Thief in the Night-- Pretrib or Second Coming?
- Thread starter presidente
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
And, regarding G5034:
G1722 + G5034 = "in haste"
You are dancing around a pinhead trying to make 'in haste' (G5034 modified by G1722) mean something devoid of the relative time-frame part of the definition.
"... things which must - "in haste" (hurried movement through a brief/short span of time) - 'come to be'..."
"... things which must/will soon begin to happen/occur/transpire..." (modern english equivalent)
G1722 + G5034 = "in haste"
You are dancing around a pinhead trying to make 'in haste' (G5034 modified by G1722) mean something devoid of the relative time-frame part of the definition.
"... things which must - "in haste" (hurried movement through a brief/short span of time) - 'come to be'..."
"... things which must/will soon begin to happen/occur/transpire..." (modern english equivalent)
You're tending to do what FreeGrace2 also tends to do with this verse, and that is, mis-quote a very important word--sometimes even leaving it out altogether when quoting this verse as your support (...as well as leaving off the ending phrase).
You think it is saying, "until the TIME of restoration of all things." (as though it occurs at a moment-in-time / point-in-time). But it says, "until the TIMES of restoration of all things having been spoken by the mouth of His prophets from the age"... and that INCLUDES Israel once again being called by God "My people" (or, "My people, Israel"--whereas presently they are "Lo Ammi" / "not My people") which, as I've stated in past threads, starts at some point WITHIN the Tribulation period (not commencing upon its conclusion, as many suppose).
--"the TIMES of restoration" involves more than merely the point in time of His Second Coming to the earth; it also involves the "blindness [/a hardening]... UNTIL" (and again, that "UNTIL" thing is not referring to the point in time of His Second Coming to the earth / Return... it's too late at that point!!)
You think it is saying, "until the TIME of restoration of all things." (as though it occurs at a moment-in-time / point-in-time). But it says, "until the TIMES of restoration of all things having been spoken by the mouth of His prophets from the age"... and that INCLUDES Israel once again being called by God "My people" (or, "My people, Israel"--whereas presently they are "Lo Ammi" / "not My people") which, as I've stated in past threads, starts at some point WITHIN the Tribulation period (not commencing upon its conclusion, as many suppose).
--"the TIMES of restoration" involves more than merely the point in time of His Second Coming to the earth; it also involves the "blindness [/a hardening]... UNTIL" (and again, that "UNTIL" thing is not referring to the point in time of His Second Coming to the earth / Return... it's too late at that point!!)
-
1
- Show all
So what you're saying is that Luke 21:28's saying "begin [G756] to come to pass / to become / come to be / etc [G1096]" is redundant?
I'm not seeing it so.
That's because the "things" in this passage (and the other) take time to unfold ("become" / "come to pass"); but in Lk, it's exhorting regarding the "BEGIN" part (for them to start looking up when those "things" BEGIN)
I'm not seeing it so.
That's because the "things" in this passage (and the other) take time to unfold ("become" / "come to pass"); but in Lk, it's exhorting regarding the "BEGIN" part (for them to start looking up when those "things" BEGIN)
-
1
- Show all
Not really... coz it doesn't mean that in either Luke 18:8 (G1722+G5034 are used), nor in Rom16:20 (where used); rather, means that, when it takes place / occurs / happens (whenever that is slated to take place), it will be "IN QUICKNESS" that they occur. Not that they will "SOON" take place (in any of those three passages).
-
1
- Show all
"The Revelation of Jesus Christ WHICH GOD GAVE UNTO HIM [unto Jesus] TO SHOW UNTO His servants things which must come to pass in quickness..." is talking about the things which take place "after these [things]"... that is, after "the things WHICH ARE" of chpts 2-3.
Chapter 4 verse 1 is the next occurrence of this word "TO SHOW" and speaks of "after these [things]" (after the things which ARE, of chpts 2-3), John is then called up, and it is said to him at that point, "and I WILL SHOW YOU what things must take place after these [things]" - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/4-1.htm (what is being "SHOWN" to John [and beyond him to the other "servants"--see Rev7:3-4 for example] is the "future" aspects of the Book, not what comes before chpt 4).
[let the readers note what John is told to "Write" per 1:19... and recall that the Greek word "mello" (v.19c) also carries the meaning of "[is] SURE [to]" (meaning the same basic meaning as "MUST" in vv.1:1 and 4:1)]
Chapter 4 verse 1 is the next occurrence of this word "TO SHOW" and speaks of "after these [things]" (after the things which ARE, of chpts 2-3), John is then called up, and it is said to him at that point, "and I WILL SHOW YOU what things must take place after these [things]" - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/4-1.htm (what is being "SHOWN" to John [and beyond him to the other "servants"--see Rev7:3-4 for example] is the "future" aspects of the Book, not what comes before chpt 4).
[let the readers note what John is told to "Write" per 1:19... and recall that the Greek word "mello" (v.19c) also carries the meaning of "[is] SURE [to]" (meaning the same basic meaning as "MUST" in vv.1:1 and 4:1)]
You haven't proven your claims. They are only opinions.
If you are such an expert on a pre-trib rapture, why can't you quote ANY verse that shows Jesus clearly taking resurrected, glorified believers to heaven?
That is the crux of the "rapture"; Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven. There are NO verses.
That would be the ONLY WAY your view gets any cred.[/QUOTE]
This isn't your quote. It was mine. Please figure out how to better format your posts.
Why don't you quote the verse so everyone can see? I don't believe your claim. Prove it by quoting the verse.
Wrong. Quote the verse and THEN we'll see.
Yeah, real helpful. Just quote Greek as if that does it. Quote the verse, and then explain the Greek words.
Of course you aren't right. You are DEAD wrong. You have NO verse showinsg Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven.
Why doesn't that bother you? That is the main focus of the pre-tribbers; that glorified trip to heaven after the resurrection.
If you are such an expert on a pre-trib rapture, why can't you quote ANY verse that shows Jesus clearly taking resurrected, glorified believers to heaven?
That is the crux of the "rapture"; Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven. There are NO verses.
That would be the ONLY WAY your view gets any cred.[/QUOTE]
This isn't your quote. It was mine. Please figure out how to better format your posts.
Why don't you quote the verse so everyone can see? I don't believe your claim. Prove it by quoting the verse.
Wrong. Quote the verse and THEN we'll see.
Yeah, real helpful. Just quote Greek as if that does it. Quote the verse, and then explain the Greek words.
Of course you aren't right. You are DEAD wrong. You have NO verse showinsg Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven.
Why doesn't that bother you? That is the main focus of the pre-tribbers; that glorified trip to heaven after the resurrection.
-
1
- Show all
FreeGrace2 said:
In FACT, the mission is to get the 2W up to heaven. And they will get up there. So no mission will fail. Sheeeesh.
Exactly !! Same words. And NONE of those mentioned in the UNNAMED verse you quoted were glorified or received resurrection bodies.
And NEITHER will the 2W.
Totally irrelevant.
Are you trying to be dense. Of course the 2W went back up to heaven. Why would you think I don't think they did?
My only point was that they were NOT glorified when they went up. Don't you even know what you are debating about?
As to your earlier point about not having the definite article with "resurrection" one can't assume there will be only 1 is ridiculous.
You may check this out yourself, but doing a word search in the entire Bible there are NO uses of the plural of "resurrection". It is ALWAYS in the singular.
Here is what else I found:
"the resurrection"
ESV = 144 times
Berean Study Bible = 137
NKJV = 183
"a resurrection"
ESV = 22
NIV = 19NKJV = 25
So you have no point. The Bible screams just 1 resurrecction for the saved and 1 for the unsaved, and that is very clear from Rev 20:4-6.
In FACT, the mission is to get the 2W up to heaven. And they will get up there. So no mission will fail. Sheeeesh.
Exactly !! Same words. And NONE of those mentioned in the UNNAMED verse you quoted were glorified or received resurrection bodies.
And NEITHER will the 2W.
Totally irrelevant.
Are you trying to be dense. Of course the 2W went back up to heaven. Why would you think I don't think they did?
My only point was that they were NOT glorified when they went up. Don't you even know what you are debating about?
As to your earlier point about not having the definite article with "resurrection" one can't assume there will be only 1 is ridiculous.
You may check this out yourself, but doing a word search in the entire Bible there are NO uses of the plural of "resurrection". It is ALWAYS in the singular.
Here is what else I found:
"the resurrection"
ESV = 144 times
Berean Study Bible = 137
NKJV = 183
"a resurrection"
ESV = 22
NIV = 19NKJV = 25
So you have no point. The Bible screams just 1 resurrecction for the saved and 1 for the unsaved, and that is very clear from Rev 20:4-6.
cv5 said:
The thing is bro.....the pre-trib rapture doctrine is the eschatological component (related quintessentially and uniquely to the Church alone) that never contradicts Scripture. Really its breathtaking in its all-encompassing perfection.
Post-trib is a bull in the china shop. Daniel's seventy weeks gets trampled, as do the words of Jesus, Paul, and pretty much everything else.
That's a very good word for all of the posts on the theory of pre-trib rapture: puffery. There is NO substance at all.
I keep asking for the verse that describes Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven but they just ignore it. Because they know.
The thing is bro.....the pre-trib rapture doctrine is the eschatological component (related quintessentially and uniquely to the Church alone) that never contradicts Scripture. Really its breathtaking in its all-encompassing perfection.
Post-trib is a bull in the china shop. Daniel's seventy weeks gets trampled, as do the words of Jesus, Paul, and pretty much everything else.
That's a very good word for all of the posts on the theory of pre-trib rapture: puffery. There is NO substance at all.
I keep asking for the verse that describes Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven but they just ignore it. Because they know.
-
2
- Show all
FreeGrace2 said:
But you CAN'T exegete any glorified trip to heaven because there aren't any.
What chapters? And what is your question?
Since the Bible doesn't 'identify" any of them, who cares? And what is the importance of them to your theory anyway?
According to Henry Morris, who is unfortunately a pre-tribber like you, he suggests that the 24 elders are the 24 patriarchs listed listed in the line of of the promised seed. page 88 in his book "The Revelation Record", an excellent verse by verse commentary except for his silly notions about a retrib rapture.
So what do you suppose they represent or are? And back up your claim with Scriptural evidence.
Seriously? You actually think these verses support Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven before the Tribulation?
Why? Paul is simply explaining the difference between mortal and immortal bodies.
You are definitely straining through a very narrow straw.
But you CAN'T exegete any glorified trip to heaven because there aren't any.
What chapters? And what is your question?
Since the Bible doesn't 'identify" any of them, who cares? And what is the importance of them to your theory anyway?
According to Henry Morris, who is unfortunately a pre-tribber like you, he suggests that the 24 elders are the 24 patriarchs listed listed in the line of of the promised seed. page 88 in his book "The Revelation Record", an excellent verse by verse commentary except for his silly notions about a retrib rapture.
So what do you suppose they represent or are? And back up your claim with Scriptural evidence.
Seriously? You actually think these verses support Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven before the Tribulation?
Why? Paul is simply explaining the difference between mortal and immortal bodies.
You are definitely straining through a very narrow straw.
FreeGrace2 said:
Since the Bible doesn't 'identify" any of them, who cares?
Of course. Why not? What is the importance of who the 24 elders are anyway? Do you have a clue?
As if this somehow answers my question.
In fact, IF you really did have a clue, you would have explained HOW the identity of the 24 elders relates to a pre-trib rapture.
But you don't, as you have clearly indicated with verses irrelevant to my question.
Since the Bible doesn't 'identify" any of them, who cares?
Of course. Why not? What is the importance of who the 24 elders are anyway? Do you have a clue?
As if this somehow answers my question.
In fact, IF you really did have a clue, you would have explained HOW the identity of the 24 elders relates to a pre-trib rapture.
But you don't, as you have clearly indicated with verses irrelevant to my question.
-
1
- Show all
FreeGrace2 said:
You haven't proven your claims. They are only opinions.
If you are such an expert on a pre-trib rapture, why can't you quote ANY verse that shows Jesus clearly taking resurrected, glorified believers to heaven?
All you guys seem able to do is make totally senseless comments when asked for evidence for your view.
Why would anyone enjoy the Tribulation? You seem to think my view is based on WANTING to go through it. That would be nuts, and any sane person would agree with me on that.
So you can save all your silly, petty, etc snarks for someone else.
I have given solid proof of ONE resurrection for the saved and ONE for the unsaved, which you cannot refute. All you can do is disagree, but so what? Without any evidence for your disagreement, you have nothing.
I have given solid proof that the ONE resurrection of the saved is "when He comes", and the word "comes/coming" in relation to the Lord can ONLY refer to the Second Advent, since the OT prophesied about the 2 comings of the Messiah.
So, I have proven from Scripture that the ONE resurrection of the saved will be at the Second Advent when King Jesus comes back to earth to reign in His Millennial kingdom.
And you have no evidence at all for your theory.
You haven't proven your claims. They are only opinions.
If you are such an expert on a pre-trib rapture, why can't you quote ANY verse that shows Jesus clearly taking resurrected, glorified believers to heaven?
All you guys seem able to do is make totally senseless comments when asked for evidence for your view.
Why would anyone enjoy the Tribulation? You seem to think my view is based on WANTING to go through it. That would be nuts, and any sane person would agree with me on that.
So you can save all your silly, petty, etc snarks for someone else.
I have given solid proof of ONE resurrection for the saved and ONE for the unsaved, which you cannot refute. All you can do is disagree, but so what? Without any evidence for your disagreement, you have nothing.
I have given solid proof that the ONE resurrection of the saved is "when He comes", and the word "comes/coming" in relation to the Lord can ONLY refer to the Second Advent, since the OT prophesied about the 2 comings of the Messiah.
So, I have proven from Scripture that the ONE resurrection of the saved will be at the Second Advent when King Jesus comes back to earth to reign in His Millennial kingdom.
And you have no evidence at all for your theory.