And I would add that given the basis by which Jesus will proclaim who are the righteous and who are the wicked when He returns, this will not include the church.
Much love!
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!
And I would add that given the basis by which Jesus will proclaim who are the righteous and who are the wicked when He returns, this will not include the church.
Much love!
If this were true, it would include the implicit teaching of Israel's rejection of the offered Kingdom, said offer even being repeated by Peter following Jesus' ascension into heaven.
If Jesus had prophesied the rapture of a gentile church, well, there would be no Gentile church if the Jews as received Jesus, and received their Kingdom.
If Jesus had taught concerning a gentile church, that would have made His offer to Israel disengenuous, and God does not lie.
Much love!
BARNEY BRIGHT
Well-Known Member
The watchtower society didn't inspire 1Thessaloians 4:13-17 in which God inspired the Apostle Paul to write of the resurrection of the dead. Paul was not inspired to write about someone who doesn't die, but all of sudden disappears off the planet because they're changed without dying. Someone changed without dying isn't a resurrection from the dead and the Apostle Paul was inspired to write about the resurrection of the dead. So those who believe in the rapture take 1Thessalonians 4:13-17 out of context. You can say anything you want about me but unlike others who take 1Thessalonians 4:13-17 out of context, I'm not going to agree with that. I know God inspired the Apostle Paul to write about the resurrection at 1Thessalonians 4:13-17, that's a fact, anyone doesn't want to believe that, that's their choice.
BARNEY BRIGHT
Well-Known Member
Why, because you and others are infallible all-knowing beings who could never be wrong about what you say is the truth in the scriptures at 1Thessalonians 4:13-17. I certainly agree that anyone has the right to believe what you think the truth is in the scriptures at 1Thessalonians4:13-17 and express that. However just because anyone doesn't believe God inspired Paul to write about the resurrection at 1Thessalonians 4:13-17 doesn't mean that person or persons are correct. I believe God inspired Paul to write about the resurrection at 1Thessalonians 4:13-17, that's what I believe. Anyone doesn't want to believe that, that's their choice.
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:
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.
It is really that easy to see, Barney.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
In my view that comment would be the tail wagging the dog!
You don't explain the Day of the Lord by the problem you think the Thessalonians were having! Rather, you first understand the Day of the Lord, and then recognize the problem the Thessalonians were having, by contrast.This is an important point. The Day of the Lord must be understood, I believe, by the law, "the simpler, the better." We know what the Day of the Lord is without a lot of theological explanation. It would help to know the background of the term, etc. but we can over-think it to death.
Quite simply, the Day of the Lord is the day Messiah comes back to initiate the Messianic Age, or the Kingdom Age. Every Jew should've known what Jesus meant when he came on the scene proclaiming "the Kingdom is near." He was heralding himself as Messiah, who was bringing access to his Kingdom near. His own presence made the Kingdom near in proximity, near to being able to live by it, even if it was, time-wise, a long ways off.
According to Dan 7, the Day of the Lord would mean the destruction of the Little Horn, the Antichrist, when the Son of Man comes down with his authorization from heaven to establish his Kingdom on the earth. This is why in 2 Thes 2 Paul states matter-of-factly that the appearance and destruction of Antichrist must precede the return of Jesus for his Church. The Kingdom cannot come unless Antichrist comes and is destroyed first.
So what was the problem the Thessalonian Christians were having? They fell into the same trap Jesus warned of in his Olivet Discourse. There, Jesus warned his disciples to ignore the false prophets who declare a false Kingdom, and false religion. The Jews had been using the Law to bolster their claim that God would deliver them from the Romans. But they were only using the Law, abusively, to hide their true guilt.
The Christians failed to see that there were false prognosticators of Christ's Kingdom, claiming that it had a cult-like appearance on earth immediately, at present, being revealed through various false apostles and teachers. Paul argued against this by proclaiming that these movements were not revealing the true Kingdom, but were the work of imposters. They were a façade of Christianity that obviously hid sin in the camp.
Jesus predicted that we would have to face these errors and deceptions first, to be tested as to whether our Christianity is true. And then the Kingdom would come to destroy the false and the sinful.
Therefore, Paul wanted the Thessalonian Christians to know for certain that the true Kingdom comes only at the end of these kinds of movements and heresies, when the errors of Antichrist himself were exposed and defeated.
Last edited:
Let's look at the passage:
2 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;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
For that day shall not come . . . what day? The Day of Christ. I would say this is the same as the Day of the Lord, a day of vengeance and wrath.
And if you had told the Thessalonian Christians that the Day of Christ, or the Day of the Lord, is now here, they would have been troubled, but why? And why in particular concerning our being gathered to Jesus at His coming?
If they were post-trib, then they'd just be being told, it's closer. However, if they were pre-trib, you'd be in effect telling them, you missed it. Or, you were wrong. That's what would be troubling.
And, while apostasia is more often used for rebellion at that time in history, it still could mean departure, and that was the literal meaning to the word.
Aristophanes' "The Birds" used apostasia to describe the humans' flight to the sky-city of the birds. That play, like others from Aristophanes, would have even very likely been known to Paul's audience. He was like their Shakespeare.
Don't worry about what they are telling you that this is the Day of Christ - a day of wrath! That day won't come yet, first, there is must be the departure, and the man of sin revealed.
In that departure is the removal of the restraint of the secret working of lawlessness, as the church is removed, and the restraining of evil - against the believers - stopped.
Remember, I told you this when I was with you.
1 Thessalonians 4 . . . the catching away. 1 Thessalonians 5 . . . the Day of the Lord and Sudden Destruction.
Much love!
And the gentile church is an interruption, more like, God's light to the gentiles while the kingdom promise to Israel is in abeyance due to their unbelief.
God keeps His promises. One, that His light would be also for the gentiles, another, that all of Israel will be saved. So then, when Israel rejected Christ, God sent Paul to the gentiles. And when the fullness of the gentiles is come in, all Israel shall be saved, the kingdom promise fulfilled. The gentiles are not part of that kingdom promise to Israel. And the time in which this will happen, it will be a different dispensation from God.
Paul in no wise states that the destruction of antichrist must precede the rapture of the church. I agree the kingdom will come after the destruction of the man of sin, but again, to Israel, not the church.
Much love!
BARNEY BRIGHT
Well-Known Member
It's really easy for me to see that you're taking this Scripture out of the context of the resurrection. I told you I'm not going to agree with that and I don't care what anyone thinks about it. You don't take scriptures out of context.
At 1Thessalonians 4:13,14 Paul is talking about those who already died, then in verse 15,16 he writes that at the coming of Jesus he resurrects those who have already died which means they have been sleeping in death waiting from the time they died until Jesus comes again to be resurrected by him. Then at verse 17 Paul writes about those who are on earth and are alive who will be caught up to heaven. This means these who are still alive and who will be in heaven, when each one of them dies at the moment they do die, they're instantly resurrected and changed in a twinkling of an eye and caught up to heaven, because these who are on earth and still alive don't have to sleep in death for a period of time when they die as those did who were sleeping in death before the coming of Jesus , because Jesus has already come and his second prescence has already begun.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
Somethings we agree on, and somethings we don't. Let me put it the way I see it. The Gentile Church is hardly an "interruption" in God's plan for Israel! On the contrary, God has always planned, as a priority, to save people out of *all* nations, indiscriminately. He just had to begin with Israel, to start the process.
Israel was privileged to be the initial model nation for the rest of the world. In the same way, Christian nations have been going down the same path that Israel did.
You're right, that each nation has its own prophecy and its own destiny. But all nations together comprise the Church, and this is God's Bride--not His 2nd choice after Israel!
Not even Israel has been rejected in the present age in regard to the remnant that does accept Christ. Nations can begin as a godly nation, and end with a very small remnant that is faithful to God. That's been true of Israel, and it's also true of many Christian nations.
God has not left Israel behind with respect to the remnant that still survives as a Christian remnant. It's just that the recovery of the full nation to God awaits the end of the same process that God is taking other nations through.
We both agree that the 2nd Coming will take place at the destruction of Antichrist. If you want to believe Jesus comes back *before* the Reign of Antichrist, I don't know what you base that on, biblically, but it's certainly your choice to make! Take care!
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
I've been speaking to another in another forum about this. It may be referring to the same issue. I've been trying to tell this person that there is a difference between the time spacing in John's history and in the events these visions refer to. Obviously, in John's personal history, he saw each vision in chronological sequence. He could not do otherwise!
But the visions he saw, though in chronological sequence in his own time, do not represent events with a particular chronological sequence. The narrative, therefore, has a chronological sequence, based on the fact it relates to John's own personal time. But nothing indicates the visions themselves have a chronological sequence matching this order.
On the contrary, I see multiple visions of the same events, flashbacks, prolepses, and a rich symbolism that focuses not on timing issues, but rather, on events that require faithfulness from the Church.
John may see a prolepsis of Jesus coming back in one place. After that he may say, "next I saw," and relate another vision that is a flashback of a time in the past. The fact John says, "next I saw" does not mean he is speaking of events forward in time. Rather, he is just speaking of his own time frame in which the next thing he sees is a new vision.
There is a very specific time frame for the Antichrist. But beyond this we are just given snippets of time in which these things are emphasized, sometimes in repetition, so that the Church is warned about various deceptions and trials to their faith.
For example, the 7 trumpets are given not to show a chronological sequence between them, but rather, to show their unity with one another in pointing to the Last Trumpet. All of these judgments rise almost simultaneously in a crescendo of judgment preparing for the coming of Christ's Kingdom.
They are numbered, therefore, not to show a sequence in time, but rather, to show a commonality in purpose, with a rising crescendo leading towards a common goal--the Kingdom of God.
The 10 plagues of Egypt were different plagues taking place in chronological sequence. But in contrast to this, the 7 trumpets are symbols, and not actual history, to point not to a sequential series of events, but rather, to a variety of events that take place almost simultaneously.
Symbols take place in sequence, but not the actual historical events or matters they point to. There was indeed a sequence in time in the series of visions in which John saw them--it had to be--time moves forward.
But it is an entirely different thing to say the events these visions point to are designed as a timeline of events. We clearly don't have that. We obviously don't have that, since we have the same events repeated more than once, we have flashbacks, and we have prolepses. These cannot take place in a chronological timeline.
Last edited:
I would argue that if we follow the words of the text, we have a very credible timeline, supported entirely from the plain wording of the text.
Parathetical portions are clearly delineated. Prophetic narrative is distinct from symbols, and symbols are defined by the Bible.
You say, we clearly don't have that, we obviously don't have that, these cannot take place in a chronlogical timeline.
But as I read it, of course they take place in the sequence we are told.
The seals are opened, then the trumpets are sounded, then the bowls are emptied.
Wording relates to the actions themselves within the prophetic narrative.
Revelation 8
1 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour.
2 And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to them were given seven trumpets.
3 And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne.
After the 7th seal is opened, 7 angels are given 7 trumpets. The first sounds, and something happens. The second sounds, and something happens. In that sequence, otherwise, how would we know it's NOT that sequence? If that is what is presented?
Much love!
As I said, more like God's light to the gentiles, which He had promised, and He was keeping that promise Even Though Israel rejected Him.
Had Israel received Jesus, God would have fulfilled all related prophecies, and the light to the gentiles would have gone out to them through Israel. When Israel rejected Jesus, God sent Paul directly to the gentiles.
Much love!
By this then you are suggesting that we simply ignore the fact that they are stated as occuring in a sequence? And that the prophetic sequences in New and Old Testaments align in many cases?
The earthquake of the 6th trumpet and the judgments of the first trumpet parallel the destruction of Gog/Magog et al.
The 5th trumpet gives a specific duration, the 5th and 6th are the first and second Woe, the third Woe, the 7th trumpet, Satan cast to the surface of the earth, trapped there, enraged! All of these things in a sequence.
And yes, all leading to the return of Christ, and the judgment of Humanity, and of the Powers of Heaven.
Much love!
Seals 1-6 are opened.
144,000 servants of God are sealed.
An innumerable multitude appears in heaven.
Seal 7 is opened.
7 trumpets are sounded.
The abomination of desolation is set up.
The two witnesses are killed after 42 months.
Israel flees to the wilderness.
The great tribulation has begun.
Image of the Beast worship is required, refusal means death.
The bowls are emptied.
The armies are gathered.
Jerusalem is taken.
Jesus returns.
All this and more is laided out in the Revelation, the 'uncovering' of Jesus Christ.
Much love!
144,000 servants of God are sealed.
An innumerable multitude appears in heaven.
Seal 7 is opened.
7 trumpets are sounded.
The abomination of desolation is set up.
The two witnesses are killed after 42 months.
Israel flees to the wilderness.
The great tribulation has begun.
Image of the Beast worship is required, refusal means death.
The bowls are emptied.
The armies are gathered.
Jerusalem is taken.
Jesus returns.
All this and more is laided out in the Revelation, the 'uncovering' of Jesus Christ.
Much love!
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
Lots of things happen in sequences without indicating a necessary time sequence. If I have 7 books on the shelf, does this mean each one appears in time one after another? No, 7 is simply the number of items to be mentioned. Mentioning them one by one obviously takes place in chronological sequence. But mentioning them in chronological sequence, again, does not indicate they each appear in chronological sequence. I can name each book one after another, and still not indicate that they each appear one after another in time!
So what I'm saying is that the number 7 merely indicates that they are all a unit, a group pointing towards a common end. All 7 trumpets, though mentioned one after another, happen generally in the same time period, and all point to the Last Trump, the coming of God's Kingdom.
Use of similar language from one prophetic event to another does not necessarily indicate the same event is taking place. There may or may not be a relationship. Unless there is a clear connection, we run the risk of confusing two very different prophecies. It's best, therefore, to define the prophecy in its own context first.
What is your evidence for this? As I said, time references to the sequence of the visions do not reflect upon the chronology of the events to which they point. For example, John could say, "first I see this," and then, "next I saw this," and finally, "then I saw this." In John's time, he is saying he sees each thing in sequence. But what he saw could conceivably be the same thing told in 3 different ways.
Okay
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
BARNEY BRIGHT
Well-Known Member
No I didn't you just want to think I did. You're the one siding with Satan, when he said Eve wouldn't die, if she ate The forbidden fruit.The persons who were named Adam and Eve, died. They didn't continue existing in another form in another plain of existence, that would mean they're still alive somewhere, I definitely don't believe that, they're dead just as I said she would.
Last edited:
Similar threads
