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

[OldSage]

It is a view from the past. the preterist believes that some or all is history with no future fulfilment.

Ad 70 is a partial fulfilment.

Rev 14 is a partial fulfillment but it has not happened yet. Ad 70 has.

Harvest is a law of heaven.
It is in STAGES as God laid out.

Firstfruits is always first. Hence "firstfruits".

Putting more components on the table ( verses) , is higher ground...not lower.

Like the pretribs in this thread.

We are the hound dogs.

We dig and sling off the labels and false doctrine.

But you never will be wondering what we believe if you follow the posts.

Most others make us guess.

But some flat out decieve and lie,
Claiming dead men guide me and have influenced my view.

BTW ,Not you

When you see the postrib desperation of invoking dead men as CRITICAL, and maligning others with some connection that is a flat out lie, it taints truth


They are agents of something intending to reframe truth.

i think it is a label that people use. I don't think one should take it too seriously.

I think there are people who claim the second coming has occurred and obviously, like you,
my inner hound would be saying "This doesn't pass my sniff test", and like you
I would be growling in disagreement. [Hint: I am not a preterist!]

 

[OldSage]

It is his job. He is doing a job. It is satanic and ruthless.

".....and power was given him to OVERCOME THE SAINTS"

REV 13
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

9 If any man have an ear, let him hear.

10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.

12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.

13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,

14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

SEE THAT?
THE AC KILLS all the saints.

I understand the opposite

REV 13
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

 

[Absolutely]

there is no words of rapture or second coming in The bible.

rapture and great tribulation, only foolish put happy and pain together.

cut rev 14 and mat 25 as well as 1 thes 4 and acts 1 out of your bible

 

[Absolutely]

i think it is a label that people use. I don't think one should take it too seriously.

I think there are people who claim the second coming has occurred and obviously, like you,
my inner hound would be saying "This doesn't pass my sniff test", and like you
I would be growling in disagreement. [Hint: I am not a preterist!]

You endorsed gary.

Pretetist.

It is the theological bracketing and accepeted by historisists as the known label in debates.

They call themselves that

Historicist = preterist.

 

[Absolutely]

I understand the opposite

REV 13
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

It is circular.

Obviously those accepting the mark are no longer in the book of life.

Similarly if one thinks the ac does not kill every man woman and child as the bible says, then, in their minds, they will have to conclude those who are running from cave to cave are indeed in the book of life and AT THE SAME TIME , still on the planet.

I can make it say either, but by adding verses and context ....the view of the church not martyred goes away.

 

[soberxp]

cut rev 14 and mat 25 as well as 1 thes 4 and acts 1 out of your bible

There is no theory of rapture in the Bible, and there is no second coming of Jesus.

only return of Jesus.............

Okay,he has return.

 

[Absolutely]

Firstfruits of main harvest is Jesus and the patriarchs.

Main harvest is the rapture (gentile bride) as well as those martyred by the ac.
That is main harvest.

The Jews gathered in rev 14 are 3rd part of harvest and any stragglers. ( "blessed are they that die in the lord from henceforth")

Harvest is 4 parts.

Law from heaven.

 

[Absolutely]

There is no theory of rapture in the Bible, and there is no second coming of Jesus.

only return of Jesus.............

Okay,he has return.

Show me in rev 14.

 

[FreeGrace2]

If it were to come to a face to face debate, Walvrood would humble any one of us.

No, he wouldn't. He made a very clear claim that he CANNOT PROVE from Scripture.

More properly devastate us.

If that were true, and I would have expected all of the pretribbers to have read his article, why can't ANY OF YOU guys provide any verse that teaches that Jesus takes resurrected and raptured believers to heaven?

More specifically, since he himself equated "gathered up" as a phrase for the rapture, he shot himself in the foot, if not the head.

The 2 verses that speak of being "gathered up" are both in reference to the Second Coming. Boom.

You would not stand a chance in a debate with him.

Depends on the subject matter. If about a pretrib rapture, he wouldn't stand a chance.

By my observation you have lost in every encounter with TDW.[/QUOTE]
Your "observations" are rather near sighted, then. His "embellished" posts are nearly impossible to figure out.

It wasn't even close. Why pray tell? Because of the VASTLY Superior scholarship of TDW.

Why hasn't he, or anyone else for that matter, been able to provide ANY verse that teaches that Jesus takes resurrected and raptured believers to heaven.

He is smoking everybody.....

Yeah, sure. All he's going to do is get lung cancer if he continues.

<<<It seems obvious that most of these things CANNOT be understood or determined UNTIL they occur.>>>

Paul speaks you don't get it. Jesus speaks you don't get it. Case closed.

Rather, mind closed. On your side.

Still looking for that verse that would exonerate your side.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Hi FG,

My feeling right now is that the little horn answers the question of the strong delusion sent by God
which is another reason to see the little horn as the AC.

Oh, I thought you mentioned that the uprooting horn and the AC were different. Did I misunderstand?

 

[FreeGrace2]

1 Thessalonians 4: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
?

The issue is about Walvoord's comment about taking raptured believers to heaven. 1Thess 4 doesn't say anything about Jesus THEN taking them to heaven. But he sure thinks so. In fact, no verse says that.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 is right. There is no mention of heaven there.

Thanks

Or in any other verse that mentions the rapture.

 

[soberxp]

Show me in rev 14.

In my opinion, revelation is only Enlightening thinking.
There is nothing in revelation that fits the present world.
Revelation is only fits spiritual things.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yes but clouds are synonymous with transfiguration.

No, the transfiguration occurs IN OR WITH THE CLOUDS.

Where in Scripture was anyone in the clouds in a human body?

When Jesus "gathers up" the living believers, that won't be an issue. Are you suggesting that Jesus can't gather up believers in their human bodies in the clouds?

The time of the "twinkling of the eye" and our "being changed" per 1 Cor 15:52 isn't given. So it could be just before the believer's feet leave ground. Or it may be when they meet Jesus in the air (clouds).

 

[FreeGrace2]

Putting more components on the table ( verses) , is higher ground...not lower.

Like the pretribs in this thread.

So, where are the verses that teach that Jesus takes resurrected and raptured believers to heaven. Even Walvoord couldn't do that.

We are the hound dogs.

If Walvoord had provided even just 1 verse that teaches that Jesus takes the resurrected/raptured believers to heaven, all you "hound dogs" would have been stuffing it down my throat all this time.

In fact, if there were such a verse, I would have to repent of my current view. But I am not repenting because none of you "hound dogs" have such a verse. As you well know.

We dig and sling off the labels and false doctrine.

Not true.

But you never will be wondering what we believe if you follow the posts.

Oh, it's real clear what you believe. But why can't you provide verses that actually teach what you claim about the rapture?

When you see the postrib desperation of invoking dead men as CRITICAL, and maligning others with some connection that is a flat out lie, it taints truth

I, for one, have not invoked any man. I have provided a very clear verse that shows the rapture (gathering up, which Walvoord admitted refers to the rapture) as occuring when Christ returns at the Second Advent.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I am watching this thread and I can say many posters here have NEVER contributed anything that is actually correct exegesis supported by scripture. Quite literally 100% wrong 100% of the time. No conceptual model of the truth that is based in Biblical reality.

But the truth of the doctrine of the rapture has been set forth in all necessary detail. So our job is done....

OK then, why haven't any of you quoted a verse that actually gives "all necessary details" about Jesus taking the resurrected and raptured believers to heaven?

Making such a bold claim without any evidence isn't very helpful.

I suggest you wait until one of you finds that elusive verse.

 

[FreeGrace2]

In my opinion, revelation is only Enlightening thinking.
There is nothing in revelation that fits the present world.
Revelation is only fits spiritual things.

This is called "spiritualizing". People do that to be able to make up whatever they want to believe.

Revelation was given to the churches (ch 1-3). And it ends with 22:16 - “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

John wasn't spiritualizing anything. He was giving future history and the end of human history. When Jesus sets up His millennial kingdom, He will be literally ruling on this earth.

 

[soberxp]

This is called "spiritualizing". People do that to be able to make up whatever they want to believe.

Revelation was given to the churches (ch 1-3). And it ends with 22:16 - “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

John wasn't spiritualizing anything. He was giving future history and the end of human history. When Jesus sets up His millennial kingdom, He will be literally ruling on this earth.

There is no need to ruling on this earth.
we are not belong to this world.
we are belong to kingdom of God.
Rev is not prophesy at all, more like parable for us.
The revelation ends by saying I will come soon.
So can anyone explain clearly whether revelation recorded before or after Jesus' return.
Who can explain what Jesus taught?
What Jesus taught does not fit the description of revelation，
What revelation expresses is not in accordance with revelation itself,
You can't intimidate people into believing in God, but that's what revelation says.
What Jesus taught love your enemy does not fit the description of revelation，
But that's what revelation says,It's about intimidating people into believing in God.
They don't believe in such a God in rev.
do you still never get The point?
Only through love could leading people believe in God,that is what Jesus teachs us.

 

[FreeGrace2]

There is no need to ruling on this earth.

You can tell Jesus that after He sets up His kingdom.

we are not belong to this world.

And the faithful believers will "co-reign" with Him (2 Tim 2:12) and "share in His glory" (Rom 8:17b).

we are belong to kingdom of God.

Yes we do. And what I've said above is biblically true.

Rev is not prophesy at all, more like parable for us.

That is totally incorrect. But then, by spiritualizing, one can say pretty much whatever they want.

The revelation ends by saying I will come soon.

And since a day + 1,000 years and 1,000 years + a day, with the Lord, several thousand years is only a few days.

So can anyone explain clearly whether revelation recorded before or after Jesus' return.

Seriously? John wrote Revelation sometime between 85-96 AD. Do you think Jesus had already returned the second time by then?

[QUOT]What Jesus taught love your enemy does not fit the description of revelatioN[/QUOTE]
So, YOUR definition of things somehow refutes what John wrote? Seriously?

Revealation is about God''s wrath. Or does your definition of "love your enemy" lead you to be a universalist, whereby all of humanity will go to heaven?

The Bible speaks of the lake of fire and second death (they are the same). Have you rejected the teaching about them?

Rev 20:15 is clear: those whose names are NOT in the book of life (they never received the free gift of eternal life) will be cast into the lake of fire.

But that's what revelation says,It's about intimidating people into believing in God.

Was that how you believed in God?

They don't believe in such a God in rev.
do you still never get The point?

It seems you're the one who isn't getting the point. Your questions are quite shocking for a Christian to be asking.

Only through love could leading people believe in God,that is what Jesus teachs us.

Are you not aware that even angels, pluss 144,000 Jews will be evangelizing on earth during the literal tribulation? See Rev 14:6,7

One of Satan's chief deceptions is that since God is a God of love, He WON'T throw anyone into the lake of fire.

Which is exactly where he will be heading, because of his rebellion.

 

[OldSage]

Oh, I thought you mentioned that the uprooting horn and the AC were different. Did I misunderstand?

I see the uprooting horn as the AC -
but what do you think, you probably know a lot more than me?