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

[cv5]

Your premise is entirely wrong. The discussion you're wishing to have only demonstrates a gross misunderstanding of the scriptures on both eschatology and the new covenant:

Galatians 3:28
28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

You won't answer those simple questions because....you can't.

Because....you are faking it.

TDW was bending over backwards begging you for one legit biblical reply to softball questions a 10 yr old could answer. And you came up empty.

Thats a fact Jack....

 

[FreeGrace2]

By anyone's standard of measure that's a lot of reasons!

https://lifecoach4god.life/2013/06/...etribulational-rapture-by-dr-john-f-walvoord/

There's one very good reason there ISN'T a pretribulational rapture: the Bible NEVER says such a thing.

If Jesus comes down from heaven with all the dead saints and meets all the living saints, and resurrects all the dead ones and "changes" all the living one, and then goes back to heaven, why doesn't Scripture ever say that?

There is no such "U-turn" in the Bible; Jesus returning to heaven with all believers.

In fact, 2 Thess 2:1-3 clearly states the order of the Second Coming and the "gathering", better known as the rapture. The Second Coming precedes the "gathering".

1 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters,
2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come.
3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

Finally, the pre-tribbers must deal with what the Bible terms "the FIRST resurrection", which occurs when Jesus returns at the Second Advent and resurrects the tribulation martyrs.

Rev 20-
4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection.

There can't be a PRE-first resurrection, 7years prior. That doesn't make sense.

1 Cor 15:23 - But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

Here, we have 2 groups, from the phrase "each in turn". The first "group" is Christ, described as "the firstfruits". What then follows is real clear; "when He comes", "those who belong to Him".

If the resurrection/rapture is pre-trib, the tribulation martyrs can't be included in "the first resurretion", because that would be 7 years before Christ comes at the Second Advent.

 

[Runningman]

There's one very good reason there ISN'T a pretribulational rapture: the Bible NEVER says such a thing.

If Jesus comes down from heaven with all the dead saints and meets all the living saints, and resurrects all the dead ones and "changes" all the living one, and then goes back to heaven, why doesn't Scripture ever say that?

There is no such "U-turn" in the Bible; Jesus returning to heaven with all believers.

In fact, 2 Thess 2:1-3 clearly states the order of the Second Coming and the "gathering", better known as the rapture. The Second Coming precedes the "gathering".

1 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters,
2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come.
3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

Finally, the pre-tribbers must deal with what the Bible terms "the FIRST resurrection", which occurs when Jesus returns at the Second Advent and resurrects the tribulation martyrs.

Rev 20-
4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection.

There can't be a PRE-first resurrection, 7years prior. That doesn't make sense.

1 Cor 15:23 - But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

Here, we have 2 groups, from the phrase "each in turn". The first "group" is Christ, described as "the firstfruits". What then follows is real clear; "when He comes", "those who belong to Him".

If the resurrection/rapture is pre-trib, the tribulation martyrs can't be included in "the first resurretion", because that would be 7 years before Christ comes at the Second Advent.

That's a very astute observation about the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15 and the rest of what you said is spot on. I agree with it.

 

[Runningman]

You won't answer those simple questions because....you can't.

Because....you are faking it.

TDW was bending over backwards begging you for one legit biblical reply to softball questions a 10 yr old could answer. And you came up empty.

Thats a fact Jack....

Psalm 109:1-4
1{To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.} Hold not thy peace, O God of my praise;
2For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me: they have spoken against me with a lying tongue.
3They compassed me about also with words of hatred; and fought against me without a cause.
4For my love they are my adversaries: but I give myself unto prayer.

 

[Truth7t7]

Your premise is entirely wrong. The discussion you're wishing to have only demonstrates a gross misunderstanding of the scriptures on both eschatology and the new covenant:

Galatians 3:28
28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

They have been soundly defeated regarding 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (Falling Away), now diversion in changing the topic

 

[Truth7t7]

Psalm 109:1-4
1{To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.} Hold not thy peace, O God of my praise;
2For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me: they have spoken against me with a lying tongue.
3They compassed me about also with words of hatred; and fought against me without a cause.
4For my love they are my adversaries: but I give myself unto prayer.

John 15:20KJV
20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.

 

[Truth7t7]

One Scripture wonders are par for the course as far as false prophets are concerned. And no I'm not talking about somebody else.

The sounds of defeat, John N Darby & Adulterer C.I. Scofield dispensationalism, in a pre-trib rapture is a lie

 

[Truth7t7]

Blurring the distinction between the Church and Israel is a slippery slope to replacement theology. It's an inference that cannot be escaped.

What does historical premillennialism say about God's covenant with Abraham and David?
What does it say about ethnic Israelites in the time of the millennium?
What does it say about the The Church the Bride of Christ?
Where is the Church at the time of the millennium?

Answer these questions correctly and you will necessarily deny historical premillennialism.

There Is One Existing Covenant With Man, The New Testament In The Blood Of Jesus Christ In Salvation, The Church

1. Dispensationalism promotes John N Darby & Adulterer C.I. Scofield's "Zionism", There Is No Future Covenant With National Israel, This Isn't Found In Gods Word, Simple.

2. THERE Won't Be A Future Millennium, Jesus Christ Returns In Fire And Final Judgement, Dissolving The Heavens And Earth By Fire

3. THERE Won't Be A Future Millennium, Jesus Christ Returns In Fire And Final Judgement, Dissolving The Heavens And Earth By Fire

 

[Truth7t7]

You won't answer those simple questions because....you can't.

Because....you are faking it.

TDW was bending over backwards begging you for one legit biblical reply to softball questions a 10 yr old could answer. And you came up empty.

Thats a fact Jack....

No need to answer your (Diversion)

The Greek (Apostasia) Isnt A Pre-Trib Rapture Of The Church To Heaven As You Falsely Claim (A Fact Jack)

No need to consider your claim of (Perfect Tense Indicative) Gods Words Are Clear Below

The Greek "Apostasia" (Departure/Falling Away) isn't a Pre-Trib Rapture Of The Church To Heaven, it's that simple

Apostasia: (Defection From Truth) (Apostasy) (Falling Away) (Forsake) Who You Trying To Fool (Yourself)

Lexicon :: Strong's G646 - apostasia

Strong’s Definitions
ἀποστασία apostasía, ap-os-tas-ee'-ah; feminine of the same as G647; defection from truth (properly, the state) ("apostasy"):—falling away, forsake.

KJV Translation Count — Total: 2x
The KJV translates Strong's G646 in the following manner: to forsake (with G575) (1x), falling away (1x).

2 Thessalonians 2:3KJV
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

 

[GaryA]

That's Biblical, succinct, elegant, complete and beautiful.

Thank you.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

(quoting Grk grammar sources):
"The element of “time” in a Greek verb is only prevalent and primary if the verb is in the indicative mood."
[and]
"The perfect and pluperfect tenses are indentical in aspect though different in time. Thus both speak of an event accomplished in the past (in the indicative mood) with results existing afterwards - the perfect speaking of existing results in the present, the pluperfect speaking of existing results in the past."
[ ^ parenthesis original]

So SEE the verb, G1764: https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/2-2.htm [ V-RIA-3S (<--this "R" means "PERFECT tense" and the "I" means "INDICATIVE"--just as is explained in the above portion of this post)]

Thoughts on this?

 

[GaryA]

GaryA is a preterist.

I do not consider myself to be a preterist.

I believe the more accurate and appropriate term is 'historicist'.

Do you consider a 'historicist' to be a type of 'preterist'?

Why in the world would I consult with somebody who has utterly failed to comprehend the clear meaning of Scripture? He is dead wrong as regards practically every other primary Biblical docrine pertaining to eschatology too.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion...

(Just don't forget what Matthew 12:36 says.)

 

[Truth7t7]

Thoughts on this?

Thoughts On This

The Greek "Apostasia" (Departure/Falling Away) isn't a Pre-Trib Rapture Of The Church To Heaven, it's that simple

Apostasia: (Defection From Truth) (Apostasy) (Falling Away) (Forsake)

Lexicon :: Strong's G646 - apostasia

Strong’s Definitions
ἀποστασία apostasía, ap-os-tas-ee'-ah; feminine of the same as G647; defection from truth (properly, the state) ("apostasy"):—falling away, forsake.

KJV Translation Count — Total: 2x
The KJV translates Strong's G646 in the following manner: to forsake (with G575) (1x), falling away (1x).

2 Thessalonians 2:3KJV
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

 

[GaryA]

The root cause is cognitive dissonance.

The root cause of belief in the 'pre-trib' system is cognitive dissonance.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

It sounds like you're skeptical of the Biblical narrative now. It says there were deceivers alleging the day of Christ is at hand. Some of them were troubled by it.

So, you do realize that v.2 is speaking of what the false conveyors were saying: "the day of the Lord is here [perfect indicative]"

...which is something DISTINCT FROM...

v.1's Subject ("our episynagoges UNTO HIM") that PAUL is supplying the corrective toward...


...so that, when Paul says (in v.3a) "that day will NOT be present [<--THIS PART] if not shall have come the..."

that he is speaking to what the false conveyors were saying, by responding ABOUT THAT "day" (the one they were DECEIVING / falsely conveying about) and proceeding to explain how THAT "fits" in relation to the other.




IOW, what people TEND to do is EQUATE in their minds the Subject of v.1 and the Subject of v.2 (which are DISTINCT ITEMS), so that when they proceed to read v.3, they read "that day will NOT be present if not shall..." and INCORRECTLY attach that to the Subject OF VERSE 1', by completely jumping clear BACK OVER v.2 (IGNORING IT) to grab v.1's Subject to explain what v.3a is starting out saying (but they are DISTINCT ITEMS!)...

...just like what Subject PAUL is bringing to the fore ['our gathering UNTO HIM' v.1 (our 'noun-event' IN THE AIR)], is COMPLETELY DISTINCT from the Subject that the false conveyors had been expressing ('the day of the Lord IS HERE,' playing out on the earth in our present experience / 'a time-period' unfolding ON THE EARTH)


Don't jump back OVER v.2 (completely BYPASSING IT) when ascertaining WHAT v.3a ('that day') is speaking about... or you'll come to a completely INCORRECT conclusion about what Paul is actually conveying in v.3.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

It sounds like you're skeptical of the Biblical narrative now. It says there were deceivers alleging the day of Christ is at hand. Some of them were troubled by it.

So, you do realize that v.2 is speaking of what the false conveyors were saying: "the day of the Lord is here/is present [perfect indicative]"

...which is something DISTINCT FROM...

v.1's Subject ("our episynagoges UNTO HIM") that PAUL is supplying the corrective toward...


...so that, when Paul says (in v.3a) "that day will NOT be present [<--THIS PART] if not shall have come the..."


...that he is speaking to what the false conveyors were saying, by responding ABOUT THAT "day" (the one they were DECEIVING / falsely conveying about) and proceeding to explain how THAT "fits" in relation to the other.




IOW, what people TEND to do is EQUATE in their minds the Subject of v.1 and the Subject of v.2 (which are DISTINCT ITEMS), so that when they proceed to read v.3a, they read "that day will NOT be present if not shall..." and INCORRECTLY attach that to the Subject OF VERSE 1', by completely jumping clear BACK OVER v.2 (IGNORING IT) to grab v.1's Subject to explain what v.3a is starting out saying (but they are DISTINCT ITEMS!)...

...just like what Subject PAUL is bringing to the fore ['our gathering UNTO HIM' v.1 (our 'noun-event' IN THE AIR)], is COMPLETELY DISTINCT from the Subject that the false conveyors had been expressing (v.2 'the day of the Lord IS HERE,' playing out on the earth in our present experience / 'a time-period' unfolding ON THE EARTH)


Don't jump back OVER v.2 (completely BYPASSING IT) when ascertaining WHAT v.3a ('that day') is speaking about... or you'll come to a completely INCORRECT conclusion about what Paul is actually conveying in v.3.


[MAJOR GRAMMAR PROBLEM ]

 

[GaryA]

2 Thessalonians 2:

1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;


The phase "that day" in verse 3 is referring [back] to [the] 'day of Christ' in verse 2 - which is the same 'event' ("by extension" in the context) as that which is described as 'the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ' and 'our gathering together unto him'.

All of the "coming of" and "day of" phrases that are found on the chart on this web page are referring to the [same] Second Coming of Christ:

http://mywebsite.us/BibleStudy/Second_Coming.html

 

[Absolutely]

Also, I might add, under the pre-tribulation belief, the church is raptured out before the great tribulation and anti-Christ. Yet a lot of people still believe in it.

When the great tribulation comes, and the anti-Christ come, the rapture will not have happened. I stand confident because I believe the scriptures.

People will be looking for the day of Christ. What will they say or do when the great tribulation starts? They'll probably be troubled in mind and spirit.

Many people will likely commit apostasy thinking the Bible was wrong, but the Bible isn't wrong. It's just very much misunderstood by the pre-tribulation theology.

I would also like to add that pre-tribulation is decidedly an "itching ears" doctrine. People love the idea of not having to be present for the great tribulation. I get that! But that just isn't what the Bible says about when the rapture happens.

Conversely, post-tribulation rapture is not for itching ears. It's for people who accept whatever the Bible says because the truth matters more than our preferences. Just something to consider.

Do you ever pause from sweeping generalities to make a biblical stand?
As in my challenge for postribs to post a verse pointing to a postrib rapture.

Nobody ever has produced a single one.

Should be a ton of them.

Instead you guys stand in ashes. In ruination from the accuracy of Gods word obliterating false notions with no basis of scripture.

We have laid out SYSTEMATICALLY, with ease what we believe.

You guys have not one verse to counter our position.
None at all.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

The phase "that day" in verse 3 is referring [back] to [the] 'day of Christ' in verse 2 - which is the same 'event' ("by extension" in the context) as that which is described as 'the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ' and 'our gathering together unto him'.

Not quite.

--"The day of the Lord" (which most scholars agree is the phrase in v.2--Something truly "freak-out-worthy" b/c "JUDGMENTs unfolding upon the earth[+]"-related [and CONSISTENT with their PRESENT and ONGOING, VERY NEGATIVE experiences they were ENDURING-1:4, so perfectly BELIEVABLE to them, as to what the false conveyors were saying "IS HERE / IS PRESENT"]); I had listed about 24 versions showing this phrase in v.2 (and it hails back to the OT "definition" of this phrase... NOT to how "Amill-teachings" define it!)

is distinct from

--"The day of Christ" (when WE will be UP THERE "WITH [G4862 - UNIONed-with] HIM" / "IN THE AIR" / "RAPTURE"-event-related [for rewards at BEMA for "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" ONLY, etc...]... something they would be JOYFUL ABOUT, anticipating, not "SHAKEN IN MIND" and "TROUBLED" [by incorrectly / being deceived into] believing it IS HERE / IS PRESENT [as the false conveyors were SAYING, per v.2--completely distinct!]);

 

[GaryA]

Not quite.

--"The day of the Lord" (which most scholars agree is the phrase in v.2--Something truly "freak-out-worthy" b/c "JUDGMENTs unfolding upon the earth[+]"-related [and CONSISTENT with their PRESENT and ONGOING, VERY NEGATIVE experiences they were ENDURING-1:4, so perfectly BELIEVABLE to them, as to what the false conveyors were saying "IS HERE / IS PRESENT"])

is distinct from

--"The day of Christ" (when WE will be UP THERE "WITH [G4862 - UNIONed-with] HIM" / "IN THE AIR" / "RAPTURE"-event-related [for rewards at BEMA for "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" ONLY, etc...]... something they would be JOYFUL ABOUT, anticipating, not "SHAKEN IN MIND" and "TROUBLED" [by incorrectly / being deceived into] believing it IS HERE / IS PRESENT);

Nope.

"quite"