Ok post #2629 deals with that. Incidentally, do you play Civilization 5? 
I do a little fishing and bicycling to helps round out my day and fill in those gaps. God willing I can get back in the swing of things like the old days.
50 Reasons For a Pretribulational Rapture By Dr. John F. Walvoord
- Thread starter cv5
- Start date
-
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.
Heavens no. I don't do any gaming or online gaming or any of that sort of thing. Frankly I'd like to do Bible studies, preaching serving the Church etc. etc. 24/7. However and unfortunately my poor worn-out body and brain simply can't handle it. I can only do three or four hours per day of Bible studies nowadays. Back in my peak years he was eight to 10 hours per day given the opportunity.
I do a little fishing and bicycling to helps round out my day and fill in those gaps. God willing I can get back in the swing of things like the old days.
I do a little fishing and bicycling to helps round out my day and fill in those gaps. God willing I can get back in the swing of things like the old days.
Luke 21:20-24 are speaking specifically to the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem. Nothing more nothing less. Nothing before that event and nothing after that event.
The Great Tribulation is linked to the abomination of desolation. It is the A of B that begins the 3 1/2 year GT.........spoken of by Daniel the prophet.
Your eschatology is way way out of whack my friend. Scrap the whole thing and start over is my advice.
The Great Tribulation is linked to the abomination of desolation. It is the A of B that begins the 3 1/2 year GT.........spoken of by Daniel the prophet.
Your eschatology is way way out of whack my friend. Scrap the whole thing and start over is my advice.
Did you even read it? It's impossible to limit what is said there to only the 70 AD event! I really don't have time for mindless defenses of positions. Unless you're really interested, and actually read what's written, I'm not interested in discussing it further. I feel like I'm arguing all by myself, with a completely disinterested discussion partner.
Your mindless rendering of Luke 21 shows that it's *you* who lack any consideration of what's actually written.
I really don't have time for mindless defenses of positions. Unless you're really interested, and actually read what's written, I'm not interested in discussing it further. I feel like I'm arguing all by myself, with a completely disinterested discussion partner.Your mindless rendering of Luke 21 shows that it's *you* who lack any consideration of what's actually written.
I agree--Preterism is worse than Pretrib in some respects. It relegates most all future prophecies to the past, leaving us without tools for both the present and the future.
As I've said, I'm not Preterist, and not Partial Preterist either. I do hold to the historical interpretation of the Olivet Discourse, however, which is what the Church Fathers also held to. This is not the Partial Preterist position. Viewing the Olivet Discourse as *emphasizing* the destruction of the temple in 70 AD is not Partial Preterism, but rather, Historicism.
We know for a fact Jerusalem and its temple were destroyed in 70 AD. So I'm actually on very solid ground. The fact the Church Fathers hold to my position also lends me great support. There is little support for belief that Luke 21.20-24 is strictly about the endtimes, except that it is ignored or viewed as some kind of dualistic fulfillment, which is rather bizarre. Some separate Matthew and Mark's versions of the Olivet Discourse from Luke's version of the same in order to apply 2 different applications of the prophecy, one to the endtimes and the other to Jesus' time.
Partial Preterists do have in common with the historicists the belief that the Abomination of Desolation was fulfilled by the Romans 66-70 AD. But you should not say the historicist interpretation of the AoD is strictly owned by PPs. That would be false. PPs tend to make the entire book of Revelation as something fulfilled in history, in the time of the ancient Roman Empire. I completely disagree with that.
But many prophecies have already been fulfilled in history, including Jesus' 1st Coming. And the destruction of the temple, stone by stone, is also an historically-fulfilled prophecy. This is beyond question.
As I've said, I'm not Preterist, and not Partial Preterist either. I do hold to the historical interpretation of the Olivet Discourse, however, which is what the Church Fathers also held to. This is not the Partial Preterist position. Viewing the Olivet Discourse as *emphasizing* the destruction of the temple in 70 AD is not Partial Preterism, but rather, Historicism.
We know for a fact Jerusalem and its temple were destroyed in 70 AD. So I'm actually on very solid ground. The fact the Church Fathers hold to my position also lends me great support. There is little support for belief that Luke 21.20-24 is strictly about the endtimes, except that it is ignored or viewed as some kind of dualistic fulfillment, which is rather bizarre. Some separate Matthew and Mark's versions of the Olivet Discourse from Luke's version of the same in order to apply 2 different applications of the prophecy, one to the endtimes and the other to Jesus' time.
Partial Preterists do have in common with the historicists the belief that the Abomination of Desolation was fulfilled by the Romans 66-70 AD. But you should not say the historicist interpretation of the AoD is strictly owned by PPs. That would be false. PPs tend to make the entire book of Revelation as something fulfilled in history, in the time of the ancient Roman Empire. I completely disagree with that.
But many prophecies have already been fulfilled in history, including Jesus' 1st Coming. And the destruction of the temple, stone by stone, is also an historically-fulfilled prophecy. This is beyond question.
-
1
- Show all
Did you even read it? It's impossible to limit what is said there to only the 70 AD event! I really don't have time for mindless defenses of positions. Unless you're really interested, and actually read what's written, I'm not interested in discussing it further. I feel like I'm arguing all by myself, with a completely disinterested discussion partner.
Your mindless rendering of Luke 21 shows that it's *you* who lack any consideration of what's actually written.
I really don't have time for mindless defenses of positions. Unless you're really interested, and actually read what's written, I'm not interested in discussing it further. I feel like I'm arguing all by myself, with a completely disinterested discussion partner.Your mindless rendering of Luke 21 shows that it's *you* who lack any consideration of what's actually written.
Anyhoo......sorry buddy I'm not buying what you are selling. In fact I don't agree with anything you have said so far. Absolutely nothing as far as I have reviewed your posts. Furthermore there's no doubt in my mind whatsoever that I am absolutely right and you are absolutely wrong. Time for bed talk to you later thanks and goodnight.
QUOTE:
QUESTION
ANSWER
Not only can we take the Bible literally, but we must take the Bible literally. This is the only way to determine what God really is trying to communicate to us. When we read any piece of literature, but especially the Bible, we must determine what the author intended to communicate. Many today will read a verse or passage of Scripture and then give their own definitions to the words, phrases, or paragraphs, ignoring the context and author’s intent. But this is not what God intended, which is why God tells us to correctly handle the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).
https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-literal.html
:END QOUTE.
2 Timothy 2:15-16 (NCV)
15 Make every effort to give yourself to God as the kind of person he will accept. Be a worker who is not ashamed and
who uses the true teaching in the right way.
16 Stay away from foolish, useless talk, because that will lead people further away from God.
Titus 3:9-11 (NIV)
9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.
10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.
11 You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.
You've read Luke 21 innumerable times, and yet don't take the time to actually consider what it says? What do you do when you get to verses 20-24? Did you know that respectable Christian commentators view things just as I've given it to you. Would you give them the same disrespect you've given me? Perhaps.
For those who happen to pass by via this conversation, here is the relevant passage:
Luke 21. 20 “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
What I said is that this passage defines the "Great Tribulation," aka as the "Great Distress," as the historic Jewish Diaspora, beginning with the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD and ending with the Return of Christ. The Abomination of Desolation, therefore, appears to have something to do with the Roman invasions 66-70 AD.
And let's look at what some of the Commentators are selling?
Pulpit Commentary: Clearly warned by Jesus that the gathering of the Roman armies in the neighborhood of Jerusalem was the unmistakable sign of the end of the Jewish polity, the Christian congregations fled to Pella beyond Jordan. The Jews never ceased to the last trusting that deliverance from on high would be vouchsafed to the holy city and temple. The Christians were warned by the words of the Founder of their faith - words spoken nigh forty years before the siege - that the time of mercy was hopelessly past.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers: As far as it goes, it favors the view that he and others saw the “abomination” in the presence of the invading armies.
McClaren's Expositions: The ‘sign’ of her ‘desolation’ was to be the advance of the enemy to her walls. Armies had been many times encamped round her, and many times been scattered; but this siege was to end in capture...The Christians obeyed, and fled, as we all know, across Jordan to Pella. The rest despised Jesus’ warning-if they knew it,-and perished.
Benson Commentary: Cestius Gallus, in the beginning of the war, invested Jerusalem... To this agrees what Eusebius tells us, (Hist., Luke 3:5,) “That the people of the church in Jerusalem, being ordered by an oracle, given to the faithful in that place, left the city before the war, and dwelt in a city of Perea, the name of which was Pella.” This oracle, of which he speaks, seems to have been our Lord’s prophecy and admonition, to which every circumstance of the history perfectly agrees.
Jamieson-Faucett Brown Bible Commentary: 20, 21. by armies—encamped armies, that is, besieged: "the abomination of desolation" (meaning the Roman ensigns, as the symbols of an idolatrous, pagan, unclean power) "spoken of by Daniel the prophet" (Da 9:27) "standing where it ought not" (Mr 13:14). "Whoso readeth [that prophecy] let him understand" (Mt 24:15).
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible: And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies,.... The Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Persic versions read, "with an army"; that is, with the Roman army, as it was by the army which Titus Vespasian brought against it, and besieged it with...
Okay, perhaps you've noticed, if you even take the time to read, that *all* of these notable Bible Commentators are saying what I said. So you're not "buying what they're selling" either? You see, you're not just countering me--a nobody. You're countering some pretty great Bible scholars without blinking an eye, simply because "you don't want to buy." I guess it's "cheaper" to buy out of your own storehouse of knowledge, which for you doesn't require the input of studied Christians of the past?
In the end, you're going to be pushing *yourself,* and not Christ, who called for us to "submit to one another," and to "consider each other better than yourself."
For those who happen to pass by via this conversation, here is the relevant passage:
Luke 21. 20 “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
What I said is that this passage defines the "Great Tribulation," aka as the "Great Distress," as the historic Jewish Diaspora, beginning with the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD and ending with the Return of Christ. The Abomination of Desolation, therefore, appears to have something to do with the Roman invasions 66-70 AD.
And let's look at what some of the Commentators are selling?
Pulpit Commentary: Clearly warned by Jesus that the gathering of the Roman armies in the neighborhood of Jerusalem was the unmistakable sign of the end of the Jewish polity, the Christian congregations fled to Pella beyond Jordan. The Jews never ceased to the last trusting that deliverance from on high would be vouchsafed to the holy city and temple. The Christians were warned by the words of the Founder of their faith - words spoken nigh forty years before the siege - that the time of mercy was hopelessly past.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers: As far as it goes, it favors the view that he and others saw the “abomination” in the presence of the invading armies.
McClaren's Expositions: The ‘sign’ of her ‘desolation’ was to be the advance of the enemy to her walls. Armies had been many times encamped round her, and many times been scattered; but this siege was to end in capture...The Christians obeyed, and fled, as we all know, across Jordan to Pella. The rest despised Jesus’ warning-if they knew it,-and perished.
Benson Commentary: Cestius Gallus, in the beginning of the war, invested Jerusalem... To this agrees what Eusebius tells us, (Hist., Luke 3:5,) “That the people of the church in Jerusalem, being ordered by an oracle, given to the faithful in that place, left the city before the war, and dwelt in a city of Perea, the name of which was Pella.” This oracle, of which he speaks, seems to have been our Lord’s prophecy and admonition, to which every circumstance of the history perfectly agrees.
Jamieson-Faucett Brown Bible Commentary: 20, 21. by armies—encamped armies, that is, besieged: "the abomination of desolation" (meaning the Roman ensigns, as the symbols of an idolatrous, pagan, unclean power) "spoken of by Daniel the prophet" (Da 9:27) "standing where it ought not" (Mr 13:14). "Whoso readeth [that prophecy] let him understand" (Mt 24:15).
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible: And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies,.... The Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Persic versions read, "with an army"; that is, with the Roman army, as it was by the army which Titus Vespasian brought against it, and besieged it with...
Okay, perhaps you've noticed, if you even take the time to read, that *all* of these notable Bible Commentators are saying what I said. So you're not "buying what they're selling" either? You see, you're not just countering me--a nobody. You're countering some pretty great Bible scholars without blinking an eye, simply because "you don't want to buy." I guess it's "cheaper" to buy out of your own storehouse of knowledge, which for you doesn't require the input of studied Christians of the past?
In the end, you're going to be pushing *yourself,* and not Christ, who called for us to "submit to one another," and to "consider each other better than yourself."
Of course the 12 baskets and the 7 baskets were literal. The point is, they were both specific and symbolic. They did not stop being specific numbers just because they were to be taken symbolically.
In the case of the 144,000 the number was also specifically 144,000. And it is not prohibited from having a symbolic meaning purely because there is a specific number attached to it.
You're arguing in a circle, that the number 144,000 cannot be symbolic of something less literal because a literal number cannot represent a number that is not literal. Obviously, 7 hills can represent Rome, provide a literal number of 7 hills, and still symbolically represent something different from purely 7 hills. It represented an entire city! Retaining the meaning of "7" did not stop it from representing symbolically, in this case, something greater than 7.
I would say that 144,000 Israelites, comprised of 12 tribes of 12,000 each are literal numbers presenting literal symbols that represent something less literal. And I say that because the 12 tribes had ceased to exist by the time of this writing. In John's day, Israel was known as populated by "Jews," and not by "the tribes of Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, etc.
So "12 tribes," though presenting a literal number of tribes from which Israel issued, symbolically portrayed a greater number of Christian Jews in Israel. They were being viewed as "equals" among the tribes, indicating that competition among the tribes had ended, and that unity is now based on a common heritage in Christ. We can see the same in Eze 47.
In the case of the 144,000 the number was also specifically 144,000. And it is not prohibited from having a symbolic meaning purely because there is a specific number attached to it.
You're arguing in a circle, that the number 144,000 cannot be symbolic of something less literal because a literal number cannot represent a number that is not literal. Obviously, 7 hills can represent Rome, provide a literal number of 7 hills, and still symbolically represent something different from purely 7 hills. It represented an entire city! Retaining the meaning of "7" did not stop it from representing symbolically, in this case, something greater than 7.
I would say that 144,000 Israelites, comprised of 12 tribes of 12,000 each are literal numbers presenting literal symbols that represent something less literal. And I say that because the 12 tribes had ceased to exist by the time of this writing. In John's day, Israel was known as populated by "Jews," and not by "the tribes of Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, etc.
So "12 tribes," though presenting a literal number of tribes from which Israel issued, symbolically portrayed a greater number of Christian Jews in Israel. They were being viewed as "equals" among the tribes, indicating that competition among the tribes had ended, and that unity is now based on a common heritage in Christ. We can see the same in Eze 47.
QUOTE:
QUESTION
Can/should we interpret the Bible literally?
ANSWER
Not only can we take the Bible literally, but we must take the Bible literally. This is the only way to determine what God really is trying to communicate to us. When we read any piece of literature, but especially the Bible, we must determine what the author intended to communicate. Many today will read a verse or passage of Scripture and then give their own definitions to the words, phrases, or paragraphs, ignoring the context and author’s intent. But this is not what God intended, which is why God tells us to correctly handle the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).
https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-literal.html
:END QOUTE.
2 Timothy 2:15-16 (NCV)
15 Make every effort to give yourself to God as the kind of person he will accept. Be a worker who is not ashamed and
who uses the true teaching in the right way.
16 Stay away from foolish, useless talk, because that will lead people further away from God.
Titus 3:9-11 (NIV)
9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.
10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.
11 You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.
QUESTION
ANSWER
Not only can we take the Bible literally, but we must take the Bible literally. This is the only way to determine what God really is trying to communicate to us. When we read any piece of literature, but especially the Bible, we must determine what the author intended to communicate. Many today will read a verse or passage of Scripture and then give their own definitions to the words, phrases, or paragraphs, ignoring the context and author’s intent. But this is not what God intended, which is why God tells us to correctly handle the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).
https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-literal.html
:END QOUTE.
2 Timothy 2:15-16 (NCV)
15 Make every effort to give yourself to God as the kind of person he will accept. Be a worker who is not ashamed and
who uses the true teaching in the right way.
16 Stay away from foolish, useless talk, because that will lead people further away from God.
Titus 3:9-11 (NIV)
9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.
10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.
11 You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.
If I say "the cow jumped over the moon," you can rest assured that I mean that *symbolically.* If Joseph said that in his dream sheafs bowed down to him, you can rest assured that the "sheafs" represented Joseph's brothers.
If Daniel said a 4th Beast with 10 horns arises, you can rest assured that the image conveys something symbolic, unless syou can think of a Beast with 10 horns? The 10 horns may present a literal number "10," and these 10 horns may represent a literal number of 10 kings. But the number is still being used symbolically in reference to a beast. And the thing it represents is much greater than a beast--it represent an empire.
So forget the lessons on literal or non-literal interpretation. I am not "one of those liberals."
When Jesus used noah to frame the rapture, HE SAID " BEFORE THE FLOOD"
Before the flood is a time bracket.
Before the flood...Noah....one taken/left...watch and wait and be ready.
Re read it.
37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
prettib rapture before the flood.
you need lot and noah removed AFTER judgement.
HELLO!!!!
Before the flood is a time bracket.
Before the flood...Noah....one taken/left...watch and wait and be ready.
Re read it.
37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
prettib rapture before the flood.
you need lot and noah removed AFTER judgement.
HELLO!!!!
I agree with you as far as that the temple in Jerusalem is destroyed. That doesn't satisfy the scope of Jesus' words though. The tribulation that Jesus said would be unmatched in intensity since the beginning of the world never happened. History also proves that. Therefore, you have a consistency problem with your historicist interpretation.
The AoD is therefore conclusively a description of a future thing.
Since Jesus is never wrong under any circumstances then obviously He was referring to a future event.
The AoD is therefore conclusively a description of a future thing.
Since Jesus is never wrong under any circumstances then obviously He was referring to a future event.
@randyk To add to this... This is why verses about the abomination of desolation (AoD) in the temple must be referring to a prophecy about a future third temple constructed in Israel.
I know you have read 2 Thessalonians 2. So you know that the Man Of Sin will be in the temple when Jesus returns and annihilates him. That hasn't happened yet. Or do you say this has already happened?
I know you have read 2 Thessalonians 2. So you know that the Man Of Sin will be in the temple when Jesus returns and annihilates him. That hasn't happened yet. Or do you say this has already happened?
Quote. """When you read 2 Thes 2 I'm sure you read into the teaching you've already been given on it. I'm sure that when you read Revelation, and read a Pretrib Rapture into John's being caught up to heaven that you got indirectly from Darby's teaching. It certainly is *not* in the Bible itself!"""
And when i read the word i read it with the knowledge that Jesus is the theme cover to cover.
Man is pursued by God cover to cover.
Redemption
Rebellion brings judgement
Obedience brings reward.
God delivered lot, noah, and the baby jesus BEFORE JUDGEMENT.
POSTRIBBERS remove that truth.
Say it can not happen.
Say God will never remove before Judgement....even calling it evil.
I would say , instead of , " your prior exposure skews your bible view" that i need a picture of Gods heart.
God sees the rapture for what it is...the gathering of the bride.
Mat 25 is that gathering.
That gathering is ...worthy vs unworthy.
Jesus said " pray to be counted worthy of the rapture"
That is my view.
You are so busy shooting as many messangers as you can, you failed to understand the rapture and the purpose of Jacobs trouble.
Ironic that your indictment of a skewed starting place fits all post trib / mil. Adherents.
They failed to get heavens view.
Darby invoking does zero to the debate.
Has nothing at all to do with a thing.
In fact it is a sign a person has a weak position.
Shooting the messanger is a tactic in a debate.
It takes the debate from facts and substance into trying to make an opponent backpeddle OUT OF FACTS AND SUBSTANCE.
DARBY
DARBY
DARBY
.....complete nothing burger.
And when i read the word i read it with the knowledge that Jesus is the theme cover to cover.
Man is pursued by God cover to cover.
Redemption
Rebellion brings judgement
Obedience brings reward.
God delivered lot, noah, and the baby jesus BEFORE JUDGEMENT.
POSTRIBBERS remove that truth.
Say it can not happen.
Say God will never remove before Judgement....even calling it evil.
I would say , instead of , " your prior exposure skews your bible view" that i need a picture of Gods heart.
God sees the rapture for what it is...the gathering of the bride.
Mat 25 is that gathering.
That gathering is ...worthy vs unworthy.
Jesus said " pray to be counted worthy of the rapture"
That is my view.
You are so busy shooting as many messangers as you can, you failed to understand the rapture and the purpose of Jacobs trouble.
Ironic that your indictment of a skewed starting place fits all post trib / mil. Adherents.
They failed to get heavens view.
Darby invoking does zero to the debate.
Has nothing at all to do with a thing.
In fact it is a sign a person has a weak position.
Shooting the messanger is a tactic in a debate.
It takes the debate from facts and substance into trying to make an opponent backpeddle OUT OF FACTS AND SUBSTANCE.
DARBY
DARBY
DARBY
.....complete nothing burger.
Naw, man... people were *distinguishing* between the point-in-time of "our Rapture [IN THE AIR]" and Christ's Second Coming to the earth, well before Darby in the late 1800s. The following is just one puny example... but there are certainly more...
Consider:
https://www.pre-trib.org/articles/r...llowing-titles-millennium-last-novelties/read
"Two Academical Exercises on Subjects Bearing the following Titles; Millennium, Last-Novelties" - Morgan Edwards (1700s)
Morgan Edwards first published these in 1744, and then published it again in 1788...
...the below quoted texts are excerpted from pages 7, 21, 24, 25 (note: the site says the spelling of Edwards has been modernized)... not exactly how we describe "pre-trib" today, but certainly he is *distinguishing* the point-in-time of "our episynagoges[/I] unto Him" and His Second Coming to the earth / His 'MANIFESTATION' / 'OPENLY MANIFEST' (as we "pre-tribbers" also see *distinguished* in Scripture):
[pg 7]
"II. The distance between the first and second resurrection will be somewhat more than a thousand years.
"I say, somewhat more; because the dead saints will be raised, and the living changed at Christ's "appearing in the air" (1 Thes. iv, 17); and this will be about three years and a half before the millennium, as we shall see hereafter: but will he and they abide in the air all that time? No: they will ascend to paradise, or to some one of those many "mansions in the father's house of God" (John xiv: 2), and to disappear during the foresaid period of time. The design of this retreat and disappearing will be to judge the risen and changed saints; for "now the time is come that judgment must begin," and that will be at the house of God" (1 Pet. iv. 17). . ."
[pg 21]
"5. Another event previous to the Millennium will be the appearing of the son of man in the clouds, coming to raise the dead saints and change the living, and to catch them up to himself, and then withdrawing with them, and observed before, This event will come to pass when Antichrist be arrived at Jerusalem in his conquest of the world; and about three years and a half before his killing the witnesses, and assumption of godhead. . . . "
[pg 24]
"8.The last event, and the event that will usher in the millennium, will be, the coming of Christ from paradise to earth, with all the saints he had taken up thither (about three years and a half before. . . ."
[pg 25]
"Millions and millions of saints will have been on earth from the days of the first Adam, to the coming of the second Adam. All these will Christ bring with him. The place where they will alight is the "mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east." Zech. Xiv, 4."
[end quoting; underline mine]
[caveat: his views differ slightly with mine, as you know... ]
Consider:
https://www.pre-trib.org/articles/r...llowing-titles-millennium-last-novelties/read
"Two Academical Exercises on Subjects Bearing the following Titles; Millennium, Last-Novelties" - Morgan Edwards (1700s)
Morgan Edwards first published these in 1744, and then published it again in 1788...
...the below quoted texts are excerpted from pages 7, 21, 24, 25 (note: the site says the spelling of Edwards has been modernized)... not exactly how we describe "pre-trib" today, but certainly he is *distinguishing* the point-in-time of "our episynagoges[/I] unto Him" and His Second Coming to the earth / His 'MANIFESTATION' / 'OPENLY MANIFEST' (as we "pre-tribbers" also see *distinguished* in Scripture):
[pg 7]
"II. The distance between the first and second resurrection will be somewhat more than a thousand years.
"I say, somewhat more; because the dead saints will be raised, and the living changed at Christ's "appearing in the air" (1 Thes. iv, 17); and this will be about three years and a half before the millennium, as we shall see hereafter: but will he and they abide in the air all that time? No: they will ascend to paradise, or to some one of those many "mansions in the father's house of God" (John xiv: 2), and to disappear during the foresaid period of time. The design of this retreat and disappearing will be to judge the risen and changed saints; for "now the time is come that judgment must begin," and that will be at the house of God" (1 Pet. iv. 17). . ."
[pg 21]
"5. Another event previous to the Millennium will be the appearing of the son of man in the clouds, coming to raise the dead saints and change the living, and to catch them up to himself, and then withdrawing with them, and observed before, This event will come to pass when Antichrist be arrived at Jerusalem in his conquest of the world; and about three years and a half before his killing the witnesses, and assumption of godhead. . . . "
[pg 24]
"8.The last event, and the event that will usher in the millennium, will be, the coming of Christ from paradise to earth, with all the saints he had taken up thither (about three years and a half before. . . ."
[pg 25]
"Millions and millions of saints will have been on earth from the days of the first Adam, to the coming of the second Adam. All these will Christ bring with him. The place where they will alight is the "mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east." Zech. Xiv, 4."
[end quoting; underline mine]
[caveat: his views differ slightly with mine, as you know...
]
All the " church fathers were postrib" baloney was debunked years ago.
Who really cared untill postrib adherants started invoking those dead men into a non bible argument.
They also could not agree on the trinity.
-
1
- Show all