Then where do we descend from? We go up to heaven for a split second then come immediately back down? Doesn't make sense
Is pre-tribulation rapture a doctrine of demons?
- Thread starter Mantis
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Not saying what someone here might say, but in the past I've seen where people point to "meet" the Lord in the air as being the same as to "meet" Paul at the Three Taverns, to escort Him back to Rome.
Like, we go up into the sky to meet Jesus as His is returning, and then we escort Him back to the ground.
The word there is used only in these places, and in the parable of the 10 virgins.
One of the issues with this is, No sheep at the sheep/goats judgment.
Most people I know who assert this idea don't think the Sheep/goats judgments is as it says it is. They will say it's a parable, or doesn't really happen when He returns. Not to mention having to change His criteria for judgment, as they try to work out how grace saved Christians can be being judged by their works to see if they will be declared righteous.
Much love!
How is it that the 144,000, sealed before any of the plagues of the trumpets and bowls, sealed before any harm to the grass and trees is allows . . . how is it that they are called, "the servants of God"? Weren't there more than that? Where did the rest go?
Revelation 7:9 KJV
9) After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
Much love!
Revelation 7:9 KJV
9) After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
Much love!
That's one of the reasons for pretrib. Christians go up, then during the Tribulation others come to faith, then we come down and Jesus judges the nations.
Just so. If the Christians are gathered as part of the "chosen", no sheep!
Much love!
Many associate the "gathering of the elect", or, "chosen" in Matthew 24 with the rapture of the church.
Paul wrote that the church was a mystery revealed through himself. Were Jesus to have been teaching regarding the church, that would be contrary to this being a mystery. For Paul's words to be true, and they are, the church including gentiles In Christ was not being taught by Jesus. To include gentile believers into Jesus' saying "the elect" is to read into the text meaning that is not there.
Jesus prophesied that the elect, or, the chosen would be gathered, and that later the nations would be gathered to be judged.
There are many ways to read the Bible, and the different views attest to to this. When I seek to know how those who heard Jesus would have understood Him, this is both to me obvious and inescapable.
The Jews knew their identification as God's chosen nation out of all the other nations. So as Jesus is saying, the chosen, or, elect, will be gathered, then the nations will be gathered, they would know He is indicating them, Israel, the chosen, and then gentile nations, all others.
Joel 3 is one place that prophesies this gathering of the nations for judgment, to happen after Israel is regathered.
Yes it's true that "elect" is used for Christians later in the New Testament, it would be about 30 years or so before that usage is given concerning the church. When Jesus gave this prophecy, there is only one way they would have understood it, and this is that way. We can't take the later meaning of a word to try to make an earlier use conform. That's just not good language interpretation.
The regathering of Israel, God's chosen nation, back to the promised land was prophesied many times, along with the gathering of the gentile nations for judgment.
Jesus' prophecy is fully in harmony with the Law and the Prophets, and will be fulfilled.
And there is no contridiction in the fact that through Paul, God revealed something otherwise hidden, the partial blinding of Israel, gentiles brought near, gentiles in whom Christ dwells, flesh and bone of His flesh and bone, that some would be transform while still living.
Which brings in an interesting question.
Are we thinking that the Isrealites regathered from the nations, that they will be likewise transformed? I don't see that in the Bible, and in fact, I see the prophesied that they will continue to have children, something not done by those who are become celestial.
And do we see the OT faithful resurrected at that same time? This brings in other timing questions, such as of Daniel, Go thy way . . . you shall stand in your lot at the end of the days (1335 days). That needs to be harmonized also.
But that those "In Christ" are resurrected and transformed, removed into heaven with Christ, this allows that 144,000 Jews are "the servants of God". All others had been just removed.
That those in Christ are removed prior to the end of the age allows that those who are of the nations gathered for judgement, their judgment by works does not conflict with our gospel of grace.
And this provides us with the identification of this innumerable multitude,
Revelation 7:9-10 KJV
9) After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
10) And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.
. . . who appear in heaven BEFORE the plagues, before that 7th seal is opened.
That those in Christ are resurrected and transformed allows Daniel's and Jesus' prophecies to stand as is, without conflict. OT resurrection does not have to be combined with the gathering of Israel, since it's not the same thing as the catching up of those in Christ, whether alive or dead.
And do we really believe that 5 months of torment so extreme as to make people wish they would just die, but they can't die, is that really what God is planning for His children? I mean, If I thought that were what was being prophesied, I'd accept it. But that's not what is being prophesied. And it's just plain over the top to suggest to me this is God's desire for His children, to be tormented in that way.
The alternative is to somehow include * * me * * in the group of immune individuals, those who were sealed in their forehead by the angel, who brought out of the east the seal of God with him, to seal the 144,000 Jews, the only ones immune.
People do that by saying "we are sealed with the Holy Spirit". Of course in so saying, they make the Holy Spirit as a seal an angel carries. And besides, the wording is different, context is different, it's different. Some don't care about the differences.
I don't mind that so much, we all do things like that, we have to decide if it really means it like this or like that. But if we're open and willing, word and topic searches answer it all, or at least that's what I've found so far. And just reading the Book over and over, all the time. Getting to really know it.
And when the conflicts start stacking up, I think we need to pay attention to that. It's truth that sets us free.
Much love!
Paul wrote that the church was a mystery revealed through himself. Were Jesus to have been teaching regarding the church, that would be contrary to this being a mystery. For Paul's words to be true, and they are, the church including gentiles In Christ was not being taught by Jesus. To include gentile believers into Jesus' saying "the elect" is to read into the text meaning that is not there.
Jesus prophesied that the elect, or, the chosen would be gathered, and that later the nations would be gathered to be judged.
There are many ways to read the Bible, and the different views attest to to this. When I seek to know how those who heard Jesus would have understood Him, this is both to me obvious and inescapable.
The Jews knew their identification as God's chosen nation out of all the other nations. So as Jesus is saying, the chosen, or, elect, will be gathered, then the nations will be gathered, they would know He is indicating them, Israel, the chosen, and then gentile nations, all others.
Joel 3 is one place that prophesies this gathering of the nations for judgment, to happen after Israel is regathered.
Yes it's true that "elect" is used for Christians later in the New Testament, it would be about 30 years or so before that usage is given concerning the church. When Jesus gave this prophecy, there is only one way they would have understood it, and this is that way. We can't take the later meaning of a word to try to make an earlier use conform. That's just not good language interpretation.
The regathering of Israel, God's chosen nation, back to the promised land was prophesied many times, along with the gathering of the gentile nations for judgment.
Jesus' prophecy is fully in harmony with the Law and the Prophets, and will be fulfilled.
And there is no contridiction in the fact that through Paul, God revealed something otherwise hidden, the partial blinding of Israel, gentiles brought near, gentiles in whom Christ dwells, flesh and bone of His flesh and bone, that some would be transform while still living.
Which brings in an interesting question.
Are we thinking that the Isrealites regathered from the nations, that they will be likewise transformed? I don't see that in the Bible, and in fact, I see the prophesied that they will continue to have children, something not done by those who are become celestial.
And do we see the OT faithful resurrected at that same time? This brings in other timing questions, such as of Daniel, Go thy way . . . you shall stand in your lot at the end of the days (1335 days). That needs to be harmonized also.
But that those "In Christ" are resurrected and transformed, removed into heaven with Christ, this allows that 144,000 Jews are "the servants of God". All others had been just removed.
That those in Christ are removed prior to the end of the age allows that those who are of the nations gathered for judgement, their judgment by works does not conflict with our gospel of grace.
And this provides us with the identification of this innumerable multitude,
Revelation 7:9-10 KJV
9) After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
10) And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.
. . . who appear in heaven BEFORE the plagues, before that 7th seal is opened.
That those in Christ are resurrected and transformed allows Daniel's and Jesus' prophecies to stand as is, without conflict. OT resurrection does not have to be combined with the gathering of Israel, since it's not the same thing as the catching up of those in Christ, whether alive or dead.
And do we really believe that 5 months of torment so extreme as to make people wish they would just die, but they can't die, is that really what God is planning for His children? I mean, If I thought that were what was being prophesied, I'd accept it. But that's not what is being prophesied. And it's just plain over the top to suggest to me this is God's desire for His children, to be tormented in that way.
The alternative is to somehow include * * me * * in the group of immune individuals, those who were sealed in their forehead by the angel, who brought out of the east the seal of God with him, to seal the 144,000 Jews, the only ones immune.
People do that by saying "we are sealed with the Holy Spirit". Of course in so saying, they make the Holy Spirit as a seal an angel carries. And besides, the wording is different, context is different, it's different. Some don't care about the differences.
I don't mind that so much, we all do things like that, we have to decide if it really means it like this or like that. But if we're open and willing, word and topic searches answer it all, or at least that's what I've found so far. And just reading the Book over and over, all the time. Getting to really know it.
And when the conflicts start stacking up, I think we need to pay attention to that. It's truth that sets us free.
Much love!
Last edited:
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Beware of the treachery and twisting of scripture that 'some' do so that they may seem to have great understanding.
The Bible is a chlidren's book written for God's children - the Elect of God.
One of the many lies of pre-trib is to say that the 'elect' refers to the Jews - that is false.
Everyone who is Born-Again by the Blood of Jesus and sealed with the Holy Spirit is the Elect of God.
There is no separation between Jew and Gentile who are in Christ - I Peter chapter 1, Romans chapters 8 -11, John 6:44, Matt 24:24, Galatians ch 3, Ephesians 1:1-10, James Ch 1:1, Titus 1:1-3, I Corinthians, 1:1-9, Luke 10:22, James 1:18,
Boom = JOHN CHAPTER 17
Anyone who tells you that the elect of Matt 24 does not pertain to Blood washed Saints is LYING to you - they are decieved.
Anyone who tells you that the Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ, was speaking only to the Jews/Israel is lying to you.
The deception of pre-trib abuses scripture and seeks to undermine and divide the Fellowship in the Body of Christ.
In order to believe the lie of pre-trib you have to change the meanings of scripture to fit and support the lie.
"No lie is of a Truth" 1 John 2:21
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Here is the deception of pre-trib, this is the twisting of scripture and the ARROGANCE to even suggest that the Lord Jesus Christ did not know or did not intend to include those he was and is still saving as His 'Elect'.
What extreme arrogance and pride as stated below.
"Paul wrote that the church was a mystery revealed through himself. Were Jesus to have been teaching regarding the church, that would be contrary to this being a mystery. For Paul's words to be true, and they are, the church including gentiles In Christ was not being taught by Jesus. To include gentile believers into Jesus' saying "the elect" is to read into the text meaning that is not there."
What extreme arrogance and pride as stated below.
"Paul wrote that the church was a mystery revealed through himself. Were Jesus to have been teaching regarding the church, that would be contrary to this being a mystery. For Paul's words to be true, and they are, the church including gentiles In Christ was not being taught by Jesus. To include gentile believers into Jesus' saying "the elect" is to read into the text meaning that is not there."
I'm curious, what are you able to tell me about the Koine Greek "musterion", translated "mystery"? Are you familiar with that word?
What does it mean, "a mystery kept hid from the foundation of the world"?
Much love!
I'm sure that Jesus knew exactly who He was speaking of. If you are thinking I'm saying that Jesus was in error, perhaps a more careful reading of my post may be in order?
Much love!
This is exactly true.
So then, can you tell me, why is it there are sheep in the sheep/goats judgment? I don't think your view permits an answer which will agree with Scripture.
Much love!
You have the choice to offer hostility and rhetoric, or something meaningful. Up to you.
Much love!
I think it says that only those who take the mark will be tormented like that. Not those without the mark
Revelation 9:1-6 KJV
1) And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.
2) And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit.
3) And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power.
4) And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
5) And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.
6) And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.
Revelation 7:3-4 KJV
3) Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.
4) And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.
Only these will be exempt.
Much love!
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Love it Mark - made me laugh - Thank You for thatI'm a literal physical Mark.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
You shouldn't think that because someone cannot answer a select question that his position is therefore indefensible. I should think you agree, and yet you are demanding an answer. Wouldn't you rather have the person be honest if he or she doesn't know something? It doesn't at all mean that his or her position is wrong!
I'm Postrib, and have some very good arguments for holding to that position. That doesn't mean I'm absolutely certain or convinced about certain passages that are more difficult. In this case, our brother may not know the answer to 2 Thes 2 and your question about it. But he is absolutely right there that Pretrib has a greater worry, that they cannot come up with any biblical theology stating explicitly that the Rapture of the Church precedes the Tribulation.
I don't mean that you can try to prove an Imminent Rapture, and then argue logically towards a Pretrib Rapture, but that you should produce explicitly Pretrib Theology in the Bible! You won't be able to do it. It's just not there.
For 1800 years Christians read the Bible and never concluded a Pretrib Rapture is in the Bible. Darby got there by his own contrived theology, logically concluding things that were less than explicit--things he wished to believe.
But I will give you my own take on 2 Thes 1 and your question. What were the Thessalonian Christians afraid of? They were afraid that Christ had come back somewhere in the world, and perhaps in some movement claiming to be bringing in the Kingdom of Christ.
Jesus himself had warned about this, and I would assume that this is what he was concerned with--premature claims that the Kingdom has come or is coming imminently. Jesus made it clear in the same Address that he was Coming *after* the Tribulation of the present age, and after the punishment of the Jewish People. He made it clear that any secret Rapture theory was a false one, and that we should only believe he has come if it is a universal revelation to the earth. That is explicit biblical theology.
Pretrib tries to circumvent this explicit theology by splitting the history of the Church from the history of Israel, placing Israel's history in B.C. and in 7 years at the end of the age. But no such distinction exists in Scriptures. It is "read into" Scriptures with the presumption that it is true in advance, without any explicit theology justifying it.
And then, because it is not explicit theology, it is claimed to be accepted only by special revelation, without which Christians are assumed to be blind and unprepared for Christ's Coming. Talk about circular reasoning!
Let me be clear. If Scriptures do not provide explicit theology, you should not believe it. If the Holy Spirit doesn't spell it out, we shouldn't read it in.
That is the problem with Pretrib, and it is a serious offense. They read their theology into Scripture passages, and then concoct a prophetic scheme that just isn't in the Bible.
That being said, I don't hate any Pretribber because like them I was taught it by those who I looked up to. But when I pursued the Scriptures independently, I found no Pretrib teaching in the Scriptures whatsoever. The only thing I had to fight against was the memory of what I had been force fed. Once I got free of the brainwashing, the picture got very clear.
Last edited:
So it makes no sense that the souls of the righteous dead in heaven - such as the souls of martyrs John saw who died for not taking the mark during the tribulation, come with Jesus to the earth, to be reunited with their resurrected and immortalized bodies at the resurrection?
Jesus comes with all those souls, bringing them WITH Him:
1Th 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
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.
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
BTW according to soul sleep doctrine, Jesus can’t bring anyone with Him as He returns to earth, because everyone is sleeping in the dirt, awaiting resurrection.
Except for Moses, of course - he died yet somehow appeared to Jesus on the mount of transfiguration - maybe he got a special permit from God to avoid a dirt nap before entering heaven?
He had said that he answered. I'm pointing out he did not. I'm not impugning his position because he can't answer a certain question I toss at him.
I do in fact know I ask very pointed and difficult questions, and my intent is not necessarily that someone provide me with an answer. I anticipate that people who hold certain views are unable to answer certain questions, and I ask them hoping the person will try anyway, and discover the conflict.
It's intended to make people think.
Naturally not knowing a particular point of fact or piece of evidence does not negate an assertion. The assertion can be correct with the proponent having no idea why. Rules of logic.
I've not read the post past this first part, I don't know whether this leads you to reconsider anything.
Much love!
Similar threads
