Rapture Top Dogs Admit no Proof Exists.

[Lady Crosstalk]

I would say it is simply amazing that many who claim to be Christians take to the Preterist position the way they do.

There is a lot of scripture that talks about the end times and I would say that totally chops the legs out of Preterism.

And if it sealed up the vision and prophecy by 70AD, then Revelation is irrelevant. Matter of fact, John was simply pulling our lariat. it is well documented by early church writers, internal evidence, and extra biblical sources that John wrote Revelation long after 70AD. Most likely 90-95AD. So right there, the Preterist idea falls flat on its face.

You can watch a debate between Hank Hanegraaff and Dr. Mark Hitchcock (Lawyer, Theologian, Pastor) on this very issue. Hanegraaff, the "Bible Answer Man" on radio and a Preterist, it was sad to watch him take the beating he did in that debate. I don't wish ill of any believer, but he really got his clock cleaned by Hitchcock.

You can watch it. It is a 3 hr debate. Guess it will be a challenge here to see who really is interested in both sides of the issue or are content to bury themselves in their own bucket.

Hank Hanegraaff has not much of a following among Evangelicals anymore since he became an Eastern Orthodox adherent, a couple of years ago. Mark Hitchcock is quite respected though.

 

[Keraz]

As Dr. Andy Woods (Lawyer, Theologian, Greek Scholar) has stated, 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is pre-trib rapture..... game, set, match.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 Let no one deceive you, that Day [The Return of Jesus] cannot come before the final rebellion against God, when wickedness will be revealed in human form; the man doomed to destruction. R.E.Bible
NOTHING to do with a 'rapture'!
The convoluted machinations of the 'rapturists' to make this verse support their false theory, knows no bounds!

 

[Copperhead]

2 Thessalonians 2:3 Let no one deceive you, that Day [The Return of Jesus] cannot come before the final rebellion against God, when wickedness will be revealed in human form; the man doomed to destruction. R.E.Bible
NOTHING to do with a 'rapture'!
The convoluted machinations of the 'rapturists' to make this verse support their false theory, knows no bounds!

Oh wise one who is up on all things....

2 Thessalonians 2:3 (1599 Geneva Bible) Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sin be disclosed, even the son of perdition.

Virtually every translation prior to the KJV used "departure", "departing", "the departure", etc. Even the Latin Vulgate (4th century) used the word "dicessio" which has a meaning of physical or spatial departure, not a doctrinal departure. The context of the chapter is laid out in verse 1...

2 Thessalonians 2:1 (1599 Geneva Bible) Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our assembling unto him,

The context is our gathering or assembling to Him, not our defection or "falling away" from Him. This further expounded on in...

2 Thessalonians 2:7-8 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.

It is generally accepted that the "He" that is restraining is the Holy Spirit. Nothing else can restrain evil. And the Holy Spirt indwells the redeemed. So the overall picture is one of the redeemed are gathered to the Lord via the departure.

Context is everything. Apostasia and its variant aphistemi, are used in Greek literature in many ways, including a physical departure as well as a doctrinal departure. The context is key to how the word is used. And 2 Thessalonians 2, the context in the passage that the word is used is our gathering to assembling to the Lord, not our doctrinal departure or "falling away".

An analogy would be something like this... "it was really cool outside today" compared to "he has a really cool motorcycle". Word "cool" is used in both, but have totally different meanings based on the context.

Paul was very good at meticulous sentence structure that is studied in many college level literature classes today. It is key to look at how he developed the passage and the grammar. And it is clear from the context, a departure or "rapture" is in view in verse 3.

Also Greek scholar and head of Moody Bible Institute NT Greek, Dr. Kennth Wuest (1893 - 1961), also showed in his analysis of the passage the same thing. Dr. Andy Woods did a review of Wuest's assertions in 2018 and came to the same conclusion. In fact, even more so that caused Woods to say emphatically that 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is pre-trib..."game, set, match".

Using your assertion, it is convoluted to come to any conclusion that the passage is talking about a doctrinal departure, falling away, or rebellion when the context is clearly our gathering or assembling to the Lord. Seems to me that some have a unhealthy, irrational fear of a rapture. I guess that would beg the question... "Why?"

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

The rapture happens after the resurrection according to Paul. And the resurrection happens on the last day according to Jesus and the gospels.

Amen, and there's no 'rapture' away off mother earth but as of a dust cloud gathered on and over the surface of the globe called earth -- a "cloud" of resurrected and alive "gathered in -up" redeemed.

 

[Waiting on him]

Amen, and there's no 'rapture' away off mother earth but as of a dust cloud gathered on and over the surface of the globe called earth -- a "cloud" of resurrected and alive "gathered in -up" redeemed.

The cloud is the great cloud of witnesses

 

[Keraz]

Also Greek scholar and head of Moody Bible Institute NT Greek, Dr. Kennth Wuest (1893 - 1961), also showed in his analysis of the passage the same thing. Dr. Andy Woods did a review of Wuest's assertions in 2018 and came to the same conclusion. In fact, even more so that caused Woods to say emphatically that 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is pre-trib..."game, set, match".

I do not consider myself 'wise'. Those who do, as the above people, they cannot understand the prophesies. Matthew 11:25
Re the 2 Thess 2:3 verse, to interpret as you and many others want it to mean, requires another scripture that plainly states; "God will rapture His Church to heaven". Lacking such a verse or anything like it, means you are in error to apply a "departure" to it.

Seems to me that some have a unhealthy, irrational fear of a rapture. I guess that would beg the question... "Why?"

I know the Prophetic Word very well and what we Christians are Promised is for us to live in the holy Land, being the people God always wanted there. His witnesses, Isaiah 43:10, John 15:27 and the Light to the nations. Isaiah 49:8, Matthew 5:14-16 Going to live in heaven is never prophesied and Jesus refutes it. John 3:13, John 7:34, John 17:15, +

Any other theory about our future is unbiblical and is a lie from the father of lies.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

... the events of the Book of Revelation are yet future.

Never denied. I just never tried to 'solve' most of its symbolisms because I just know it will be futile to even try. Actually I once upon a time did try while I was young and foolish enough to think I could.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

The cloud is the great cloud of witnesses

Yea! Amen! You sommer make me feel exited!

 

[Copperhead]

I do not consider myself 'wise'. Those who do, as the above people, they cannot understand the prophesies. Matthew 11:25
Re the 2 Thess 2:3 verse, to interpret as you and many others want it to mean, requires another scripture that plainly states; "God will rapture His Church to heaven". Lacking such a verse or anything like it, means you are in error to apply a "departure" to it.

I know the Prophetic Word very well and what we Christians are Promised is for us to live in the holy Land, being the people God always wanted there. His witnesses, Isaiah 43:10, John 15:27 and the Light to the nations. Isaiah 49:8, Matthew 5:14-16 Going to live in heaven is never prophesied and Jesus refutes it. John 3:13, John 7:34, John 17:15, +

Any other theory about our future is unbiblical and is a lie from the father of lies.

The implication of the righteous being removed and hidden where the Lord is is all thru the scripture. Psalms 27:5, Isaiah 26:19-21 which seems to be that passage Yeshua had in mind in John 14:1-3 and Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-18. And many places that reference the "birth pains" or "labor pains" which is generally seen as a precursor to the tribulation period.

But for you to accuse the brethren of a capitol offense is definitely not in your pay grade. You are not the sole arbiter of deciding what the scripture says. To say that those who see a pre-trib removal are promoting lies (malicious intent) and that they are of the father of lies (not redeemed) is sin, pure and simple. You do not have the authority in heaven or on earth to make such judgements. You are condemning those who see the passages as a pre-trib removal of the righteous as essentially being false prophets, and the scripture is quite clear that one cannot make that judgement until what the person(s) has said never comes to pass. So you are prejudging such folks without meeting the scripture standard. And the penalty of being a false prophet is death, which makes you promoting the idea that such are guilty of a capitol offense and should be condemned even before the facts are in evidence according to scripture. Deuteronomy 18:22 & Deuteronomy 13:5.

You guys who don't like other reasoned opinions that contradict your own always seem to resort to worldly, political style character assassination tactics. In your arrogance to prove how righteous your opinions are, you in fact embrace the world system in how you treat the brethren. And the sad thing is, you guys don't even realize that you are conforming to the very thing that is condemned in scripture. It is ok to disagree. We are not robots. But folks like you take it way beyond what is allowed. Especially when it comes to issues that are not a condition of justification.

In none of what I posted did I make any such accusations of lies, malicious intent, false prophets, etc against you or anyone else. That you have resorted to that level of discourse, really, you need to look inward and reevaluate you approach. Else you might be viewed as coming in to disrupt the brethren as a wolf in sheep's clothing.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

The implication of the righteous being removed and hidden where the Lord is is all thru the scripture. Psalms 27:5, Isaiah 26:19-21 which seems to be that passage Yeshua had in mind in John 14:1-3 and Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-18. And many places that reference the "birth pains" or "labor pains" which is generally seen as a precursor to the tribulation period.

But for you to accuse the brethren of a capitol offense is definitely not in your pay grade. You are not the sole arbiter of deciding what the scripture says. To say that those who see a pre-trib removal are promoting lies (malicious intent) and that they are of the father of lies (not redeemed) is sin, pure and simple. You do not have the authority in heaven or on earth to make such judgements. You are condemning those who see the passages as a pre-trib removal of the righteous as essentially being false prophets, and the scripture is quite clear that one cannot make that judgement until what the person(s) has said never comes to pass. So you are prejudging such folks without meeting the scripture standard. And the penalty of being a false prophet is death, which makes you promoting the idea that such are guilty of a capitol offense and should be condemned even before the facts are in evidence according to scripture. Deuteronomy 18:22 & Deuteronomy 13:5.

You guys who don't like other reasoned opinions that contradict your own always seem to resort to worldly, political style character assassination tactics. In your arrogance to prove how righteous your opinions are, you in fact embrace the world system in how you treat the brethren. And the sad thing is, you guys don't even realize that you are conforming to the very thing that is condemned in scripture. It is ok to disagree. We are not robots. But folks like you take it way beyond what is allowed. Especially when it comes to issues that are not a condition of justification.

In none of what I posted did I make any such accusations of lies, malicious intent, false prophets, etc against you or anyone else. That you have resorted to that level of discourse, really, you need to look inward and reevaluate you approach. Else you might be viewed as coming in to disrupt the brethren as a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Amen, Copperhead! It is indeed sad when others in Christ fantasize about putting to death those who dispute their pet theologies. Good thing we have the protection of our rights. The Blessed Hope is that we will be with the Lord Jesus before those rights are systematically stripped away, as they will be under the Ten Kings and their leader, the Antichrist.

 

[Helen]

2 Thessalonians 2:3 Let no one deceive you, that Day [The Return of Jesus] cannot come before the final rebellion against God, when wickedness will be revealed in human form; the man doomed to destruction. R.E.Bible
NOTHING to do with a 'rapture'!
The convoluted machinations of the 'rapturists' to make this verse support their false theory, knows no bounds!

Amen...true indeed.

 

[Helen]

Amen, and there's no 'rapture' away off mother earth but as of a dust cloud gathered on and over the surface of the globe called earth -- a "cloud" of resurrected and alive "gathered in -up" redeemed.

Yes... But they will never drop their "get out of trouble free" card.
They have been sold a lie..and will choose to keep it, as it makes them 'feel good'.
They have everything to lose if they are wrong! The will always hang on to their weak and flimsy verses ...they are much too frightened to let go.
Even though , many many thousands of saints butchered without any rapture have gone before them, they believe their skin will be more precious to God!!

 

[Copperhead]

Yes... But they will never drop their "get out of trouble free" card.
They have been sold a lie..and will choose to keep it, as it makes them 'feel good'.
They have everything to lose if they are wrong! The will always hang on to their weak and flimsy verses ...they are much too frightened to let go.
Even though , many many thousands of saints butchered without any rapture have gone before them, they believe their skin will be more precious to God!!

Nah. New body! Old corruptible skin will be changed to incorruptible skin. Did you not read Paul?

And what of all those believers over the centuries that never faced persecution or harm? Are they somehow not eligible for anything since they didn't have to endure what, say, the brothers and sisters in N. Korea, Sudan, etc have had to endure?

It would seem that in the zeal to attack the pre-trib position, that it almost seems folks actually want all the calamities to fall upon them and others just to prove themselves correct. That really is sad. To wish harm on others just to be able to gloat that the are right in their eschatology.

And it seems so strange... if the pre-trib position is so anti-biblical, then why does the secular world of New Agers, Channelers, UFO types and such expend an inordinate amount of ink and speaking time trying to dismiss the pre-trib portion and almost totally avoid the other positions? It seems goofy that if the pre-trib position is a lie of Satan that Satan would be working overtime to dismiss the idea.

Which should cause anyone in the body to maybe step back and not be so quick to chastise the pre-trib position, even though it is ok to disagree with it, lest they actually be siding with those who hate the Lord.

 

[Helen]

Nah. New body! Old corruptible skin will be changed to incorruptible skin. Did you not read Paul?

Yes, read him many times, and still do...yet nowhere in his writing does he say what the rapturists say that he says!!

 

[Copperhead]

Yes, read him many times, and still do...yet nowhere in his writing does he say what the rapturists say that he says!!

Let's see, rapturists say that the redeemed are removed or depart and are gathered with the Lord before the revealing of the antichrist and subsequent tribulation period begins. Sounds surprisingly similar to Paul's 2nd letter to the Thessalonians.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 (1599 Geneva Bible) Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sin be disclosed, even the son of perdition.

How about the 1534 Tyndale Bible?

2 Thessalonians 2:3 Let no ma deceave you by eny meanes for the lorde commeth not excepte ther come a departynge fyrst and that that synfnll man be opened ye sonne of perdicion

And it must have to do with a removal of the righteous, as the context was established just two verses earlier.... our gathering or assembling to the Lord.

2 Thessalonians 2:1 (1599 Geneva Bible) Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our assembling unto him,

2 Thessalonians 2:1 (NASB ) Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,

How is it that Paul doesn't say what rapturists do?

 

[Davy]

Yes, if you mean Sinai Covenant! But the Noahic Covenant, the Abrahamic Covenant, the Davidic Covenant, etc are all still very much intact and current.
....

The old covenant is NOT... the New Covenant. Can't apply old covenant links to those other covenants either, since they were given PRIOR to the old covenant and law. Yeah, I know what you're thinking. You're thinking the covenant God made with David was under the old covenant. David's throne per that covenant is for Christ Jesus, The King. Jesus was the King of Righteousness Hebrews 7 spoke of that met Abraham, which happened PRIOR to the old covenant. So Jesus has always... been our rightful King. The throne for the nation of Israel was only a temporary thing until He comes Who's right it is, i.e., Jesus Christ (Gen.49:10; Ezek.21:27).

 

[Davy]

And if you read closely, the New Covenant is one made with all Israel, both houses, all tribes. Not a word about a gentile in the passage.

Believers, made up of both Jew and Gentile, are the body of Messiah. Also called the bride of Messiah. Israel is not the bride of Messiah or the body of Messiah.

Again, you have to be reminded that the New Covenant by Faith was given first... to Abraham, even before the children of Israel were born. And God gave Jacob the new name Israel PRIOR to giving the law through Moses. The word 'Israel' represents the TRUE House of God, and is forever connected with God's Salvation through His Son Jesus Christ, even in the time of Abraham when The Gospel was preached to him.

This by Apostle Paul destroys any fleshy claims by Jews to being the only Israel...

Eph 2:11-14
11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14 For He is our peace, Who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
KJV

Paul didn't say there that Israel will have their own covenant, and the Gentiles will have their own covenant. The Gentiles will be JOINED as spiritual Israelites along with believing Israelites into ONE BODY, and that... is Christ's Church. It is to Christ's Church that those covenants and promises now belong, and that is... what Paul's "commonwealth of Israel" is per the New Covenant. Do you even know what a 'commonwealth' is? It is made up of more than one nation.

 

[Copperhead]

those other covenants either, since they were given PRIOR to the old covenant and law.

Really? When was the Davidic covenant given before the Torah? Seems that it was given in 2 Samuel 7, which as best I can tell, was a considerable time after the Torah was given.

I wouldn't go jumping too fast before getting your facts straight. It weakens your case.

 

[Copperhead]

Paul didn't say there that Israel will have their own covenant, and the Gentiles will have their own covenant.

That is true. But the covenant with Israel was a national, earthly covenant. The covenant the redeemed are a part of is not in the same league.

Jeremiah 31:31-32 Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord.

The covenant is with the Hebrew people just like the Sinai covenant was.​

 

[Davy]

But if you actually read the scripture, you would find in 2 Chronicles that several times many of the northern tribes migrated south and joined the southern kingdom as the northern kingdom went from bad to worse. One of those events over 100 years after the Assyrian conquest of the northern kingdom.

And if you read Ezra, you would find that the remnant he brought back from the Babylonian exile were called Jews 9 times and Israel 40 times.

And if you read Nehemiah, you would find that the remnant he brought back from the Babylonian exile were called Jews 11 times and Israel 22 times.
....

There you go again pushing that same old falsehood. They taught you well.

The ten northern tribe "kingdom of Israel" with its capital city at Samaria, under king Jeroboam of the tribe of Ephraim, contained the majority of Israelites, even after some of its remnants went south to join with Judah.

You cannot... assume ALL of the ten northern tribes migrated south to join with Judah after king Jeroboam in the north setup idol worship in the north. That was at the start of his reign when God first gave Jeroboam of Ephraim to reign over the northern ten tribes of Israel. Only small REMNANTS of the northern tribes left the north and went south to join with Judah. If they ALL had, then you would have to scrap the rest of the history written after 1 Kings 12 to 2 Kings 18, because the northern "kingdom of Israel" couldn't have existed by your false assumptions!

Per Ezra 2, the ONLY tribes mentioned returning after the Jews' 70 years Babylon captivity are the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. And then foreigners are mentioned. And I've already explained WHY the Jews were called Israel at that time, i.e., because the ten tribe northern "kingdom of Israel" had already been removed out of the holy lands! You just skipped over my explanation of that, showing you have not really read all the Bible history on this matter.