Posted on 07/07/2007 7:48:37 PM PDT by tnarg
Mark it down as biblical truth: There is no pre-tribulation rapture.
However, untold thousands believe in the "secret rapture of the church" prior to the tribulation period. This is because untold thousands don't want to have to think of suffering through a tribulation time frame. The late Corrie ten Boom called this pre-trib rapture teaching the "American doctrine." Go figure.
The belief in a secret rapture of believers before the tribulation is also because of a best-seller, "The Late, Great Planet Earth," by Hal Lindsey which was set loose in the l960s. It has been a paperback aggressively pushed by practically every evangelical / fundamentalist engine going.
Theologians, videos, films and preachers bolster up this myth with their earnest preachings and teachings.
Yet this is nothing but a myth, accented as much by certain theologically conservative Protestant segments similar unto the Roman Catholic underlining of the immaculate conception of Mary. Nevertheless, if there is no biblical support for such a Mariology teaching, it is bogus. Likewise, the pre-tribulation rapture teaching is bogus.
The pre-trib rapture concept was manufactured in the 1800s in an 18 year old Plymouth Brethren girl's dream, told to her Pastor, John Darby, and then relayed to C. I. Scofield who bought into the dream as revealed truth. Scofield placed this pre-tribulation rapture notion as a footnote in his popular Bible, hence the spread of the myth.
However, just the opposite is biblical truth. In Matthew 24:29-3l, for instance, the rapture ("gathering together") is placed in the same time frame as the open second coming of Jesus Christ. And all of this is "after the tribulation" (verse 29). That is it in a nutshell!
Yet pre-tribulation rapturists sidestep this clear passage for more oblique passages. The latter are twisted and turned in order to fit into the "American doctrine." Yet such twisting is not sound exegesis. And for biblically-riveted evangelicals and fundamentalists to commit this drastic error is bordering on the horrific.
All other passages in Scripture relating to the "gathering together unto Him" must refer back to the literal time line provided by Jesus in Matthew 24.
One must not use a symbolic passage in the Book of Revelation or any other symbolically-based section of the Bible by which to draw a pre-tribulation rapture doctrine.
Further, one must not take words of the apostle Paul so as to insert them opportunistically into a conjured pre-tribulation string of Scripture references. Yet this has been done ad infinitum.
Instead, Jesus' literalism of Matthew 24 must be used as the benchmark for all other "gathering together" themes of Scripture.
One starts with literalism and moves into symbolism when seeking to understand Scripture; it is not the other way around.
During the 1970s and 1980s there was much written and preached about a pre-tribulation rapture. This has wound down some in the last decade or so. Why?
Today, with the world situation being what it is, there is not that much risk-taking in preaching dogmatically the pre-tribulation rapture. Why?
Is it because there are many who are beginning to question its validity? Is it because the world state is so uncertain that to go out on a limb with a false hope may ricochet?
One wonders, with world events progressively becoming more and more anti-Christian, why the pre-tribulation rapture persons are not celebrating each dawn as the day when Jesus may return to earth.
Such is not the phenomenon on a large scale. Furthermore, it may be because the next generation has not bought into this notion.
In any case, it is a myth, a legend of conservative Protestantism's own conjuring and has no base in the Holy Scriptures.
Yet these very Protestants are the ones who ardently point out the myths of Catholicism while holding to some of their own myths. Both segments of Christendom need to do some serious housecleaning of manufactured legends in order to return to the simple Bible truths; otherwise, the church suffers from severe lack of knowledge.
What is so frightening about holding to a pre-tribulation rapture? It is more than mere academic quibbling. Holding to such a notion is drastically weakening the church worldwide.
The church should be preparing for spiritual battle against the most evil forces arrayed by hell.
Instead, the church is languishing with a false hope. This is all orchestrated by the demonic powers in order to eventuate in a limp army of believers. And to see that through in this age of laxity in religion does not take much on the part of the dark powers. In addition, the apostate segment of religion is doing its fair share of blackening truth.
Does it take much intelligence to realize that there are awesomely wretched days yet ahead for the righteous remnant?
Those who are not strong will drop--fall away, as biblically predicted. They will be too numerous to contemplate. But for those who are truly into carrying the daily cross there will be nothing able to thwart their zeal for Christ.
Already the remnant is being strengthened by the Spirit of light. He is gathering His own together in the power of the resurrection and the might of the revealed Word. There numbers are few; but their ardor before the Father is lovingly honored.
Set your vision upon the difficulties yet to be. They are but the trials permitted by the coming Christ.
At the close of the tribulation period, then there will be the gathering together of the believers from the four corners of the earth. They will greet Jesus in the clouds as He descends through space, having left the right hand of the Father in heaven.
The gathering together ("rapture") and the second advent then will be realized as one and the same event occurring at the end of the tribulation time frame. Jesus' declaration in Matthew 24:29-3l states it clearly.
That isn't very fair, is it P-Marlowe. You told me what you believed and I didn't ridicule you, now did I?
The word 'Saxon' is believed to be derived from the word seax, meaning a variety of single-edged knives.
It's certainly a possibility but in my "expert" opinion, and I am stipulating it is just an opinion - the Sax-Ons / Isaac Sons, makes a great deal of sense. Perhaps the Saxons were also known for carrying single-edged knives and that could be where that theory came from.
Indeed, but I didn't ridicule the experts.
I sometimes rely upon "experts". Especially in those areas (i.e., Greek grammar) where I have little or no personal knowledge.
Sometimes it is best to defer to people who know what they are talking about and then form our opinions on the meaning of certain passages. Many of these "experts" that you ridicule are men of good faith who have studied the scriptures dilligently for longer than you or I have been on the planet. They may not be right, but their work is worthy of consideration.
Whenever I come up with some oddball theory, I find it a good practice to consult with Gill, Clarke, Robinson, JF&B, K&D, Barnes, Thayer, Strong, Matthew Henry, John MacArthur and Calvinist Dark Lord to see whether or not anyone else on the planet is in agreement with my particular interpretation. If not, I tend to discard it as being vain.
I'm vain enough without thinking I'm smarter than those guys.
I didn't ridicule anyone. I did point out that there are experts of every ilk. I haven't studied that long but I do know when I listen to some of them that it is not what the scriptures say. I don't just mean that I disagree with what they say but that what they say disagrees with scripture. I enjoy learning from others, many here on Free Republic, as they seem to have a lot to offer.
I'm vain enough without thinking I'm smarter than those guys.
I don't believe anyone here thinks they are smarter than anyone else, including the experts. My point is just that the experts are all over the map in their beliefs. It is total confusion, at least it is to me.
......Ping
In post 104 I provided you with commentary from 4 (actually 7) commentators who were all in agreement with each other in their disagreement with your (rather tortured) interpretation of II Thess.2:9.
I asked if you could provide me with one commentator who agreed with you, and you couldn't. Yet you persisted in your insistence that you were right and that the purpose that those experts served was "To completly confuse as many people as possible." (perhaps said in jest).
The commentators are fairly consistent in their interpretation of II Thess 2:9. It appears that in regard to II Thess 2:9, it is fairly clear that your interpretation is not shared by anyone who has actually done a detailed study of the verse. So either you are smarter than all the experts or you are wrong.
I've been wrong before.
Is it possible that you are wrong in your interpretation?
If not, why not?
It's not the labels that concern us...
The Catholics (and others) teach that the Tribulation has already passed...They claim that Jesus Christ already showed up the 2nd time Spiritually...And that Jesus is now reigning on earth leading His Kingdom...
They, the Catholic church is the 'New Israel' under the 'new' covenant...
The Post-Millenialists as I understand it figure they'll go on thru the Great Tribulation but somehow miss the Wrath of God...They as well, reject the Restoration of Israel (the real Israel) as far as I know...
Pre-Millenialists believe the bible when it says Jesus will show up from Heaven WITH the saints to combat Satan and protect the Jewish remnant that survives the Great Tribulation...
There a myriad of details in this operation...
And why is it important to get worked up about the Pre-Millenial position??? The main theme of the bible is the Kingdom...With Jesus Christ as it's King...The O.T. is chock full of information of the restoration of Israel to the Kingdom...
The United States is in the position to protect the Jews as well as take their side of the coming conflict...
Although the bible says ALL Nations will turn against Israel, and be judged accordingly, individual Christians must side with Israel...We must recognize that God is not done with His chosen people, Israel...
Well, actually, yes, it is the labels, and you've kindly provided us with a nice list of "bad labels" to prove the point.
But here's the deal: Jesus doesn't much care about what particular labels you want to apply. What He said was for us to take up our crosses and follow Him.
What we're supposed to be worrying about is stuff like this:
For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.' Then the righteous will answer him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?' And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.' (Matt.25:35-40)
He also said not to waste time on worrying about whether or when the end comes -- he just said to be ready for it when it does come (see Matt. 25). And if, when it does come, you've taken up your cross and followed Him, you haven't got anything to worry about.
OTOH, note that Jesus didn't much care about your various "-ists" believe -- well, maybe He did, as far as the Scribes and Pharisees were concerned, but his point there is that they were missing the point, to everybody's detriment.
What this controversy seems to be about, is whether or not people will get hurt when He shows up again. Well, Jesus makes no bones about the fact that there is short-term cost to following Him -- what do you think "taking up your Cross" is supposed to mean, if not difficult times?
And none of this twaddle about pre-/post-millenialism adds a damned bit to our chances for salvation -- but it does injure the Body of Christ, which cannot be viewed kindly.
I have not heard this before. Catholic believe Trib passed, Jesus 2nd time but only spiritually, and CC is the new israel. Got more info? Any sources? I am interested to know more.
I know I'm not smarter and I believe I'm not wrong so that just leaves - I believe they are wrong. If 100 men stand there and tell you the world is flat, after an exhaustive study, but God's Word told you the world was round who would you believe? I know that isn't quite fair as they are also using the Bible as reference but that is how I feel. I just do not agree with them.
"I've been wrong before"...... Is it possible that you are wrong in your interpretation?
Yes, of course it is possible. When I read it it seems to point to the One that comes after Satan, the One that will destroy him "with the brightness of His coming". To me it is Satan who has all power and signs and lying wonders and Christ will consume him with the "spirit of His mouth".
The only one that "comes after Satan" is Christ, so if not understood as I do it would have to be that the "him" in vs.9 is Satan himself who has given power to the anti-christ. That would make the two entities separate beings. To me, scripture tells us that they are one and the same. The anti-christ being the religious beast of Rev., a role Satan plays to fool mankind.
So, I could be wrong but it just wouldn't make sense to me.
the purpose that those experts served was "To completly confuse as many people as possible." (perhaps said in jest).
No, no jest was intended. I know that, God is not the author of confusion, but our different religions, interpretations, etc. can certainly confuse His words.
You are not a dispensationalist at all if you think that the Church is going to go through the time of Jacobs trouble,(Jer.30) Daniels 70th week (Daniel 9).
The Church must be taken home before the Tribulation begins since the Tribulation is for the Jews, not the Church.
The Church returns with Christ in Rev.19 to set up His Millennial reign.
Excellent post-thanks.
Enoch was taken by God in Gen.5
This is just nonsense about the 'lost ten tribes' and the word Jew only refers to the Southern Kingdom.
Amen.
So?
That means that all of the tribes are represented by the term Jew.
Amen.
Romans 11.
Rev.19 explains that the anti-Christ (who Satan indwelt) and the false Prophet are put alive into the Lake of Fire.
Satan is put into a bottomless pit for a 1,000 years (during the Millennial reign) and then released for a short time to deceive the nations again leading to the 'Gog-Magog' revolt.
After that is put down, he is put into the Lake of Fire, which was originally created for him (Matt.25).
You do not need to consult the 'experts' but you do need to consult all of the scripture.
Where are we disagreeing? I said the same thing FTD. Because of those scriptures I see that it is Christ coming after Satan's lying wonders. As I said, I could certainly be wrong but that is what those scriptures say to me.
FTD wrote to attiladhun2: You are not a dispensationalist at all if you think that the Church is going to go through the time of Jacobs trouble,(Jer.30) Daniels 70th week (Daniel 9)..... The Church must be taken home before the Tribulation begins since the Tribulation is for the Jews, not the Church.
Jeremiah 30:7 Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it.
Of course His children won't experience His wrath. He assures us of that. We are "saved out of it" by knowing His Word, knowing that the fake comes first and being prepared for it.
Rev.12:17 tells us that the dragon is coming to earth to, "make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.: That is us. We will be here. Also, please note Jer.30:3 - "My people Israel and Judah". There are two different houses.
Please explain to me why you believe Daniel 9 tells us the church will be taken home before the tribulation and why the "Jews" will experience it.
Atilladhun said: "No one was “raptured” during Noah’s flood. Noah and his family went through the judgment, safe in the Ark of safety, just as also Christians go through tribulations of all kinds safe in the arms of the Savior.".....FTD replied: Enoch was taken by God in Gen.5
I agree with Atilladhun. Noah was one of our examples and He gave us many. He will keep us safe during the time of trouble if we don't fall for Satan's lies and stay true to the true Christ. Enoch was "taken" by God, as was Elijah but Noah, Daniel, the 3 Hebrew children, God's children during the Exodus, were not. They endured as He wants us to. They went through the trouble with His protection.
This is just nonsense about the 'lost ten tribes' and the word Jew only refers to the Southern Kingdom.
Then you call His Word "nonsense". It is there and He wants us to understand.
No! What that means is that some Israelites from the Northern Kingdom decided they had enough and moved south to be with the Jews who at that time were observing God's laws. This is one of the reasons why: [I Kings 12:31-32] And he made an house of high places, and made priests of the lowest of the people, which were not of the sons of Levi. And Jeroboam ordained a feast in the eighth month, on the fifteenth day of the month, like unto the feast that is in Judah, and he offered upon the altar. So did he in Bethel, sacrificing unto the calves that he had made: and he placed in Bethel the priests of the high places which he had made.
And this is what subsequently happened in the North:[I Kings 14:15-16] For the LORD shall smite Israel, as a reed is shaken in the water, and he shall root up Israel out of this good land, which he gave to their fathers, and shall scatter them beyond the river, because they have made their groves, provoking the LORD to anger. And he shall give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam, who did sin, and who made Israel to sin. This is also why most of the Levites ended up in Judah....they had been spread evenly among the twelve tribes.
So....the Benjamites, most of the Levites and some of the folks from all the other tribes became known as Jews. Strong's #3064. Yhuwdiy (yeh-hoo-dee')a Jehudite (i.e. Judaite or Jew), or descendant of Jehudah (i.e. Judah (Jew)
The Israelites who stayed in the north retained that appellation (Israelite)...never being called Jews in scripture. I know some of you just have a burning desire to prove me wrong, but Biblically....you cannot.
[I Kings 12:21-24] And when Rehoboam was come to Jerusalem, he assembled all the house of Judah (Jehudite), with the tribe of Benjamin, an hundred and fourscore thousand chosen men, which were warriors, to fight against the house of Israel, to bring the kingdom again to Rehoboam the son of Solomon. But the word of God came unto Shemaiah the man of God, saying, Speak unto Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, king of Judah, and unto all the house of Judah and Benjamin, and to the remnant of the people, saying, Thus saith the LORD, Ye shall not go up, nor fight against your brethren the children of Israel: return every man to his house; for this thing is from me. They hearkened therefore to the word of the LORD, and returned to depart, according to the word of the LORD. The people in the Northern Kingdom were never called "Jehudites"!
Now Mr. Missler can write anything he wants and I'm sure a great many people will "take it to the bank". He is known to be a man of God and this is what caused me the concern.
[II KIngs 17:6] In the ninth year of Hoshea the king of Assyria took Samaria, and carried Israel away into Assyria, and placed them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes. And verse 18 tells us: Therefore the LORD was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight: there was none left but the tribe of Judah only. We know from previous posts (and Holy Scripture) that the tribe of Judah now consisted of Judah, Benjamin, Most of Levi and some Israelites from all the other tribes who did not want to live under the ungodly rule of Jeroboam.
Since we all know Mr. Missler to be an honest man I guess we can just chalk this up to "Honest Error" since it disagrees with scripture.
Another thing also caught my eye.....:Eventually, all 12 tribes were represented in the south. God even addresses the 12 tribes in the south: "Speak unto Rehoboam the son of Solomon, king of Judah, and to all Israel in Judah and Benjamin...."
This is the passage in context: [I Kings 12:16-23] So when all Israel saw that the king hearkened not unto them, the people answered the king, saying, What portion have we in David? neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: to your tents, O Israel: now see to thine own house, David. So Israel departed unto their tents. But as for the children of Israel which dwelt in the cities of Judah, Rehoboam reigned over them. Then king Rehoboam sent Adoram, who was over the tribute; and all Israel stoned him with stones, that he died. Therefore king Rehoboam made speed to get him up to his chariot, to flee to Jerusalem. So Israel rebelled against the house of David unto this day. And it came to pass, when all Israel heard that Jeroboam was come again, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel: there was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only. And when Rehoboam was come to Jerusalem, he assembled all the house of Judah, with the tribe of Benjamin, an hundred and fourscore thousand chosen men, which were warriors, to fight against the house of Israel, to bring the kingdom again to Rehoboam the son of Solomon. But the word of God came unto Shemaiah the man of God, saying, Speak unto Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, king of Judah, and unto all the house of Judah and Benjamin, and to the remnant of the people, saying, Thus saith the LORD, Ye shall not go up, nor fight against your brethren the children of Israel: return every man to his house; for this thing is from me. They hearkened therefore to the word of the LORD, and returned to depart, according to the word of the LORD.
Now....most students of the Bible know that Rehoboam reigned in Judah from 931-913 B.C. These same students of the word also know that the Assyrian deportation took place in 721 B.C. and the books writing about these events were written after the return of Judah from Babylon(525 B.C.)
Now, I'm not going to call Mr. Missler a liar....because I know him to be a man of God. I am going to say that Mr. Missler is being very disingenuous in his comment that "Eventually all 12 tribes were represented in the south." So what! The exile of the Northern Kingdom happened 200 years later! When the Jews returned from Babylon 400 years later they testify to the fact that Israel is still in Assyria! [II Kings 17:22-23] For the children of Israel walked in all the sins of Jeroboam which he did; they departed not from them; Until the LORD removed Israel out of his sight, as he had said by all his servants the prophets. So was Israel carried away out of their own land to Assyria unto this day.
By the way.....I'm not a British Israelite! I am a student of the Bible and tend to believe what it says! If you post anything else by Mr. Missler I probably won't take the time to read it. When scripture tells me that the Nation of Israel is still in captivity (525 B.C.) and secular history tells me they are still beyond the Euphrates (first century A.D./Josephus) it makes Mr. Missler's essay all the more asinine!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.