The Case for a Post-Tribulation Second Coming

[Sel@h]

I don't see it that way.
Acts says Jesus will return in the same way He left....The return in Rev 19 is nothing like the way Jesus left.
For instance Jesus returns riding a white horse....and didn't leave riding a white horse.

This supports a pre-trib return at the rapture and not a single return after the end of the tribulation.

Gosh, I just don’t follow. Say it again differently maybe.

 

[Sel@h]

Gosh, I just don’t follow. Say it again differently maybe.

@CrowCross ,Are you saying that Jesus Christ will return twice?

 

[Davidpt]

I don't see it that way.
Acts says Jesus will return in the same way He left....The return in Rev 19 is nothing like the way Jesus left.
For instance Jesus returns riding a white horse....and didn't leave riding a white horse.

This supports a pre-trib return at the rapture and not a single return after the end of the tribulation.

Why aren't you applying it to Zechariah 14:4 then, since it is obvious you are referring to Acts 1, for one.? He clearly left from the mount of Olives and that Zechariah 14:4 has Him returning there, His feet literally standing upon the earth on the mount of Olives. But Pretrib has Him up in the air per the Pretrib rapture, never touching down below, but doing a uturn instead. Your Pretrib rapture contradicts Acts 1 and Zech 14:4 since it doesn't have Jesus fulfilling in like manner, in regard to where He left from and where He returns to.

 

[ScottA]

Seals are not events; they are just knowledge of what will happen at the end.

Knowledge yes, line upon line here a little there a little. But also the release and setting the captives free.

 

[Sel@h]

Knowledge yes, line upon line here a little there a little. But also the release and setting the captives free.

Hi, Scott. Did you know that this is exactly how Isaiah did teach, but in Isaiah 28:10, it is given as mockery to Isaiah by the religious crowd. They’re making fun of Isaiah.

 

[ScottA]

Hi, Scott. Did you know that this is exactly how Isaiah did teach, but in Isaiah 28:10, it is given as mockery to Isaiah by the religious crowd. They’re making fun of Isaiah.

Hmmm, what translation states it so? That is not how the King James reads.

 

[Sel@h]

Hmmm, what translation states it so? That is not how the King James reads.

The King James. Keep reading a few verses. Do a little research.

 

[ScottA]

The King James. Keep reading a few verses. Do a little research.

"be ye not mockers" doesn't exactly say, "Isaiah 28:10, it is given as mockery to Isaiah" as you have said.

 

[Sel@h]

@ScottA

Let’s go back to verse 7. Isaiah is warning the false prophets who are drunk with wine. In verses 9 and 10, they answer Isaiah. Notice the quotation marks at the beginning of verse 9 and at the end of verse 10. They’re making fun of the way Isaiah is trying to teach them.

Here is a commentary by:
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
9, 10. Here the drunkards are introduced as scoffingly commenting on Isaiah's warnings: "Whom will he (does Isaiah presume to) teach knowledge? And whom will He make to understand instruction? Is it those (that is, does he take us to be) just weaned, &c.? For (he is constantly repeating, as if to little children) precept upon precept," &c.
line—a rule or law. [Maurer]. The repetition of sounds in Hebrew tzav latzav, tzav latzav, qav laqav, qav laquav, expresses the scorn of the imitators of Isaiah's speaking; he spoke stammering (Isa 28:11). God's mode of teaching offends by its simplicity the pride of sinners (2Ki 5:11, 12; 1Co 1:23). Stammerers as they were by drunkenness, and children in knowledge of God, they needed to be spoken to in the language of children, and "with stammering lips" (compare Mt 13:13). A just and merciful retribution.

 

[ScottA]

@ScottA

Let’s go back to verse 7. Isaiah is warning the false prophets who are drunk with wine. In verses 9 and 10, they answer Isaiah. Notice the quotation marks at the beginning of verse 9 and at the end of verse 10. They’re making fun of the way Isaiah is trying to teach them.

Here is a commentary by:
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
9, 10. Here the drunkards are introduced as scoffingly commenting on Isaiah's warnings: "Whom will he (does Isaiah presume to) teach knowledge? And whom will He make to understand instruction? Is it those (that is, does he take us to be) just weaned, &c.? For (he is constantly repeating, as if to little children) precept upon precept," &c.
line—a rule or law. [Maurer]. The repetition of sounds in Hebrew tzav latzav, tzav latzav, qav laqav, qav laquav, expresses the scorn of the imitators of Isaiah's speaking; he spoke stammering (Isa 28:11). God's mode of teaching offends by its simplicity the pride of sinners (2Ki 5:11, 12; 1Co 1:23). Stammerers as they were by drunkenness, and children in knowledge of God, they needed to be spoken to in the language of children, and "with stammering lips" (compare Mt 13:13). A just and merciful retribution.

Wwweeell...it appears that it is the commentators who are looking at a different translation then...because the KJV doesn't have quotations, but reads as a proclamation from Isaiah without them speaking.

But your initial point was about the seals, as was mine.

 

[Sel@h]

Wwweeell...it appears that it is the commentators who are looking at a different translation then...because the KJV doesn't have quotations, but reads as a proclamation from Isaiah without them speaking.

But your initial point was about the seals, as was mine.

Yes, I noticed that my King James doesn’t have the quotation marks. I just believe our Father’s Word. Let’s drop this subject for now. I’m sorry for derailing my own thread. God bless. Thank You, Jesus.

 

[grafted branch]

It’s getting close; the latter days are already here. Let’s not be deceived.

The gathering of believers to Christ will only occur after the Antichrist has reigned.

The popular "Rapture" theory, specifically the Pre-tribulation view, suggests that Christ will remove the church before the tribulation begins. This view claims believers will be whisked away to safety, avoiding all the fear and chaos of the Antichrist. However, this idea lacks biblical support and suggests a cowardice inconsistent with the faith of those who have died defending the truth. Our protection comes from God, our Rock, not from physical hiding places like caves in Petra.

Scripture is clear that the return of Christ happens at the last trump, after the "man of sin" is revealed. In 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8, Paul explicitly warns believers not to be deceived: the Day of Christ cannot come until there is a great falling away and the son of perdition is revealed. This false messiah will exalt himself and sit in the temple of God, claiming to be God.

While some theorists claim that the "restrainer" mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:7 is the Holy Spirit being removed during a Rapture, this is very poor scholarship. The context makes it clear that the restrainer is holding back Satan, not the church. In reality, the Archangel Michael is the one restraining Satan in heaven.

Satan’s spirit is active on earth, but he himself is not yet here in person. He will be cast out by Michael and his angels, arriving on earth first to reign as the false christ. Only after this event will the gathering to Christ occur. Do not be deceived by theories; rely solely on the Word of God.

Remember, Jesus Christ IS NOT returning until the great apostasy (falling away) occurs AFTER Satan, the son of perdition (meaning the son who will perish), is revealed.

How do you see the son of perdition being revealed?

I’ve had some folks tell me that they will watch and listen to this person then compare that to the scriptures and that’s how he will be revealed and how they will know who he is. It seems kinda strange to use the Antichrist’s words and actions to interpret scripture but that’s what it seems some people are going to do.

What are your thoughts on this? How can we know when scripture gets fulfilled?

 

[CrowCross]

Gosh, I just don’t follow. Say it again differently maybe.

When Jesus left was Jesus riding a white horse? The answer is no.
When Jesus returns will Jesus be riding a white horse? The answer is yes.

The angels said Jesus would return the same way He left in Acts 1....correct?

The 1 Thes 4 shows Jesus coming in the clouds...not riding a White horse...but....in the same way He left when He was taken up in the clouds..

This shows Jesus returns twice. Once in the clouds the way He left and a second time on a white horse.

Was that easier to follow?

 

[CrowCross]

Why aren't you applying it to Zechariah 14:4 then,

Zech 14 shows what Jesus does when He physically returns. This event isn't the rapture event.

since it is obvious you are referring to Acts 1, for one.? He clearly left from the mount of Olives and that Zechariah 14:4 has Him returning there, His feet literally standing upon the earth on the mount of Olives.

Yes, this is the physical return of Jesus.

But Pretrib has Him up in the air per the Pretrib rapture, never touching down below, but doing a uturn instead.

Correct. This matches John 14... 2 In My Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? This is what Jesus is currently doing...unless He's done the construction project. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and welcome you into My presence, This is the rapture when He comes back.so that you also may be where I am. Jesus takes us to Hs Fathers house with many rooms. 4You know the way to the place where I am going.c”

Your Pretrib rapture contradicts Acts 1 and Zech 14:4 since it doesn't have Jesus fulfilling in like manner, in regard to where He left from and where He returns to.

Yes, Acts 1 "contradicts" Zech 14:4 because Jesus doesn't leave on a white horse. If Luke told us Jesus left on a white horse fitting the Rev 19 presentation you would have a point.

 

[ewq1938]

When Jesus left was Jesus riding a white horse? The answer is no.
When Jesus returns will Jesus be riding a white horse? The answer is yes.

The angels said Jesus would return the same way He left in Acts 1....correct?

The 1 Thes 4 shows Jesus coming in the clouds...not riding a White horse...but....in the same way He left when He was taken up in the clouds..

This shows Jesus returns twice. Once in the clouds the way He left and a second time on a white horse.

Was that easier to follow?

Is this one easy to follow also?

1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

When Jesus left was Jesus leaving with a lot of people? The answer is no.
When Jesus returns will he return with a lot of people? The answer is yes.

Jesus does not have to return in every exact way and detail as he left.

There are no actual contradictions between the second coming found in Rev 19 or 1Th 4.

Jesus has one return left, known as the second coming. There is not a 3rd or 4th etc.

 

[Randy Kluth]

It’s getting close; the latter days are already here. Let’s not be deceived.

The gathering of believers to Christ will only occur after the Antichrist has reigned.

The popular "Rapture" theory, specifically the Pre-tribulation view, suggests that Christ will remove the church before the tribulation begins. This view claims believers will be whisked away to safety, avoiding all the fear and chaos of the Antichrist. However, this idea lacks biblical support and suggests a cowardice inconsistent with the faith of those who have died defending the truth. Our protection comes from God, our Rock, not from physical hiding places like caves in Petra.

Scripture is clear that the return of Christ happens at the last trump, after the "man of sin" is revealed. In 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8, Paul explicitly warns believers not to be deceived: the Day of Christ cannot come until there is a great falling away and the son of perdition is revealed. This false messiah will exalt himself and sit in the temple of God, claiming to be God.

While some theorists claim that the "restrainer" mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:7 is the Holy Spirit being removed during a Rapture, this is very poor scholarship. The context makes it clear that the restrainer is holding back Satan, not the church. In reality, the Archangel Michael is the one restraining Satan in heaven.

Satan’s spirit is active on earth, but he himself is not yet here in person. He will be cast out by Michael and his angels, arriving on earth first to reign as the false christ. Only after this event will the gathering to Christ occur. Do not be deceived by theories; rely solely on the Word of God.

Remember, Jesus Christ IS NOT returning until the great apostasy (falling away) occurs AFTER Satan, the son of perdition (meaning the son who will perish), is revealed.

There's no need to even address the Restrainer. The whole point Paul makes is that *before* Christ can return to assemble his Church the Man of Sin, ie the Antichrist, must be both revealed and destroyed. As Paul refers to the Antichrist he is the one "doomed to destruction." That is, the Antichrist will be destroyed not before Christ returns for his Church but *at* the very Return of Christ.

2 Thes 2.1 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. ...7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

Paul later describes the destruction of Antichrist as taking place *at* the Return of Christ, destroying him at his Coming by the "breath of his mouth." No need to even discuss the Restrainer, since Pretribbers use that as a desperate ploy to find a "Pretrib Rapture" anywhere--just after Paul had said that is impossible!

The Restrainer, whoever he is, holds back the appearing of the Antichrist until the proper time. And then he will be revealed and oppose God until Christ Comes Back to defeat him.

I personally agree with the Church Fathers that Roman Government is the Restrainer, holding back the rise of Antichrist until a divided Europe accepts him as Emperor. This seems more in line with the context of Dan 7 than the view that the Restrainer is the Holy Spirit--something that does not even exist in principle in the Prophets.

We largely only have Dan 7 to go on, and that depicts a Roman Imperial structure that survives until the end of the age, though it divides into 10 kingdoms and 7 kings at the time when Antichrist arrives. It seems that the Roman Empire ultimately gives way to division into multiple nations, and then renews its imperial structure under the control of the Antichrist.

This is actually the history of Europe. Europe was Christianized, and prevented the rise of Antichristianity. But Humanism, Liberalism, and ultimately Christian Apostasy has taken place progressively until today we have a disunited post-Christian Europe. We only have yet to see Europe reunite as an empire and come under the control of the Antichrist. We only have yet to see Christianity completely lose its grip on doctrinal orthodoxy and succumb to the philosophy and religion of this world.

Paul would've named the Restrainer if it had not referred to Rome. Christians would not be caught provoking the Empire with such clear identification! The book of Revelation is very careful to use apocalyptic language in reference to this Roman Beast.

But as I said, it is completely unnecessary to address the Restrainer. After all, Pretribbers use that ambiguity to deflect from the doctrinal statements Paul has already made regarding the timing of Christ's Return. It is positively to take place "at" the "destruction" of the Man of Sin, who is called "the one doomed to destruction." That means Christ cannot return for his Church until it comes time to actually destroy the Man of Sin. My view only....

 

[sondring7]

There's no need to even address the Restrainer. The whole point Paul makes is that *before* Christ can return to assemble his Church the Man of Sin, ie the Antichrist, must be both revealed and destroyed. As Paul refers to the Antichrist he is the one "doomed to destruction." That is, the Antichrist will be destroyed not before Christ returns for his Church but *at* the very Return of Christ.

2 Thes 2.1 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. ...7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

Paul later describes the destruction of Antichrist as taking place *at* the Return of Christ, destroying him at his Coming by the "breath of his mouth." No need to even discuss the Restrainer, since Pretribbers use that as a desperate ploy to find a "Pretrib Rapture" anywhere--just after Paul had said that is impossible!

The Restrainer, whoever he is, holds back the appearing of the Antichrist until the proper time. And then he will be revealed and oppose God until Christ Comes Back to defeat him.

I personally agree with the Church Fathers that Roman Government is the Restrainer, holding back the rise of Antichrist until a divided Europe accepts him as Emperor. This seems more in line with the context of Dan 7 than the view that the Restrainer is the Holy Spirit--something that does not even exist in principle in the Prophets.

We largely only have Dan 7 to go on, and that depicts a Roman Imperial structure that survives until the end of the age, though it divides into 10 kingdoms and 7 kings at the time when Antichrist arrives. It seems that the Roman Empire ultimately gives way to division into multiple nations, and then renews its imperial structure under the control of the Antichrist.

This is actually the history of Europe. Europe was Christianized, and prevented the rise of Antichristianity. But Humanism, Liberalism, and ultimately Christian Apostasy has taken place progressively until today we have a disunited post-Christian Europe. We only have yet to see Europe reunite as an empire and come under the control of the Antichrist. We only have yet to see Christianity completely lose its grip on doctrinal orthodoxy and succumb to the philosophy and religion of this world.

Paul would've named the Restrainer if it had not referred to Rome. Christians would not be caught provoking the Empire with such clear identification! The book of Revelation is very careful to use apocalyptic language in reference to this Roman Beast.

But as I said, it is completely unnecessary to address the Restrainer. After all, Pretribbers use that ambiguity to deflect from the doctrinal statements Paul has already made regarding the timing of Christ's Return. It is positively to take place "at" the "destruction" of the Man of Sin, who is called "the one doomed to destruction." That means Christ cannot return for his Church until it comes time to actually destroy the Man of Sin. My view only....

++++The popular "Rapture" theory, specifically the Pre-tribulation view, suggests that Christ will remove the church before the tribulation begins. This view claims believers will be whisked away to safety, avoiding all the fear and chaos of the Antichrist

Do you agree that believers in the TRIBULATION can lose their salvation ?

 

[ewq1938]

++++The popular "Rapture" theory, specifically the Pre-tribulation view, suggests that Christ will remove the church before the tribulation begins. This view claims believers will be whisked away to safety, avoiding all the fear and chaos of the Antichrist

Do you agree that believers in the TRIBULATION can lose their salvation ?

Yes, and before it. If it's possible to lose salvation, it can happen during or before the trib. The trib is likely the most dangerous period of time for that but certainly not the only.

 

[CrowCross]

1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

When Jesus left...did Jesus leave with a bunch of people? Nope. Nor did Jesus leave on a white horse.

You're trying to extrapolate the ascension out beyond the bounds of the context. What's next...is Jesus going to wear the same sandals He left in?

 

[ewq1938]

When Jesus left...did Jesus leave with a bunch of people? Nope. Nor did Jesus leave on a white horse.

You're trying to extrapolate the ascension out beyond the bounds of the context. What's next...is Jesus going to wear the same sandals He left in?

I'm just holding a mirror up to your views on this regarding the white horse. It doesn't matter that he left alone but comes with horses or people etc. The return is not supposed to be an exact copy of of the ascension.