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

But but but.......what of the Abrahamic covenant, "Palestinian" covenant, and Davidic covenant?
Are you postulating that God has abandoned His commitment, violated His own sacrosanct trust, and kicked Israel to the curb?

That's an outrageous belief system you've got it going on there. Would not touch it with a 10 foot pole.

I just put Truth7t7 on my permanent IGNORE LIST. He makes no sense at all.

First of all, please just write without the caps and other stuff that makes it hard to read on the page. It makes your posts hard to follow when you add all that stuff, and nearly impossible to comprehend in quotes, making replying more difficulty. If you want to emphasize a word or two, pick bold or underline. We don't have sight-word vocabulary for caps so that makes reading comprehension slower and more difficult.

Secondly, the post is hard to follow without the verse in front of us. You spend time posting, but it doesn't do good if people follow what you say. Let's have a look.

II Thessalonians 1
2 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.

Since there is no evidence in the Bible at all for pre-trib, why would I reinterpret this passage in an unnatural way to make it fit your pre-trib theory? The pre-trib theory rests on assuming pre-trib, then interpreting passages like this around the theory.

Chapter 1 already talks about 'that day.' What happens at that time? Let's take a look at all the things that happen. This is addressed to the 'church' there as we see in verse 1.

7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.


'You' in verse 7 is the church, a specific church, but church nontheless in context. We see this is the revelation/coming of Jesus, not 'parousia', but the same event. The church is here on that day to receive rest. The wicked are judged on that day.

The verses you refer to in chapter 2 are just a few verses later. The chapter numbers were added later. So why wouldn't 'day of Christ' in chapter 2 refer to this day of rest for believers and vengence for unbelievers?

Also, the word order in 2:1 does not really fit your scenario either, since you have the gathering together of the saints preceding our Lord's coming, and the verse says, "by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him."

We can also compare the sequence here with that of Matthew 24, which sets the tribulation first, then after the tribulation, the sign of the coming of the Son of Man and the gathering together of the elect. Notice the parallels?

So I do not interpret I Thessalonians 2:1-2 to refer to two separate events. Since I have no motivation to create an argument for pre-trib out of whole cloth, I do not interpret the verse in such a way. Rather, I seek to interpret them consistent with the passage around it and with the rest of scripture.

Do you have any verses you can show that actually teach pre-trib that do not rely on reading pre-trib into the passage in the first place? I would like to see a pre-trib argument that does not rely on circular reasoning or allegorical interpretation if you can come up with one.

Why did HE PERSONALLY Tell people nearly 2000 years ago, to:


Matthew 25:13 (NCV)
13 “So always be ready, because you don’t know the day or the hour the Son of Man will come.

I could write it like this and be just as accurate: "Since there is no evidence in the Bible at all for post-trib"
What you meant to say is that you can't find the evidence that millions of other believers see.

Other Greek texts say "the Day of the Lord." Which is right? I go with Day of the Lord because Paul used that in his first letter. And Day of the Lord fits the context better. They were under severe persecution that would fit Day of the Lord better than "the day of Christ."

Verses 7, 8, 9 quoted above: Which coming would these verse fit better? His Rev. 19 coming to Armageddon, or a pretrib coming as shown in 1 Thes 4?

No one has ever proven that this gathering of the elect is Paul's rapture, and there are good arguments against it. No one argues against Christ coming in chapter 19 as AFTER the trib. We all agree with that. Paul teaches that his rapture / gathering comes just before the Day of the Lord (1 Thes. 5). That certainly does not fit "after the trib. John starts THE DAY at the 6th seal.

Please explain in your own words why they were so upset.

Paul taught that his gathering will come JUST before the Day of the Lord and the start of wrath. We find that at the 6th seal, before any part of the 70th week - which begins at the 7th seal.

Then John saw the just raptured church in heaven in chapter 7 - right after the 6th seal start of wrath. In comparison, John does not get to the days of GT Jesus spoke of until late in chapter 14 - and we see the beheaded begin to show up in heaven in chapter 15. No circles. No allegories. The huge crowd of believers in in chapter 7, NOT in chapter 19.

Probably a wise move.

No.
Creating a contradiction where non exists. Can you show me any scripture that say that angels are not involved in the gathering at the rapture? God often uses agents to do things that He does.

You are the one tying 'peace and safety' to these passages. Matthew says marrying and giving in marriage. Luke's version says "so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man."

I suppose could take the 'days of the Son of Man' to go all the way back to the beginning of the tribulation before the coming of the Son of Man at the end of it. But you cannot show any evidence at all from scripture for the idea of a rapture before the tribulation. It just is not in there. It's a popular theory because the stuff in Revelation sounds pretty horrific and a lot of people do __not__ want to be here. So if the preacher says they won't, they like that. Plus most people do not study the issue enough to see that the whole theory is based on nothing but 'the preacher said so' and reading the pre-trib idea into passages.

When it comes to Noah, Jesus does not say anything about the ark being like Christians getting out of the tribulation by going somewhere else. It's not in here. And the reference to Noah comes after the coming of the Son of Man in the sequence there in Matthew 24

Can you show me where it says there will be a pre-trib rapture. Quote the verse. Don't just reference a passage you think teaches pre-trib without showing the verses and explaining it.

So basically, you get pre-trib by taking a reference and making up an elaborate interpretation that does fit with other scripture.

By other scripture I mean scriptures like II Thessalonians 1, in which the church is still here when Jesus gets back and executes judgment on the wicked. He comes to give the church rest, to execute judgment on them that believe not, and to be glorified in them that believe on that 'day.' Chapter 2 also speaks of the day of Christ. How is II Thessalonians 1 reconcilable with pre-trib? Do you have multiple second comings of Jesus? Where does the Bible hint at the idea that we are looking for Jesus to come back multiple times? Pre-trib interpretations of Revelation are also quite tenuous. The real thing that seems to be keeping you in pre-trib is that abandoning it makes some of your other interpretations fall apart-- but these are very tenuous allegorical interpretations.

I think we have been around the block on this with Revelation 14. I don't see pre-trib in there, but I seem to recall that you had a very weak argument to read it in there somewhere, and maybe it is so weak, I do not remember where you think you see it. Maybe it is because you assume a certain chronology around the harvest, seeing the book as sequential, but only when it suits pre-trib purposes.

Again, my way of interpreting these passages is to anchor my doctrine first to the straightforward passages and interpret allegorical passages in light of the basic doctrine. You seem to ignore or gloss over the straight forward stuff (e.g. I Thessalonians 1) and rely on allegorical interpretations. There is no reason to accept your allegory that the ark equals heaven, for example, or your interpretations of various passages in Revelation. Unless you can actually show some solid evidence for pre-trib, what is the motive for interpreting allegories that way to begin with? Since your interpretation contradicts some of these other literal passages, that is a reason against relying on your allegorical interpretations.

Also, notice the rapture and resurrection occur at Jesus parousia/coming in I Thessalonians 4. In II Thessalonians 2, 'that wicked' is destroyed by the brighteness of Jesus coming. Your interpretation would not even have the wicked one be revealed until after the rapture, so it does not make sense unless you posit multiple parousia. That's untenable. It's just too big of a stretch. You might also posit that Christ is in the clouds of heaven descending slowly for 7 years.... but you'd think they might have mentioned that.

Our hoping being one return of Christ with occurs simultaneous with the resurrection/rapture/transformation event fits the scriptures better. Alegoricalize around that, the straightforward teaching of scripture. I Corinthians 15 also sets the resurrection 'at His coming', not seven years before His coming. This passage also refers to the bodies of those who do not sleep being transformed, which is typically associated with what happens at the rapture.

Your throwing out allegorical interpretations is not convincing. If you want to have a serious conversation, let's talk about how pre-trib could possibly fit with II Thessalonians 1.

Explain why john saw this huge crowd, too large to number, in chapter 7, when John does not start the 70th week until the 7th seal and does not arrive at the midpoint until the 7th seal and does not start the days of great tribulation that Jesus spoke of until late in chapter 14?

Yes, there are other verses that show a PRETRIB Rapture is Possible. But that is obvious. I do not see how come so many are dead set against Pretrib. I has to be because they have grown up HATING, John Nelson Darby, his theology. Do you know I NEVER HEARD of the man until about 1990. Therefore, my PRETRIB beliefs were formed without even hearing one sermon about HIM and His Teaching.

So could PREJUDICE against DARBY, be most of what their resistance is all about ? ? ?

No, that is unlikely, but if people study a bit, they find out that almost no one believed in it before Darby, which is why his name gets thrown around a bit.

Some of us were raised being taught pre-trib, only to study the Bible and find passages that conflict with the idea and realized that the pastors would 'assume pretrib' when teaching certain passages, when there was no reason to interpret those passages through the pre-trib lens.

There are NO postrib rapture verses.
Never seen one.

Unless you happen to know of one...please post it.

I will wait.

Your model has the dead in Christ raptured AFTER the living are gathered DURING THE GT IN rev 14.

Your model has no allowance for the business in heaven.

Your model has no allowance for anything of the wedding in heaven.

You dont have ANY DEFENSE.

YOU just keep saying " if it is a black car show me anywhere "black car" is written on it.

Postrib rapture is just poorly thought out.

Matthew 24
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Post means 'after'. So 'after the tribulation of those days' means post trib.

You assume I have to interpret all parts of Revelation you do except a few pieces, and that harvest means rapture in the pasage. I do not insist that Revelation should be interpreted as an exactly chronological sequence of events.

What do you refer to by 'business'? Be specific. A lot is going on in heaven in the book of Revelation. If you do not present evidence, you do not make a case.

Also, it helps if you show specific verses so I do not have to guess how you interpret the allegories in Revelation.


Show me scripture that says that the wedding is in heaven. If you are talking about Revelation 19, show any verse there that says or implies that there will be a wedding or marriage 'in heaven'. Assuming doctrine is not the same as presenting Biblical evidence for your doctrine. Again, one of my objections to pre-trib is that pre-tribbers 'prove' it by reading pre-trib into a passage, assuming a passage is talking about pre-trib, when there is no reason to view that passage that way and no 'onramp' to the highway of circular reasoning they drive around on. Where is the scripture to justify a rapture before the tribulation to begin with to justify interpreting all these passages in line with pre-trib?

Dual Covenant Theology Is A False Teaching, The Only Covenant That Exist Is The Shed Boold On Calvary

unarguable

This is because J. N. Darby is the father of pre-tribulation doctrine, whether you heard of him or not it is always the arguments he introduced into the church that are used.

Basically he fiddled around with one or two words in 2. 2. Thessalonians. He made the word apostastes to mean departure or removal whereas the true meaning is rebellion and the church has always interpreted it as rebellion and Antichrist the man of rebellion or the man of sin, the son of perdition. He is the perpetrator of the Great Tribulation or the great persecution which Jesus warned would come.

Please stop it. Of course you have

You've been shown 2 Thess 2:1 many times. You just choose to reject the truth.

And remember that "Absolutely" knows quite well that there are NO rapture verses that say that raptured believers go to heaven.

You are in for quite a surprise.....