The Tribulation and the Church, WHEN?

[TheDivineWatermark]

We wait only upon very little and the seekers of signs will find themselves caught unawares, just as the Bible says.

There are no "biblically-defined 'SIGNS'" that precede our Rapture.

ALL of the "biblically-defined 'SIGNS'" FOLLOW our Rapture, and take place WITHIN and DURING the future, specific, limited time-period [7-yrs] which leads UP TO [and these 'SIGNS' point toward-->] His Second Coming to the earth, FOR the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom (not our Rapture).




[note: this is not to say that we ('the Church which is His body' [to whom "the Rapture" SOLELY pertains]) are completely clueless; Scripture itself has much to say... much more than we (as a Body) commonly realize]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Just in case it was not clear, the meaning intended here is that all four phrases in blue are referring to the same 'event'.

I disagree that [the contents of] verse 1 and [the contents of] verse 2 are speaking of identical things.

--verse 1 is speaking solely of our Rapture (in its two phrases)

--verse 2 is Paul basically telling them not to be persuaded by anyone telling them "the Day of the Lord IS PRESENT" (it wasn't)

--most versions showing that the Greek there in verse 2 refers to "the Day of the Lord" (rather than the wording of "the Day of Christ" [which phrase indeed refers to something distinct from the phrase "the Day of the Lord"]--and when we grasp that the following phrase is, "IS PRESENT [perfect tense]," then "the DOTL" is the only one that makes sense to the context: "the DOTL" takes place ENTIRELY "upon the earth" (not so, with "the Day of Christ")

--in every place where the phrase "IN THAT DAY" is used in the same contexts as the phrase "the Day of the Lord," they refer to the SAME thing (the same TIME PERIOD), and such is the case with THIS 2Th1&2 context (both chpts) as well, and this is how we can be certain that the phrase "the DOTL" here in 2Th2 indeed means a "time period" (which unfolds upon the earth)

--verse 3, then, is speaking of the time period from the verse IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING [VERSE 2] (this is the grammatically-correct way of reading this), and not reaching way back over and PAST v.2 to grab v.1's "[noun-]event" in order to ascertain what v.3 is actually speaking about, and just what Paul is conveying here



...this is just for starters...

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Verse 2, "...as that [/purporting] the Day of the Lord IS PRESENT [G1764 - enestēken /enistémi ; PERFECT tense]"

https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/2-2.htm




Viewing how this word is used in its other references is instructive, to this end... [brb after I grab that...]

https://biblehub.com/greek/1764.htm [note the "perfect tense" ones... represented by the "R" (in the list of 7 verses at right), the "R"--'perfect tense'--is in 6 of them, and means "is present"]

 

[Absolutely]

Very simple, I do not consider the verses to be pre-trib verses based on my study of the Bible for over 57 years. To be sure I use to believe in the pre-trib rapture and had an open mind to examine the evidence and I just don't buy it. I also have a question for you. Can you name any of the early Church Fathers that promoted the pre-trib view in any of their writings? And as a side note you said this?

"You failed to factor in the pretrib rapture verses.
Why would you do that?" This would be what is known in logic as an argument from silence, at least for me. What do I mean? It's like if anyone was to say, "Show me one verse in the book of Acts where anyone said that Jesus Christ is God." Just because it may not specifically found in the book of Acts does not mean Jesus is God, He is identifed as God in other books.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

So even though we see a" caught up" in rev 14 DURING the gt,you still think the dead in christ are risen after the living in opposition to 1 thes 4.
You have the dead in christ resurrected after the alive ones harvested in rev 14.(postrib rapturists have the dead raised postrib...erroneously)
Oh,and that( rev 14 harvest) is BY JESUS.
So you now must agree with several second comings

 

[Absolutely]

I've studied plenty, likely far more than yourself.

What I don't do is try to use the Bible as a divination tool.

When you come into the land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord. And because of these abominations the Lord your God is driving them out before you.

What's strange is that the moment we are saved we have come into the land the Lord our God has given us..

yet.. there are all manner of people doing these practices, and trying to use the Bible to do them..

Thing is, the Bible clearly reveals what it is talking about, and we can see the fulfillment of the prophecies, many prior to Christ's death, and we see everything played clearly out in early church history. and still playing out today..

We wait only upon very little and the seekers of signs will find themselves caught unawares, just as the Bible says.

Ironica)y history shows no mark,no flying scorpions,no firey hailstones,no one world ruler, and on and on.

 

[Absolutely]

2 Thessalonians 2:

1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Please note that the two phrases in blue in the first verse go together. (i.e. - they are referring to the same 'event'. And, the other two phrases in blue are also referring to the same 'event'.)

Please note that "our gathering together unto him" occurs at "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" - also referred to as "the day of Christ" in verse 2.

The 'falling away' - and the revealing of the man of sin - comes before the 'day' referred to by the phrases in blue.

"Falling away"
Is not there in the greek.
It ONLY says "departure"

Now,read it with "departure"

Ironically it will not fit your deal.
I can read it litterally OR with the added "from the faith"
Either way fits pretrib.

"Second coming" also fits pretrib rapture doctrine

But we jave no case made for mid or postrib rapture.
None

 

[bluto]

You just don't get it.
Only Israelites are witnessing post Rapture. The Church has vacated the earth end of Chapter 3. Read Rev ch 4:1. Kicks off the post-rapture period of the final 7 years.

Cant be more obvious.

You flat out don't know what your talking about cv5. What verse or verses say the Church has vacated the earth in chapter 3 of Revelation? And if Revelation 4:1 kicks off the post-rapture period of seven years why at Revelation 4:8 it says, "Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord God, The Almighty, who was anbd who is and who is to come?"

Revelation 1:8 says the exact same thing, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." And what about Revelation 20:5, "The rest of the dead did not come to life UNTIL the thousand years were COMPLETED, THIS IS THE FIRST RESURRECTION." Plus you have this at Revelation 22:20, "He who testifies of these things says, "Yes, I am coming quickly." Amen, Come, Lord Jesus." Again, there is no rapture and it was made up less than 200 years ago. I ask this question to which nobody addressed? What early Church Fathers ever spoke of a rapture in any of their writings? In fact, can you tell me if any of the Reformers posited a rapture in any of their writings before the tribulation?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[GaryA]

You just don't get it.
Only Israelites are witnessing post Rapture. The Church has vacated the earth end of Chapter 3. Read Rev ch 4:1. Kicks off the post-rapture period of the final 7 years.

Cant be more obvious.

One of the things that people do that keeps them "bound in the snare" and "holding onto error" - is that they spend waaaaay too much of their effort trying to make every-little-thing in the Bible "mean something" that can be wrapped-around and folded-into the magical-mystical woven fabric of ideas that they think is in-of-itself the revelation of the truth (when, in actuality, it is just Wisdom of Men thinking) --- whereas, if they would simply let go of all of that and just pay attention to what the Bible is really actually saying -- they would do far better...

One of the very best things you can do to help yourself to properly understand the End Times Scenario (in fact, it is a "first-level" requirement) is to not assume anything that the Bible does not actually say.

If your study of biblical prophecy is not firmly based on this principle, then you will "miss it completely" - every - single - time.

The Bible is best understood when you simply "take it at its word" - instead of trying to "figure it out" with Wisdom of Men thinking.

Wisdom of Men thinking tries to "solve" everything with 'logic'.

What you need to understand is that 'logic' is but one form of reasoning.

There is another form of reasoning that must be used to understand the spiritual things of scripture -- we call it 'faith'...

The Great Wisdom of God has written the Bible in a way such that those who try to "figure it out" with Wisdom of Men thinking will fail to properly understand it; whereas, those who will accept it in faith and simply allow the Holy Spirit to help them to properly understand what it actually says - without trying to "see beyond" the simple elegance of the scriptures - will succeed.

 

[cv5]

One of the things that people do that keeps them "bound in the snare" and "holding onto error" - is that they spend waaaaay too much of their effort trying to make every-little-thing in the Bible "mean something" that can be wrapped-around and folded-into the magical-mystical woven fabric of ideas that they think is in-of-itself the revelation of the truth (when, in actuality, it is just Wisdom of Men thinking) --- whereas, if they would simply let go of all of that and just pay attention to what the Bible is really actually saying -- they would do far better...

One of the very best things you can do to help yourself to properly understand the End Times Scenario (in fact, it is a "first-level" requirement) is to not assume anything that the Bible does not actually say.

If your study of biblical prophecy is not firmly based on this principle, then you will "miss it completely" - every - single - time.

The Bible is best understood when you simply "take it at its word" - instead of trying to "figure it out" with Wisdom of Men thinking.

Wisdom of Men thinking tries to "solve" everything with 'logic'.

What you need to understand is that 'logic' is but one form of reasoning.

There is another form of reasoning that must be used to understand the spiritual things of scripture -- we call it 'faith'...

The Great Wisdom of God has written the Bible in a way such that those who try to "figure it out" with Wisdom of Men thinking will fail to properly understand it; whereas, those who will accept it in faith and simply allow the Holy Spirit to help them to properly understand what it actually says - without trying to "see beyond" the simple elegance of the scriptures - will succeed.

You might want to think about what it DOESN'T say as well. Such as no mention of the Church in Rev Ch 4 and onwards.

 

[bluto]

You might want to think about what it DOESN'T say as well. Such as no mention of the Church in Rev Ch 4 and onwards.

Yea, your right, like it DOESN'T say anything about a pre-trib rapture which was made up. And I'm still waiting for you or anybody else for that matter where any church fathers wrote about a pre-trib rapture before about 175 years ago. This is what you don't get.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[GaryA]

You might want to think about what it DOESN'T say as well. Such as no mention of the Church in Rev Ch 4 and onwards.

This is exactly the kind of thing I was referring to. You have been led into error - the wrong method of thinking and the wrong approach to interpreting Revelation.

I will see about writing a post to further explain later - I am eating right now, and it would be better to wait until I have finished with that before getting into an explanation that will surely require a longer post...

 

[Absolutely]

Yea, your right, like it DOESN'T say anything about a pre-trib rapture which was made up. And I'm still waiting for you or anybody else for that matter where any church fathers wrote about a pre-trib rapture before about 175 years ago. This is what you don't get.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

Thats been debunked and posted as solid proof there was the pretrib doctrine.
Factor in the catholics that burmed pretrib adherants and their writings as heretics.
Then of course with israel destroyed and the jews scattered it appeared israel would never be a factor in prophecy.
That all changed in 1947.
With the restoration of israel.prophecy was automatically re evaluated.
Again,factor in what we know,not what you want it to be.
Only pretrib rapture is plausable.
The others views are not even plausable.

 

[GaryA]

When Wisdom of Men thinking becomes the core base of your method of interpretation and the fact base of your consideration, the "woven fabric" that I mentioned earlier becomes a consuming pride-based fascination that completely overrides the importance of simply accepting what the Bible actually says.

For as long as you focus on weaving that fabric, it will blind you to what the scriptures are trying to tell you.

 

[Absolutely]

historically, the protestant reformers were historicist in their understanding of prophecy..

futurist is a new phenomenon.. you only hear about it more because it sells more books.

Evidence proves you wrong

Pretrib writings have been found dating 300 ad.
You're one of the few that even pull the church fathers card anymore.
Totally debunked

 

[Absolutely]

OK. I get where you are coming from now.

https://gatheringofchrist.org/getting-to-know-ahayah-in-a-real-way/

Not a good place to start that's for sure.

Like i said
Black hebrew radicals.

 

[Absolutely]

All praises to Ahayah Bahasham Yashaya Wa Raach!
——
Yes that’s one of the Truth Israelite teachers I listen to among others
——
I notice that when people fear truth they go into attack mode. I see it all the time.
——Why?
Because you can’t argue with scripture!
——
I’ve seen scripture quiet those who thought they were knowledgeable in the Word.
——
If this truth were taught in the church everyone would understand scripture.
—
And because they don’t teach scriptural truth what do people really understand?
——
Everyone has been taught by someone and Regardless of teachers we still have to our own research to the truth!
And let the Holy Spirit help us!

Actually truth is truth.
Plain and simple
Like cv said you got a bogus starting place with those radicals you got stringing you along.

 

[GaryA]

For the sake of time - and my fingers - read this post (#70) from the thread 'correctly studying the book of revelation':

https://christianchat.com/bible-dis...e-book-of-revelation.61216/page-4#post-975358

 

[GaryA]

When Wisdom of Men thinking becomes the core base of your method of interpretation and the fact base of your consideration, the "woven fabric" that I mentioned earlier becomes a consuming pride-based fascination that completely overrides the importance of simply accepting what the Bible actually says.

For as long as you focus on weaving that fabric, it will blind you to what the scriptures are trying to tell you.

The threads in that fabric are assumptions you make - and consider to be absolute fact - but that the Bible does not actually say.

However, you are intent on making them the cornerstone basis for your entire eschatology - and you wrap everything around it --- instead of making those things that the Bible actually says the cornerstone basis for your entire eschatology - which is the correct approach.

 

[GaryA]

A really good example of this is the idea that Revelation "flows" 100% chronologically along a prophecy timeline in a total allegorical and symbolic fashion - from chaper to chapter and verse to verse - and that, the "transition" from chapter 3 to chapter 4 represents the 'rapture', etc. etc. etc.

If you have fallen into this trap, then you will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever be able to properly understand Revelation - unless you become willing to pull all of the threads out of that fabric you have weaved and learn to trust more in what the Bible actually says than in the assumptions that come from the Wisdom of Men.

 

[GaryA]

I will now work on showing you some relevant examples of what the Bible actually says...