Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pretrib Rapture Diehards
Preterist Archive ^ | 2005 | Dave MacPherson

Posted on 10/05/2009 1:14:36 PM PDT by topcat54

Since the 1970's stunning new data has been surfacing about the pretribulation rapture's long-covered-up beginnings in the 1800's. In recent years several persons associated with Dallas Theological Seminary (which had long been pretribized) have reportedly gone to Britain to check on my research sources and then write books opposing my claims. In 1990 an Ohio pastor told me that Dr. _____ _____, the most qualified DTS prof, traveled there and came back and wrote nothing! The pastor added that he and some others had a good laugh. But change was coming. In 1993 Chuck Swindoll, who became DTS president after John Walvoord, stated: "I'm not sure we're going to make dispensationalism [the chief attraction of which is a pretrib rapture] a part of our marquee as we talk about our school." When asked if the word "dispensationalism" would disappear, he answered: "It may and perhaps it should" ("Christianity Today," Oct. 25, 1993)! But a few diehards (with the stubbornness of Iraqi insurgents and New Orleans looters) keep on milking their cash cow while continuing to cover up and twist the following historical facts about their latter-day, cult-like belief:

(Excerpt) Read more at preteristarchive.com ...


TOPICS: Theology
KEYWORDS: development; futurist; history; rapture

1 posted on 10/05/2009 1:14:37 PM PDT by topcat54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: topcat54

The church is not mentioned again after Chapter 3 in Revelation. “Christianity Today”, is not so Christian in their worldview and is a lousy source.

Pre-trib is Truth.


2 posted on 10/05/2009 1:19:30 PM PDT by kingpins10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
Sorry, I couldn't resist...


3 posted on 10/05/2009 1:20:21 PM PDT by Charles Martel (NRA Lifetime Member since 1984; TSRA rookie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingpins10

I happen to believe it, but in the end we’ll all know, and hopefully soon.

I have to say I’m tired. I’d like to go home.


4 posted on 10/05/2009 1:22:17 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

More UNHISTORICAL, UNBIBLICAL, RUBBERIZED BLATHER

FROM THE IRRATIONAL, REPLACEMENTARIANS et al,

I see.

What an UNsurprise.


5 posted on 10/05/2009 1:22:27 PM PDT by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs

I know. are we just spinning our wheels fighting this one world thought that is ocurring right now. Delaying the inevitable?


6 posted on 10/05/2009 1:34:00 PM PDT by mel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Quix
You do realize that typing things in ALL CAPS and/or
COLORS
doesn't make them any more believable?
7 posted on 10/05/2009 1:45:23 PM PDT by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mel

I just cling to my belief in God with a kung-fu grip and put a brave face on every morning.

Truly scary stuff going on right now, but nothing like 1930’s Germany.


8 posted on 10/05/2009 1:50:16 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: kingpins10
It's the weekly dispensational bashing from the usual suspects.

The issue continues to be the reformed theologians total inability to rightly exegete the OT. They cannot interpret the OT without casting it in the light of the NT. They see every prophecy about Israel that wasn't fulfilled as applying to the church ... and where it doesn't make sense ... they pull out the "spiritual sense" interpretation.

The dispensational premillenial position is the natural result of the historical grammatical approach to interpretation coupled with proper theological method. Since both camps would claim to use the historical grammatical approach to interpretation the larger issues are with theological method.

The Dispensational position would use the following theological method when dealing with matters of interpretation:

1. Recognize preunderstanding.

2. Form a Biblical Theology of the OT using a literal interpretation of the OT text.

3. Form a Biblical Theology of the NT using a literal interpretation of the NT text.

4. Synthesize results into a Systematic Theology.

The non-Dispensational method would use the following:

1. Recognize preunderstanding.

2. Form a Biblical Theology of the NT using a literal interpretation of the NT text.

3. Form a Biblical Theology of the OT based upon the NT understanding of the OT text.

4. Synthesize results into a Systematic Theology.

This is the heart of the matter ... they read the NT back into the Old and cannot interpret the OT outside that framework. It is why they must insist that Matt 24 was totally fulfilled in 70 AD.

10 posted on 10/05/2009 2:06:57 PM PDT by dartuser ("If you torture the data long enough, it will confess, even to crimes it did not commit")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kingpins10

When I first became a Christian I became a member of Assemblies of God and remained a member for 18 years. Naturally I was Pre-trib, and EXTREMELY interested in Bible prophesy. I was actually brought to the Lord by Hal Lindsey’s book “The 1980’s, Countdown to Armageddon”. Since then I caught him in a clear and intentional lie in one of his books (A prophetical walk through the holy land) but his failing did not shake my faith one iota. Rather, it showed why he, as well as I, needs the salvation offered through the blood of Christ. But I digress...

A very well read member of our large church gave weekly classes on bible prophesy and was, himself, a strong pre-tribulationist and a personal friend. One day my questions about it reached a head during that class and I found myself leaning towards what can be called mid-tribulationism.

My friend discussed it with me and then gave me a white paper he had written on the subject. I was very excited to be convinced of pre-tribulationism again. After all, who wouldn’t want to avoid all that bad stuff in the first 3.5 years. But as I read his paper and examined each individual
“proof”, one by one, every single one was shot down, leaving me with nothing. I found myself not only questioning his interpretations of some scripture, but strongly disagreeing with his conclusions. The more I read the more I was convinced that his own wishful thinking had brought him to this position.

On a side note, I left that church 12 years ago and visited about 8 months ago. When I entered his class, over half of the people there (about 30 of the 60) were people I attended the class with back in the late 90’s. He was teaching the same class I had cycled through at least twice, to the SAME PEOPLE. He would ask the SAME QUESTIONS and they would give the SAME ANSWERS they did in the 1990’s. I just bit my tongue because, by now, I had some VERY different answers and a LOT of research and documentation to support them.

I am now more convinced of Mid-Tribulationism than ever. Don’t get me wrong, it is not a “bullet” doctrine, but I can’t find anything that supports pre-trib other than the “if it is mid trib events would tell us the exact date” argument, which is easily countered.

About a year ago I found this site: http://watchmanbiblestudy.com/BibleStudies/Definitions/Def_Pretrib.htm

It is worth a read.


11 posted on 10/05/2009 2:10:00 PM PDT by RobRoy (The US today: Revelation 18:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dartuser

WELL PUT

Though it leaves out human perversity in the equation.


12 posted on 10/05/2009 2:11:00 PM PDT by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dartuser
It's the weekly dispensational bashing from the usual suspects.

The issue continues to be the reformed theologians total inability to rightly exegete the OT.

Did all the dispy's get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? Been a while since I've seen it this deep.

13 posted on 10/05/2009 2:19:15 PM PDT by Lee N. Field (It doesn't take much to be a false prophet now beyond a WebTV and a blogspot account.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

“Since the 1970’s stunning new data has been surfacing about the pretribulation rapture’s long-covered-up beginnings in the 1800’s.”

wrong for so many reasons, but let’s assume it completely started in the 1800’s or even 1900’s.

For me, the issue is simply whether something is true, based on the Word of God. Is it there? Not how long people have recognized it was there.

I find a pretribulation meeting with Christ and “those of us who are alive and remain” in Thessalonians. Good enough for me. I wasn’t alive anytime before the 1900’s anyway...

The Reformation did a good job recovering the Gospel. It couldn’t do everything at once - nor did it.

In my experience, it is the wackos who deny the Church and claim it is simply Israel that dredge up this kind of nonsense article. They will not even admit to the New Testament being written to instruct the Church.

But, to each their own. I don’t want to invest my life digging through their trash to try to correct them. And anyway, they are too busy trying to carry out Christian Reconstructionism (see Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Reconstructionism) and stone adulterers with Gary North to accept feedback.

I wish them well.

ampu


14 posted on 10/05/2009 2:19:50 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lee N. Field

Naw.

Sometimes we throw more of your stuff back in your faces than at other times.


15 posted on 10/05/2009 2:21:19 PM PDT by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

INDEED.

Well put.


16 posted on 10/05/2009 2:22:13 PM PDT by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs

You are right there.


17 posted on 10/05/2009 3:11:43 PM PDT by mel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

I’ve gone from pre-trib to pre-wrath myself, but all I can say is, I want to be ready no matter when it happens.


18 posted on 10/05/2009 3:19:46 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dartuser

The 70 AD destruction of the temple is not the fulfilling of Matthew 24 because Israel was not a nation at that time.

In Matthew 24:32 Jesus states, “Now learn a parable of the fig tree...:

Whenever Christ states “now learn” and then speaks in another parable, the fig tree is obviously not the literal fig tree but representative of something. In this case, Israel.


19 posted on 10/05/2009 3:25:33 PM PDT by kingpins10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
wrong for so many reasons, but let’s assume it completely started in the 1800’s or even 1900’s.

It did. There is textual no evidence of a pre-trib rapture in the Bible. Even some dispensationalists have admitted as much.

I find a pretribulation meeting with Christ and “those of us who are alive and remain” in Thessalonians.

If that is all it takes, then I can find transformationalism in there as well. But of course, objectively speaking, there is no pre-trib rapture in 1 Thess 4 (or any place else). If you have to fishing for it if it’s required by your system. Most Christians have a system that does not require a dualistic view of the second coming.

20 posted on 10/05/2009 5:18:20 PM PDT by topcat54 ("Don't whine to me. It's all Darby's fault.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Quix
You said RUBBER …. The Quixomatic RUBBER Meter® is at 3 for the day.

Contestant Q

Thank you for playing. A new game will begin tomorrow.

21 posted on 10/05/2009 5:20:33 PM PDT by topcat54 ("Don't whine to me. It's all Darby's fault.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kingpins10
The church is not mentioned again after Chapter 3 in Revelation.

So what? That's a lousy argument. Since it is a symbolic book, describing spiritual warfare, the identity of the kingdom of light vs. the kingdom of darkness is apparent.

22 posted on 10/05/2009 5:30:12 PM PDT by topcat54 ("Don't whine to me. It's all Darby's fault.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
FYI...I am only responding to your enciteful post to prove that a Christian can believe in the rapture of the church, and a pre-trib one at that, without being likened to radical cult-like diehards (with the stubbornness of Iraqi insurgents and New Orleans looters).

You can most certainly believe however you please about the subject of end-times. The most important issue is, however, what do you believe about getting into heaven? Is salvation by grace through faith in the sacrificial payment of Jesus Christ on the cross? Is it by faith plus good works or can you be saved purely by earning your way there? That's the "meat", all else becomes gravy besides this most important doctrine.

Scripture says one day "we will know even as we are known". The time for arguments will be past and will probably even seem silly.

23 posted on 10/05/2009 5:33:47 PM PDT by boatbums (Pro-woman, pro-child, pro-life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

GOODNESS!

Ms DeMar seems to be quite slow today! Particularly considering that counting to 3 should not be a problem.

Fascinating.


24 posted on 10/05/2009 5:42:03 PM PDT by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

“It did. There is textual no evidence of a pre-trib rapture in the Bible. Even some dispensationalists have admitted as much.”

I really don’t care who said what. I know Greek. I know how to study the Bible. I see a meeting with Christ by “those who are alive and remain”. After studying the Bible, I believe it to be Pre-Trib. I wouldn’t be willing to be martyred for the belief. It is a belief. I really don’t care what you think, or your husband. It seems silly that you want to attack the beliefs of Christians. I suspect people do this from an insecurity, but who knows.

“If that is all it takes, then I can find transformationalism in there as well.

Well, show us a verse then! You’ve been asked 9 times and can’t seem to find one. This is apparently an admission that you have no verse to point to, which is what I believed after our many interactions.

“Most Christians have a system that does not require a dualistic view of the second coming.

I see one time we go meet Christ where He is not on the Earth, but in the sky. I see another when Christ touches the Earth. Since Christ never touches the Earth during the “meeting in the sky”, I don’t count it as a return to Earth. That leaves me with one Second Coming.

In any case, it doesn’t matter to me how many believe it or not. I don’t determine what is true by taking a poll. Those who do will never know what it truth - only what is popular.

I answer to Him, for me.

Thanks,
ampu


25 posted on 10/05/2009 5:59:53 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: boatbums
The time for arguments will be past and will probably even seem silly.

There is no probably about it my FRiend. Believers can, and do, disagree on the details. A seeker stumbling into these threads would surely be led to "Christians are idiots" side of the balance. The fifth grade name-calling (much of which I expect will be directed at me after I press "post") and "My Bible is Better than Your Bible" pissing contests do more to spurn seekers than any single thing we do in the Name of the Lord. I am certain He is not proud of any of this nonsense.

26 posted on 10/05/2009 6:17:35 PM PDT by j_tull (I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
Thank you for your response. I heartily agree. That's why I wanted to “cut to the chase” and reveal the true Gospel - because that is what should be defended, and argued, if need be.
27 posted on 10/05/2009 6:30:09 PM PDT by boatbums (Pro-woman, pro-child, pro-life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

It’s not an “argument” at all. Most Biblical scholars like Dr. Ed Hindson, Dr. Dave Breese, Grant Jeffrey, etc. are of the same opinion.

Not to mention, directly after Chapter 3, the plagues begin. Worldwide inflation, etc.

Time will tell, that is for sure. Peace.


28 posted on 10/05/2009 7:19:20 PM PDT by kingpins10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: j_tull

Scripture has plenty of biting satire and mockery of evil.


29 posted on 10/06/2009 12:37:26 AM PDT by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary

>>I’ve gone from pre-trib to pre-wrath myself, but all I can say is, I want to be ready no matter when it happens.<<

That’s the bottom line. I said earlier it is not one of my “bullet” doctrines. A friend of mine came up with that. I asked him what it means and he said, “do you believe it strong enough to take a bullet for it”.

That certainly clears up what I STRONGLY believe and what I “think” is true.

To give credit where credit is due, here is the friend: http://edgoble.com/


30 posted on 10/06/2009 7:42:44 AM PDT by RobRoy (The US today: Revelation 18:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

That’s a good point. I wouldn’t take a bullet for that belief either. It’s one of those either/or ‘facts’ in scripture. I may steal it, LOL.


31 posted on 10/06/2009 12:25:58 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary

I stole it! ;)

At least by giving my friend official credit here, we know where it came from first. It’s documented. :)


32 posted on 10/06/2009 12:32:47 PM PDT by RobRoy (The US today: Revelation 18:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

OK, then I can’t get away with claiming I dood it.


33 posted on 10/06/2009 12:35:05 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
Pretrib Rapture DieBlowhards

The title needed fixing :)

34 posted on 10/06/2009 12:35:59 PM PDT by Alex Murphy (...We never faced anything like this...we only fought humans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

He sounds like a very interesting character! Thanks.


35 posted on 10/06/2009 8:34:30 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

Ezekiel 13 whole chapter.


36 posted on 10/06/2009 9:17:24 PM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
Ezekiel 13 whole chapter.

???

37 posted on 10/07/2009 6:29:28 AM PDT by topcat54 ("Don't whine to me. It's all Darby's fault.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: kingpins10
Most Biblical scholars ...

I think you mean most dispensationalist Bible scholars. Which is a minority of a minority in the real world.

You might want to broaden your horizons when it comes to which “Bible scholars” you listen to.

38 posted on 10/07/2009 6:56:23 AM PDT by topcat54 ("Don't whine to me. It's all Darby's fault.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

When you say something like, “You might want to broaden your horizons when it comes to which “Bible scholars” you listen to”, you infer that those are the only scholars that I have read.

It is not wise to assume things like that. Reading differing views is always helpful. But as I said, when Christ himself says, “Now learn a parable”, he is telling us to listen and listen closely and search the Scriptures. The signs of a near-future world oligarchy are blinding.


39 posted on 10/07/2009 8:02:07 AM PDT by kingpins10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: kingpins10
When you say something like, “You might want to broaden your horizons when it comes to which “Bible scholars” you listen to”, you infer that those are the only scholars that I have read.

Fair enough. Who else have you read from the non-dispensational world?

It is not wise to assume things like that.

It was a suggestion based on your comment that “most Bible scholars”, etc. Clearly you are misinformed since most Bible scholars do not hold to that opinion.

The signs of a near-future world oligarchy are blinding.

Only to some. Mostly those who have been exposed to the erroneous system called dispensationalism, (e.g., Hindson, Breese, Jeffrey, VanImpe, Lindsey, Ice, etc.). Again, that opinion is a minority view among Bible scholars.

40 posted on 10/07/2009 8:39:23 AM PDT by topcat54 ("Don't whine to me. It's all Darby's fault.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

Funny, there are numerous articles in the MSM calling for a “new world order.”

They’re not talking about ordering from a restaurant menu.

Your hubris knows no bounds.


41 posted on 10/07/2009 3:19:47 PM PDT by kingpins10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: kingpins10
Funny, there are numerous articles in the MSM calling for a “new world order.”

Funny, there is no "gospel according to the MSM" in my Bible. I don't use the "MSM" to help me interpret the Bible. But thank you for pointing out the fundamental problem with futurism.

And a curious evasiveness. I asked a simple question:

Fair enough. Who else have you read from the non-dispensational world?
And you come back with a charge of hubris.

I point out your faulty claim:

The signs of a near-future world oligarchy are blinding.
And you come back with a charge of hubris.

I point out that “most Bible scholars” don’t believe this nonsense, and you come back with a charge of hubris.

The sociological responses are facinating.

42 posted on 10/07/2009 4:07:23 PM PDT by topcat54 ("Don't whine to me. It's all Darby's fault.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

Not going to argue with you. you are correct, I am incorrect.

Peace to you.


43 posted on 10/07/2009 8:39:51 PM PDT by kingpins10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
Ezekiel 13 whole chapter.

???

Did you read the whole chapter?

Paul says...ICorinthians 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples (examples): and they are written for our admonition, (warning), upon whom the ends of the world (age) are come.

Now Paul did not say what was to be written but what had already been written happened unto them. Paul identifies who the them are that was already written about, starting in verse 1 and continues to identify who the them are up to verse 10.

This thread is about what? You think that the Heavenly Father did not know what HIS people would be taught as the end of the flesh age draws to a close? Ezekiel is not the only holy prophet elected to pen what happened to them as our warning as to what would be again.

44 posted on 10/08/2009 1:10:17 AM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson