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

  • 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.
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
Not even close. Paul's point is clear. v.1 cannot happen until the rebellion occurs and the man doomed to destruction is revealed.

Doesn't matter what you disagree with. The language and wording is very clear. v.1 cannot happen until v.3 occurs.
Why do you go about making false statements regarding this issue? There is nothing in the context that says that v.1 cannot happen until v.3. There is no support!
You'd have to read v3 to understand that is exactly what Paul was saying.

The reason Paul starts off with "Concerning the appearing of our Lord and our being gathered to Him" is because there were some in Thessalonica who were teaching that "The Day of the Lord" had already come. So, the Thessalonians were basically concerned that if the Day of the Lord had already come, it would mean that they missed the appearing of the Lord and our being gathered to Him, because that event takes place first. They were basically saying, "Hey Paul, there are some who are teaching that the time of God's wrath is here. How we weren't caught up in the air to meet the Lord as you taught us.

Verse 1 takes place prior to the Day of the Lord[/QUOTE]
Do you agree that the "coming of our Lord" means the Second Advent? If not, prove that it means something else.

btw, from v.2, the DotL BEGINS at the Second Advent. It does NOT include the Trib, because Jesus isn't even on earth.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
It's everywhere FG. Choose a book and we'll find it
1 and 2 Thess. Find any warning about the coming destruction of Jerusalem.

Actually, since you're so sure of yourself about finding such warnings in any of Paul's epistles, go ahead and pick one out yourself and prove me wrong.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
You can stop right there!

The information regarding the living believers being transformed and caught up was something that was previously unknown.
Now you can stop right there. If being raptured and taken to heaven "was previously unknown", then exactly when was it known?

I mean, point to the verse that makes it known.

In 1 Corinthians 15:51-53, Paul says "Behold, I show you a Mystery." The word means some that was previously unknow because it was covered and is now being revealed.
OK, in these 3 verses, point to which verse mentions being raptured/changed/etc and taken to heaven.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
Every Church that I have attended Teaches a Pre-Trib Rapture, and I have attended a lot of them because we moved a lot since the early 80's.
So, what's the plan? Just taking a vote to what is the truth?
 
Oct 23, 2020
971
164
43
1 and 2 Thess. Find any warning about the coming destruction of Jerusalem.

Actually, since you're so sure of yourself about finding such warnings in any of Paul's epistles, go ahead and pick one out yourself and prove me wrong.
Ok I took Ephesians fairly randomly

Ephesians 5:6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

The children of disobedience are the Israelites, the wrath is the destruction of Israel (Judea and Jerusalem)
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,947
1,691
113
If v.2 isn't referring back to v.1, then you HAVE TO ADMIT that Paul changed gears, which you have already denied.

You can't have it both ways.
Unless she believes the subject in each verse does change, it would appear that DTW reads these verses, in my summary, as 'concerning the rapture...don't believe it has occurred...because it must first occur for it to occur... :unsure:
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
1 and 2 Thess. Find any warning about the coming destruction of Jerusalem.

Actually, since you're so sure of yourself about finding such warnings in any of Paul's epistles, go ahead and pick one out yourself and prove me wrong.
Ok I took Ephesians fairly randomly

Ephesians 5:6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

The children of disobedience are the Israelites, the wrath is the destruction of Israel (Judea and Jerusalem)
Nice fantasy going. Prove your claims. You are only putting your own spin on what Paul wrote.

What he said is true generally throughout the ages. Don't kid yourself. it's true in every generation.

What you didn't do is quote any verse with a clear warning regarding Jerusalem.

What else ya got?
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
If v.2 isn't referring back to v.1, then you HAVE TO ADMIT that Paul changed gears, which you have already denied.

You can't have it both ways.
Unless she believes the subject in each verse does change, it would appear that DTW reads these verses, in my summary, as 'concerning the rapture...don't believe it has occurred...because it must first occur for it to occur... :unsure:
DWM already claimed that Paul wasn't "changing gears" in v.2. If she believes as you indicate, then she has to admit that Paul DID change gears.

But that isn't reasonable, since he began v.1 with "concerning...". That was his concern: the coming of the Lord and our being gathered to Him. If that isn't the Second Advent and rapture, one IS FORCED to have Paul completely changing gears and going off on a tangent. Which he wasn't.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,214
1,980
113
Ok.
v1 concerning the true claim (which is not yet) v2 asking do not believe any claim that it has already
NO. Not what I'm pointing out.

You are EQUATING (as is FrGr2) the Subject of v.1, with the Subject of the contents of the "false claim" in v.2.



The "false claim's content" (v.2) is NOT the SAME Subject Paul is bringing in v.1.


So your word "it" (which I've emphasized in your quote) is NOT pointing back to Paul's Subject (he's bringing to bear) in v.1, as you are having it do.


Paul is saying, instead, "[v1] concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our episynagoges unto Him [i.e. our Rapture in the air event... which I, Paul, am bringing to your mind]"

"[v2] ...don't let anyone convince you that the day of the Lord [TRIB JUDGMENTS UNFOLDING on the earth] IS ALREADY HERE / IS ALREADY PRESENT"

(Paul did not mention that earthly tribulation-period of judgments unfolding in v.1... but... the content of the "false claim" he's talking about in v.2 IS TALKING ABOUT THAT [anyone falsely claiming that IT--the JUDGMENTS UNFOLDING--IS ALREADY PRESENT], and Paul is cautioning them NOT to believe anyone trying to convince them that that TIME-PERIOD OF JUDGMENTS is already present and unfolding upon the earth in their experience...).

"[v.3a] NOT [is]..."


v.3 because 2 conditions, the rebellion and revelation of the antichrist, have yet to be met but you add the rapture as a third condition, correct?

"[v3b] because, if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE *FIRST*..." (i.e. v1's Subject--"our Rapture IN THE AIR"--that PAUL IS BRINGING to bear on the Subject of the "false claim" [of v2] that he doesn't want the Thessalonians to be wrongly persuaded IS ALREADY HERE / IS ALREADY PRESENT")


[v3c]... the other thing required to be "in evidence" in order for such a claim to be true (i.e. in order for it to be TRUE "that the day of the Lord IS ALREADY HERE / IS ALREADY PRESENT"--because the TRIB YRS OF JUDGMENT unfolding are inextricably linked with ALL that the man of sin is slated to DO over the course of those SEVEN YEARS, the "IN THE NIGHT" ASPECT OF "the day of the Lord" earthly-located time-period).



So, no... there's TWO conditions [v3b/c] that must be "in play / in evidence" in order for such a claim to be true:

--"[v3b] THE DEPARTURE *FIRST* (ONE THING *FIRST* i.e. "our Rapture IN THE AIR" event, aka "our episynagoges UNTO HIM" v.1's Subject);

--"[v3c] AND the man of sin BE REVEALED" (he's "revealed" at the START of the SEVEN YEARS [2:9a / 8a], NOT at its MIDDLE [2:4], NOR at its END [2:8b])





Hope this helps you see my perspective (as I have explained it throughout this thread). = )



Some people will continue to EQUATE Paul's v.1 Subject, with the "false claim's content/Subject" he's telling of in v.2, no matter how many times one points out that they are DISTINGUISHED / ENTIRELY DISTINCT "Subjects"... but how Paul is telling how the ONE Subject fits IN RELATION TO the OTHER Subject (time-wise / sequence-wise--ONE THING *FIRST*!!! before the other can be present to unfold upon the earth... ;) )
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,214
1,980
113
Unless she believes the subject in each verse does change, it would appear that DTW reads these verses, in my summary, as 'concerning the rapture...don't believe it has occurred
NO.

Not what I've explained. = )


That is NOT what the "false claim's content" (v.2), Paul is telling about, consists of. ;)


(see my post above this one, for explanation)
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,947
1,691
113
NO. Not what I'm pointing out.

You are EQUATING (as is FrGr2) the Subject of v.1, with the Subject of the contents of the "false claim" in v.2.



The "false claim's content" (v.2) is NOT the SAME Subject Paul is bringing in v.1.


So your word "it" (which I've emphasized in your quote) is NOT pointing back to Paul's Subject (he's bringing to bear) in v.1, as you are having it do.


Paul is saying, instead, "[v1] concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our episynagoges unto Him [i.e. our Rapture in the air event... which I, Paul, am bringing to your mind]"

"[v2] ...don't let anyone convince you that the day of the Lord [TRIB JUDGMENTS UNFOLDING on the earth] IS ALREADY HERE / IS ALREADY PRESENT"

(Paul did not mention that earthly tribulation-period of judgments unfolding in v.1... but... the content of the "false claim" he's talking about in v.2 IS TALKING ABOUT THAT [anyone falsely claiming that IT--the JUDGMENTS UNFOLDING--IS ALREADY PRESENT], and Paul is cautioning them NOT to believe anyone trying to convince them that that TIME-PERIOD OF JUDGMENTS is already present and unfolding upon the earth in their experience...).

"[v.3a] NOT [is]..."





"[v3b] because, if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE *FIRST*..." (i.e. v1's Subject--"our Rapture IN THE AIR"--that PAUL IS BRINGING to bear on the Subject of the "false claim" [of v2] that he doesn't want the Thessalonians to be wrongly persuaded IS ALREADY HERE / IS ALREADY PRESENT")


[v3c]... the other thing required to be "in evidence" in order for such a claim to be true (i.e. in order for it to be TRUE "that the day of the Lord IS ALREADY HERE / IS ALREADY PRESENT"--because the TRIB YRS OF JUDGMENT unfolding are inextricably linked with ALL that the man of sin is slated to DO over the course of those SEVEN YEARS, the "IN THE NIGHT" ASPECT OF "the day of the Lord" earthly-located time-period).



So, no... there's TWO conditions [v3b/c] that must be "in play / in evidence" in order for such a claim to be true:

--"[v3b] THE DEPARTURE *FIRST* (ONE THING *FIRST* i.e. "our Rapture IN THE AIR" event, aka "our episynagoges UNTO HIM" v.1's Subject);

--"[v3c] AND the man of sin BE REVEALED" (he's "revealed" at the START of the SEVEN YEARS [2:9a / 8a], NOT at its MIDDLE [2:4], NOR at its END [2:8b])





Hope this helps you see my perspective (as I have explained it throughout this thread). = )



Some people will continue to EQUATE Paul's v.1 Subject, with the "false claim's content/Subject" he's telling of in v.2, no matter how many times one points out that they are DISTINGUISHED / ENTIRELY DISTINCT "Subjects"... but how Paul is telling how the ONE Subject fits IN RELATION TO the OTHER Subject (time-wise / sequence-wise--ONE THING *FIRST*!!! before the other can be present to unfold upon the earth... ;) )
Ok, YEs, ty:^ I think I've got it now. You read vv. 1-3 as Paul saying, "touching on the rapture (my idea of it), don't listen to anyone claiming that we said the DOTL has come, because the DOTL (your idea of it) will not come until the rapture (which is not the DOTL) has happened and the man of sin is revealed.
:)
NO.

Not what I've explained. = )


That is NOT what the "false claim's content" (v.2), Paul is telling about, consists of. ;)


(see my post above this one, for explanation)
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,947
1,691
113
FreeGrace2 said:
If v.2 isn't referring back to v.1, then you HAVE TO ADMIT that Paul changed gears, which you have already denied.

You can't have it both ways.

DWM already claimed that Paul wasn't "changing gears" in v.2. If she believes as you indicate, then she has to admit that Paul DID change gears.

But that isn't reasonable, since he began v.1 with "concerning...". That was his concern: the coming of the Lord and our being gathered to Him. If that isn't the Second Advent and rapture, one IS FORCED to have Paul completely changing gears and going off on a tangent. Which he wasn't.
I read that, in v.2, Paul is referring back to the subject of v.1 by employing the name of the day of which description of is offered in v.1.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,214
1,980
113
The problem: he isn't tracking himself I'm afraid.....
Well, there are a lot of threads going on in this BDF section, I'm sure it's not easy keeping it all straight as to who said what and when, and what point someone has already made and what their reasonings were for saying it...

One thing I'd like to see though, is... when I state my viewpoint, that someone [with differing view] "play back" what I've said, using their own words; but what I see happening is, when they "play back" my viewpoint, it's not actually "my viewpoint" they're playing back to me... as though they cannot even "step into the shoes" of the other's viewpoint without injecting their own thoughts / idea into it (that wasn't being expressed by the other person). :D
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,214
1,980
113
Ok, YEs, ty:^ I think I've got it now. You read vv. 1-3 as Paul saying, "touching on the rapture (my idea of it), don't listen to anyone claiming that we said the DOTL has come, because the DOTL (your idea of it) will not come until the rapture (which is not the DOTL) has happened and the man of sin is revealed.
:)
Yeah, but be sure to get that very important word "FIRST" in there in the right place (I do not see it at all ^ in your "explanation" of my viewpoint of what the text itself is saying)

AND... recall, the Thessalonians (Paul said in his first letter) ALREADY "KNOW PERFECTLY" the manner of its ARRIVAL... (like... the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" that COMES UPON a woman... and Jesus spoke of those as being what PRECEDE and LEAD UP TO His 2nd Coming / RETURN to the earth... not what commence AT His Return, see ;) --so it is not *my* idea of what "the day of the Lord" entails, but what SCRIPTURE ITSELF says it entails, and in more than merely one passage... [and I realize you're likely referring to the "false conveyors' idea of it (??)])
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
5,947
1,691
113
Yeah, but be sure to get that very important word "FIRST" in there in the right place (I do not see it at all ^ in your "explanation" of my viewpoint of what the text itself is saying)

AND... recall, the Thessalonians (Paul said in his first letter) ALREADY "KNOW PERFECTLY" the manner of its ARRIVAL... (like... the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" that COMES UPON a woman... and Jesus spoke of those as being what PRECEDE and LEAD UP TO His 2nd Coming / RETURN to the earth... not what commence AT His Return, see ;) --so it is not *my* idea of what "the day of the Lord" entails, but what SCRIPTURE ITSELF says it entails, and in more than merely one passage... [and I realize you're likely referring to the "false conveyors' idea of it (??)])
Ok, I can clearly see where the confusion comes in now, it comes in the form of a statement of opinion as if it were fact, underpinned with the suggestion that I don't see it as the author did. hmm
 

randyk

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2021
902
268
63
Pacific NW USA
What do you think the books are? The Book Of Life and the Book of Death maybe?

Deuteronomy 30
19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:
I never made that association before. Very interesting, but I'd have to think about it. My initial thought would be that its like balancing books by an accountant. Everybody gets paid their due. :)
 

randyk

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2021
902
268
63
Pacific NW USA
You can stop right there!

The information regarding the living believers being transformed and caught up was something that was previously unknown. In 1 Corinthians 15:51-53, Paul says "Behold, I show you a Mystery." The word means some that was previously unknow because it was covered and is now being revealed.



OH, and do you know the day that the Father has selected, randyk? No, you don't! Therefore, the day when He appears is imminent for all believers because we don't know the day that the Father has specified. I wish that you people would stop trying to support your beliefs with these with these ridiculous ideas that you come up with. Because neither you nor I know the time that the Father has selected for the Lord to appear and gather His church, then for both you and I and everyone else "Imminent" means the same exact thing, i.e. the Lord could come at any time.



Wrong again! Imminency means that the event is Looming, on the horizon, about to take place, in the workings, impending, approaching, brewing, in the cards, etc., etc. Jesus gave us an example of His imminent appearing in the following scripture:

"Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day on which your Lord will come. But understand this: If the homeowner had known in which watch of the night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. For this reason, you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour you do not expect."

Believers Christ, like the good man of the house who doesn't know at what time the thief will come to break in, continue to watch and to be ready because we don't know at what time the Lord is going to appear to gather His church.



First of all, the 144,000 are from 12,000 from each of the twelve tribes of Israel. They are not the church. And second, there is no judgment mentioned regarding the 144,000. The church will not, I repeat, will not be on the earth during the tribulation period.



You have no idea what you are talking about. You treat God's coming wrath as though casual, of none effect. Yet, Jesus said that it would be a time of great tribulation unequaled from the beginning, till now and never to be equaled again. And that if that time of God's wrath was allowed to go on any longer than the prophesied time, no one would be left alive on the earth.

However, the fact is that believers within the church have been, like Abraham, credited with the righteousness and have been reconciled to God. Jesus took upon himself the wrath that all believers deserve, satisfying it completely. This stems from not understanding the severity and magnitude of God's coming wrath. However, you and others continue to claim that the church is destined for the same punishment. You plainly do not have enough study regarding these matters and should not be making these claims.



Wrong! You're trying to make the trials and persecutions that Jesus said believers would have because of our faith in Him, the same as God's coming unprecedented wrath, which they are not. Those within the church who are watching and are continuing in faith, are indeed exempt from God's coming wrath. For those who believe in Christ, their sins have been forgiven and covered over. As the scriptures states, we are not appointed to suffer God's wrath. The wrath of God will be for the specific purpose of the fulfillment of the last seven years that was decreed upon Israel and Jerusalem and for the punishment of a Christ rejecting world.



Everyone on the planet earth at that time will be exposed to God's wrath and there will be no ark's to get on and no small city to run to.

This coming wrath which will commence once the church has been removed from the earth, will be God's direct wrath against a Christ rejecting world. Believers are not appointed to suffer that coming wrath, because Jesus already did.

The next event to take place is the gathering of the church, which will be followed by God's wrath via the seals, trumpets and bowl judgments, as well as the plagues that the two witnesses bring. Sudden destruction will come upon the wicked, but those in Christ are not in darkness so that this day should take us by surprise like a thief. We will be gathered from off the earth just as the Lord promised.
If you're happy with your view, and intolerant of other views, there's no sense trying to discuss it, right? If you'd like to hear how I would answer these matters, just ask. But you seem too emotionally riled up to be even remotely interested in what I have to say. Or am I wrong?
 

randyk

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2021
902
268
63
Pacific NW USA
You can stop right there!
My responses will not just be to you, but also for others who may be interested.

The information regarding the living believers being transformed and caught up was something that was previously unknown. In 1 Corinthians 15:51-53, Paul says "Behold, I show you a Mystery." The word means some that was previously unknow because it was covered and is now being revealed.
I think that the sense of human restoration, after the Fall, was there from the beginning. God did punish Adam and Eve, but he continued with His plan in creation, giving them children, some seeking God and some not. The idea that people would be raised from the dead is clearly seen in Isaiah.

Isa 26.19 But your dead will live, Lord; their bodies will rise— let those who dwell in the dust wake up and shout for joy— your dew is like the dew of the morning; the earth will give birth to her dead.

It is also seen in Danial.

Dan 12.1 But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered. 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever.

The idea of being glorified can be viewed from the image of the Tree of Life in the garden of Eden, offering Adam immortality. It also comes from the comparison God gave Abraham of his descendants with the angels in heaven. This glorified state of existence was promised to Abraham's descendants and to the nations that adopt his faith.

I believe the sense of "mystery" mentioned in 1 Cor 15 has to do with the transformation from our present state to the glorified state. We have never known such perfection, and what it will be is mysterious to us now.

OH, and do you know the day that the Father has selected, randyk? No, you don't! Therefore, the day when He appears is imminent for all believers because we don't know the day that the Father has specified. I wish that you people would stop trying to support your beliefs with these with these ridiculous ideas that you come up with. Because neither you nor I know the time that the Father has selected for the Lord to appear and gather His church, then for both you and I and everyone else "Imminent" means the same exact thing, i.e. the Lord could come at any time.
No, I don't believe "imminency" ever meant to convey the idea that *Christ can come at any moment.* Not only is that not said, but there has been no chance that Christ could come until the time for Antichrist's defeat. Paul says that here:

2 Thes 2.3 that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

Do you think Jesus was saying that his Kingdom could come even before the Cross? Absurd! And yet, Jesus used the same language before the cross when he proclaimed the Gospel of the *soon-coming* Kingdom of God. He said that even at that time, before the cross, the Kingdom was "near."

Wrong again! Imminency means that the event is Looming, on the horizon, about to take place, in the workings, impending, approaching, brewing, in the cards, etc., etc. Jesus gave us an example of His imminent appearing in the following scripture:

"Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day on which your Lord will come. But understand this: If the homeowner had known in which watch of the night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. For this reason, you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour you do not expect."

Believers Christ, like the good man of the house who doesn't know at what time the thief will come to break in, continue to watch and to be ready because we don't know at what time the Lord is going to appear to gather His church.
I agree that we were not given dates to live by, since God controls the times and seasons Himself. He is Lord over time. We dare not presume we can do this or that, because it is God who actually controls what anybody does in his life.

This has nothing to do with Christ's supposed ability to come back at any time. Not knowing when he will come has nothing to do with when he can come. We know from Scriptures that he will come on the last day of the age, to set up his Kingdom. And yet, not knowing this date does *not* mean that he can come today.

The fact is, we could die on any day. And each day we can opt to do what pleases God or not, to do what is valuable to God or not. And so, every day counts no matter how far off Christ's return is. Knowing that he has already provided for our salvation, and is soon to bring judgment on its behalf, we should be operating with that in mind, regardless of when he will return.

First of all, the 144,000 are from 12,000 from each of the twelve tribes of Israel. They are not the church. And second, there is no judgment mentioned regarding the 144,000. The church will not, I repeat, will not be on the earth during the tribulation period.
The 144,000 are Christians. As such, they are the Church on earth!

Rev 14.1 Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads.

And you think the Beast persecutes non-Christians?

Rev 13.7 It was given power to wage war against God’s holy people and to conquer them. And it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. 8 All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the Lamb’s book of life, the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world... This calls for patient endurance and faithfulness on the part of God’s people.

You have no idea what you are talking about. You treat God's coming wrath as though casual, of none effect. Yet, Jesus said that it would be a time of great tribulation unequaled from the beginning, till now and never to be equaled again. And that if that time of God's wrath was allowed to go on any longer than the prophesied time, no one would be left alive on the earth.
That quote was directed, by Jesus, at Jewish believers. The great tribulation is for Jewish unbelievers that believers would also be caught up in. They were not the objects of God's wrath, but as members of the Jewish People, believers would also suffer the consequences of Roman desolation.

There is nothing "casual" about this. In WW2 a lot of innocent people suffered and died, including good Christians. This was not always Christian persecution--sometimes it was just the consequence of being in the same world with irresponsible, sinful people. How many people, for example, have been afflicted by COVID, and yet were innocent Christians simply exposed to the virus by irresponsible people? It happens, brother!

However, the fact is that believers within the church have been, like Abraham, credited with the righteousness and have been reconciled to God. Jesus took upon himself the wrath that all believers deserve, satisfying it completely. This stems from not understanding the severity and magnitude of God's coming wrath. However, you and others continue to claim that the church is destined for the same punishment. You plainly do not have enough study regarding these matters and should not be making these claims.
I have never claimed that the common experience of conditions of judgment between unbelievers and believers meant that believers were the object of God's punishment! Two cases:

1) Ungodly unbelievers persecute Christians because they hate the Christian testimony. This is Christian persecution.

2) Ungodly unbelievers provoke God by their immorality, injustice, and lack of compassion, and God pours out His curses upon their society. The godly believers, in the minority in that society, suffer the effects of criminality, injustice, and a lack of compassion that exists in that society. And they also experience the disasters that God allows to fall upon that society, including drought, storms, and disease.
 
Oct 23, 2020
971
164
43
Yeah, but be sure to get that very important word "FIRST" in there in the right place (I do not see it at all ^ in your "explanation" of my viewpoint of what the text itself is saying)

AND... recall, the Thessalonians (Paul said in his first letter) ALREADY "KNOW PERFECTLY" the manner of its ARRIVAL... (like... the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" that COMES UPON a woman... and Jesus spoke of those as being what PRECEDE and LEAD UP TO His 2nd Coming / RETURN to the earth... not what commence AT His Return, see ;) --so it is not *my* idea of what "the day of the Lord" entails, but what SCRIPTURE ITSELF says it entails, and in more than merely one passage... [and I realize you're likely referring to the "false conveyors' idea of it (??)])
lol. When I fed back this to you you complained I had completely misunderstood you...
 
Oct 23, 2020
971
164
43
Yeah, but be sure to get that very important word "FIRST" in there in the right place (I do not see it at all ^ in your "explanation" of my viewpoint of what the text itself is saying)

AND... recall, the Thessalonians (Paul said in his first letter) ALREADY "KNOW PERFECTLY" the manner of its ARRIVAL... (like... the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" that COMES UPON a woman... and Jesus spoke of those as being what PRECEDE and LEAD UP TO His 2nd Coming / RETURN to the earth... not what commence AT His Return, see ;) --so it is not *my* idea of what "the day of the Lord" entails, but what SCRIPTURE ITSELF says it entails, and in more than merely one passage... [and I realize you're likely referring to the "false conveyors' idea of it (??)])
https://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/2-thessalonians-2.199969/

I actually created a new thread for you TDW so that you could put your interpretation up at the start.