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

[OldSage]

I don't really "gainsay" the scholar's point regarding the "grammar," but only the "definition" he is assuming re: what v.2 tells us is the content of the false claim... it's not that the false claim consists of it being said "that THE SECOND COMING is already here / is already present [perfect indicative]"; rather, that the false claim, according to what Paul in v.2 informs of its content, is "that THE DAY OF THE LORD is already here / is already present [perfect indicative]"...

...so I think I can say I AGREE (and that's exactly what I'VE been SAYING) about the "grammar" issue he's pointing out (if I'm understanding him correctly, and I think I am)...

...however, it's not the "grammar" issue I see a problem with in his words ^ , it's the "definition" of the phrase (v.2) in what the false claim consists of ("that THE DAY OF THE LORD is already here / is already present [perfect indicative]"--not "THE SECOND COMING" that he assumes the phrase refers to--but I find that all kinds of ppl inject that "idea" into that phrase... but I've already explained in past posts why I believe "the DOTL" commences PRIOR TO the point in time of His "RETURN" to the earth at Rev19, commencing rather at the START of the 7-Trib yrs [aka the "IN THE NIGHT" aspect 1Th5:2-3 (also involving the "NIGHT WATCHES"), which PRECEDES the point in time of His Second Coming to the earth, as I've mentioned and explained elsewhere...). "Day," esp in time-prophecies regarding Israel, always start at DARK / SUNDOWN and run through DAYLIGHT of the following portion... This is how I see this long spans of time also (Trib AND MK age)

So you see the Day of the Lord and the Coming of Jesus as two separate things.
That the Day of the Lord can be in play, but the Lord has not returned, correct?

This is just not a very tenable position. It runs completely counter to the internal logic of what Paul says,
and there is no scriptural basis for this idea. Indeed the contrary.

1 Thessalonians 5:2
for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.

So it's really hard for me to see what clarity you are imparting here.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

So you see the Day of the Lord and the Coming of Jesus as two separate things.
That the Day of the Lord can be in play, but the Lord has not returned, correct?

This is just not a very tenable position. It runs completely counter to the internal logic of what Paul says,
and there is no scriptural basis for this idea. Indeed the contrary.

The day of the Lord [earthly-time-period] ARRIVES to unfold upon the earth prior to the point in time that Jesus Himself returns to the earth; so it involves (all told) "a period-of-time [not merely 24-hrs] of JUDGMENTs, as well as a period-of-time [also not merely 24-hrs] of BLESSINGs"...

--its ARRIVAL is LIKE... the INITIAL "birth PANG [singular; 1Th5:2-3 ; Matt24:4/Mk13:5 "G5100 - tis - 'A CERTAIN ONE' ['a certain one' bringing deception]']"... the initial "birth pang" that COMES UPON a woman... which Jesus referred to in His Olivet Discourse also;

--and LIKE a thief "IN THE NIGHT"... that is, the TIME-PERIOD arrives "as a thief IN THE NIGHT"...

...but wherever the text uses this ^ phrase re: JESUS HIMSELF, it states, "Behold, *I* come LIKE A THIEF.[period.]" (NO "IN THE NIGHT" words accompany this phrase when speaking of JESUS HIMSELF / JESUS' OWN PERSONAL return / coming to the earth at Rev19. Ex. Rev16:15-16 - Armageddon timing).


I've listed about 3 verses/passages in the past showing how this phrase "IN THE NIGHT" (which is a fairly rare phrase, in OT passages) connects with what I've said about the 7-yr trib above (and its connections--eg. the man of sin, etc...) and in previous posts; as well as the "NIGHT WATCHES" [/'LAMPS LIT'] issue, which I've made posts on in the past too... (related)... Those things are showing the time period LEADING UP TO His "return" to the earth at Rev19 (aka the 7-yr Trib that precedes His RETURN to the earth).

As I've mentioned before, I do see a "CHANGE" in scenery (so to speak) takes place, when Jesus will "STAND to JUDGE" Isa3:13, Rev5:6, [2Th2:7b-8a [and 2Th1:7-8] paralleling the wording of Lam2:3-4]... and that Rev1:1 [/4:1 / 1:19c] is saying that those "future aspects" of the Book are "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" aka those 7-Trib years leading UP TO Christ's "RETURN" to the earth at Rev19--IOW, He at that point (in Rev5:6) is commencing the [earthly-located] time-period (the DOTL) from His location up IN HEAVEN by means of His action of opening the FIRST SEAL [parallel BoBPs] (I pointed out how in 4:3 the description of the "he that sat" in that verse, is identical to the "first" and "last" gemstones on the "breastpiece of judgment" in Ex28), and it is only at the end of those judgments (7-yrs-worth) that He comes down in a final full-sweeping concluding judgment (and "separation" like in Matt25:31-34), and then the "blessings" aspect will thereafter commence (also not being merely "a singular 24-hr day"), aka the MK age / "the age [singular] to come"]

1 Thessalonians 5:2
for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.

So it's really hard for me to see what clarity you are imparting here.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

^ the trib period of judgments unfolding won't be present (like the 'false claim' of v.2 purports IS), if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE *FIRST* (Paul's v.1 Subject)...


[let's just cover that first part of the verse 3 first... since ppl are struggling over it thus far...]

 

[OldSage]

The day of the Lord [earthly-time-period] ARRIVES to unfold upon the earth prior to the point in time that Jesus Himself returns to the earth; so it involves (all told) "a period-of-time [not merely 24-hrs] of JUDGMENTs, as well as a period-of-time [also not merely 24-hrs] of BLESSINGs"...

--its ARRIVAL is LIKE... the INITIAL "birth PANG [singular; 1Th5:2-3 ; Matt24:4/Mk13:5 "G5100 - tis - 'A CERTAIN ONE' ['a certain one' bringing deception]']"... the initial "birth pang" that COMES UPON a woman... which Jesus referred to in His Olivet Discourse also;

--and LIKE a thief "IN THE NIGHT"... that is, the TIME-PERIOD arrives "as a thief IN THE NIGHT"...

...but wherever the text uses this ^ phrase re: JESUS HIMSELF, it states, "Behold, *I* come LIKE A THIEF.[period.]" (NO "IN THE NIGHT" words accompany this phrase when speaking of JESUS HIMSELF / JESUS' OWN PERSONAL return / coming to the earth at Rev19. Ex. Rev16:15-16 - Armageddon timing).


I've listed about 3 verses/passages in the past showing how this phrase "IN THE NIGHT" (which is a fairly rare phrase, in OT passages) connects with what I've said about the 7-yr trib above (and its connections--eg. the man of sin, etc...) and in previous posts; as well as the "NIGHT WATCHES" [/'LAMPS LIT'] issue, which I've made posts on in the past too... (related)... Those things are showing the time period LEADING UP TO His "return" to the earth at Rev19 (aka the 7-yr Trib that precedes His RETURN to the earth).

As I've mentioned before, I do see a "CHANGE" in scenery (so to speak) takes place, when Jesus will "STAND to JUDGE" Isa3:13, Rev5:6, [2Th2:7b-8a [and 2Th1:7-8] paralleling the wording of Lam2:3-4]... and that Rev1:1 [/4:1 / 1:19c] is saying that those "future aspects" of the Book are "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" aka those 7-Trib years leading UP TO Christ's "RETURN" to the earth at Rev19--IOW, He at that point (in Rev5:6) is commencing the [earthly-located] time-period (the DOTL) from His location up IN HEAVEN by means of His action of opening the FIRST SEAL [parallel BoBPs] (I pointed out how in 4:3 the description of the "he that sat" in that verse, is identical to the "first" and "last" gemstones on the "breastpiece of judgment" in Ex28), and it is only at the end of those judgments (7-yrs-worth) that He comes down in a final full-sweeping concluding judgment (and "separation" like in Matt25:31-34), and then the "blessings" aspect will thereafter commence (also not being merely "a singular 24-hr day"), aka the MK age / "the age [singular] to come"]

You mean Matthew 24/Mark 13 verse 8?
All referring the the birth pangs that preceded the destruction of Judea/the temple.
Are you saying that this event is the Day of the Lord?
Sorry, but this needs serious scriptural backing, which does not exist.

I really cannot clue into what you are trying to say.

Jesus and Paul are unequivocal.
A thief does not have an appointment does he?
It's not like a thief sends you a text -
"Oh by the way, I'll be breaking in at 3AM Wednesday night".
Likewise the Day of The Lord, the Return of Jesus, comes at an unappointed hour,
an hour so unclear that Jesus does not know it.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

You mean Matthew 24/Mark 13 verse 8?
All referring the the birth pangs that preceded the destruction of Judea/the temple.

Let me start with just this much ^ (coz I gotta get some sleep now)...

No... by my phrase: the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3--the DOTL's *ARRIVAL* point]," I meant what I'd put: Matt24:4/Mk13:5 "tis - A CERTAIN ONE [G5100]". (...that is the FIRST ONE, equivalent the FIRST SEAL in the "IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" time-period that IS the "FUTURE" 7-yr trib years leading UP TO His RETURN to the earth Rev19)



And Luke 21:12 informs us (not as you have it ^ ), that "BEFORE ALL THESE" (BEFORE ALL THESE "BEGINNING of birth pangs" that vv.8-11 had just DESCRIBED, which are identically parallel/equivalent with Matt24:4-8 and Mk13:5-8), that the events getting ready to be spelled out in the verses which come next in the text (namely vv.12-24a re: the 70ad events) take place SEQUENTIALLY "BEFORE ALL THESE [BEFORE ALL these BoBPs--BEFORE ALL of those vv8-11 things / Matt24:4-8 things / Mk13:5-8 things--BEFORE ALL OF THESE, the 70ad events of vv.12-24a must occur PRIOR to them!!)]"--Just the OPPOSITE of the SEQUENCE you are suggesting...

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
Are you actually denying that Jesus ate fish with His 11 disciples after His resurrection? Since the Bible is SILENT on the subject of the metabolism of a resurrection body, I suggest that you do as well.

But then, you keep claiming that Jesus takes resurrected and raptured saints to heaven when the Bible is just as SILENT about that.

I don't take suggestions or orders from you. Now or ever. So don't even bother trying.

Yep. That's it. Just deflect. You made an unsubstantiated claim about blood and metabolism, and then dismissed the FACT that Jesus ate fish with His disciples. That action proves that Jesus' resurrection body DOES metabolize food.

Regarding my suggestion, of course you will do as you want. That's obvious.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I see your point FG

Very good. Thank you.

You are very welcome!

 

[FreeGrace2]

Of course - how else do you understand redemption?

Not sure what you by "how else". I understand "redemption" to be a purchasing. In light of the cross, Jesus' payment for our sin debt purchased the free gift of eternal life that He gives to everyone who believes in Him for salvation.

Am I missing something?

 

[soberxp]

Stop this meaningless argument and learn some true wisdom. It never benefits to work hard on food.
I'm afraid some people will throw the Bible into the trash if it doesn't conform to his mind.Wrong faith will only destroy your faith.

peace

 

[OldSage]

Let me start with just this much ^ (coz I gotta get some sleep now)...

No... by my phrase: the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3--the DOTL's *ARRIVAL* point]," I meant what I'd put: Matt24:4/Mk13:5 "tis - A CERTAIN ONE [G5100]". (...that is the FIRST ONE, equivalent the FIRST SEAL in the "IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" time-period that IS the "FUTURE" 7-yr trib years leading UP TO His RETURN to the earth Rev19)



And Luke 21:12 informs us (not as you have it ^ ), that "BEFORE ALL THESE" (BEFORE ALL THESE "BEGINNING of birth pangs" that vv.8-11 had just DESCRIBED, which are identically parallel/equivalent with Matt24:4-8 and Mk13:5-8), that the events getting ready to be spelled out in the verses which come next in the text (namely vv.12-24a re: the 70ad events) take place SEQUENTIALLY "BEFORE ALL THESE [BEFORE ALL these BoBPs--BEFORE ALL of those vv8-11 things / Matt24:4-8 things / Mk13:5-8 things--BEFORE ALL OF THESE, the 70ad events of vv.12-24a must occur PRIOR to them!!)]"--Just the OPPOSITE of the SEQUENCE you are suggesting...

Okay - so 'the Birth Pang' and 'the birth pangs' are two completely different things.
The birth pangs are the series of events enumerated by Jesus which led to the destruction of Judea.

The Birth Pang (travail) is a one-off violent spasm which harmonizes with the idea of Jesus returning in the blink of an eye.

Tying in Olivet with the first seal and a spurious future tribulation is a whole other argument and you can argue that elsewhere.
I don't believe that at all, and there is no point us wasting ink. The Olivet is predominantly about 1st century events.
If that is not obvious to you then we disagree.

The circumstances and questions posed in Luke and Matthew are different.
You have to decide if this is one event from multiple viewpoints or different events.

The persecution described by Luke is the persecution of the Church described in Acts
after the stoning of Stephen. Do you accept this or are you just forever ploughing a strange furrough?

 

[OldSage]

FreeGrace2 said:
There is nothing about action taking place ON EARTH. It all occurs IN THE AIR and IN THE CLOUDS. 1 Thess 4:17 says so.

I proved the opposite by comparing 2 passages; 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15. You didn't address them. Looks like you are ignoring them.

Some people just won't be convinced by facts.


Do you really think they were raptured into imperishable bodies? Why?

I mean here regarding an imperishable body. i understand redemption to mean Jesus buying us back our original plot - our eternal bodies

18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

 

[cv5]

FreeGrace2 said:
Are you actually denying that Jesus ate fish with His 11 disciples after His resurrection? Since the Bible is SILENT on the subject of the metabolism of a resurrection body, I suggest that you do as well.

But then, you keep claiming that Jesus takes resurrected and raptured saints to heaven when the Bible is just as SILENT about that.

Yep. That's it. Just deflect. You made an unsubstantiated claim about blood and metabolism, and then dismissed the FACT that Jesus ate fish with His disciples. That action proves that Jesus' resurrection body DOES metabolize food.

Regarding my suggestion, of course you will do as you want. That's obvious.

I never discussed anything whatsoever about blood. I asked what metabolic processes did Jesus use to pass through walls. Now I'm asking what bathroom did Jesus use the one in heaven or the one on earth?

My questions are of course absurd because your position is absurd and apallingly ignorant.

 

[cv5]

Let me start with just this much ^ (coz I gotta get some sleep now)...

No... by my phrase: the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3--the DOTL's *ARRIVAL* point]," I meant what I'd put: Matt24:4/Mk13:5 "tis - A CERTAIN ONE [G5100]". (...that is the FIRST ONE, equivalent the FIRST SEAL in the "IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" time-period that IS the "FUTURE" 7-yr trib years leading UP TO His RETURN to the earth Rev19)



And Luke 21:12 informs us (not as you have it ^ ), that "BEFORE ALL THESE" (BEFORE ALL THESE "BEGINNING of birth pangs" that vv.8-11 had just DESCRIBED, which are identically parallel/equivalent with Matt24:4-8 and Mk13:5-8), that the events getting ready to be spelled out in the verses which come next in the text (namely vv.12-24a re: the 70ad events) take place SEQUENTIALLY "BEFORE ALL THESE [BEFORE ALL these BoBPs--BEFORE ALL of those vv8-11 things / Matt24:4-8 things / Mk13:5-8 things--BEFORE ALL OF THESE, the 70ad events of vv.12-24a must occur PRIOR to them!!)]"--Just the OPPOSITE of the SEQUENCE you are suggesting...

Absolutely correct. Misapprehension of Luke 21 is the cause of massive eschatological error. It actually gives birth to brazen heresies in my opinion.

 

[OldSage]

Absolutely correct. Misapprehension of Luke 21 is the cause of massive eschatological error. It actually gives birth to brazen heresies in my opinion.

Such as?

 

[cv5]

Such as?

Such as those being supported on this thread.

 

[OldSage]

Such as those being supported on this thread.

Lol...so hard to take you seriously

 

[TMS]

Mat 25: 31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

The order that Jesus tells us is that the reward is given when He comes in Glory.

Not 10 years before or 1000 years after.

 

[cv5]

Lol...so hard to take you seriously

That's your problem not mine. You should earnestly desire to know what I know. The contrary is not true. Just to let you know.

 

[Runningman]

Such as?

Dispensationalists are in a world of their own. Big thing is that they read the Bible entirely different which, in my opinion, makes them difficult to reach. That's how they're able to forego the plain text reading of scripture to make it mean something else entirely than what is plainly said.

The issue is they end up thinking the Bible says something it doesn't actually say, but after extensive processing and digestion of scripture they produce doctrines unrecognizable as sound, coherent, theology. It isn't just the pre-trib rapture, there are many many many other incorrect precedents and thought processes they utilize to distort plain truths in scripture.

(I think I've met one dispensationalist who is a post-tribber, but as far as I can tell it's rare)

 

[cv5]

Dispensationalists are in a world of their own. Big thing is that they read the Bible entirely different which, in my opinion, makes them difficult to reach. That's how they're able to forego the plain text reading of scripture to make it mean something else entirely than what is plainly said.

The issue is they end up thinking the Bible says something it doesn't actually say, but after extensive processing and digestion of scripture they produce doctrines unrecognizable as sound, coherent, theology. It isn't just the pre-trib rapture, there are many many many other incorrect precedents and thought processes they utilize to distort plain truths in scripture.

(I think I've met one dispensationalist who is a post-tribber, but as far as I can tell it's rare)

The Bible says what it says. I know what it says. I am neither a dispensationalism nor a covenantalist nor a Calvinist nor an Armenian. The categories that you espouse to exist are meaningless and irrelevant to me.

However there are definitely heresies out there. In general most of them kick Israel to the curb. You take Israel out of the eschatological equation and guaranteed you will be promoting a heresy.