What is your BEST PROOF for a pre-trib Rapture?

[TheDivineWatermark]

You need to consider how very different things are today in terms of how God relates to us compared to how He did prior to 70 AD. The other HUGE difference is we no longer wait in Hades for redemption and restoration with God upon death. We go straight to heaven upon our physical death. The '"the restoration of all things" was our re-connection to God that was lost in the Garden.
[…]
The resurrection occurred in 66 AD and was witnessed by Nero and recorded by two Roman historians.

Paul was already saying this [in the bold ^ ] was a fact when he penned 2 Corinthians [chpt 5], which, to me, indicates that they were not awaiting the events surrounding 70ad for this to begin being the case... and most scholars believe Corinthians was written in the mid-50s (so this "change" you are speaking of in the bold, did not delay clear to the events surrounding 70ad).

See example in the following quote by GotQuestions:

[quoting GotQuestions] "Date of Writing: The Book of 2 Corinthians was very likely written approximately A.D. 55-57.
[...]
"Connections: Throughout his epistles, Paul frequently refers to the Mosaic law, comparing it with the surpassing greatness of the gospel of Jesus Christ and salvation by grace. In 2 Corinthians 3:4-11, Paul contrasts the Old Testament law with the new covenant of grace, referring to the law as that which “kills” while the Spirit gives life. The law is the “ministry of death, written and engraved on stone” (v. 7; Exodus 24:12) because it brings only the knowledge of sin and its condemnation. The glory of the law is that it reflects the glory of God, but the ministry of the Spirit is much more glorious than the ministry of the law, because it reflects His mercy, grace and love in providing Christ as the fulfillment of the law." [end quoting; bold and underline mine]

https://www.gotquestions.org/Book-of-2-Corinthians.html



I remain unconvinced of your viewpoint.

The '"the restoration of all things" was our re-connection to God that was lost in the Garden.

Acts 3:21 - "whom indeed it behooves heaven to receive until the times of restoration of all things of which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from the age."

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

If the rapture and resurrection occur all at once, as is commonly supposed in futurist circles, how is it that according to Revelation 14:13 and Revelation 21:24-26 people are continuously entering the New Jerusalem long after the resurrection and the rapture? These verses challenge this idea.

• "the Rapture" is a one time event pertaining SOLELY to "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" [all those saved "in this present age [singular]" (Eph1:20-23 WHEN [as to its existence])] (not to all other saints of all OTHER time periods: not to OT saints, not to TRIB saints, not to MK saints)

• "resurrection" does not take place solely at one point in time, but "[each] IN HIS OWN ORDER" (meaning, there is an ORDER/SEQUENCE to it, and there doesn't remain ONLY ONE at ONE point in time; "first resurrection" refers to the "resurrection OF LIFE" [so, first in QUALITY] but this takes place in a few different points in time in the chronology; however, "resurrection" [except in the case/cases where passages are referring to an event LIKENED UNTO a resurrection, which I've pointed out] means "to stand again [on the earth]" and speaks of physically/bodily [not just "spiritually". Job understood this, from the words we see he used in Job19:25-27])

However, what is stated in Revelation 21:24-26 and Revelation 14:13 are exactly what one would expect if life on earth continues after the end of the age and the saints who have outlived the resurrection are each raised to heaven at the time of death.

I believe Rev14:13 is speaking of those saints who die in the trib years (so FOLLOWING "our Rapture" and to whom it is not applicable [though "resurrection" surely is]), and Rev21:24-26 also refers to "the nations of them WHICH ARE SAVED"... whom I believe "death" is not applicable [in the MK age+] therefore no "resurrection" from the dead is necessitated there. [see both parts of what Jesus had said to Martha in John 11:25-26, esp. v.26 (where they are speaking of "the last day" (not a singular 24-hr day)]

Yes, life continues "after 'the end [singular] of the age [singular]'" because Jesus will have returned and all saints will be present and accounted for, to enjoy the MK age by that point in the chronology (at the start of the MK age, Rev19), which is "the age [singular] to come" (Matt12:32) [same as what Dan7:27 speaks of "the greatness of the kingdom UNDER the whole heaven" following the specific day-amounts/time-frame supplied in v.25 there], whereas the phrase "the ages [plural] of the ages [plural]" speaks of what we call "eternity"/"forever".

No one is disagreeing that life continues after "the end [singular] of the age [singular]" at Rev19 His "RETURN" to the earth (for "the age [singular] to come" follows that, and is the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom, aka "the wedding FEAST/SUPPER," aka "the kingdom OF THE heavenS," and the "kingdom" that His disciples were inquiring of Him as to its TIMING in Acts 1:6 ["RESTORE again"] and of which [was INCLUDED in that to which] Peter referred in his words to "ye men of Israel" (who had put Him to death) in Acts 3:21[12,13-15a,17,etc] "restoration of all things of which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from the age."

 

[TooFastTurtle]

DivineWaterMark would you agree that the millennium is part of "this age" and the "age to come" which is eternal only starts at the creation of the New heavens?

I would view it as many did in the past that the millenium is kind of a "Sabbath" in the end, after which the New Earth is coming.

 

[JohnR7]

What would be your BEST PROOF for a pre-trib rapture?

The story of Lot is the "best proof" because Lot is a type of the Church and God removed Lot before He poured out His wrath. "God hath not appointed us to wrath" (1 Thes 5:9)

 

[JohnR7]

"resurrection" does not take place solely at one point in time,

The resurrection takes place at the end of the 1,000 year reign of Christ. "The rest of the dead did not come back to life until the thousand years were complete. This is the first resurrection." (Rev6:20)

 

[Melach]

The story of Lot is the "best proof" because Lot is a type of the Church and God removed Lot before He poured out His wrath. "God hath not appointed us to wrath" (1 Thes 5:9)

but noah is also used by Jesus as an example and noah was still on the earth went through the flood in the ark protected, just like lot was still on earth and just like israelites were on earth during the plagues but they were protected because of the blood of the Lamb. sounds like revelation so...

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

The resurrection takes place at the end of the 1,000 year reign of Christ. "The rest of the dead did not come back to life until the thousand years were complete. This is the first resurrection." (Rev6:20)

The one that the word "THIS" is referring to is (the underlined below):

"Blessed and holy is the one HAVING A PART [G3313] IN the first resurrection! Over these the second death has no authority, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him a thousand years." Rev20:6

But in 20:5, it says of the others, "but the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years shall have been completed" (whereas those HAVING A PART in 'THIS' resurrection ['the FIRST resurrection'... the one 'OF LIFE'] will reign with Him for those thousand years; however, by contrast, it is said of 'the rest of the dead' [that what will be true of THEM is that they] 'lived not again until the thousand years shall have been completed'... see the difference??)

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

but noah is also used by Jesus as an example and noah was still on the earth went through the flood in the ark protected, just like lot was still on earth and just like israelites were on earth during the plagues but they were protected because of the blood of the Lamb. sounds like revelation so...

Yes, I see Noah and Lot as examples of those who are protected through the judgments; whereas Enoch is a "type" of "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" [the ONE BODY] who was taken out [/up] BEFORE the flood judgment came on the earth.

 

[Melach]

Yes, I see Noah and Lot as examples of those who are protected through the judgments; whereas Enoch is a "type" of "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" [the ONE BODY] who was taken out [/up] BEFORE the flood judgment came on the earth.

hundreds of years before the flood. not used even once in n.t. as a type. that is stretching it. but i like you i want to kiss you you are usually polite and friendly

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

DivineWaterMark would you agree that the millennium is part of "this age" and the "age to come" which is eternal only starts at the creation of the New heavens?

I would view it as many did in the past that the millenium is kind of a "Sabbath" in the end, after which the New Earth is coming.

I do believe the "sabbatismos" of Hebrews 4:9 is "the 7th Millennium," yes [aka "The Last Day" / "Day of Rest"], or "the third day" (of Hos5:15-6:3) from the perspective from the time of His ascension (per v.15).


As for the word "age"... I'm seeing it a bit differently from what you've written above... I'll try to explain very briefly here:

• "this present age [singular]"/"this present evil age [singular]" (Gal1:4, 1Tim6:17, Tit2:12, etc) is what is commonly called "the church age" (to which is related the phrase: "and having been established IN THE PRESENT TRUTH" 2Pet1:12)

• "the ages [plural] coming" (Eph2:7) speaks of all of those ['ages'] that FOLLOW "this present age [singular]" (I'll come back to that)

• "the end [singular] of the age [singular]" (Matt24:3 / Matt13:24,30,39,40,49-50, etc) refers to that ['age'] which Jesus and His disciples were STANDING IN and SPEAKING OUT from, but which will resume and conclude in/during the "[future] 7-yr tribulation period that LEADS UP TO His Second Coming to the earth [FOLLOWING 'our Rapture']"

• "the age [singular] to come" (Matt12:32) speaks of that which immediately follows "the end [singular] of the age [singular]" which will be "the promised and prophesied EARTHLY Millennial Kingdom age" (His disciples CORRECTLY understood 'WHAT' this was, they just did not understand the 'WHEN' of it!)

• "the ages [PLURAL] of the ages [PLURAL]" (Gal1:5 for one example of a number of references to this - https://biblehub.com/text/galatians/1-5.htm ) speaks of that which we call "eternity/forever"

...there are other related phrases, but they aren't really pertinent to our present discussion (where we're looking forward).


So where I had put Eph2:7's "that in the ages [plural] coming...," THIS refers to ALL of the "ages [more than one]" that FOLLOW "this present age [singular]" (and which I've LISTED FOLLOWING that particular entry... see there?? ALL of those "ages [plural] coming" is what that particular verse speaks to [ALL that FOLLOW "this present age [singular]"]).

Hope that helps you see my perspective at least a little better.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Sure you can bro! What I personally believe is that I am being thrown by every wind of doctrine when it comes to eschatology. Im DEEP ROOTED when it comes to other things, but eschatology is like the odd man out for me. Everytime I think I gots this figured out I find something else and BAM there goes that.

I have heard many debates, read all the articles the books the this and that. And one thing that I see is that ALL eschatological positions got some MAJOR problems with them, by MAJOR i mean they have to CHANGE what verses mean, or water down the verses to not mean what they plainly say.

I can demonstrate this quickly for ALL common views:

Dispensational premillennialism - You have to imagine that 1 Thess 4:15 is a DIFFERENT COMING than the second coming that everyone was waiting for, EVEN THOUGH its clear when compared to with rest of Scripture that there is only one time Jesus is coming again (Acts 1:11, Acts 3:21) Its also clear that even in the midst of the vials in Revelation 16:15 Jesus is still saying "I am COMING" so He still has not COME! Paul says Christians get rest at the same time as Jesus returns in flaming fire, so clearly not a rapture separate coming: 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9. To their credit: This view is the best of both worlds in the sense that it accounts for the verses that seem to say Jesus could come at any moment, while also taking seriously the many signs preceding the Lord's return concluding yeah these cant be the same event, they are usually taking scripture very seriously and literally (except for interpreting revelation 4:1 ) and a big bonus: the MOST righteous living, Spirit filled, on fire for God Christians I know are in this camp. My church also teaches this. All my favorite preachers teach this.

Historical premillennialism - You have the problem who populates the millennium? 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 proves to be a stumbling stone here too, because all the saved are given rest, glorified bodies, resurrected, and the lost are destroyed, leaving no one left in the flesh the populate the millennium. How do they get around it? They go to Zechariah 14, say some people are left, or try to otherwise twist 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 to say only SOME lost are destroyed, those who WILLINGLY dont know Him and so on. The other problem is, the Rapture seems largely meaningless because Jesus is coming to this very same earth, so why do a U-turn to begin with. To their credit: I believe this view is the one you end up with when just reading the entire book of Revelation and/or bible from cover to cover, which is why it was the most popular view in the early early early church!

Amillennialism - You have to completely twist and turn Revelation 20 and jump all over the Bible to make the claim that satan is bound already. First resurrection is spiritual, yet rest of the dead also live after the millennium, and thats a physical resurrection. Well that means all the saved are part of it too! Making the first spiritual resurrection, being born again spiritually kind of POINTLESS. They also have to ignore Revelation 19 and Revelation 20 are clearly in chronological order, beast and false prophet taken out first, satan then bound, released and then thrown into the lake of fire where the beast and the false prophet ARE (already ARE, cause they was thrown in there in Revelation 19)! To their credit: This view fits the New Testament the best OUTSIDE OF the book of Revelation.


Basically as you can see, MAYBE im just nitpicking, but IMO: ALL the views have holes in em. Which is why we got many VIEWS to begin with! SORRY if I went too long hopefuly SOMEONE has enough patience to read thru my drivel!

I don’t agree with your assessment of amillennialism. Satan is bound in the sense that he is unable to universally deceive Gentiles. Kim Riddlebarger has a good book on amillennialism if anyone wants to read a coherent explanation on problem passages.

But I doubt very many here will put forth much effort in serious study.

 

[bud62]

When JESUS comes the second time, the first thing that happen is that HE slays the wicked by the brightness of HIS coming ,Then the dead in CHRIST will be called up in the air , Then we witch are alive and remain will be called up in the air . And go to heaven for the judgment of the lost or the wicked , so GODs saints will know why love ones or preacher where not saved . Who is left on earth alive ?
Only Satan and His angels . Think GOD , GOD BLESS

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

From what I recall of his writings (KR in Post #1011), he thinks Jesus still does not know the day nor the hour. Is that right?

( )

 

[bud62]

Satan is bound be cause there is no one left on earth for him to temp they are all dead . It spiritual chain not a real chain , a chain will not holed a spirit. GOD BLESS.

 

[bud62]

This means that the 1000 years is in heaven not on earth . GOD BLESS .

 

[bud62]

WE are talking about the rapture right .

 

[49]

Just amazes me that out of all the posts/comments here, even those that agree with some other's replies still do not agree fully. God is not the author of confusion, so why all the confusion?

 

[GaryA]

Not as big a hole as God's temple being gone. Abomination of Desolation, hmmm? The two witnesses not being recorded is small by comparison. How is ANY of this going to happen when Gods temple is gone? MUCH bigger problem in my opinion. A much bigger hole if you ask me, but you're fine with that?

AoD - already happened.
Temple - been destroyed.
Two Witnesses - yet future.

 

[Melach]

Satan is bound be cause there is no one left on earth for him to temp they are all dead . It spiritual chain not a real chain , a chain will not holed a spirit. GOD BLESS.

sounds like adventist doctrine. satan is in the abyss it says. the earth is not abyss. if there is no one left on earth for satan to deceive why does he do just that in the end? this is before the second resurrection. adventists have to change the verse order to make it fit that satan deceives those in the second resurrection somehow and circles the new jerusalem.

 

[PlainWord]

Because God was writing NOT ONLY FOR THAT AGE but for time eternal.

So you believe God intends for every generation to spent all their time and emotional energy waiting for Christ to return? So He pulled the wool over the eyes of His disciples??

John 15:15 I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you.

Some friend!! Your view has Christ as a liar and trickster to His friends.