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

[/QUOTE]
Let's see that verse in other translations:


1534 Tyndale N.T.
Let no ma deceave you by eny meanes for the lorde commeth not excepte ther come a departynge fyrst and that that synfnll man be opened ye sonne of perdicion

1535 Coverdale Bible
Let no man disceaue you by eny meanes. For the LORDE commeth not, excepte the departynge come first, and that Man of Synne be opened, even the sonne of perdicion.

1539 Cranmer Great Bible
Let no man deceaue you by any meanes, for the Lorde shall not come excepte there come a departinge fyrst, & that that synfull man be opened, the sonne of perdicion.

1549 Matthew's Bible
Let no man deceyue you by any meanes, for the Lord commeth not, except there come a departyng first, and that, that sinful man be opened, the sonne of perdicyon

1565 Beza Bible
Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for [that day shall not come,] except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, [euen] the son of perdition.

1575 Geneva Bible
Let no man deceiue you by any meanes for that day shal not come, except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition.

Now, according to Paul's theme, what could be departing as something being "taken out of the way. " Let's see: the theme is the gathering... Could that be a significant "departing"? CHECK!

You mean THIS gap shown in pruple?

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

What happened and when in that "gap?" 70 AD happened. And then to the end - all in a gap before Daniel gets to the final week.

So, where specifically in Lamentations is a pretrib rapture mentioned, if it really is parallel language?

They relate in one way, for sure. None of them mentions a pretrib rapture either.

Very good. I'm glad that there are ppl who know that there aren't any.

Why didn't you mention 2 Thess 2:1?

It only takes one verse to prove something. And the Bible never contradicts itself.

Which is why there are NO verses about a pretrib rapture.

Let's see that verse (2 Thess 2:1) in other translations:

1534 Tyndale N.T.
Let no ma deceave you by eny meanes for the lorde commeth not excepte ther come a departynge fyrst and that that synfnll man be opened ye sonne of perdicion

1535 Coverdale Bible
Let no man disceaue you by eny meanes. For the LORDE commeth not, excepte the departynge come first, and that Man of Synne be opened, even the sonne of perdicion.

1539 Cranmer Great Bible
Let no man deceaue you by any meanes, for the Lorde shall not come excepte there come a departinge fyrst, & that that synfull man be opened, the sonne of perdicion.

1549 Matthew's Bible
Let no man deceyue you by any meanes, for the Lord commeth not, except there come a departyng first, and that, that sinful man be opened, the sonne of perdicyon

1565 Beza Bible
Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for [that day shall not come,] except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, [euen] the son of perdition.

1575 Geneva Bible
Let no man deceiue you by any meanes for that day shal not come, except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition.[/QUOTE]
Except for the Geneva, there sure was a whole lot of misspelling going on. A good reason to avoid the old ones.

However, if you research biblehub.com you will find in the interlinear of that verse, there is NO mention in the Greek about a "departure".

In fact, the Greek says the same thing as all the better translations. "Our gathering together".

However, what possibly could be the meaning of "departure" anyway? Well, none of the rapture verses have "departure", so it must refer to something else.

How about "departure from the faith"? That works.

1 Tim 4:1 -
English Standard Version
Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,

There you go.

No. No rapture verse uses the idea of departing. You're just desperate.

A few verses beyond is the "restrainer" being taken out of the way. That's not the church, though you would sure like it to be.

It's government. Moral governments have been keeping evil governments at bay for a long time. Before the USA it was England.

But now, with the present administration of pure evil, the USA surely has been removed, taken out of the way of keeping other evil governments at bay.

In fact, we are now actively supporting the other evil governments.

Agreed. THAT kind of "bow" aka "the battle bow" (its last 3 occurrences in the OT)

That kind of "bow" (the "battle bow" kind, with arrows) is also used:

--in contexts speaking of a "DECEITFUL bow" - Psalm 78:9 / Hosea 7:16

--in contexts speaking of "bend THEIR TONGUES like bows; LIES prevail over truth in the land. For they proceed from evil to evil, and they do not take Me into account,” declares the LORD." - Jeremiah 9:3

--in contexts speaking of "The WICKED have drawn out the sword, and have bent their bow, to cast down the poor and needy, and to slay such as be of upright conversation." - Psalm 11:2 / 37:14

[etc...]

Likewise, there are a number of verses speaking of "ARROWS" in the same way ('lies' /'deceit').


Jesus says, in Matt24:4 / Mk13:5 "Take heed, lest A CERTAIN ONE [G5100 - tis] *deceive* you, FOR MANY will come in My name saying..." (i.e. the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" OF "the beginning of birth PANGS [PLURAL]" [with many more following on from THOSE], where the INITIAL ONE, Paul says [1Th5:2-3] is at the *ARRIVAL* of the DOTL time-period, aka the START of the TRIB YRS! aka SEAL #1... aka the "whose COMING [/ARRIVAL / ADVENT / PRESENCE / parousia] is after the working of Satan" [lying wonders... deceivableness...] of "the man of sin" 2Th2:9a, IN HIS TIME [the "IN THE NIGHT / DARK / DARKNESS" time-period, aka the first aspect of "the DOTL," meaning the "7 TRIB yrs"] )


... and which SEAL #1 which Rev1:1 / 1:19c / 4:1 says (when you COMPARE THE GREEK):

--that 'mello [SURE to / CERTAIN to]' MEANS the same as "MUST";
--and "TO SHEW UNTO" = "I WILL SHEW YOU";
--and "things which must come to pass AFTER THESE THINGS" = "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" in CONTRAST TO "the things WHICH ARE" which are NOT said to be "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]"),

... that this is speaking of the specific, future, LIMITED time-period [the 7 yrs] that both Rom16:20 ("CRUSH Satan UNDER YOUR FEET *IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]*") and Lk18:8 ("AVENGE *IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]*") ALSO speak to! [not speaking of "NOW"... but FOLLOWING "our Rapture"];

...and when you consider that the "4 living creatures" are described in the SAME WAY that the "4-directional plotment" of Israel is described in the OT (so, concerning "earthly-located" matters), but interestingly enough, also specific "time-stamp-related" things (each of the "4 living creatures," that is);

... and when you consider that this is when Jesus will 'STAND to JUDGE" Isa3:13, Rev5:9 etc;

...and when you consider that 5:6 states "seven Spirits of God HAVING BEEN SENT [PERFECT participle] out into/unto all the earth" can just as easily mean, FOLLOWING "our Rapture / THE Departure";

...and when you consider that "kings went [/go] out to battle" at a VERY SPECIFIC point-in-time/date (in Scripture), think: Jesus in Rev19, then counting back precisely "2520 days," one can see that the Rev5:6 "context"/setting ("[saw IN THE MIDST of the throne and of the 4 living creatures and IN THE MIDST of the elders (i.e. UP IN Heaven)] a Lamb STANDING as HAVING BEEN SLAIN [PERFECT participle]...") is also pinpointing a particular calendar date [but not back in "32ad," see ])





--way too much more to say about this topic... but as you can see, I remain unconvinced of your viewpoint that the SEALS have been unfolding since the first century. No.



[BTW, I *disagree* that the "a great multitude... of all the nations" (Rev7:9,14) coming out of "THE GREAT tribulation" (i.e. the SECOND HALF of the 7 yrs) are "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY"... NO. Disagree!]

NOT AT ALL! First of all I am convinced they are addicted to arguing, and second of all, they are scoffing at a pretribulation CALLING OUT OF THE BRIDE OF CHRIST TO GO TO THE WEDDING OF CHRIST IN HEAVEN.


2 Peter 3:3-4 (NRSV)
3 First of all you must understand this, that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and indulging their own lusts
4 and saying, "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since our ancestors died, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation!"

When you said:
...and I replied with:

"No, he didn't say that" ...

I was speaking of "who" YOU had just said "said [such and such],"... that being, "JOHN"...

...so how are you changing the convo back to Paul's words, suddenly?? :

What are you suggesting, that "JOHN" wrote 2Th2:1?

Coz I addressing what YOU had put (which had to do with "JOHN SAID")...

... but perhaps, instead of it being ME that "can't read very well," perhaps it was you that meant to write instead, what "PAUL SAID," but you mis-typed it?? Could it be?

Agreed!

--"shall destroy the city and the sanctuary" (events surrounding 70ad); and

--"desolaTIONS [PLURAL] are determined" (some of which fit within that "gap")



Daniel 9:24-27 is SEQUENTIAL... thus the "gap" fitting in just as you point out in the above ^ .



This corresponds with the number of "UNTIL / TILL" passages pertaining to "Israel" ("Israel's FUTURE"), as cv5 also pointed out a few of those references (as well as the passages showing such a "chronology" which I've pointed out in past posts also).

--in contexts speaking of a "DECEITFUL bow" - Psalm 78:9 Why do you call this a deceitful bow? In the Septugint it is still the Greek Toxon.

Section removed due to over 1876 words and it STILL would not accept it.

It is still a bow as in bend from the Hebrew root word, and that means a weapon of war. It fits perfectly at the first seal where it says "conquering and to conquer." There is no deceit in a bow to shoot an arrow. If there is deceit it may be in the one carrying the bow. If deceit was meant, I am sure there were other Greek words John could have used.

The Hebrew of the word "bow:"
bow (68x), archers (with H3384) (3x), archers (2x), archers (with H1869) (1x),

I might comment; it is a HUGE stretch to go from the Greek "Toxon" in Revelation where it speaks of conquer to a Hebrew word in Psalms. They are both speaking of a weapon of war.

Psalms text removed due to server.

Sorry, but in context, I don't see deceit as in a wet bow string. I see God working against them because they turned away from God.

If one were to read the first seal with NO PRECONCEPTIONS, how in the world could they come up with deceit?

2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

A white horse. In prophecy often a horse was to represent war or warfare. That fits with conquering.
John used white 17 times in Revelation: let's look at some of them.

All the the Revelation texts using "white removed do to the server lying. I am way less that 1600 words and it still won't accept it.

It seems you imagine God would use "white" 16 times for what you see above, and they use it once for deception. WRONG. you are using eisegesis. You came to this verse with the preconceived idea that this verse and seal was about the Antichrist. You should know better!

2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

Had a bow: Greek Toxon from which we get toxic or poison. The common bible use is a weapon of war. Only for eisegesis would one try to see if this word "bow" has been used in another way.

A crown was given him. This was a stephanos of victor's crown, "a prize in the public games " says Strong's, and Paul as he talked about those "striving for mastery." It was also used for Jesus' crown of thorns. Would GOD award this crown to the Beast? This is a book of revealing. God colored the Beast as fiery red. The beast ends up dead. I don't think a victor's crown fits him.

Conquering and to conquer. Sorry, but a better translation would be overcoming and to overcome. Greek nikaō :
overcome (24x), conquer (2x), prevail (1x), get the victory (1x). Note that the two times as conquer is only this passage in Revelation. All the other uses in the New Testament is as shown: 24 times as overcome.

1 Jo 5:4 For whatsoever is born of God overcometh G3528 the world: and this is the victory that overcometh G3528 the world, even our faith.

This rider on the white horse is not our waging wars to conquer other nations. His war is against principalities and powers.

You have and continue to pull this verse out of its context. Don't take my word for it, go back and read. While you are at it, ask yourself the same questions Jesus asked me about this:

1. “Why did John not immediately see Me at the right hand of the Father in chapter four? I ascended back into heaven years before John saw this vision. There are over a dozen verses showing that I went to be at the right hand of the Father. Why then did John not immediately see Me at the right hand of the Father?”

2. “John watched a search to find one worthy to open the seals—a search that ended in failure—and that is the reason John wept much: no man was found worthy. However, if you read ahead, you find that I was found worthy to break the seals. Why then was I not found in that first search?”

3. “If you notice in chapter 4, the Holy Spirit was still in the throne room. I told the disciples that as soon as I ascended, I would send Him down. Why was the Holy Spirit still in the throne room in chapter 4?”

These questions speak to the context of the first seal. Most of the church world is thinking future while God and John were in the past. Keep in mind, God is showing John a vision. Therefore we can KNOW that John is seeing EXACTLY what God wants him to see. In other words, GOD HAS A REASON why John did not immediately see Jesus at the right hand of the Father. God wanted John to think about WHEN Jesus would not have been at the right hand of the father.

God was very specific and had a purpose for showing us a search for one worthy that ended up in failure and why John wept. Why did we need to know that John wept, and why "much?" God had a REASON to include those words. It proves the point that this search John watched ended in failure. God wants all the readers to take note that a search for one worthy to take the book and open the seals ended in failure. Keep in mind, when I was bugging God about why he had John write about his weeping, He, God, said to me: "It shows timing." Later He said, "it also shows the "passing of time."

I submit that you are ignoring the timing shown in this passage, because you approach it with preconceived theories that this vision MUST be future. Case in point: WHEN did Jesus ascend and send the Holy Spirit down? Neither you nor anyone else can find 2000 years in those verses, not even hidden or between verses. God's intent was, we learn that Jesus got the book and began opening the seals AS SOON AS HE ASCENDED.

I don't believe in a pre-trib rapture, but what really concerns me about it is the way the general population has lapped it up without the slightest question.

As I was always taught, Christ could return at any second, thus making preparedness an imperative. However, we don't need a pre-trib rapture to to goad us into being prepared; there's already another very good reason: No one knows when there number's up.

This time I am only going to answer your single paragraph.
Sorry, but bows and arrows, being inanimate objects, cannot have deceit.
What does this have at all to do with the first seal except by eisegesis? You are trying to force the idea that somehow God was thinking the Antichrist Beast when He had John pen the first seal. There is NOT ONE WORD in the description of the first seal that would hint of anything evil. Leave eisegesis for the post-tribbers. I expect better from you! And you are still ignoring the context.

Did you not stop to realize that the Beast is not known (not revealed) until he enters the temple and declares he is God? My friend, that is at the MIDPOINT of the 70th week, not the beginning. You are mistaken again. Did you notice how Jesus skipped from "the end is not yet" church age right to the middle of the week and the abomination? Why? We know from Daniel that he will confirm a covenant of some kind for 7 years. I think this is done in secret. Neither John in Revelation or Jesus say anything about it. If we follow John, the Beast is not seen until he rises up from the sea in chapter 13. This is 7 chapters after the start of the DAY at the 6th seal.

This is just more eisegesis: forcing your theory onto a verse that has not even one word to hint of such a thing. And you are STILL ignoring the context: when Jesus ascended and sent the Holy Spirit down, after prevailing over death to be found worthy.

You are forcing a theory upon a scripture (the first seal) that has no connotation of evil whatsoever. And you are still ignoring the context. WHY was Jesus not seen in the throne room at the right hand of the Father. WHY was the Holy Spirit there? Why was no man found? I will tell you what Jesus told me: unless you can answer these questions correctly, you will never understand this part of John's vision. All you have shown so far is eisegesis and trying to compare other verses due to preconceptions upon the first seal. You want it to be future, while John and Jesus are in church history! You are 2000 years off!

Yes this teaching of future animal blood sacrifice instructed by God is blatant heresy in my opinion

The old school dispys believe and teach that ethnic Jews have a different path to God bypassing Calvary, there are a few around, very seldom heard anymore.

To teach that God below in Ezekiel 43:18-21 is instructing future Jews in a temple, regarding animal blood sacrifice?

Ezekiel 43:18-21KJV
18 And he said unto me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord God; These are the ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon.
19 And thou shalt give to the priests the Levites that be of the seed of Zadok, which approach unto me, to minister unto me, saith the Lord God, a young bullock for a sin offering.
20 And thou shalt take of the blood thereof, and put it on the four horns of it, and on the four corners of the settle, and upon the border round about: thus shalt thou cleanse and purge it.
21 Thou shalt take the bullock also of the sin offering, and he shall burn it in the appointed place of the house, without the sanctuary.

That is what I am saying.

I'm not saying anything otherwise.


"he went forth CONQUERING and TO CONQUER" [i.e. as his aim] (same word used later in Rev, at 11:7 and 13:7, of a LATER point in time of the SAME Trib yrs [same dude])


[similar to the idea of, "by peace SHALL DESTROY MANY" (i.e. it's a DECEPTION)... we know the "peace" is very short-lived, because at SEAL #2 "peace" is taken from the earth, SEAL #2 WARS]

It gets even better

These Jews instructed by God to sacrifice animals in a Temple in Jerusalem, will be leading the world in their Millennial Kingdom, as Jesus Christ sits on a earthly throne watching?

Yes Millennialism is a false teaching, preparing the way for the future "Walk On Christ" aka the Man Of Sin, The Antichrist

I was showing that both Paul and John taught the same thing.

"After this I looked" - Rev. 4:1 - many people read into this what it does not say. I have heard them say, "it means after the church age." Yet in the rest of the verse it is talking about John around 95 AD still IN the church age. The truth is, John used this phrase or "after these things" or something similar as a transitional phrase when one subject in the vision changed to another subject.

You have a way of writing things in the most confusing way possible! "after these things" is found in the KJV of Revelation three times, and none in chapter 4. Just so you know! ;-)

Let's quote the verse:
After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.

After this [After God finished dictating messages to the churches.]
I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven [Real door or not makes no difference here]
the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me [It seems God's voice can sound like a trumpet.]
Come up hither [John called up to heaven for a purpose: so WE can have this final book in the bible. ]
I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. [Notice this is nothing more than a statement of fact: God is going to show John things in his future and as we know now, even in our future.

Pay close attention: this phrase does not include the word "only." God left Himself free to speak of other things but "hereafter." in other words, no one can prove that every word after this MUST be "hereafter" words. Anyway, that word was in reference to JOHN in 95 AD, not to use in the year 2021. And it is an absolute truth: God DID show John many things that were herefafter.

Are you making reference to "shortly?
The Greek word for shortly "en"

The KJV translates Strong's G1722 in the following manner: in (1,902x), by (163x), with (140x), among (117x), at (113x), on (62x), through (39x), miscellaneous (264x).

The "shortly" must be hidden in the 254 miscellaneous uses.) No mater because it has now been close to 2000 years. Or, only "two days." In the mind of God, I think we can say "shortly" fits.

To imagine that all of Revelation (or even from chapter 4 onward) is only about the 70th week is just more eisegesis. It seems you are good at that on this subject!

@lamad , [re: current train of discussion]


[quoting old post]

2Th2:3b-9a is covering the entire 7-yr period, just like Dan9:27a/b/c is... its "BEGINNING," its "MIDDLE," *and* its "END" (all three! In each passage!)

The "he,he,he" of Dan9:27[26b] IS the "who, who, who" of 2Th2:3-9a ('whose/who/whom'); so that:

--2Th2:9a/8a = its/his "BEGINNING" ("whose COMING/ARRIVAL/ADVENT/PRESENCE/parousia") [Dan9:27a(26b); Matt24:4/Mk13:5; Rev6:2];

--2Th2:4 = its/his "MIDDLE" ("who OPPOSETH/EXALTETH/SITTETH") [Dan9:27b; Matt24:15/Dan12:11; Rev13:5-7/Dan7:20-25]

--2Th2:8b = its/his "END" ("whom the Lord SHALL CONSUME...SHALL DESTROY") [Dan9:27c; Matt24:29-31; Rev19]



V.8a is the man of sin's ARRIVAL... v.8b is his END (7 yrs apart). So that v.8b is saying, this is the guy He WILL destroy (IDENTIFYING who, but not saying [destroyed] "at the moment the man of sin ARRIVES" )



THAT ^ all corresponds precisely with the OTHER texts expressing a "BEGINNING, MIDDLE, and an END" (of those "7 yrs"):


--Matt24:4(/Mk13:5) [BEGINNING]; Matt24:15,21 [MIDDLE], Matt24:29-31 [END]

--Rev5:6(4:1-6:2) [BEGINNING]; Rev13:5-7 [Dan7:25;... MIDDLE]; Rev19:15 [END]

--Daniel 9:27a(26b) [BEGINNING ("for ONE WEEK [7 yrs]")]; Daniel 9:27b [MIDDLE]; Daniel 9:27c [END]


[and so, likewise...]

--2Th2:9a,(7b-)8a,3b ['be REVEALED';... BEGINNING]; 2Th2:4 ['whom opposeth...exalteth...SITTETH';... MIDDLE]; 2Th2:8b ['whom the Lord SHALL CONSUME... DESTROY';... END]

[end quoting old post]