What is your BEST PROOF for a pre-trib Rapture?

  • 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.
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
1st you claim we are raptured off the earth because we are not appointed to wrath.

Revelation 19:14-15 (KJV)
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

Then you claim we are brought back to earth just as Gods wrath begins. Darbys rapture is simply a bunch of baloney
Your rapture lines up and originated in Catholicism.
 

bluto

Senior Member
Aug 4, 2016
2,023
505
113
Again, 1:7 says, "ye who are troubled rest/repose with us IN THE REVELATION of the Lord Jesus from heaven, with His mighty angels, taking VENGEANCE on... " (did you see my recent post on the concept of His "vengeance"??)

It doesn't say, "will receive rest when" nor "will give rest when" but "rest/repose with us IN THE REVELATION of"



Let me put it like this, and see if you can grasp "why" the VAST MAJORITY of "prophecies" throughout Scripture have not been spelled out in nice, neat, fully-developed and "date-stamped" paragraphs of fullest explicit-ness!!! but instead are like a smattering of snippets here and there, a phrase placed side by side with another phrase of something else that takes place thousands of years apart from the other thing, and the like.

If the Lord spelled it out, point blank, "the Rapture will take place ON __/__/__ [insert specific calendar date]," then that would totally defeat the purpose of what He will be "putting into play" following our Rapture[/Departure] which is spelled out in 2Th2:10-12 (that is, IN the "dark/darkness" / "IN THE NIGHT" aspect of the entire long "DOTL" time period, meaning, IN/DURING the trib years [the yrs that "the man of sin" will be in operation]), which passage says,

"10 and in every deception of wickedness unto those perishing, in return for which they did not receive the love of the truth in order for them to be saved. 11 And because of this, God will send to them a working of delusion, for them to believe what is false, 12 in order that all those not having believed the truth but having delighted in unrighteousness should be judged." [this passage is referring to a DURATION of this, not a split-second "judgment" at His "RETURN"]

If it were written even more explicitly than even the OT prophecies were written (which those in Acts 3, Peter was saying had OVERLOOKED/BYPASSED "the Suffering Servant" aspects of the OT prophecies [eyeing only the "Conquering King" aspects alone], THUS themselves having a hand in fulfilling those very aspects [His rejection and crucifixion/Suffering Servant aspects]), then HOW would you propose "the working of DELUSION" would come to fruition (unfold and play out), seeing as things would be "spelled out explicitly in DIRECT WORDING with straightforward calendar-dates [__/__/__]" according to how you would like for it to be said in order for it to meet your expectations (for it to be true); Instead, He has the Matthew 13:24,30,39,40,49-50 event (when the angels will "REAP") to be in the EXACT OPPOSITE SEQUENCE as that of "our Rapture" event (for it is at a distinct time-slot), for HIS purposes (to the end that is shown in vv.10-12, above). Make sense??

It can be clear TO US (His Spirit-indwelt believers), if we aren't insistent that that one particular word CANNOT mean THAT, and that that other phrase is defined like the "made up definition" says it means (instead of how SCRIPTURE ITSELF defines it), and we don't blur two distinct items together into one item (verses 1 and 2), and don't inject certain other things, and so forth...




I've mentioned in past posts... the Olivet Discourse makes use of a "consistent 'you'," and the "proleptic 'you'" meaning (basically), "all those in the future OF THE SAME CATEGORY"

... and those He was speaking to in [up to, and INCLUDING] the Olivet Discourse were "those to whom the promised and prophesied EARTHLY Millennial Kingdom WAS PROMISED" (and that was, TO ISRAEL... and the "GUESTS" whom THEY will "INVITE" [i.e. the Gentiles/nations who will be existing in the trib yrs with them (FOLLOWING "our Rapture"/"THE Departure")--Let's not usurp Israel of THEIR role, and THEIR rewards, and the place God has FOR THEM, at that [specific, future, limited] time-period, which is AFTER "our Rapture"/"THE Departure"]). It's not "all about us".

[I'll try to go find that other post I'm talking about, that speaks of His "VENGEANCE" (its timing)]
In regards to 2 Thessalonians 1:7 I beg to differ on your understanding of what it's teaching. The Greek word used is "en" which means, "rest with us "EN/AT" the revelation of our Lord Jesus from heaven etc.

What's interesting is the that same Greek word "en" is used at vs10 of 2 Thessolonians 1:10. "when He comes to be glorified "en/in" His saints on that day," In other words, "in the persons of" or "holy ones."

So what you have is the same word "en" in the Greek used in two verses and it is the "CONTEXT" that defines how the word is to be understood. And notice that you could surmise from both verses the "reveling" or unveiling" (at vs7) with at vs10 "on that day, i.e the day of His coming (your favorite word of the day) "WHEN WE GET REST/RELIEF." :eek:

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
 
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
I say there is no U-turn because the use of the term by most people carries with it the implication that the reverse direction takes place immediately after the initial direction.

Jesus does not do a U-turn at all.

After the saints are raptured, they remain with Jesus in the air "for the duration" until Jesus has accomplished all that He desires to do before descending further down to the Earth - mainly, "dishing out" the Wrath of God upon the Earth - which, in timeline/event terms, is fairly short - but, not as immediate as is implied by the use of the term 'U-turn'.
Another reason why rev 1 4 is not the rapture.

Angels appear APART FROM JESUS and reap "rotten fruit".
According to you,the purpose of the rapture is to bring wrath,with the saints in the sky being a inconvience or a speed bump,and are treated as such.
No "honeymoon," no wedding supper,no 5 wise virgin wedding chamber,no 5 foolish shut out,(or even the room for them to go and return and have the missing oil),nor any room for the dialog at the last supper.

Nope does not fit
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
I like it. The view that you hold seems to be that its PROGRESSIVELY fulfilling, like Matthew 24:15 can be fulfilled in AD70 but Matthew 24:31 can be fulfilled in AD2020.
In addition to what I put (in response to this) in Post #779, there's also the following to consider (a post I made in the past):

[quoting that post]

I think I've mentioned a cpl times the usage of the "abomination [singular]" that Jesus refers to (where He said in Matt24:15 "When ye therefore see the abomination [singular] of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place..."), that this points back to its usage in the singular also in Daniel, that being Daniel 12:11 "the abomination [singular] which maketh desolate SET UP [H5414]..."; so it is this "set up [H5414]" word that I think may help us when looking into The Revelation...

--"set up" - H5414 - "weletet/nathan" - [meaning] "give, put, set [established, permit, executes]"


In Revelation 13:2, it says, "And the beast [from/out of the sea, v.1] that I saw was like a leopard, and its feet like a bear's, and its mouth like the mouth of a lion. And the dragon gave [G1325] to it his power, and his throne [/seat], and great authority." With G1325 meaning, "give, put, place [set / grant / commit a thing to one / bestow / deliver]" [see also vv.4,5,7]


Could the word in Daniel 12:11 "[be] set up [H5414]" be the link between the two passages, Dan12:11 and Rev13:2 [and also connecting the two "abomination [SINGULAR]" references, Dan12:11 and Matt24:15]? I tend to believe so.

"and the abomination [singular (like Matt24:15)] that maketh desolate set up [H5414]..."

[and]

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/daniel/12-11.htm [then hover your cursor over the number 5414, here, to see the pop-up extended definition and usages]

[and]

Allow me to just add (what I've said in the past), I do believe the "flee" in Matt24:16 correlates with the "fled/fly" of Rev12:6,14 (with 1260 days remaining until His Second Coming to the earth FOR the commencement of the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom)… so there's that, to consider also.

[and]

See also Matthew 24:15's "standing [G2476 - histemi]" :

--"standing [G2476 - hestos/histemi]" … "Usage: trans: (a) I make to stand, place, set up, establish, appoint; mid: I place myself, stand, (b) I set in balance, weigh; intrans: (c) I stand, stand by, stand still; met: I stand ready, stand firm, am steadfast." [source: Bible Hub; G2476 in Matthew 24:15 is a "transitive verb" as shown defined in the bolded portion above]

(Hebrews 9:8 has a noun form related to this "hestos/histemi [G2476]," where it says, "...the first tabernacle yet having a standing [G4714 - stasis/stasin - noun]")]

[and]

Then see 2 Thessalonians 2:4, similarly (but with different verb), and its "G2523 - kathizo/kathisai - sitteth" :

-- "G2523 - kathizo/kathisai - sitteth" … "Usage: (a) trans: I make to sit; I set, appoint, (b) intrans: I sit down, am seated, stay." [source: BibleHub; bold and underline mine]


[this would be similar to the verse which states, "The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves [G2523 - (transitive)] in Moses' seat" Matt23:2 (meaning, "to establish, to set, to appoint" and in other contexts is used like "to confer the kingdom," and "to appoint one to act as judge"]

[end quoting that post]

Hope this helps you see why I don't go for the "Historicist" viewpoint (nor the "Partial Preterist" viewpoint).
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,081
1,748
113
Again, 1:7 says, "ye who are troubled rest/repose with us IN THE REVELATION of the Lord Jesus from heaven, with His mighty angels, taking VENGEANCE on... " (did you see my recent post on the concept of His "vengeance"??)
At this point, with work and the lenght of the thread, I am mainly going through and reading posts directed to me, so no.

It doesn't say, "will receive rest when" nor "will give rest when" but "rest/repose with us IN THE REVELATION of"
Do you think translating the words as 'in' rather than at backs up pre-trib somehow?

Let me put it like this, and see if you can grasp "why" the VAST MAJORITY of "prophecies" throughout Scripture have not been spelled out in nice, neat, fully-developed and "date-stamped" paragraphs of fullest explicit-ness!!! but instead are like a smattering of snippets here and there, a phrase placed side by side with another phrase of something else that takes place thousands of years apart from the other thing, and the like.
Of course it is not that simple. The issue I am raising is the lack of evidence for pre-trib. Where is the onramp to the highway of circular reasoning? Where is there evidence for it to justify trying to fit interpretations of various passages into a pre-trib framework.

Jesus, in Matthew 24 says the love of many shall wax cold. Paul said there would be a depature/apostasy and that many would depart from the faith.

Matthew 24 tells of great tribulation, then the sign of the coming of the Son of Man and the angels gathering the elect with power and great glory. In Matthew 13, the wheat and tares are gathered by the angels at the end of the age. When we compare with Paul, I Corinthians 15 tells of Christ the firstfruits of the resurrection and afterward they that are His at His coming. I Thessalonians 4 tells of the rapture/resurrection event at Jesus' coming. II Thessalonians 2:1, Paul besearches the brethren by 'by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him....' Pre-trib reverses the order on that.

Why would I think that the gathering occurs before the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, or that there were two more comings of the Lord Jesus Christ yet to occur from reading these passages? Why would I believe that Matthew 24 and Paul's teachings are not talking about the same sets of events? What is there in scripture that would give me a reason to start trying to take passages that appear to be about the same event and interpret them as referring to two events?

You post a lot with caps, apparently trying to argue that the text could allow for an extended period of time, that a 'day' can be a long time. But it seems like your objective is to prop up pre-trib. Why believe in pre-trib in the first place? The fact that you can try to work out some scenario where pre-trib might work if you postulate that there are multiple comings of Christ or something along those lines is not evidence that Jesus is returning more than once.

I actually used to believe pre-trib. I let it go when I realized pretribbers were interpretting passages to try to make them work with pre-trib rather than deriving pre-trib teaching from the Bible.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
In regards to 2 Thessalonians 1:7 I beg to differ on your understanding of what it's teaching. The Greek word used is "en" which means, "rest with us "EN/AT" the revelation of our Lord Jesus from heaven etc.

What's interesting is the that same Greek word "en" is used at vs10 of 2 Thessolonians 1:10. "when He comes to be glorified "en/in" His saints on that day," In other words, "in the persons of" or "holy ones."
So what you have is the same word "en" in the Greek used in two verses and it is the "CONTEXT" that defines how the word is to be understood. And notice that you could surmise from both verses the "reveling" or unveiling" (at vs7) with at vs10 "on that day, i.e the day of His coming (your favorite word of the day) "WHEN WE GET REST/RELIEF." :eek:
...except, I don't believe it is stating "when He comes TO GLORIFY His saints," but instead says, "when He comes TO BE GLORIFIED *IN* His saints"... and I do believe there is a big difference between these two *ideas*/*expressions*… and...

I believe that the phrase "IN THAT DAY" correlates to the phrase "the Day of the Lord" (whenever these two phrases are used IN THE SAME CONTEXTS, they refer to the SAME TIME-PERIOD [of some (lengthy) DURATION], which phrase ("IN THAT DAY"), in this context, I believe connects to the phrase "[and to be admired] among all those having believed, because 'the-testimony-of-us-to-you' was believed IN THAT DAY" [not in THIS day speaking of "in this present age [singular]," but "IN THAT DAY"/in 'the Day of the Lord [(future)-TIME-PERIOD-of-JUDGMENTs-(i.e. the trib yrs)-which-will-afterward-be-followed-by-a-period-of-time-of-BLESSINGs-(i.e. the MK age)--ALL THAT is "the DOTL [earthly-time-period, of MUCH DURATION]"]" [this is set in contradistinction to what OTHERS will come to "believe" in the trib yrs (ALSO *following our Rapture*), which is spelled out (OPPOSITELY) in 2Th2:10-12, the other end of this bracketed CONTEXT]

---> see: https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/1-10.htm
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
Do you think translating the words as 'in' rather than at backs up pre-trib somehow?
I believe that the phrase "IN THE REVELATION OF" (coupled with the phrase continuing on, where it says "TAKING VENGEANCE ON") refers to a lengthy period of time of JUDGMENTS UNFOLDING (which is what the phrase "the Day of the Lord" entails, in part--i.e. the entire 7-yr trib as its starting section [i.e. "IN THE NIGHT"/"DARK/DARKNESS" aspect], of its OVERALL time period of MUCH DURATION).


You'd have to read my post regarding the time-period of "VENGEANCE" that I had linked (I think I did)
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
What is there in scripture that would give me a reason to start trying to take passages that appear to be about the same event and interpret them as referring to two events?
Let's start with the "definition" of the phrase "the Day of the Lord" (2Th2:2--the thing Paul was telling the Thessalonians not to believe anyone trying to convince them that "the Day of the Lord IS PRESENT [PERFECT indicative--meaning, started at a point in the past with continuing effects into the present]"--which would have been an entirely REASONABLE thing for them to be convinced of, DUE TO their PRESENT and ONGOING, VERY *NEGATIVE* things they were ongoingly EXPERIENCING/ENDURING, per 1:4).

The biblical definition (not the faulty "amill-teachings'" definition of it) is:

"an-earthly-period-of-time-[not merely 24-hrs in length]-OF-JUDGMENTs-followed-by-a-period-of-time-[also not merely 24-hrs in length]-of-BLESSINGs" (ALL THAT TOGETHER is "the DOTL"--it involves/includes: the 7-yr trib unfolding upon the earth [the "IN THE NIGHT"/DARK/DARKNESS aspect (1Th5:2-3 its ARRIVAL)], His Second Coming to the earth [the "SUN of righteousness ARISE" aspect], AND the 1000-yr-reign on/over the earth [the "reign... GLORIOUSLY" aspect]... ALL THREE!)

So, when we grasp the biblical definition of it, we can START to see Paul's point he's conveying in 2Th2... (verse 1's noun-event is NOT the same item as verse 2's earthly-located TIME-PERIOD; everyone tends to EQUATE these TWO DISTINCT ITEMS, consequently MISSING Paul's ACTUAL POINT he is conveying here)
 
Last edited:
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
I say there is no U-turn because the use of the term by most people carries with it the implication that the reverse direction takes place immediately after the initial direction.

Jesus does not do a U-turn at all.

After the saints are raptured, they remain with Jesus in the air "for the duration" until Jesus has accomplished all that He desires to do before descending further down to the Earth - mainly, "dishing out" the Wrath of God upon the Earth - which, in timeline/event terms, is fairly short - but, not as immediate as is implied by the use of the term 'U-turn'.
With lot the angels not lot did a u turn .
With the 10 virgin parable jesus did a uturn.

But nowhere was there a deliverance AFTER JUDGEMENT,as exists in the anti pretrib cause,with the bizarre need for those delivered to return to that same place of destruction.

It would be..."and then through the rubble emerged lot and his family,the angels came and delivered them about a mile away. Then they said "lot follow me back to sodom...."

Or "noah having gone through the flood was delivered afterward and went up to heaven,then was brought back immediately to earth."

Neither is plausable or has any purpose.
 
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
I actually used to believe pre-trib. I let it go when I realized pretribbers were interpretting passages to try to make them work with pre-trib rather than deriving pre-trib teaching from the Bible.
Wow,interesting,because I;


actually used to believe pos-trib. I let it go when I realized postribbers were interpretting passages to try to make them work with postrib rather than deriving pre-trib teaching from the Bible.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,631
113
The reason I do not believe Matthew 24:15 could have been fulfilled in the 70ad events, is because of the CHRONOLOGY issues I've pointed out in the past.

Matthew 24:4-8 EQUALS Mark 13:5-8 EQUALS Luke 21:8-11 ["the beginning of birth pangs" (in all three passages)--these are the SAME THINGS (identical, and at SAME TIME-SLOT)]...

where (then) v.12 (Lk21) goes on to say, "BUT BEFORE ALL THESE things [i.e. BEFORE ALL of "the beginning of birth pangs JUST LISTED (vv.8-11)]," the 70ad events must take place FIRST [BEFORE them!] (vv.12-24a/70ad events; with 24b following on and unfolding from there).


Consequently, Matthew 24's "SEE-then-FLEE" [v.15] must be distinct from Luke 21's "SEE-then-FLEE" [v.20] DUE TO this very important "CHRONOLOGY" thing! This puts Matthew 24's "SEE-then-FLEE" AFTER "the beginning of birth pangs" [and is the reason for the "THEREFORE" in your v.15]; whereas in Luke 21 the "SEE-then-FLEE" PRECEDES "the beginning of birth pangs" (and I do not suggest, "immediately precedes," just to be clear ;) )
Who can make sense of any of this? Now you are saying Matthew 24's "see then flee" must be distinct from Luke 21's "see then flee" and AGAIN I point out: To the average reader are these not the EXACT same events described in these chapters?
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
Who can make sense of any of this? Now you are saying Matthew 24's "see then flee" must be distinct from Luke 21's "see then flee" and AGAIN I point out: To the average reader are these not the EXACT same events described in these chapters?
Well, to think *that*, one has to completely disregard the CHRONOLOGY (which many people do disregard it!) This is how the "amill-teachings" also think Satan's being cast down "unto the earth" in Rev12:12-13 has already taken place in the past. Total disregard for the "timing/sequence/chronology" words in and around those two verses. Not to mention the other related passages that inform "what happens when" relative to that particular event. ;)



First off, do you even believe that Matt24:4-8 EQUALS Mk13:5-8 EQUALS Lk21:8-11 ['the beginning of birth pangs']?? [same exact things, same time period??]

That's the FIRST thing you could consider.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,631
113
Well, to think *that*, one has to completely disregard the CHRONOLOGY (which many people do disregard it!) This is how the "amill-teachings" also think Satan's being cast down "unto the earth" in Rev12:12-13 has already taken place in the past. Total disregard for the "timing/sequence/chronology" words in and around those two verses. Not to mention the other related passages that inform "what happens when" relative to that particular event. ;)



First off, do you even believe that Matt24:4-8 EQUALS Mk13:5-8 EQUALS Lk21:8-11 ['the begging of birth pangs']??
Hey! I believe the devil was cast down too! Rev 12 talking about Jesus going up and all that.

MATCHES with the gospels account: John 12:31 !
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
Hey! I believe the devil was cast down too! Rev 12 talking about Jesus going up and all that.

MATCHES with the gospels account: John 12:31 !
So you think Satan was "cast down" when [you think that] Jesus was [supposedly] "snatched UP [hērpasthē - G726]"??

Sometimes I think you just like to yank people's chains. lol

[where is the word "heaven" in Jn12:31?? (per Rev12:7-9)]
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,631
113
So you think Satan was "cast down" when [you think that] Jesus was [supposedly] "snatched UP [hērpasthē - G726]"??

Sometimes I think you just like to yank people's chains. lol
I believe what it says in John 12:31. SORRY if that doesnt flow with your dispie charts or something!
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
I believe what it says in John 12:31. SORRY if that doesnt flow with your dispie charts or something!
I had added this before you grabbed my post:

"[where is the word "heaven" in Jn12:31?? (per Rev12:7-9)]"

lol


[and how do you see what was said in Rev2:26-27? "25 But hold fast to what you have until which time I might come. 26 And the one overcoming and keeping My works until the end, I will give to him authority over the nations, 27 and he will shepherd them with a rod of iron, as the vessels of the potter are broken in pieces—just as I also have received from My Father."]
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,631
113
I had added this before you grabbed my post:

"[where is the word "heaven" in Jn12:31?? (per Rev12:7-9)]"

lol


[and how do you see what was said in Rev2:26-27? "25 But hold fast to what you have until which time I might come. 26 And the one overcoming and keeping My works until the end, I will give to him authority over the nations, 27 and he will shepherd them with a rod of iron, as the vessels of the potter are broken in pieces—just as I also have received from My Father."]
The word heaven isnt used but hard to be cast out of anywhere else, he was already on earth.

I believe Rev 2:26-27 is talking about how those who persevere till the end will be given authority to rule over the nations. Just as Jesus is ruling now and as it was given to Him by Father. Jesus has all authority right now and is at the right side of the Father
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
I believe Rev 2:26-27 is talking about how those who persevere till the end will be given authority to rule over the nations. Just as Jesus is ruling now and as it was given to Him by Father. Jesus has all authority right now and is at the right side of the Father
Okay, what did you think about what was being presented in the video I placed in my Post #526 (page 27 of this thread), about the word "US" in Revelation 5:9 (not to mention also being referred to in Rev1:5-6) :

https://christianchat.com/threads/what-is-your-best-proof-for-a-pre-trib-rapture.188798/post-4100019


I can't recall if you commented on what is being presented in that [9-min] video.



[and... do you believe "David's throne" is located IN HEAVEN, as the "amill-teachings" have it??]
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,081
1,748
113
Let's start with the "definition" of the phrase "the Day of the Lord" (2Th2:2--the thing Paul was telling the Thessalonians not to believe anyone trying to convince them that "the Day of the Lord IS PRESENT [PERFECT indicative--meaning, started at a point in the past with continuing effects into the present]"--which would have been an entirely REASONABLE thing for them to be convinced of, DUE TO their PRESENT and ONGOING, VERY *NEGATIVE* things they were ongoingly EXPERIENCING/ENDURING, per 1:4).

The biblical definition (not the faulty "amill-teachings'" definition of it) is:

"an-earthly-period-of-time-[not merely 24-hrs in length]-OF-JUDGMENTs-followed-by-a-period-of-time-[also not merely 24-hrs in length]-of-BLESSINGs" (ALL THAT TOGETHER is "the DOTL"--it involves/includes: the 7-yr trib unfolding upon the earth [the "IN THE NIGHT"/DARK/DARKNESS aspect (1Th5:2-3 its ARRIVAL)], His Second Coming to the earth [the "SUN of righteousness ARISE" aspect], AND the 1000-yr-reign on/over the earth [the "reign... GLORIOUSLY" aspect]... ALL THREE!)

So, when we grasp the biblical definition of it, we can START to see Paul's point he's conveying in 2Th2... (verse 1's noun-event is NOT the same item as verse 2's earthly-located TIME-PERIOD; everyone tends to EQUATE these TWO DISTINCT ITEMS, consequently MISSING Paul's ACTUAL POINT he is conveying here)
This doesn't read pre-trib. Your posts are a little frustrating because you post on the idea of the day of the Lord being a period of time, when that doesn't really prove your point.

If the day of the Lord isn't going to take place until the apostasy and the man of sin is revealed, that is not evidence for a pre-trib rapture or multiple parousia's.

You also have to make the parousia into a multi-year process with Jesus in the sky waiting, or else have multiple parousias.