where has it been debunked? where is the proof?That's been Debunked already.
where has it been debunked? where is the proof?That's been Debunked already.
Thank you for your honesty. You have actually read the Mcdonald prophecy, many people just parrot what they heard from someone that Darby got the rapture from McDonald's visions. If you read it, it is not pre-trib as you said.The alleged version of the Margaret McDonald prophecy I read did not seem to be talking about a pre-trib rapture at all. Darby was a cessationists. There may have been some interaction between Darby and Irving at...I can't remember of the estate where they held the end-times discussions back in the 1800's in England.
The Catholic Apostolic Church movements idea of the millinneum, from what I read, is quite different from dispensationalism.
It doesn't say it anywhere...yet it is peddled by many as factual!yes! everyone always says 144 000 jewish evangelists but it doesnt say that anywhere. its made up where does it say anything about evangelism
Your whole point is the rapture will occur when Christ returns "PRIOR" to the seven year period of the great tribulation, that's it.
So, we read the following at John 6:39, 40, 44, and vs54 which all say the same thing, "I Myself will rasie him up on THE LAST DAY." How do you prove that your pretrib rapture contention is "BEFORE" the last day? It has already be proved when the last day is by what Jesus stated at Matthew 24:3 when the disciples (three of the disciples that is) said to Jesus, "what will be the sign of Your coming, and the end of the age/world.?
Now, (and speaking of Matthew 24) what is your opinion of starting at vs40-41? "There shall be two men in the field, one will be taken, and one will be left?" vs41, "Two women will be grinding etc.I almost forgot to tell you that it was taught people would mysteriously instantly disappear causing other to die from plane crashes etc. Then even made movies of this kind of thing happening. Since you don't personally believe it then why was this such a popular belief among pretrib scholars?
False.....his faith was in the BLOOD....and he KNEW OF THE REDEEMER as evidenced by Genesis 3:15......man...you guys really devalue the thread of grace, O.T. prophecies of Christ and faith....Abel was a Christian? Abel placed his trust in the resurrected Jesus Christ? Not. Abel had faith in God but not the cross of Christ. The Church began after the resurrection.
Study EVERY word applied to them and every location they arw mentioned....do the math I.E. reason out who they are and their purpose and WHAT they are called!Who are they then? What is their purpose?
False.....his faith was in the BLOOD....and he KNEW OF THE REDEEMER as evidenced by Genesis 3:15......man...you guys really devalue the thread of grace, O.T. prophecies of Christ and faith....
In the VOLUME OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME......go translate what Eve said when she had Cain....even she understood the prophetic utterance of Genesis 3:15......
yes! everyone always says 144 000 jewish evangelists but it doesnt say that anywhere. its made up where does it say anything about evangelism
Thank you for your honesty. You have actually read the Mcdonald prophecy, many people just parrot what they heard from someone that Darby got the rapture from McDonald's visions. If you read it, it is not pre-trib as you said.
If you've been following what I've put about "SEQUENCE/CHRONOLOGY," then you can see that Matthew 24:14 [see that verse] is what WILL be taking place IN/DURING the trib [FOLLOWING "our Rapture"]... and then compare that verse with Rev7:9,14 (which passage is set incontradistinction to "the 144,000" in the earlier part of that chpt).
Then see also the very brief excerpt I put, about the study [long ago, somewhere] how "Paul" is a "type" of the FUTURE "144,000" (the study showed their many points of similarity... I didn't put the actual "study" in a recent post/diff thread, just a few points regarding it).
and that "the 144,000" are said to be "firstfruit" (of a "harvest"), NOTING the TWO DISTINCT mentions of "firstfruit" in Lev23, and which I've shown in past posts that the wording in Rev14:4 parallels the wording of the SECOND of these TWO mentions of "firstfruit" in Lev23 [v.17] (associated with the "WHEAT harvest"), where it also says, the "TWO loaves" and "baken WITH LEAVEN" [that ain't US--see 1Cor5:7 "ye are UNleavened" stated factually]
[note also the phrase "a KIND of firstfruit, said in James]
2Th1:7 just says, "ye who are troubled REST/REPOSE with us IN THE REVELATION of Jesus Christ from heaven with His mighty angels"...
the text does not have the words "WHEN," nor "you WILL RECEIVE [rest when]," nor "He WILL GIVE [rest when]"... but is simply stated factually, "ye who are troubled REST/REPOSE with us IN THE REVELATION OF..."
https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/1-7.htm
"the DOTL" and "IN THAT DAY" (whenever used in close proximity / same contexts), always refers to the SAME TIME PERIOD, and thus is the case also with chpts 1 and 2, here! (where this is the proof that the "time period" spoken of [DOTL/IN THAT DAY], ARRIVES well-before Jesus Himself returns[/arrives] to the earth at Rev19/His Second Coming to the earth time-slot)
Jesus invented it .
Noah,Lot,all the examples are prejudgement.
Are you aware you need a post judgement "taken"
The "one taken" of mat 24 is not in a destroyed earth/population context ,neither is the "5 wise virgins taken" context
2Th2:3 - "that day ^ will NOT be present if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE *FIRST*…" (ONE THING named as being *FIRST* b/f the DOTL can BE PRESENT to unfold upon the earth with its "man of sin" and ALL he is slated to DO over the course of those 7-yrs)
Liddell and Scott (1895) - "apostasia - LATER FORM FOR apostasis"
"apo stasis" - "a standing away from [a previous standing]" or, DEPARTURE... but here in our verse it is "THE Departure" (the one Paul had JUST MENTIONED in v.1!)
[and recall what I'd put about the "stasin/stasis" verse]
Show me some passage where there is a sequence of events and a pre-trib rapture occurs? Otherwise, show me where there is more than one parousia/coming of Christ after His ascension. The things that occur at the parousia do not line up with the pre-trib theory. The man of sin is destroyed at the brightness of His parousia. The dead in Christ rise and the rapture occurs at His parousia.Your case is weak.
The ac is revealed, No problem.
He is revealed to us,
The world welcomes him as a great man.
There is no conflict with the pretrib rapture.
I even believe we will all be rounded up and detained by the thousands.
The bride will be raptured from those facilities......pretrib
Apparently there was one guy named Ephraim who believed in something along the lines of the pre-trib rapture. I know of no evidence that Darby had heard of him. As far as I know, Darby invented the dispensational pre-trib rapture, or re-invented pre-trib. I see no evidence that the apostles believed it or that any church taught it before Darby.Thank you for your honesty. You have actually read the Mcdonald prophecy, many people just parrot what they heard from someone that Darby got the rapture from McDonald's visions. If you read it, it is not pre-trib as you said.
Darby did not invent the pre-trib rapture, nor did Scofield. In fact I disagree with the Scofield Bible, where? Not so much in any particular doctrine since I have never read a Scofield Bible and I do not know what the man believed. I am just on principle against ALL commentaries that are attached into the Bible. Because many times what happens is people forget which part was commentary and which part was the actual words of Scripture and they equate the two.
If I would read what Scofield thought perhaps I would agree with him, perhaps not. I just believe the best way to come to truth is through Scriptures being revealed to us by the Holy Spirit, not some church father in the past or Darby or Bible commentary or some modern day Bible teacher. Those are all nice things to have, but they are not the way to approach this topic, I believe.
So now we get to 2 Thess chapter 2. Paul says again, don't get shook up regarding the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering to Him." (vs1).
vs3 says, "Let no one in any way deceive you,
for it will not come "UNLESS THE APOSTACY COMES FIRST, and the man of lawlessness is reveale, the son of destruction."
This is perfectly consistent with the words of Jeus at Matthew 24:15 where Jesus tells us what to do when the Abomanation of Desolation is revealed.
No, Paul is NOT saying [v.1] "don't get shook up REGARDING the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering-together [event] unto Him"
[that is to BLUR TOGETHER two entirely distinct items--and most ppl do this (which is incorrect) so don't feel bad, you're not alone! lol]
No, Paul is NOT saying [v.1] "don't get shook up REGARDING the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering-together [event] unto Him"
[that is to BLUR TOGETHER two entirely distinct items--and most ppl do this (which is incorrect) so don't feel bad, you're not alone! lol]
Verse 2 says that, and then goes on to talk HERE (in VERSE 2) about "what" they are not to "get shook up" about, and it's NOT what you just suggested it was ^ , but something completely DIFFERENT.
[… ^ the part you are LEAVING OUT COMPLETELY, which is part of WHY you are not grasping what is actually being said]
[that (what you are doing) is to BLUR TOGETHER two entirely distinct items--and most ppl do this (which is incorrect) so don't feel bad, you're not alone! lol]
Define the "IT" of this sentence (correctly) and then you will begin to see clearly what Paul is actually conveying (which is NOT what you are suggesting he is conveying!)
You are making distinctions and creating categories without Biblical justification to do so, and when doing so runs against both historical interpretation and the natural reading of the text.[that (what you are doing) is to BLUR TOGETHER two entirely distinct items--and most ppl do this (which is incorrect) so don't feel bad, you're not alone! lol]
Most ppl define what v.2 is talking about INCORRECTLY [he's not talking about the "event" of VERSE 1 in this VERSE 2!], thus missing what Paul is actually conveying.
but "the DOTL" will "ARRIVE" way back at the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3; Matt24:4/Mk13:5; SEAL #1; Dan9:27A[26]/2Th2:9a/8a[not 8b!] all speaking of the "START" of the 7-yrs!... THIS is when "the man of sin be revealed" NOT at the later [MID-trib] 2Th2:4/Matt24:15 [AoD] thing! (which is also the Dan9:27B MIDDLE part)