The Rapture!

[Jac3510]

Quick question here guy's.

Does the belief in pre tribulation rapture require a 3rd comming of Christ?

No. We use the English word "coming" because it is easy, but the technical wording we should be using is either "revelation" or "advent." There are only two revelations or advents of Christ as recorded by the Bible. The first was at His birth. The second will be at the Judgement. The Rapture is not an advent. To the best of my knowledge, although I could be wrong, the rapture is never described by the words under consideration.

[IRQ Conflict]

Thanks Jac, I was believing in pre-trib, but as my sister pointed out to me there is no third coming or 'advent' as you say recorded in the Word.

I'm thinking that when the saints (us) are not prevailing against the enemy that Christ will come then for the elects sake?

Then once we are transformed at His coming we will turn and fight and prevail for our Lord?

Does this sound right? I haven't studied enough to declare anything, it's just off the top of my head.

[Jac3510]

I would encourage you to keep holding the pre-trib position. There are a lot of absolute baseless claims against a pre-trib rapture that show just how really desperate post-tribers and amill's are, i.e., "The word isn't even used in the Bible," or "The Bible doesn't record three comings," and, my favorite, "The doctrine was invented by Darby in the 1800's." Very rarely is Scripture used as an argument. And, any arguments relating to Scripture are typically "explaning away" passages rather than making a solid apologetic.

See, it comes down to this: we all recognize there will be some sort of Rapture. Paul flat says that those living at this event will be translated and meet Christ in the air. We all know how the pre-triber takes this, but the post-triber has to take the ridiculous position that we meet Christ in the air as He is descending. In other words, we are raptured and immediately make a U-Turn mid-air and return to earth . . . that, my friend, is a silly notion all the way around. So, which position seems more reasonable to you?

As for your specific question, I don't think we can say when Christ will return. I don't believe that Jesus will wait until we are just about to lose the battle and then ride in to the rescue. God has a certain plan for the Church, and as soon as that plan is accomplished, He will rapture it and resume His plan with Israel. We are in the time of the gentiles. The question is, when is that full? I have one prof who thinks that God has a particular number of elect He is shooting for. Distinct possibility, I suppose. In the end, all we know is that there is absolutely nothing standing between the us and the Rapture. Thus, the doctrine of imminence.

Now, I do believe that we will return with Christ at His Second Advent and fight with Him, although I'm not sure what sort of fight it will be . . . and, when we return, we will already have glorified bodies. Thus, we will have already faced the bema seat, and our rewards will have already been determined.

Think about that a moment. What has to happen after the rapture, but before the return of Christ? First, there has to be the bema seat judgment for everyone in the Church. Then, there has to be the presentation of the Church, spotless, as the bride of Christ to Jesus. Yes, God is all powerful, but it seems to stretch the mind to think that all of that will happen at the twinkling of an eye!

Hope this helps.

God bless

[B. W.]

Thanks Jac, I was believing in pre-trib, but as my sister pointed out to me there is no third coming or 'advent' as you say recorded in the Word.

I'm thinking that when the saints (us) are not prevailing against the enemy that Christ will come then for the elects sake?

Then once we are transformed at His coming we will turn and fight and prevail for our Lord?

Does this sound right? I haven't studied enough to declare anything, it's just off the top of my head.

I cannot respond fully on this yet but that is what the bible seems to be pointing at. Despite the misconceptions that rapturist are weenies and escapist, the saints (us) will be prevailing against the enemy suffering and dying right up to the time Christ comes for the elects sake. Whether this is before-mid-after - I am not sure of.

Also, why would Jesus leave a gap of time from 70 AD to current date till the end of time and not tell anyone what would prophetically happen leading up to the very end of time? This silence leaves a sour feeling in the belly and let's men use religion as a means to take dominion of the world by any means necessary.

Jesus said that His kingdom was not of this world, if it was, his people would fight for it. Also Jesus denied the devil's offer of the kingdoms of the world but some in his church justify buying the lie instead of denying the offer as Jesus did.

Next, as for the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD being the worst time of tribulation the world has ever seen and never will be seen again forgets that this ideology was written mainly before 1933-1945. Also fails to account for the events of 1948 when Israel defied all probability of survival.

If the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD was so massively unrepeatablely horrible - then what was Lodtz and Warsaw Ghettos? Day camps? What of Auschwitz and the death camps? Vacation resorts compared with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD?

To say so, based on pre WW II worldviews smells of anti-Semitism and reeks of concending arrogance. Please, tell your views to those survivors with the tattoos that are still alive that their suffering was a cake walk compared with Jerusalem in 70 AD.

The Ghettos and death camps of WW II contained the same horrors, plus many new terrors, that Jerusalem 70 AD never had. This goes to show anyone willing to understand that the terrors to come will even outshine these examples. Praise God, Jesus will collect His elect when, where, and how He wills!
-
-
-

[Jac3510]

I do find it a bit amusing that people want to think that AD 70 was the fulfillment of Daniel's 70th week. If you look at the passage itself, Gabriel says the purpose of the 70 weeks (total) is to "finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy."

God must not be very good at prophecy, because, so far as I see it, there is still transgression and sin. And, as our post- and a-mill friends will gladly admit, this prophecy relates to Israel as a nation, and not to the Church. So, that makes the problem even worse, because in AD 70, transgression and sin were not ended!

Even funnier, they want to chastize dispensationalists for inserting a 2000 year gap, and yet they insert a gap themselves of about 40 years. Funny . . . if the 70th weeks started in AD 29, as we all recognize it did, then it should have ended no later than 36! WHERE DID THAT GAP COME FROM? Oh wait, my bad . . . the 70th week is allegorical, unlike all the rest. Look at this:

1. Seventy 'sevens' : 430 literal years
2. are decreed for your people: the literal Jews
3. and your holy city: The literal Jerusalem
4. to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy: the literal purpose of the 70 weeks
5. From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem: literal decree by Artexerxes
6. until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes: Literal Messiah, Jesus
7. there will be seven 'sevens,': 49 years literal years taking us to the last book of the OT
8. and sixty-two 'sevens.' 434 literal years, taking us to 29 or 30 AD
9. It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble: which literally happened
10. After the sixty-two 'sevens,' the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing: literal crucifixion of Christ
11. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary: literally happened
12. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.: Literally happened.
13. He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.

So, 13 isn't really all that literal, even though 1-12 are. And, to top it off, even though the first 69 sevens are literal sets of literal seven years, that last year, where everything is focused, is allegorical! It has to be, of course, because that is the only way to have the Temple destruction of AD 70 be the fulfillment!

There is no way around this simple fact: if we refuse to see a gap, then that prophecy should have ended in 36 AD. Period. Silly preterists . . . don't you just love how they insert these gaps just to support their theology

The entire theology is off base, BW. I wish people would realize that it is thoroughly rooted in anti-semitism

[IRQ Conflict]

Thanks for the feedback guy's! I really appreciate your fellowship!

I have to be honest with you though, I have been a backslider for almost a decade

I haven't studied the Word in regards to Daniel, although I am fairly knowledgable in the rest of the Word, just not prophecy, so sometimes I'll be talking out the posterior heh.

I will be taking what you have said into consideration in my studies. Speaking of which, what do you think of islam and it's relevance to scripture?

I find this site most enlightening.

[puritan lad]

I would encourage you to keep holding the pre-trib position. There are a lot of absolute baseless claims against a pre-trib rapture that show just how really desperate post-tribers and amill's are, i.e., "The word isn't even used in the Bible," or "The Bible doesn't record three comings," and, my favorite, "The doctrine was invented by Darby in the 1800's." Very rarely is Scripture used as an argument. And, any arguments relating to Scripture are typically "explaning away" passages rather than making a solid apologetic.

OK Jac. As I said, I'm game. Let's forget the above arguments (although true) and focus on scripture. You haven't given a single scripture to support the idea of a pre-trib rapture. That's probably becuase their aren't any.

See, it comes down to this: we all recognize there will be some sort of Rapture. Paul flat says that those living at this event will be translated and meet Christ in the air. We all know how the pre-triber takes this, but the post-triber has to take the ridiculous position that we meet Christ in the air as He is descending. In other words, we are raptured and immediately make a U-Turn mid-air and return to earth . . . that, my friend, is a silly notion all the way around. So, which position seems more reasonable to you?

And the pre-tribber has to deny Jesus own words that the resurrection takes place on "the last day" (John 6:39-44), saying that it will happen prior to a 7 year tribulation period (1 Thess. 4:16-17). This despite the fact that 1 Thess. makes no mention of a tribulation period. (There is some scripture for you to munch on Jac.

As for your specific question, I don't think we can say when Christ will return. I don't believe that Jesus will wait until we are just about to lose the battle and then ride in to the rescue. God has a certain plan for the Church, and as soon as that plan is accomplished, He will rapture it and resume His plan with Israel. We are in the time of the gentiles. The question is, when is that full? I have one prof who thinks that God has a particular number of elect He is shooting for. Distinct possibility, I suppose. In the end, all we know is that there is absolutely nothing standing between the us and the Rapture. Thus, the doctrine of imminence.

What is the plan for Israel Jac? Is it different than the gospel of Jesus Christ?

Please give me an overview of your endtimes view. I have some serious questions for you.

[puritan lad]

God must not be very good at prophecy, because, so far as I see it, there is still transgression and sin. And, as our post- and a-mill friends will gladly admit, this prophecy relates to Israel as a nation, and not to the Church. So, that makes the problem even worse, because in AD 70, transgression and sin were not ended!

Correction. In your view, God can't tell time. (By the way, 70 sevens is 490, but I'll write it off as a typo.) To suggest that Daniel's 70 week prophecy is to make Daniel a false prophet (Deut. 18:18-22). Daniel's 70 week prophecy has been fulfilled, completely (and the Apostolic fathers would agree, not that you would care).

Also, no 40 year gap here. By 36 AD, Israel's "desolations are determined", even though that hadn't been carried out yet.

Matthew 23:37-38
“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! See! Your house is left to you desolate;"

As for making an end of Israel's sins (Remember your own interpretation applies this to Israel only), that happened in 70 AD as well.

Matthew 23:31-36
“Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers' guilt. Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell? Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation."

So much for your theory that "this generation" is still with us today.

13. He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.

So, 13 isn't really all that literal, even though 1-12 are. And, to top it off, even though the first 69 sevens are literal sets of literal seven years, that last year, where everything is focused, is allegorical! It has to be, of course, because that is the only way to have the Temple destruction of AD 70 be the fulfillment!

13 was fulfilled literally.

He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven

Fulfilled:

Matthew 26:28
"For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

he will put an end to sacrifice and offering

Fulfilled: (Hint: Animal sacrifices have ended, and contrary to your theology, they will never be accepted again.)

Hebrews 9:12-15
"Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance."

And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.

Fulfilled:

Matthew 24:15-22
“Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened."

Thankfully, good old Luke interprets the "abomination of desolation" for us, as to remove all doubt.

Luke 21:20-24
“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled."

The "Abomination of Desolation" was the 42 month armed invasion of Israel by the Romans in 70 AD (Rev. 11:1-2).

The entire theology is off base, BW. I wish people would realize that it is thoroughly rooted in anti-semitism :(

Good try Jac, but no dice. That's been tried before. Is it not Dispensationalism that looks forward to having 1/3 of the Jews killed off during the tribulation? Even your own Charles Ryrie calls the "the time of Israel's greated bloodbath". Postmillenialism, however, looks toward the future conversion of Israel (Romans 11:25-26), not it's destruction.

How about that Jac? Scripture. Now you give it a try and show me a "pre-trib" rapture?

[puritan lad]

Jac (and/or other pretribbers),

While you are chewing on my reply, maybe you'd like to address a few simple questions regarding the pre-trib view. (I'll even ignore your sloppy treatment of "this generation".)

1.) Where does the 2,000 year gap come from in Daniel's 70 week prophecy? This still has to be answered, and Daniel made no mention of it. 2,000 years is a pretty significant gap to be ignored in a 490 year prophecy.

2.) Why did Jesus tell his apostle's to flee Judea during the “great tribulation” if it was going to be a worldwide calamity taking place 2,000 years into the future?

3.) Why will the days of the “great tribulation” be shortened for the elect's sake, since, according to you, the elect will be raptured away before it even takes place?

4.) Jesus said that the resurrection takes place “on the last day”? Pre-tribbers say that it will take place before a 7-year tribulation period (not to mention a 1,000 earthly kingdom)? Who are we to believe?

5.) According to Pre-tribbers, the resurrection of the righteous dead takes place before the rapture, while the resurrection of the wicked takes place after the “millennium”. When do the “tribulation saints” and/or “millennium saints” get resurrected? Are there now 3 (or 4) resurrections?

6.) To what purposes are the animal sacrifices offered after Christ's millennial reign? According to Revelation 20, the “Gog and Magog” invasion happen after the millennium. However, according to Ezekiel, there will be animal sacrifices after the “Gog and Magog” invasion. What are they for?

That will be a good start.

God Bless,

PL

[aa118816]

Puritan Lad,

Thanks for helping me with Daniel. I have looked at all sides of the issue and I now completely agree that Daniel's weeks were completed in the first century. This seems to be an amazing apologetic that is lost on those whom beleive that there is a gap.

I do not agree with some of the preterist positions, but you have moved me on this one...also it took about a year of study including very smart people on the other side of the debate like Dr. Robert Newman.

Regards

Dan

[Jac3510]

Dan:

You noted that you were fully convinced this prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70. I would like to know how do you understand the fufillment of Dan as literal? The 7th week began in 29 AD. (or 33 AD, depending on when you date things)Everyone agrees on that. Notice a few things.

First, the covenant would be for one seven. That means, it will last for seven years, as per the rest of the prophecy. The suggestion put forward by Preterists is that this is Christ's covenant, but that is never ending, which directly contradicts the text. Secondly, He wouldn't put an end to sacrifice until the middle of the seven. That shouldhaev been 32-33 AD (or 35-36 AD). The sacrifices were put to an end, in this interpetation, at the beginning of the Seven (or the end, but no way in the middle). Thirdly, if you take this approach that Jesus is the "he" then the text says that he will set up the abom. of desc. until the end decreed on him (crucifixion) would be poured out. That doesn't jive. So, what do you do . . . you change the "him" in the second part to be "Israel", whereas in the first part it is "Jesus." The grammar doesn't allow that. If so, it would have had to say "them" (since "many" is Israel), and not "him." Finally, Jesus was crucified at the very beginning of this 70th week. There is absolutely no 7 years of anything in all of this.

I'm curious, then, what your take is.

Thanks, God bless

[puritan lad]

Puritan Lad,

Thanks for helping me with Daniel. I have looked at all sides of the issue and I now completely agree that Daniel's weeks were completed in the first century. This seems to be an amazing apologetic that is lost on those whom beleive that there is a gap.

I do not agree with some of the preterist positions, but you have moved me on this one...also it took about a year of study including very smart people on the other side of the debate like Dr. Robert Newman.

Regards

Dan

Dan,

Glad to have you aboard. Looking forward to discussing other preterist positions.

God Bless,

PL

[IRQ Conflict]

Hey guy's! You gotta read this The Coming King of Kings by Ray C. Stedman

One of the best on rapture doctine Iv'e ever read!

[waynes world]

I hold to the Pre-trib view because that best describes to me what the end times will be like. I guess it could be post trib. What is NOT Biblical is the preterist idea that says the tribulation happened in 70 ad. If that were the case then why is there no record from history that would describe that? Also the promise is that Israel will return to its homeland in the old testament and the opposite of that happened in 70 ad. Israel did start returning in 1948 when it became a state.