50 Reasons For a Pretribulational Rapture By Dr. John F. Walvoord

Good grief man read it again. If you feel the urge to copy and paste the order of terms to reverse the meaning I would caution you against it.

Well - this is quite revealing. It says a lot about how you look down your nose at others...

Proud much?

Your living in denial of God's clear words below, and your not alone.

Your Claim Of A Pre-Trib Resurrection Is 100% (False)

There is one future resurrection of "All" that have lived John 5:28-29, this take place on the (Last Day) John 6:39-40, at the (Last Day) final judgement John 12:48

All That Are In The Graves, The Last Day Resurrection And Final Judgement

John 5:28-29KJV
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

The (Last Day) Resurrection

John 6:39-40KJV
39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

The (Last Day) Final Judgement

John 12:48KJV
48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

The (Last Day) Resurrection And Final Judgement

Revelation 20:11-15KJV
11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

IT WOULD BE A WASTE OF MY TIME TO CONTINUE TO CONVERSE WITH A GUY WHO THINKS HE KNOWS THE SCRIPTURE BUT DOESN'T. In the bible, we are told to dust off our feet and move on.

You are so caught up on DESCRIPTORS you can't see THE FACTS.

Those who believe in pre-trib will be disillusioned because by the time the great trib is in full mark of the beast mode the rapture still won't have happened.

The verse you're looking for is the one we've been looking at all along. It's 2 Thess. 2:3. The falling away happens first and then the man of sin is revealed. The falling away is a prerequisite to the man of sin being revealed.

3Let 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;

@GaryA , what do you believe the verses I pointed out in the above half of this post ^ are saying (if you can gather what my "explanations" are, in this post... hopefully = ) )

If you come to a different conclusion than I have, on the above-mentioned verses, could you please explain *your* understanding of them? Thanks! = )

Who's "nit-picking" about Bill Mounce?

I was asking if the poster who had provided his definition of "apostasia" also agreed with his eschatology.

I myself had also provided Greek scholars (more than one) showing that same word's definition... but heard little response.

His eschatology is not relevant to the subject.

Those kinds of questions nearly always lead to a character assassination.

"The falling away is a prerequisite to the man of sin being revealed"

BUT.........you earlier said the man of sin being revealed is the CAUSE of the (supposed) "falling away". You said that Christians will be anguished and distressed because they realize that they are IN the tribulation. Reread your posts. That is your absurd theory. Makes no sense anyway you slice it.

By the way that is exactly what the false preachers were telling the Thessalonians. And the Thessalonians WERE distressed......NEEDLESSLY. And that's exactly what Paul countermanded with his TRUE teaching.....Of the pre-TRIB rapture. This time in written form, formerly it was a verbal teaching. Aren't we lucky to have it in black and white nowadays?

"The falling away is a prerequisite to the man of sin being revealed"

BUT.........you earlier said the man of sin being revealed is the CAUSE of the (supposed) "falling away". You said that Christians will be anguished and distressed because they realize that they are IN the tribulation. Reread your posts. That is your absurd theory. Makes no sense anyway you slice it.

Hmmmm...
I find it interesting that the phrase "children of the kingdom" is only found in Matthew 8:12;13:38 - something I may not have ever paid any specific attention to.

The words/definitions for both 'children' and 'kingdom' are pretty generic. Both are plural.

On the surface of things, it appears to be an all-inclusive group.

It depends on how 'children' is related to 'kingdom'.
It will require more study...

[DOUBLE POST] sry...will post this again later...






Let me put it like this:



example: The scholars of the esv translation basically have a "bent" toward Reformed Theology



--when it came to their "translating" Rev13:8, rather than sticking to what the text says ('slain FROM [apo] the foundation of the world'), they allowed their "bent" to impact translation, and thus came up with their "interpretation" of that verse (as saying), "written BEFORE [pro] the foundation of the world" (by their view of this being "no different" from the other "similar-sounding" phrase, found elsewhere in Scripture--however, they ARE indeed different!)



--this is the point that Kenneth Wuest is pointing out in his long article I posted some pages back, about our present word under discussion ('apostasia') and how the kjv translators chose to [rather] "interpret" instead of "translate" (the word at its most BASIC meaning , apart from injecting outside "ideas" INTO this word from other texts [i.e. obtained from their surrounding contexts])





So yes, I do believe things like this can color "translation," and "interpretation," and "definitions"...



When one can easily disregard "chronology issues" (to come to the conclusions they do on the Subject of "eschatology"), why not question what else they might be looking at according to their own "bent," or "glasses," so to speak, especially when I've pointed out sources from back as far as the 1300s showing the word was translated (among some of the first English translations BEFORE the kjv) as "[a] departing," or "departure"... and how the Liddell and Scott Greek-English Lexicon shows... where it says this word is a "LATER FORM FOR apostasis" [apo stasis - 'a standing away-from'] (meaning, the same word) and defined as "departure".



What are you seeing wrong with this? I personally do not care what view he holds to, as far as eschatology, but I HAVE witnessed where one's "bent" has IMPACTED "translation" (to instead, be providing an "interpretation"... like in the above-mentioned example of the esv translators [with their "Reformed" bent] impacting the "translation" of Rev13:8... "[Lamb] slain FROM [apo] the foundation of the world" is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT IDEA to that of "[names] written BEFORE [pro] the foundation of the world"... the text actually states the FORMER of these two; whereas the esv "interprets" [not "translates"] it to be saying the LATTER. The text itself doesn't say that though! BE AWARE [and beware!] of the particular "glasses"... Nothing wrong at all with that! if it impacts the actual text of Scripture, etc... That's all I'm saying... in agreement with ONE OF the points made, in the KS Wuest long article I posted, about our present word under discussion.)

I read the first sentence. Thank you for confirming my suspicions. You are about poisoning the well and I am not interested.
We have had these kinds of discussions ad nauseum on our overabundance of KJVO threads. They lead nowhere.

A dozen modern English versions aren't accepted
The KJV isn't accepted
Even the Greek isn't accepted so the beliefs of the translator are questioned.

(I've even consulted 2 German Bibles)

The only component that is exempt from scrutiny in your eyes is pretrib doctrine. This is unreasonable.
I'm returning to skipping past your posts.

We have had these kinds of discussions ad nauseum on our overabundance of KJVO threads. They lead nowhere.

Your claim is (False)

Your Suggested Claim Of The Church (Departing) To Heaven In A Pre-Trib Rapture Is (False)

(Apostasia) A Falling Away Or Defection From Truth Once Held (Apostasy)

Strong’s Definitions
ἀποστασία apostasía, ap-os-tas-ee'-ah; feminine of the same as G647; defection from truth (properly, the state) ("apostasy"):—falling away, forsake.

2 Thessalonians 2:3KJV
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;

I read the first sentence. Thank you for confirming my suspicions. You are about poisoning the well and I am not interested.
We have had these kinds of discussions ad nauseum on our overabundance of KJVO threads. They lead nowhere.

A dozen modern English versions aren't accepted
The KJV isn't accepted
Even the Greek isn't accepted so the beliefs of the translator are questioned.

(I've even consulted 2 German Bibles)

The only component that is exempt from scrutiny in your eyes is pretrib doctrine. This is unreasonable.
I'm returning to skipping past your posts.

The only component that is exempt from scrutiny in your eyes is pretrib doctrine. This is unreasonable.

That's how I'm seeing his "point" / posts, also.


Thus, why I am asking him, "WHAT is it that causes those finding themselves in that time period to be AWARE that they are indeed IN it and EXPERIENCING it... since it cannot be "the man of sin be revealed" as marking that AWARENESS, according to both his view and how Scripture itself is worded... so WHAT DOES MARK it, making them AWARE of its having begun??" (according to Runningman's view, I mean)

On the contrary, I WELCOME for it to be thoroughly scrutinized!!

I find none of the arguments, made by the other viewpoints, to bear up anywhere close to it (same for the past 45+ yrs of my examining this and other views... though I'm willing to change to something IF SCRIPTURE ITSELF confirms another view... I've said that many times... same as was said at the intro to KS Wuest's long article! I AGREE with that! CHANGE if Scripture itself is shown to say something else! I've not seen evidence of that, just like Scripture itself does NOT SAY, in Rev13:8, "[names] WRITTEN BEFORE [pro] the foundation of the world," but INSTEAD actually says, "[Lamb] SLAIN FROM [apo] the foundation of the world." Stick with the TEXT, not one's ideas injected into the text.)

I read the first sentence. Thank you for confirming my suspicions. You are about poisoning the well and I am not interested.
We have had these kinds of discussions ad nauseum on our overabundance of KJVO threads. They lead nowhere.

A dozen modern English versions aren't accepted
The KJV isn't accepted
Even the Greek isn't accepted so the beliefs of the translator are questioned.

(I've even consulted 2 German Bibles)

The only component that is exempt from scrutiny in your eyes is pretrib doctrine. This is unreasonable.
I'm returning to skipping past your posts.