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

[cv5]

I should think you have a better occupation than "cheerleading?" Can we just visit the arguments, rather than declare the battle over prematurely? I've argued this with TDW for years on another forum, and he has *never* won! I respect the man, but I don't feel that he's done much more than confuse an otherwise simple biblical eschatology.

Prematurely? This battle was won a long LOOONG time ago. Inevitable truth escaping your notice is your most predominant if not defining trait....

"never won" lol? On the contrary every engagement was a cringeworthy rout in his favor.

Why do you think that I am no longer adding much commentary? Because its completely unnecessary at this point.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

But the verse doesn't say "that day". Just "on the day". But whatever.

"IN [en] THAT DAY" is what it says.

Right. The point *I* was making... not the point *YOU* were making about "v.3," which I wasn't speaking of when I said "the day of the Lord" and "IN THAT DAY" refer to the SAME *TIME-PERIOD* whenever they are used in the SAME CONTEXTS (in the OT)... as these are.

And no, the verse (1:10) is not saying what you've spelled it out to be saying... please view it as the Greek has it:

https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/1-10.htm [note: the text is not saying "because YOU believed..." ; rather, "because was believed..." (a certain thing "was believed"... but not speaking of the Thessalonians' own past experience/belief... IOW, it's not saying "because YOU believed...")]


Again, in these TWO chpts (i.e. the wider CONTEXT), Paul is CONTRASTING the two different *beliefs* ppl will be coming to, when IN the Trib years (FOLLOWING "our Rapture" event)... when THEY are IN and EXPERIENCING "the day of the Lord" / "IN THAT DAY" time-period (i.e. when the man of sin will also be present on the earth for those 7 yrs)

 

[Runningman]

I've emboldened the part that I think is wonderfully said! I've felt the same way for many years. It's absolutely incredible that something spoken so simply can be completely distorted in order to create a new theology, a new eschatology!

For many centuries good Christians read 2 Thessalonians and *never* read "apostasia" as the Departure of the Church from the earth in a Pretribulational Rapture! You have to wonder how effective the Holy Spirit is if He can't even communicate to the Church what Paul meant for 1800 years!

And why so suddenly John N. Darby is privileged to see what few have seen before, to initiate a brand new eschatology in Christian history. It makes one wonder!

I've found it fascinating, and recognize that theology is either a revelation or a bondage. And if the error is a bondage, it is not easily exposed, even if it seems simple to you or me.

Those who hold to a Pretribulation eschatology are, I believe, in a kind of bondage. They are utterly unable to see things from another point of view. So it requires kindness, prayer, and persistence in speaking the truth. Thank you for what you're doing. As peripheral as this topic is to more important topics like Salvation, it is still a part of God's word. And Paul considered it important enough to write this letter.

The real danger is that there are religious movements that get proud and begin to declare themselves the voice of God or the move of God on earth, assuming an attitude that they are the advancement of God's Kingdom on earth presently in some almost militant kind of form. Zealotry and battling with carnal weapons to achieve spiritual fulfillment is not God's Kingdom, but rather, a false Messiah.

That was Paul's concern, that we would get high on ourselves, and miss the real enemy of our souls. Christ is who we need to look to, because he will defeat the foe in his own time, and not when we choose to declare it.

Yes agreed. The major flaw with interpretating 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 as a departure of the church first is that isn't an accurate translation of the word apostasia. Fiddling with the word and making it different does it help the context for a pre-trib rapture. I don't think there is a neat way to shoehorn the pre-trib rapture into scripture without just disregarding the plain reading of the scripture.

Something like "concerning our gathering to Him, that day won't come until we depart to be gathered first..." Just doesn't sit well with reason.

I think people just have a preconceived idea of what they believe the scriptures say and then try to conform the interpretation to fit a particular view which isn't how the Bible is meant to be read.

Personally, I don't have an issue with believing whatever the Bible says. I get it that sometimes things aren't crystal clear without studying, but that's what we've been doing here. Had I discovered the pre-trib rapture somehow then I would have accepted the Bible's presentation of it.

All we can do is show people what it says to the best of our understanding with prayer.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

EDIT (to finish my last post): [2Th1:10] "... in all those HAVING BELIEVED, because was believed..." a certain thing... "IN THAT DAY" (not in THIS one... and not "YOU [Thessalonians]"...)... recall, what Paul is saying there is from the perspective-in-time of the point of His "RETURN" to the earth / "MANIFESTATION" / "OPENLY MANIFEST" / Second Coming to the earth (Rev19) point.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Something like "concerning our gathering to Him, that day won't come until we depart to be gathered first..." Just doesn't sit well with reason.

Well, that didn't take long!!




NO. That's NOT what it would say... (you *have* to be joking, right?? Twinsy with FrGr2??)


[I heard that ringer! ]



No, it would not be saying as you suggest ^ , but instead (in modern parlance):

"3 Look guys, the trib can't be present till our exit takes place *FIRST* [you know, verse 1's SUBJECT!] and the man of sin arrives on the scene..." and NEITHER have happened. Clear as a bell. DING DING!! Ding-a-ling! (it's ON RECORD... TAPED!! ; ] )

 

[randyk]

Well, that didn't take long!!




NO. That's NOT what it would say... (you *have* to be joking, right?? Twinsy with FrGr2??)


[I heard that ringer! ]



No, it would not be saying as you suggest ^ , but instead (in modern parlance):

"3 Look guys, the trib can't be present till our exit takes place *FIRST* [you know, verse 1's SUBJECT!] and the man of sin arrives on the scene..." and NEITHER have happened. Clear as a bell. DING DING!! Ding-a-ling! (it's ON RECORD... TAPED!! ; ] )

All that theatrics, and not a single acknowledgement that you've changed the word, from the *day of Christ's coming for the Church* to "the Tribulation?" Again, you are switching definitions for the "day of the Lord's coming," from the day of Christ's coming for the Church to the Tribulation Period. That's a no no and a no go, DW!

You're saying that the Church was worried that the Tribulation had already started and they had missed the Rapture? That is not what it's saying. They were worried that Christ's Kingdom had already begun to come and manifest itself on earth. They didn't want to miss out on that.

These are 2 very different ways of looking at it. I'm just asking for a serious look at both views before deciding?

 

[randyk]

The question is, did Paul really tell the Thessalonians, earlier, that they could expect to be raptured out *before* the Great Tribulation? Absolutely not. No such thing exists. They did not think, because they were in tribulation, that they had missed a so-called Pretrib Rapture!

I'll say it again. All of NT eschatology begins with Dan 7, where the Son of Man is portrayed as descending from heaven, from the clouds, to establish God's Kingdom on the earth. That is, Christ comes to earth to destroy the kingdom of the Antichrist so as to rescue his people and to establish God's Kingdom on the earth. All NT theology about Christ's coming stems from this. And this is absolutely what 1 Thes 4 is all about, what the Olivet Discourse is all about, and what the book of Revelation is all about.

Dispensationalism tries to divide eschatology into Jewish eschatology and Christian eschatology. And this is the source of the confusion. In the Gospels, the Law is still in effect, and Jesus speaks only of Jewish eschatology. But this is later expanded because of the Great Commission, and Paul applies Jewish eschatology to Gentile eschatology, as well.

So NT eschatology is one, both Jewish and non-Jewish. It is about Christ coming back to deliver both Jewish and non-Jewish Christians from Antichristian persecution in the present age. We should never think that the promise of a Pretribulational Rapture will encourage us while we are still *in tribulation,* which is exactly where the Thessalonian believers were!

 

[Runningman]

Well, that didn't take long!!




NO. That's NOT what it would say... (you *have* to be joking, right?? Twinsy with FrGr2??)


[I heard that ringer! ]



No, it would not be saying as you suggest ^ , but instead (in modern parlance):

"3 Look guys, the trib can't be present till our exit takes place *FIRST* [you know, verse 1's SUBJECT!] and the man of sin arrives on the scene..." and NEITHER have happened. Clear as a bell. DING DING!! Ding-a-ling! (it's ON RECORD... TAPED!! ; ] )

Well, I saw you say that I would keep repeating it and you were right. It's just that I don't agree with your interpretation so I haven't changed my view of what I believe the verses hypothetically say.

I mean, you would have me believe verses 1-3 imply the church departs in a rapture before the man of sin revealed so I looked at that. When I looked at it I see that the Greek word you're saying is a departure of the church in a rapture doesn't define that or describe what you're saying it does.

I even tried to read it the way you said it should be read and it doesn't make sense grammatically to me. Therefore I stick with the plain text and established definitions the translators used.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

You are calling the entire "Great Tribulation" period the "Day of the Lord," including the Rapture, the Great Tribulation, and the 2nd Coming. But this is not what Paul actually said.

Hi randyk... Please allow me to correct one small point of your above paragraph. I'm not calling "OUR RAPTURE" "the Day of the Lord," I'm saying [rather, pointing out the text] "our Rapture *FIRST*" ["THE DEPARTURE *FIRST*"] before the "day of the Lord can BE PRESENT" to unfold upon the earth, with His "INFLICTING VENGEANCE ON those who...," which is a TIME-PERIOD (which was what the false conveyors were PURPORTING "IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE [PERFECT INDICATIVE]"... It wasn't), rather than MERELY "a singular 24-hr day" (i.e. wrath / "INFLICTING VENGEANCE ON" on merely the 24-hr "day" of His "RETURN". No.)


You and I simply are not going to come to any semblance of agreement on this particular point because (yes, I know your viewpoint of the "long GREAT tribulation [since the first century, unfolding]")... because... I cannot overlook the following few important points:

--Rev1:1 / 1:19c / 4:1 is saying "[to SHEW unto...]...things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" (NOT unfolding over the course of some near-2000-yrs)

--SAME ^ *time-period* ("IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]") that "AVENGE *IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]*" is speaking of in Lk18:8 (parallel to the words "[WITH His mighty angels...] ... INFLICTING VENGEANCE ON..." over the course of that SAME *time-period* (i.e. 7-yr Trib leading UP TO His "RETURN" to the earth Rev19)

--SAME ^ *time-period* ("IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]") that Rom16:20 says (to the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY), "shall CRUSH Satan UNDER YOUR FEET *IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]*" (recall, "Know ye not that *WE* SHALL JUDGE ANGELS" 1Cor6:3[14])

--that "kings go out to battle" (think: Rev19) on a very specific day, in scripture... and one can actually trace out "2520 days" [7 yrs of 360 days each] in Revelation from the first SEAL to His "RETURN" to the earth Rev19; and that the "NO MAN KNOWETH" [know] was written in the "PERFECT TENSE" (so that this verse [and parallels], speaking of His Second Coming to the earth, is NOT saying "no one WILL EVER know" nor "no one CAN EVER know"... but that Rev1:1 is actually saying "[The] Revelation OF JESUS CHRIST, which GOD GAVE UNTO HIM [unto Jesus] TO *SHEW* UNTO..." is "further information" that He did not have access to BEFORE His ASCENSION / EXHALTATION, but now He is DISCLOSING (in 95ad)

--and so much more I could say, but this is already so lengthy that it's doubtful you'll do anything but *skim* it, thus missing the reasonings (in part) I am supplying for my not being convinced of your viewpoint...

 

[randyk]

Hi randyk... Please allow me to correct one small point of your above paragraph. I'm not calling "OUR RAPTURE" "the Day of the Lord," I'm saying [rather, pointing out the text] "our Rapture *FIRST*" ["THE DEPARTURE *FIRST*"] before the "day of the Lord can BE PRESENT" to unfold upon the earth, with His "INFLICTING VENGEANCE ON those who...," which is a TIME-PERIOD (which was what the false conveyors were PURPORTING "IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE [PERFECT INDICATIVE]"... It wasn't), rather than MERELY "a singular 24-hr day" (i.e. wrath / "INFLICTING VENGEANCE ON" on merely the 24-hr "day" of His "RETURN". No.)

Okay, got it--I've probably made this mistake before. And I know why--it's because it seems so illogical to separate Paul's sense of the day of Christ's coming for the church from the Kingdom he comes to bring.

To insert, in between Christ's coming for the Church and the Millennial age, a period of 3.5-7 years of Antichristian persecution, in which the Church is persecuted and is also supposedly absent, seems ludicrous and incomprehensible to me. And how you can call this 3.5-7 years period of Tribulation the "Day of the Lord," and completely eliminate any sense of Christ's coming for his Church is also insensible to me.

I mean, I do understand you, and you are being rational. It just doesn't likely fit into what we are actually reading. It is a matter of reading an empty chalkboard, and then filling in the blanks with anything we want to insert. Nothing Paul says remotely indicates a Pretrib Rapture--it is completely being assumed by Pretribbers, without any basis for it whatsoever.

Is it any wonder that for 1800 years the Church read 2 Thes over and over and over again, and *never* saw a smidgeon of Pretrib teaching? You mention one guy who had a Pretrib Theology, but no serious systematic Pretrib Theology emerged in history until Darby. I wonder why? Maybe because in reading these passages, a Pretrib Rapture simply isn't there? If so, then maybe we should stop assuming it is there, you think?

Brother, you're a good guy, and have a good heart. But you're wrong on this one, and I hope to convince you to abandon Darbyism. He isn't worth it.

You and I simply are not going to come to any semblance of agreement on this particular point because (yes, I know your viewpoint of the "long GREAT tribulation [since the first century, unfolding]")... because... I cannot overlook the following few important points:

--Rev1:1 / 1:19c / 4:1 is saying "[to SHEW unto...]...things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" (NOT unfolding over the course of some near-2000-yrs)

--SAME ^ *time-period* ("IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]") that "AVENGE *IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]*" is speaking of in Lk18:8 (parallel to the words "[WITH His mighty angels...] ... INFLICTING VENGEANCE ON..." over the course of that SAME *time-period* (i.e. 7-yr Trib leading UP TO His "RETURN" to the earth Rev19)

--SAME ^ *time-period* ("IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]") that Rom16:20 says (to the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY), "shall CRUSH Satan UNDER YOUR FEET *IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]*" (recall, "Know ye not that *WE* SHALL JUDGE ANGELS" 1Cor6:3[14])

--that "kings go out to battle" (think: Rev19) on a very specific day, in scripture... and one can actually trace out "2520 days" [7 yrs of 360 days each] in Revelation from the first SEAL to His "RETURN" to the earth Rev19; and that the "NO MAN KNOWETH" [know] was written in the "PERFECT TENSE" (so that this verse [and parallels], speaking of His Second Coming to the earth, is NOT saying "no one WILL EVER know" nor "no one CAN EVER know"... but that Rev1:1 is actually saying "[The] Revelation OF JESUS CHRIST, which GOD GAVE UNTO HIM [unto Jesus] TO *SHEW* UNTO..." is "further information" that He did not have access to BEFORE His ASCENSION / EXHALTATION, but now He is DISCLOSING (in 95ad)

--and so much more I could say, but this is already so lengthy that it's doubtful you'll do anything but *skim* it, thus missing the reasonings (in part) I am supplying for my not being convinced of your viewpoint...

Later...

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

It is clear that the two witnesses have completed their ministry before the seventh trumpet/bowl judgments/third woe. It is less clear exactly when 144,000 complete their ministry and are gathered unto the Lord. Have you formulated an opinion or theory on this matter? I am wondering whether all of the Tribulation Saints (all of them having been martyred and none remaining) and the 144,000 (removed) are no longer on the earth before the seventh trumpet and bowl judgments.

Can you take a moment and expand on your midtrib/Fifth trumpet first woe theory?

I explained some of it EVER SO BRIEFLY in a different post, way back... and truthfully, I think I'd rather not go into all that in THIS thread... it's just so time-consuming it seems...

But I'll point out a cpl things and see if this helps you see my perspective:

[recall]
--Dan12:12's "BLESSED" (where I believe the CONTEXT is speaking of "STILL-LIVING" saints at the time of His Second Coming to the earth FOR the promised and prophesied EARTHLY Millennial Kingdom [with those saints ENTERING the kingdom age in their MORTAL bodies])... is parallel with about 8 or so other "BLESSED" passages speaking of the same time-slot and same circumstances (re: "still-living" saints on the earth, ENTERING the MK age);

--Rev20:4a's wording (distinct from v.4b's persons) is parallel the wording in Dan7:22... which I believe ALSO refers to "still-living" saints at the time of Christ's "RETURN" to the earth (see the TIMING-words in v.25, and the description in v.27); whereas Rev20:4b is speaking of the ones who were MARTYRED / BEHEADED in the SECOND HALF of the trib (when the MOTB is in effect), who will be "resurrected" (and will be "as the angels"--not marrying or producing children, like the "still-living" saints will still have the capacity to do in / during the MK age)



...IOW, I do not believe EVERY saint will be "killed" during the trib years... Is that the only point you were aiming for... or another??

 

[randyk]

You and I simply are not going to come to any semblance of agreement on this particular point because (yes, I know your viewpoint of the "long GREAT tribulation [since the first century, unfolding]")... because... I cannot overlook the following few important points:

--Rev1:1 / 1:19c / 4:1 is saying "[to SHEW unto...]...things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" (NOT unfolding over the course of some near-2000-yrs)

"Quickly" has the sense of "urgency," in the sense that what is coming in the future has ramifications for the present. And that is true. Christ's coming has been over 2000 years, and yet every life lived over the last 2000 years has been under judgment and will have their lives judged at Christ's coming.

"Quickly" in no way applies to what Jesus said about the "great punishment of the Jewish People." Luke 21 is crystal clear, that the "Great Tribulation" he speaks of has to do with Jewish punishment, extending from the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD until the end of the age. Jesus indicated his coming, therefore, would result in Israel's restoration.

And now that we've entered into the Church age, the same promises Jesus gave to the Jews in their nation applies to Christians in all nations. We can all expect to be judged for our present lives at a future time. And we suffer on an earth under siege by divine wrath. And so we look forward to Christ's coming "quickly," to deliver us. The tribulation we now suffer is *not* God's wrath directed at us, but rather at the rebellious world. We are here only to be witnesses to the forgiveness and salvation of Christ.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

All that theatrics, and not a single acknowledgement that you've changed the word, from the *day of Christ's coming for the Church* to "the Tribulation?"

It boils down to, what were the false conveyors purporting IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE [PERFECT INDICATIVE]," in verse 2?

Some translations say, "the day OF THE LORD" while others says, "the day OF CHRIST". Which is it? (those are two very *distinct* concepts / realities--they are NOT *identical*... "The DOTL" is ALWAYS shown to be "ON THE EARTH," whereas the other is NOT.)

So depending on what this verse is actually conveying (about what the false conveyors were purporting IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE [PERFECT INDICATIVE]"), then yes this will impact the meaning of the text.

...but in EITHER case, the text does NOT read (as you suggest), the "day of Christ'S COMING FOR THE CHURCH" (verse 2 I'm speaking of, note! WHAT does the TEXT STATE that the false conveyors were purporting "IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE [PERFECT INDICATIVE]"--I do NOT agree with you that they were purporting that "CHRIST HIMSELF" or "HIS KINGDOM" had already arrived / IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

"Quickly"

The word in verse 1 is not an "adverb" (quickLY), but rather, is a "noun" (same one as in Lk18:8 [corresponding with the TIME-PERIOD that 2Th1:7-8's "INFLICTING VENGEANCE ON" also speaks of] and as in Rom16:20... I believe referring to the specific, future, LIMITED time-period we commonly call "the 7-yr Trib" that leads UP TO His "RETURN" to the earth in Rev19);

This "time-period" (1:1 / 1:19c / 4:1 speaks of), meaning, "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" is set in contrast to the "things WHICH ARE" section of chpts 2-3 (which is NOT said of IT that those are "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]"--Thus, I thoroughly *disagree* with the lengthy-view of Rev4-19 / the beginning of birth pangs [which are equivalent the SEALS] / His Olivet Discourse [except that about 12 verses in Lk21 DO speak of the 70ad events] / etc... as your viewpoint has it.)






[P.S. the bold and underlining and italics (etc) in this post are for *emphasis*... in the phrases find often that readers either tend to overlook, or define in ways other than I intend to convey...]

 

[cv5]

I explained some of it EVER SO BRIEFLY in a different post, way back... and truthfully, I think I'd rather not go into all that in THIS thread... it's just so time-consuming it seems...

But I'll point out a cpl things and see if this helps you see my perspective:

[recall]
--Dan12:12's "BLESSED" (where I believe the CONTEXT is speaking of "STILL-LIVING" saints at the time of His Second Coming to the earth FOR the promised and prophesied EARTHLY Millennial Kingdom [with those saints ENTERING the kingdom age in their MORTAL bodies])... is parallel with about 8 or so other "BLESSED" passages speaking of the same time-slot and same circumstances (re: "still-living" saints on the earth, ENTERING the MK age);

--Rev20:4a's wording (distinct from v.4b's persons) is parallel the wording in Dan7:22... which I believe ALSO refers to "still-living" saints at the time of Christ's "RETURN" to the earth (see the TIMING-words in v.25, and the description in v.27); whereas Rev20:4b is speaking of the ones who were MARTYRED / BEHEADED in the SECOND HALF of the trib (when the MOTB is in effect), who will be "resurrected" (and will be "as the angels"--not marrying or producing children, like the "still-living" saints will still have the capacity to do in / during the MK age)



...IOW, I do not believe EVERY saint will be "killed" during the trib years... Is that the only point you were aiming for... or another??

Yes I completely agree that there will be living believers, both Jew and gentile on the earth who survive the tribulation wrath.

Yes let's not bother with that topic on this thread.....No need to go off on a tangent.

 

[VCO]

"The day of the Lord" and "IN THAT DAY" are the SAME TIME-PERIOD, when used in the SAME CONTEXTS throughout Scripture

(and Paul is doing the same thing here in THIS context, chpts 1 & 2)

The Day of the LORD is the Second Coming and not the RAPTURE.

Isaiah 13:9 (NASB)
9 Behold, the day of the LORD is coming, Cruel, with fury and burning anger, To make the land a desolation; And He will exterminate its sinners from it.


Jeremiah 46:10 (NRSV)
10 That day is the day of the Lord God of hosts, a day of retribution, to gain vindication from his foes. The sword shall devour and be sated, and drink its fill of their blood. For the Lord God of hosts holds a sacrifice in the land of the north by the river Euphrates.


Lamentations 2:22 (HCSB)
22 You summoned my attackers on every side, as if ⌊for⌋ an appointed festival day; on the day of the LORD’s anger no one escaped or survived. My enemy has destroyed those I nurtured and reared.


Ezekiel 7:19 (HCSB)
19 They will throw their silver into the streets, and their gold will seem like something filthy. Their silver and gold will be unable to save them in the day of the LORD’s wrath. They will not satisfy their appetites or fill their stomachs, for these were the stumbling blocks that brought about their iniquity.


Joel 2:11 (GWT)
11 The LORD shouts out orders to his army. His forces are very large. The troops that carry out his commands are mighty. The day of the LORD is extremely terrifying. Who can endure it?



Revelation 6:16-17 (GWT)
16 They said to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us, and hide us from the face of the one who sits on the throne and from the anger of the lamb,
17 because the frightening day of their anger has come, and who is able to endure it?”


Now look at the similarly between Joel 2:11 and Rev. 6:17.

I think that is not a coincidence, IT WAS LITERAL AND DELIBERATE.
The implied Answer is: NO ONE, EXCEPT THE ONES MENTIONED IN ZECH. 14:16, AND THE 144,000 JEWS, SEALED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT, THOSE NOT OF THEM, WILL BE KILLED.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Is it any wonder that for 1800 years the Church read 2 Thes over and over and over again, and *never* saw a smidgeon of Pretrib teaching? You mention one guy who had a Pretrib Theology, but no serious systematic Pretrib Theology emerged in history until Darby. I wonder why? Maybe because in reading these passages, a Pretrib Rapture simply isn't there? If so, then maybe we should stop assuming it is there, you think?

Brother, you're a good guy, and have a good heart. But you're wrong on this one, and I hope to convince you to abandon Darbyism. He isn't worth it.

Aw, come on, man... your memory isn't *that short* also, is it??

Just a few days ago... I supplied the texts of one Morgan Edwards some 100 YEARS BEFORE *Darby* who ALSO *distinguished* the point in time of our Rapture from the point in time of His "RETURN" to the earth (which is ALSO the distinction shown between 2Th2:1's "coming [parousia / presence] of OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, *even* OUR episynagoges UNTO HIM" and v.8b's "MANIFESTATION of His presence" when "EVERY eye shall see Him" (when WE go UP "to the meeting of the Lord IN THE AIR"... NO ONE ELSE *but us* will be IN HIS *PRESENCE*);

...yet here you are again, touting the "1800s" *debunked* theory (that such a doctrine STARTED then! NOT! )




[by the way, we ARE called to "correctly apportion the word of truth"... but I find that most would rather "lump it all together" into one mish-mash of mush! despite it causing a myriad of problems, not the least of which is "leaving out text and adding in text" wherever it fancies the reader so as to retain their particular "idea" they tend to impose upon the text... like suggesting that the word in v.3 SAYS "apostasy FROM THE FAITH," which is does not say nor mean (the underlined words being INJECTED INTO the word itself)... lol]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

The Day of the LORD is the Second Coming and not the RAPTURE.

Again, to be clear, I am not saying that "the DOTL" is our Rapture.



But "the DOTL" is an earthly-located *time-period* that INCLUDES all three of the following:

--the 7-yr Trib (unfolding upon the earth); AND

--Christ's Second Coming (to the earth); AND

--His 1000-yr reign (on / over the earth)


...ALL THREE.


Its *ARRIVAL* is at the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" that COMES UPON a woman per 1Th5:2-3... Jesus spoke of those.

WE (the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY) will NOT be present on the earth FOR THOSE. They are what "kick-off" the DOTL time-period (i.e. TRIB portion).



What I *disagree* with... is that "the DOTL" COMMENCES at the time of Christ's Second Coming to the earth Rev19.

No. It STARTS way back at the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3 ; Matt24:4/Mk13:5]" AKA the "FIRST SEAL" (in the "IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" time-period.. of 7 yrs duration).

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

I have asked DWM for years to stop adding so many embellishments to his posts, due to the confusing array of misdirections that that can involve. Instead of letting a verse speak for itself, we read DWM's misdirections, which is the whole point of his doing that! He *cannot* let the Scriptures speak for themselves, because they *do not say* what he wants them to say!

Also, I've complained to him for years that he gathers up bits of prophecy or eschatology from all over the Scriptures to apply in a single passage. That would be fine if he applied them with a proper systematic theology.

Instead, he redefines the "day of Christ's coming" in one place as a "day of the Lord" in another place. And obviously, there have been days of the Lord in the past that had nothing whatsoever to do with Christ's coming. And even if they did have something to do with Christ's coming, they may, in context, be referring to other elements other than just Christ's coming.

And quite frankly, just because an OT prophecy refers to the Messianic Kingdom and mentions the "Lord's day" it does not infer that the "Lord's day" has to always be used the same way. This would be applying an Interpretive Fallacy. In *every passage* in which the "Lord's day" is referred to, it has to be defined within its own context. One cannot confuse two separate passages, even if they are referring to a similar time.

A true lesson in interpretation is to apply a statement in its immediate context--not just search throughout the Bible to find the definition for a word that we want to apply in a particular passage. There may be, in the OT, a "day of the Lord" that can apply to the entire Messianic Kingdom in the totality of its age. But that doesn't mean it has to be applied the same way in other passages dealing with that time period.

It certainly doesn't mean the "day of the Lord" applies in this way to 2 Thessalonians 1 and 2, where the day specifically referred to is the day in which Christ defeats the Antichrist with the "breath of his mouth," and delivers his people by gathering them to himself.

This is, in its immediate context, a specific and literal day, just as it is shown in the original blueprint in Dan 7. There, the Son of Man comes down from heaven to establish God's Kingdom and to destroy the Man of Sin. This is a *specific day* Paul is referring to, and cannot include the 3.5 years of Antichristian rule, since the very purpose of the coming of the Son of Man is to destroy the Antichrist.

Precious friend, would the following "follow your interpretation rule"?:

Part 10 Great GRACE Departure!:

Day Of CHRIST vs Day Of The LORD! { Also The Day Of God! }:

Obeying God's Command In 2 Timothy 2 : 15, we have This!:

According To the preaching of JESUS CHRIST, In The Revelation Of The Mystery! (Romans - Philemon!) = "The Day Of CHRIST!"

Rightly Divided (2 Timothy 2 : 15!) From "Things That DIFFER":

According to God's "Prophetic" Program in: Daniel,
Matthew, And Revelation! = "The Day Of The LORD!"

q: WHY would ANYONE In The Body of CHRIST, "Today," "desire" The Day
Of The LORD? When God Inspired HIS "prophet" Amos to pen THIS!:

"WOE Unto you that desire The Day Of The LORD! To what end is it for you?...
...The Day Of The LORD Is Darkness, and not light...Shall not The Day Of The
LORD be Darkness, And Not light? Even Very Dark, And No brightness in it?"
(Amos_5 : 18, 20!)

------------------
"Expanded" For "Clarification!":

According To the preaching of JESUS CHRIST, In The Revelation Of The Mystery! (Romans - Philemon!) = "The Day Of CHRIST!" = The "Judgment Day" Of The
"Heavenly" Body Of CHRIST, who Will Be Taken Home To Heaven { LIGHT! },
For "shame... ...rewards, rejoicing, And reigning!" Amen?:

“That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit nor
by word, nor by letter as from us, as that The Day Of CHRIST is at hand."
(2 Thessalonians 2 : 2 KJB!)

“Who Shall Confirm you Unto the end, that ye may be blameless
In The Day Of our LORD JESUS CHRIST!" (1 Corinthians 1 : 8!)

“To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the
spirit may be saved In The Day Of The LORD JESUS!" (1 Corinthians 5 : 5!)

“As also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as
ye also are ours in the In The Day Of The LORD JESUS!" (2 Corinthians 1 : 14!)

“Being confident Of This Very Thing, That HE Which Hath Begun A Good Work
In you, Will Perform It Until The Day Of JESUS CHRIST!" (Philippians 1 : 6!)

“That ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere
and without offence till The Day Of CHRIST!" (Philippians 1 : 10!)

“Holding forth The WORD Of Life; that I may rejoice in The Day Of CHRIST
that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain." (Philippians 2 : 16!)

Rightly Divided (2 Timothy 2 : 15!) From "Things That DIFFER":

According To "Prophecy!": The Day Of The LORD / "earthly" Israel / nations! in
judgment / wrath / battle / destruction / terror / DARKNESS / horror / pain! =
Time Of JACOB's Trouble!!:

“The Day Of The LORD!” is common throughout the Old Testament. The prophets referred constantly to it. In the New Testament, The LORD JESUS CHRIST, Paul, and Peter referred to It! Some of the Many Passages are the following: Isaiah_2 : 11-12, 17, 13 : 4-6, 9, 13, 34 : 8; Jeremiah_46 : 10; Ezekiel_13 : 5, 30 : 3; Joel_1 : 15, 2 : 1, 11, 31, 3 : 14; Amos_5 : 18, 5 : 20; Obadiah_1 : 15; Zephaniah_1 : 7, 14; Zechariah_14 : 1; Malachi_4 : 5; Matthew_24 : 1-51; Acts_2 : 20; Romans_2 : 5; 1_Thessalonians 5 : 2; 2 Peter_3 : 10; Revelation_1 : 10.

Compare "That Day" in Isaiah_2 : 11, 17, 20, 3 : 18. This Day is a time of terror,
darkness, and wrath. It is a “day of visitation” (Isaiah_10 : 3), a “Day of the Wrath
Of The LORD!” (Ezekiel_7 : 19), THE “Great Day Of The LORD!” (Zephaniah_1 : 14!)

-------------

Finally, there is Also "The Day Of God!":

"Looking for and hasting unto The Coming Of The Day Of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?" (2_Peter 3 : 12!)
----------
Conclusion:

Was this "proper systematic theology," keeping These Passages In "God's
Context" Of EACH Of HIS TWO Different Programs {ie: NOT "Mixing them up"}?

Does not God Admonish ALL diligent Bible students:

"Prove ALL things; hold fast That Which Is Good!" (1_Thessalonians 5 : 21!)

Be Blessed!

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Precious friend(s), please explain the following CHANGE!:

Rev_19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed Him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

Why?:

Rev_19:19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him that sat on the horse, and against His army.

Perchance, on the way, were ONE "of the ARMIES {Body Of CHRIST?}" assigned
their Heavenly positions of reigning and rulership, "vacated" by the fallen angels?

Thanks. Be Blessed!

Well, I would explain it in a slightly different way (coz I don't *think* "the Church" is only JUST THEN / AT THAT POINT taking such position, if you will [I might explain that at a later time])... I see it kinda, a little more like this (BUT ALONG THAT SAME TRAIN OF THOUGHT, yes!!!):
where it is saying "the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together TO MAKE WAR against Him... and against His army"... it seems to me that the "TO MAKE WAR" is showing their "INTENTION" (in the same way that 6:2 says of the rider on the white horse "he went forth conquering and TO CONQUER" [the "and TO CONQUER" being his mindset / intention / direction / bent / aim / objective])...
...and so here in Rev19 their INTENTION has to do with making war "against Him... and against His army"... but SURPRISE, SURPRISE, what they GET in response is "[Him] and His ARMIES [PLURAL]" coming out of Heaven!!! (vastly more than they had SUPPOSED!) lol




Am I making sense?? = )



[I believe we are in general agreement, here = ) ]