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

[FreeGrace2]

Nearly 2 billion of the population is children that will be raptured. God is not going to send children into His wrath.

Why do the pre-tribbers think that God is not able to keep people safe from His wrath?

Do they really think that God aims indiscriminately at the earth and isn't able to aim His wrath precisely where it is needed?

You guys really amaze me with your unsubstantiated opinions.

When God aimed His wrath at Egypt, how many Israelites got in the way?

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
A diametrically opposed statement if there ever was one. Both can't be correct.

All you've said here is that there are 3 comings of the Lord. But where is the Scripture that says this?

Who do you know who preaches THE THREE ADVENTS OF CHRIST? I'd like to know.

Most pretribbers believe in three comings but don't have the guts to say it.

Yep. I'd call it dishonest. They HAVE TO split the Second Advent into 2 comings. There is no way around it.

1. You already know of His coming to the cross.
2. 1 thes. 4 shows a prewrath coming.
3. Rev. 19 shows a post wrath coming.

See how simple this is?

If so simple, then simply PROVE #2 above. I "see" nothing in 1 Thess 4 about a "prewrath coming". I do see the Second Advent.

I do agree that Rev 19 is the Second Advent.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
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.

How can the "dead in Christ" be "caught up"? They CAME with Him. It's the living believers who are CAUGHT UP together with THEM (that would be Jesus Christ and the saints already in heaven).

My point was, It is the human spirit that possesses a soul, not the soul possessing a spirit.

I see here another unsubstantiated claim. Please support your claim with actual evidence. So far, it is only an opinion.

When they saw Jesus walking on they water, they did not think it was a "soul." They thought it was a spirit.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't prove your opinion.

The words "soul" and "spirit" can overlap, but not always. Depends on the verse.

You are agreeing with error. You are pulling those first seals out of their context.

Prove it. All you do is make claims, coming from your opinion. Where is your support/evidence?

 

[FreeGrace2]

It is very simple: John did not start the book with the first seal.

What difference does that make? John didn't start his letter to the 7 churches with the Trib.

It is in chapter 6 and chapter's 4 & 5 are the context. In that context God is pointing to 32 AD over and over.

So, what is your point?

1: Jesus NOT SEEN at the right hand of the Father: chapter 4. (While He was on the earth or under the earth.)
2. The Holy Spirit there in chapter 4, but Jesus said He would send Him down as soon as He ascended. AT this point in time he had ascended some 60 years previous. John is seeing the throne room some time before He ascended.
3. Jesus NOT FOUND worthy to take the book and open the seals: chapter 5.
4. Jesus IS found in the next search. (Shows time moving. What changed between Jesus NOT found and Jesus found except time? Jesus prevailed over death. Again points to 32 AD.
5 John saw Jesus as He assended back into the throne room and sent the Holy Spirit down. 32 AD.

What are you trying to prove here?

What you still haven't proven from Scripture yet is that raptured believers go to heaven.

John uses Aorist verbs for most of his book.

Becuase that's the tense he meant.

We can only find the timing of things when they are written with these verbs by WHERE in John's narrative the first mention is.

And?

Anyway, God is not angry with the martyrs of the 5th seal.

Why would you say this? Who thinks otherwise. From Rev 20 we KNOW they will reign with Christ.

Wrath or judgment does not start until the final martyr. So wrath cannot possibly start with the first seal.

Are you kidding? The "final martyr" could occur any time DURING the Trib.

You are forcing an idea that is NOT taught in the Bible.

My view is more reasonable than yours.

lol. You have NO verses among all the rapture verses that SAY that raptured believers go to heaven.

I have a passage that CLEARLY states that the gathering (what you call the rapture) occuring WITH the Second Advent, AND none of this occurs UNTIL the Beast #1 (aka AC) is revealed. 2 Thess 2:1-3.

So, the reasonableness is with me. I have a passage that supports my view. You don't.

 

[Absolutely]

He says this in a passage about what happens AFTER the tribulation. 'For then shall be great tribulation...after the tribulation of those days...then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven.. He shall gather together the elect...For as the days of Noah were, so also shall the coming of the Son of Man be.

Omit
Omit
Omit
Repeat.

Keep reading

It says ( which you will NEVER acknowledge) "BEFORE THE FLOOD."
THEN...one taken/left
Then...watch wait be ready.
Hello....the pretrib rapture

Not convinced?

In the same breath, Jesus gives the 10 virgin parable

Which is a "WATCH WAIT BE READY" DYNAMIC.
There is Not a single rapture verse in a postrib, destroyed earth setting.
None of your setting works.
The bible debunks postrib rapture on the setting alone

So in order to make it something palatable to your doctrine, you naturally skip over those items or reframe them.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
2 Thess 2 PROVES that the Lord's "coming" and "our being gathered to Him" is AFTER the man of sin is REVEALED.

No, it only SEEMS that way with a cursory reading. It is not really what Paul is saying.

Now, this is JUST classic! All you've got is smoke and mirrors. NO actual verses telling us that raptured people then go to heaven.

So you can stop pretending that they do. They don't or the Bible would have told us.

And you can stop your silly games with "seems that way with a cursory reading".

He IS saying that the departing (of the church) comes first

No, John said in plain language that the gathering (or rapture to you) occurs WITH the Second Advent. But you just keep wanting to dismiss or ignore that FACT.

THEN the man of sin is revealed:

You have it exactly BACKWARD. This is what John actually wrote:

3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

You will probably disagree, but "that day" refers to v.1 and "the coming of our Lord", because He actually comes on a DAY. So John clearly teaches that the Second Advent and gathering doesn't occur UNTIL the "rebellion" (guess what that means) occurs and the "man of lawlessness is revealed".

So you are the one who has it backward.

exactly the order we find in Paul's first letter and the same order we find in Revelation.

When you make these statements, it would be good to either cite the verse where you got it, or quote the verse/passage. As it stands, all you are doing is opining. I'm not interesting in opinions, but what the Word of God says.

Next, if the falling away is Paul's intent, then it does not answer Paul's "and now you know what is restraining." Most people don't know. They only guess and often it is the wrong guess.

Yes, like an opinion. Only guessing.

Vs 1 identifies Paul's theme of the pretrib coming and the rapture.

You are simply reading the verse the way you want to read it. The "coming of the Lord" is the Second Advent.

As you can see, we read every verse differently so will always disagree until we are THERE in heaven.

And that's why you are wrong. You have NO verse that says raptured people are taken to heaven. Period.

 

[Absolutely]

Nearly 2 billion of the population is children that will be raptured. God is not going to send children into His wrath.

The rapture is for the bride.

Maybe you are right.

Time will tell

 

[FreeGrace2]

Please explain how a falling away can get the man of sin revealed as shown in verse 3b.

Why do you attach a falling away with the revealing of the Beast?

The point of v.3 is that the man of lawlessness is revealed BEFORE Christ's Second Advent and gathering.

Somehow, somewhere in 3a the restrainer has to be "taken out of the way."

I believe we are seeing that right now.

Who or what is the restrainer? Can't be the Holy Spirit and the lame idea that a pre-trib rapture of the church takes the Holy Spirit off the earth. The Holy Spirit is THE convictor of sin. And evangelization will be quite active during the Trib. So He will stay through the Trib.

So, what has been "restraining" the whole idea of an evil world ruler? Government. It's easy to figure out. Throughout the last 2 centuries, various governments have provided a moral restraint against evil, like keeping communism/etc at bay.

Well, thanks to the last election, we have the most evil administration ever. And they are fully supportive of a "new world order" in which there will be a central government over the whole world. So it's not hard to figure out.

The "restrainer" has been taken away, right now.

 

[FreeGrace2]

My meaning was, you had not statement right when you said "second advent" because at the pretrib rapture it will be His second coming. But I KNOW that was not your meaning.

You keep mentioning a pretrib rapture, but you keep failing to provide any verse that says that.

 

[Hevosmies]

So you don't believe Ezekiel. What other parts of God's Holy Word do you despise?

By the way, weren't the original offers of innocent animals also "sin" offerings? Yet we know the the blood of bulls and goats can NEVER remove sin or even the guilt of sin.

So you dont believe Hebrews? what other parts of God's holy Word do you despise?

See that type of rhetoric is easy to dispell.

 

[Truth7t7]

Nonsense. No animal sacrifice in the history of the world since Adam was a propitiation for sin in actuality. They either point to forward to Christ or point back to Christ. So shall it be in the millennium.

The scriptural content pointing to the earthy millennial reign of King Jesus, in Israel in Jerusalem is overwhelming and unequivocal.

Practically all of the prophets declare that this will happen in a chorus of ringing refrain. Yet you say it ain't gonna happen, Ezekiel is delusional, nothing says what it means and means what it says. Who are you gonna believe?

Tragically, the hackery and quackery on these boards is epic. You stumble at one line of text and you collapse into a heap of steaming fetid unbelief. For pity's sake get a grip on reality man.

Yes you believe and falsely teach that Ezekiel 43:18-21 is a future Millennial Temple, and God is instructing future Jews in animal sacrifice for sin

Yes it says (Sin Offering)

Your claim is false, as previously explained this is the 2nd Zerubbabel Temple built in 536AD and destroyed by the Romans in 70AD

To think you actually teach that God will be instructing future Jews in blood sacrifice for sin, after the precious shed blood upon Calvary by my Lord Jesus Christ, in my opinion (Blasphemy)

Ezekiel 43:18-21KJV
18 And he said unto me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord God; These are the ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon.
19 And thou shalt give to the priests the Levites that be of the seed of Zadok, which approach unto me, to minister unto me, saith the Lord God, a young bullock for a sin offering.
20 And thou shalt take of the blood thereof, and put it on the four horns of it, and on the four corners of the settle, and upon the border round about: thus shalt thou cleanse and purge it.
21 Thou shalt take the bullock also of the sin offering, and he shall burn it in the appointed place of the house, without the sanctuary.

 

[cv5]

Yes you believe and falsely teach that Ezekiel 43:18-21 is a future Millennial Temple, and God is instructing future Jews in animal sacrifice for sin

Yes it says (Sin Offering)

Your claim is false, as previously explained this is the 2nd Zerubbabel Temple built in 536AD and destroyed by the Romans in 70AD

To think you actually teach that God will be instructing future Jews in blood sacrifice for sin, after the precious shed blood upon Calvary by my Lord Jesus Christ, in my opinion (Blasphemy)

Ezekiel 43:18-21KJV
18 And he said unto me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord God; These are the ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon.
19 And thou shalt give to the priests the Levites that be of the seed of Zadok, which approach unto me, to minister unto me, saith the Lord God, a young bullock for a sin offering.
20 And thou shalt take of the blood thereof, and put it on the four horns of it, and on the four corners of the settle, and upon the border round about: thus shalt thou cleanse and purge it.
21 Thou shalt take the bullock also of the sin offering, and he shall burn it in the appointed place of the house, without the sanctuary.

If you actually believe that animal sacrifices are efficacious as propitiation for sin.........you are in a lot of trouble buddy. Espousing amillennialism is bad enough.

 

[Runningman]

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, now pre-tribbers are quoting Ezekiel with the mentioning of animal sacrifices to use for sin offerings to say God's going to bring them back at a future date. Unbelievable.

 

[Hevosmies]

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, now pre-tribbers are quoting Ezekiel with the mentioning of animal sacrifices to use for sin offerings to say God's going to bring them back at a future date. Unbelievable.

Yeah. I done known this for quite a while. SOME of them teach this
This is the achilles heel of premillennialism

MANY of them believe it, but they dont talk alot about it during sermons or bible studies (for obvious reasons) but occasionally it slips out.

AS you say, MOST Christians probably will reject this as an offense to Christ's blood

Let this be a lesson, where WOODEN LITERALISM and refusal to accept symbolic language and refusal to accept that the NEW COVENANT is built on better promises will lead you.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

[...] 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.

Total guesswork on your part. The text does NOT state this (the bold ^ ), and the context (when understood) negates this idea.

How can the "dead in Christ" be "caught up"?

Because they will have (just prior) "shall rise first" (see below, at bottom of post)... "THEN..."

They CAME with Him.

This is a misunderstanding of the "understood question" of this context.

For many years I also thought this verse was saying "they CAME with Him" (at that point in time), too.

I believe the text is answering the [understood] question, "how will those believers [our loved ones who've already DIED] get to participate in the OPENLY-MANIFEST [-RETURN] thing [/elsewhere noted as the "MANIFESTATION of the sons of God" thing], the "UNIONed-WITH" thing (manifest to all creation)... how[?!], if they're DEAD??"

Paul's response: "if/since you believe Jesus died and rose again, how come y'all can't grasp He's able to have them 'rise / be resurrected [/'to stand again' (on the earth)],' coz that's how it's going to happen that y'all [both] will be 'caught-up/-away/SNATCHED' [at the same time, in ONE 'snatch-action' / 'caught-up' AS ONE] TO 'the meeting of the Lord IN THE AIR' and THUS [/in this way] shall 'we [ALL of 'us'] ever be G4862'd [UNIONed-WITH] the Lord... Not just that the STILL-LIVING component will be 'caught-up' so to be later openly-manifest WITH [G4862 UNIONed-WITH / IDENTIFIED-WITH] Him, but THEM [those of the 'ONE BODY' who've previously died] 'ALSO'--ta da!--*that* is HOW [ ] !"

It's the living believers who are CAUGHT UP together with THEM (that would be Jesus Christ and the saints already in heaven).

No. The adverb is attached to the verb-action.

The adverb ['together'] is attached to the verb-action ['caught-up'].

This means "the dead in Christ" (having just been "raised" / "shall rise first"<--that's a "resurrection," meaning simply, "to stand again [on the earth]") along with the "we which are alive and remain" will [both components] "be caught-up / caught-away / SNATCHED" ['together / AT THE SAME TIME] TO "the meeting of the Lord in the air" and so/thus/in this way shall we [the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY] ever be UNIONed-WITH / IDENTIFIED-WITH [G4862] the Lord.




[this is decidedly CONTRASTED with the Matt24:29-31 / Isa27:12-13 manner in which the elect of Israel (believing remnant of Israel, still-living at the end of the trib) will be gathered (by angels He will "SEND" to do so) by means of the "GREAT trumpet" and "to worship the Lord in the holy mount AT JERUSALEM"... which [gather] will be "ONE *BY* ONE" (not "AS ONE," as WE will be!)]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

I "see" nothing in 1 Thess 4 about a "prewrath coming".

Not really detectable via 1 Thess 4 ALONE... but when you grasp how Paul's words in 1Th5:2-3 ('birth PANG [SINGULAR]') meshes precisely with what Jesus said (Matt24:4 / Mk13:5 the INITIAL one of "the beginning of birth PANGS [PLURAL]," i.e. SEAL #1), then one can see that Paul's "SEQUENCE OF EVENTS" is consistent with how he presents it elsewhere, and is consistent with how Rev4-6 [5:9] shows it, as well. (ppl ON "THRONES" UP IN Heaven, BEFORE the first SEAL is opened, when Jesus WILL "STAND to JUDGE" Isa3:13, Rev5:6, [2Th2:7b-8a correlating with the wording of Lam2:3-4], etc)

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

No, John said in plain language that the gathering (or rapture to you) occurs WITH the Second Advent.

No, he didn't say that.

He said, already-wed ppl will be coming out of Heaven with Him, at THAT point.


[recall, (statement of fact) "the marriage CAME... and the Bride PREPARED"... and now (as "ALREADY-WED") they are heading DOWN TO "the wedding FEAST/SUPPER" on the earth (aka the earthly MK age), where the "guests [plural]" are still located, at that point, and will have been "having been invited [PERFECT participle]" TO IT all throughout the trib years (via the particular msg: Matt24:14 / 26:13 and Matt22:9-14, etc)]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

^ adding a concluding phrase (plus another clarifier):

[recall, (statement of fact) "the marriage CAME... and the Bride PREPARED"... and now (as "ALREADY-WED" [G4862!]) they are heading DOWN TO "the wedding FEAST/SUPPER" on the earth (aka the earthly MK age), where the "guests [plural]" are still located, at that point, and will have been "having been invited [PERFECT participle]" TO IT all throughout the trib years (via the particular msg: Matt24:14 / 26:13 and Matt22:9-14, etc)--but THOSE "saints" will have never lifted off the earth ; ) ]

 

[Hevosmies]

Wont this entire thing kinda die down once we stop inserting the magical gap to 69th and 70th week of Daniel?
You know, the gap that aint mentioned in the text? That gap?

All these verses are about the so called "tribulation" and all these verses are to the people in the "tribulation period". ITS ALWAYS the tribulation period OR to the jews when its something uncomfortable. INNIT BRUVS.

The way my Bible works atm is. Ephesians 2:8-9 are the ONLY verses for gentile christians in this dispensation. ALL the other ones are to the JOOS or you guessed it, to the tribulation period saints. Which of course ima be raptured before that happens. IN FACT, the rapture may just happen any t...........

 

[cv5]

FreeGrace2 said:
2 Thess 2 PROVES that the Lord's "coming" and "our being gathered to Him" is AFTER the man of sin is REVEALED.

Now, this is JUST classic! All you've got is smoke and mirrors. NO actual verses telling us that raptured people then go to heaven.

So you can stop pretending that they do. They don't or the Bible would have told us.

And you can stop your silly games with "seems that way with a cursory reading".


No, John said in plain language that the gathering (or rapture to you) occurs WITH the Second Advent. But you just keep wanting to dismiss or ignore that FACT.


You have it exactly BACKWARD. This is what John actually wrote:

3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

You will probably disagree, but "that day" refers to v.1 and "the coming of our Lord", because He actually comes on a DAY. So John clearly teaches that the Second Advent and gathering doesn't occur UNTIL the "rebellion" (guess what that means) occurs and the "man of lawlessness is revealed".

So you are the one who has it backward.


When you make these statements, it would be good to either cite the verse where you got it, or quote the verse/passage. As it stands, all you are doing is opining. I'm not interesting in opinions, but what the Word of God says.


Yes, like an opinion. Only guessing.


You are simply reading the verse the way you want to read it. The "coming of the Lord" is the Second Advent.


And that's why you are wrong. You have NO verse that says raptured people are taken to heaven. Period.

The ONLY connection between the Church and Paul's commentary on the time of the tribulation is the fact of our vv. 3 "departure" beforehand.

The only reason Paul launches into this discourse is to confirm that the Thessalonians are not then In the midst of the DOTL (recapitulating his oral teaching earlier stated), furthermore will not be suffering through it at some or any point in the future.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the Thessalonians mistakenly thought that they missed the rapture. I really don't know why all this confusion. Probably has something to do with God blinding the minds of the amillennialists as a matter of judgment. That's just a theory of mine anyways.