuriskó and its forms [note also the "bema [seat]" word used in 18:12, 16, 17, and esp in 25:6, 10, 17]; whereas in Rev5:4, the tense is "was found" [no one was found...], meaning, already conducted by that point and this is the outcome of it)

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

We do its just that your posts are hard to follow sometimes because of the: the DAY(singular) as opposed to DAYS[PLURAL] and initial birthpang[SINGULAR] as opposed to the sequence of birth pangs [PLURAL] on the this[As you can see] many of these THINGS make POSTS sometimes [DIFFICULT] TO read. But you are still our dear brother [AND WE APPRECIATE YOU]

I do that, because the point I am attempting to bring to the fore is entirely relevant to our discussion--"pre-or-post-trib-timing? "

I'm saying that most ppl miss the point being made in v.2, thus miss completely what Paul is actually conveying in this passage.


[I see evidence continually that "the point" I am bringing to the fore, is still being missed! LOL When I've said the text says "IS PRESENT," presidente says that I've said "has passed"... WHY?? ]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

The majority views---
The "church" will be raptured before the tribulation--
The anti-Christ will come from a revised Roman empire--
The anti-Christ will make a 7 year peace treaty with Israel--
The anti-Christ will break that treaty after three and a half years--
The seals and trumps are the wrath of God--
When Paul told the Corinthians that we would be changed at the LAST trump he did not mean LAST--

Something that I have learned over the years is that the majority view of Scripture is wrong most of the time.
Those who teach the majority views as listed above are wrong.

The "majority view" in Christendom (those who at least use the Bible as A PART of where they base their beliefs from) believe "amillennialism," and "post-millennialism," and "post-tribulational" views (etc) of this Subject; the "majority view" is NOT the "pre-trib rapture" viewpoint, from what I see (everywhere I look, over the past 45+ yrs, and including these recent days )

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Now, maybe the following site I am going to post and to quote you, "And maybe this will help you." Of course I doubt very much you will read it because you already have a closed mind and have no interest with others may say/believe.

Personally, I don't like to open links I'm not already familiar with (I've said this in past posts, so it's nothing personal against you, or against your link in particular).

Can you bring forward a couple if its points, perhaps ones we haven't heard before (which ones have already been covered by us pre-tribbers [for example, I gave reasons in the past WHY I am not convinced by the use of the Hebrews 9:28 verse, to be saying pre-trib is wrong. I can supply the link to THAT post, where I explain my points regarding that verse, if you like]).

I'd like to be made aware of at least a cpl of its points (ones we've not yet heard)... to see what it is that has convinced you that what is being said at your link is correct.

If you don't care to, that's fine too.

 

[Hevosmies]

Personally, I don't like to open links I'm not already familiar with (I've said this in past posts, so it's nothing personal against you, or against your link in particular).

Can you bring forward a couple if its points, perhaps ones we haven't heard before (which ones have already been covered by us pre-tribbers [for example, I gave reasons in the past WHY I am not convinced by the use of Hebrews 9:28 verse, to be saying pre-trib is wrong. I can supply the link to THAT post, where I explain my points regarding that verse]).

Do you believe Hebrews 9:28 is what they would call a "RAPTURE PASSAGE" or a "SECOND COMING PASSAGE"

Fun fact: Neither the word rapture or second coming ever appear in the Bible. Its only words like coming, revealed, etc.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Do you believe Hebrews 9:28 is what they would call a "RAPTURE PASSAGE" or a "SECOND COMING PASSAGE"

Neither.

I explained all that in a big long study (my own study) that I posted some time back.

I explained also, then (therefore), why that argument (the argument saying Heb9:28 is saying Jesus will only come again ONCE) remains unconvincing to me.



[note: I agree He will only come again to the earth once; and come in the air once (at a separate time); but I'm saying here ^ that I do not believe Hebrews 9:28 is speaking of EITHER of these two things--I supplied my reasons in that study I'd posted (too tired to go hunt for it, atm)]

 

[Hevosmies]

Neither.

I explained all that in a big long study (my own study) that I posted some time back.

I explained also, then (therefore), why that argument (the argument saying Heb9:28 is saying Jesus will only come again ONCE) remains unconvincing to me.



[note: I agree He will only come again to the earth once; and come in the air once (at a separate time); but I'm saying here ^ that I do not believe Hebrews 9:28 is speaking of EITHER of these two things--I supplied my reasons in that study I'd posted (too tired to go hunt for it, atm)]

Now we're talking homie! First, quickly: I've never heard no one say that Heb 9:28 isnt about the rapture OR second coming, WHAT IS IT ABOUT THEN? I would point out too that heb 9:28 doesnt say Jesus returns only once, the word ONCE isnt in there in the second part of the sentence it just says He returns a second time...

LETS GET TO THE MEAT of your post: You said He will only come again to the earth ONCE, thats what we all agree on. Then you said He comes in the AIR once, are there ANY SCRIPTURES talking about Jesus returning in the air? Because 1 thessalonians 4:15-17 use the word DESCEND which means COMING DOWN and usually its meaning TOUCHDOWN

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

When I said (at the TOP of my post) the word "ONCE" I meant this is their argument (the ones who are arguing against the pre-trib viewpoint).


So, I guess we could start with (one small verse, no fire-hydrants here ):

"whom indeed it behooves heaven to receive until the times of restoration of all things of which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from the age." Acts 3:21

(speaking here of the OT prophets and all those prophecies; those persons Peter was speaking to in this chpt [see vv.12, 19] overlooked "the Suffering Servant" aspects [vv.13, 26] and thus had a hand themselves in fulfilling those very things [His rejection and DEATH--THAT aspect of the OT prophecies (Suffering Servant)])

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

^ P.S. so let me just add one more thing to that ^ (and then I have to dash off for some errands)... "amill-teachings" miss what is being conveyed by Peter here in Acts 3, because they do not see the TWO [distinct] aspects [being covered here] of the word "RAISE" in this passage (ONE being that of His being "raised" to a position of prominence BEFORE His death; the OTHER being that of His being "raised" from the dead AFTER His death [of course]).


[a similar problem arises (in their doctrine) by their not distinguishing the "THEN" word in 1Cor15:24, from other "then" words/uses... no time to elaborate atm. gotta run!]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

… this [latter point] ^ then touches on what Paul is conveying in 1Cor15:51-54 (re: "THIS corruptible" and "THIS mortal"... where Paul is speaking of "Behold, I shew you a mystery")

 

[Absolutely]

Some point to historical interpretation, not all. One of the reasons for this is that pre-tribbers believe in pre-trib without any scripture that shows a pre-trib rapture occurring separate from the second coming. They assume pre-trib and read it into a lot of passages. You point this out, they keep it up. When pointing out that 'what you believe is not in the Bible' doesn't work some post-tribbers will point to the fact that early Christians including native speakers of Greek held to non-pretrib 'literal' interpretations.

I know BOTH doctrines and process all the verses.
You do not.

The only way you can say we have no verses is to misrepresent what we post or ignore it.

One of the reasons for this is that pre-tribbers believe in pre-trib without any scripture that shows a pre-trib rapture occurring separate from the second coming. They assume pre-trib and read it into a lot of passages.

No,we just don't need rev 14 to say something other than what it does. Show me how in the world this,(rev 14 gathering), is the same as millions ON WHITE HORSES(the second coming) .
Rev 14
14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.

15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.

16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.

 

[Absolutely]

Look, you got caught making "erroneous" statments, (actually lots of them" when you posted that the church fathers, particularly Irenaeus and Hippolytus were pretribulationist. You also said in your post, "You should check them out."

Well unlike you I did check them out and they believed the "opposite" of your position. You also said in your post #441, "but nothing at all about a postrib rapture." First of all there is no such thing as a "postrib rapture." There is only one "Second Coming" as scripture teaches. Just read Hebrews 9:28 just for starters.

Instead of doing your homework like your suppose to do your now "backpedaling" with this bogus argument of "For all the saints and the elect are gathered etc. Just another rabbit trail, and btw, it would be nice to post the chapter and verse number when you quote verses. Actus 17:11 would be good for you to read.

Now, maybe the following site I am going to post and to quote you, "And maybe this will help you." Of course I doubt very much you will read it because you already have a closed mind and have no interest with others may say/believe.

https://www.aboundingjoy.com/posttrib.htm

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

Ephraim (306 AD – 373 AD) was made a deacon in the church in Syria in 338 and later became the bishop of Nisibis. Although he was made a “saint” in the Roman Catholic Church, he was not involved in Catholicism and did not even live in the Roman Empire until the final years of his life. The book Pseudo Ephraim was one of his still existing works. It was called “Pseudo” because of later dispute over authorship. However the book’s one reference to the rapture is very compelling:

In his work, On The Last Times 2, he wrote:
Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: “Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!” For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.

 

[bluto]

Ephraim (306 AD – 373 AD) was made a deacon in the church in Syria in 338 and later became the bishop of Nisibis. Although he was made a “saint” in the Roman Catholic Church, he was not involved in Catholicism and did not even live in the Roman Empire until the final years of his life. The book Pseudo Ephraim was one of his still existing works. It was called “Pseudo” because of later dispute over authorship. However the book’s one reference to the rapture is very compelling:

In his work, On The Last Times 2, he wrote:
Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: “Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!” For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.

Is this all you got absolutely? How do you know what Ephraim actually said, "For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins."

The second I read those words I said to myself, "these words sound to modern to me." I then did my own homework and research and found the following site.

http://salvationbygrace.org/current-qa/ephraim-and-the-rapture/

What is interesting about this site is the fact that the author is a pretribulationist and is not convinced that these are the words of "Ephraim." He says there was a guy who was "pseudo Ephraim" that wrote those words. Just read the article for yourself. Btw, again your caught not doing your homework in verifying what is said. I know you quoted "Wikipedia" which is written by people of all stripes that may or not may have an agenda. Again, try being a good Berean according to Acts 17:11. : PS: You sure are easy to "dupe."

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[bluto]

Personally, I don't like to open links I'm not already familiar with (I've said this in past posts, so it's nothing personal against you, or against your link in particular).

Can you bring forward a couple if its points, perhaps ones we haven't heard before (which ones have already been covered by us pre-tribbers [for example, I gave reasons in the past WHY I am not convinced by the use of the Hebrews 9:28 verse, to be saying pre-trib is wrong. I can supply the link to THAT post, where I explain my points regarding that verse, if you like]).

I'd like to be made aware of at least a cpl of its points (ones we've not yet heard)... to see what it is that has convinced you that what is being said at your link is correct.

If you don't care to, that's fine too.

I don't know why you choose not to open the link but I assure you there's nothing to fear. The article is very "lengthy" so I decided to post notable people who are postribulationist, There are many more is you click on the additional link. Also, the article goes into great detail with evidence of a postrib second coming. Finally, I would not normally do this but for you I will oblige.

Notable Christian Posttribbers
The pretribulational viewpoint has been so prevalent in evangelical circles of late, that many have gotten the idea that the pretribulational view must be the "orthodox" view. The argument that, "Surely all these preachers and Bible students can’t be wrong, can they?" can be very powerful with someone who feels that he doesn’t have the time or skill to study the issue for himself.

Therefore, it may help some to realize that many notable Christian leaders and scholars have been posttribulationalists. Here are a few (there are, of course, many others):

Jay Adams, Randy Alcorn, Henry Alford, Matthew Arnold, J. Sidlow Baxter, David Brainerd, F. F. Bruce, John Bunyan, John Calvin, B. H. Carroll, William Cowper, John Gill, Robert Gundry, Hank Hanegraaff, Carl F. H. Henry, William Hendriksen, Matthew Henry, Herschell Hobbs, Adoniram Judson, John Knox, George Eldon Ladd, Hugh Latimer, C. S. Lewis, J. B. Lightfoot, Harold Lindsell, C. S. Lovett, Martin Luther, Walter Martin, Dave McPherson, Jack McAlister, Alexander McLaren, Albert Mohler, Russell Moore, John Warwick Montgomery, Doug Moo, G. Campbell Morgan, H. C. G. Moule, George Mueller, Andrew Murray, Sir Isaac Newton, John Newton, Harold J. Ockenga, J. Edwin Orr, Ian Paisley, John Piper, Bernard Ramm, Paul Rees, A. T. Robertson, Marv Rosenthal, Francis Schaffer, Oswald J. Smith, Charles Spurgeon, John R. W. Stott, A. H. Strong, Merrell Tenny, J. H. Thayer, B. B. Warfield, Isaac Watts, Charles Wesley, John Wesley, George Whitefield, William Wilberforce, Ulrich Zwingli.

(Click here for a longer list of posttribulationalists.)​

Of course, to our knowledge, none of the pastors and Bible students who lived before about 1830 were pretribulational. The first references we have to the idea of a pretribulational coming are from around the year 1830. Due to the influence of Augustine, earlier Bible students were often amillennial, believing the thousand-year reign to be symbolic. However, they also usually believed the church would have to go through a time of great tribulation. And due to the difficult times in which they lived, many believed they were already in the great tribulation.

The first man known to have advanced a pretribulational view of the return of Christ was a man by the name of Edward Irving, who was later removed from the Presbyterian church because of heretical beliefs about the nature of Christ.

Ultimately we must be careful not to simply accept or reject views of the Bible on the basis of what other men have said. Only Scripture (Sola Scriptura) is the basis of our beliefs. I have included this section for the benefit of those who think the posttribulational position is "weird" or who think that it is rejected by serious Bible students. In fact, my experience has been exactly the opposite. More serious Bible students often come to a posttribulational view of the return of Christ."

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[Absolutely]

Is this all you got absolutely

Read my posts. I NEVER have needed your shaky dead men to tell me what to believe,

That arena is solely for you guys.

My point is you guys lie when you say "nobody believed like ya'll….NOBODY.
"All those catholic heretics believed exactly like us so we are right."

So you got it wrong,but since you are correct that they ,despite their herisies,believe like you,it is without surprise, you will continue in your extra biblical adventures ,outside the scripture.

I don't care what they got wrong,I can see what they got right.

It was so bad one of them wrote "AGAINST HERESIES"

You need several things to PROVE your point
1) the ancients were infallible (since you CENTER your beliefs there)
2) my verses to go away
3) Make jesus statements about framing the end times as prejudgement with heavenly homes and wedding supper to be delusional.
4)The dead rising AFTER the living gathered in rev 14. ...or even better, the dead raised after the 144k are gathered
5) That all worship the beast (meaning all earthlings have the mark or die),as some glith with heaven being wrong
6) that billions do not go through the gt are not "enduring to the end" (postrib rapture glitch)
7) the impossible task of making the rapture cram fit into Jesus with billions of saints coming on white horses the same as Jesus on a cloud in rev 14,and Jesus harvesting the 5 wise (half the church).
…. plus much more.

I am glad i dont need anything in the bible changed.
You guys got a tough job defending that doctrine.

 

[Melach]

I know BOTH doctrines and process all the verses.
You do not.

The only way you can say we have no verses is to misrepresent what we post or ignore it.





No,we just don't need rev 14 to say something other than what it does. Show me how in the world this,(rev 14 gathering), is the same as millions ON WHITE HORSES(the second coming) .
Rev 14
14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.

15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.

16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.

this verses in rev 14:14-16 you believe is rapture? but you know this is already very deep in the tribulation time? no pre-trib there.

 

[Absolutely]

this verses in rev 14:14-16 you believe is rapture? but you know this is already very deep in the tribulation time? no pre-trib there.

Not the rapture.
Just a gathering after the 144k firstfruits gathering.
A gathering by Jesus in the gt.

That gathering makes or breaks 1 thes 4 (the dead rise first)

 

[Melach]

Ephraim said: Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: “Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!” For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.

Jesus said:
Mat 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
Mat 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Mat 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

compare words of Jesus to Ephraim's the opposite lolz
Jesus said after tribulation Ephraim say before.