Thief in the Night-- Pretrib or Second Coming?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,807
4,308
113
mywebsite.us
'begin' is inherent in the 'come into being' definition of G1096

'come into existence' - 'begin to be'

'begin' describes the transition from the non-existence state to the existence state

At the core of the definition is the 'action' of something "coming into being" or "beginning to be"...
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,807
4,308
113
mywebsite.us
And, regarding G5034:

G1722 + G5034 = "in haste"

You are dancing around a pinhead trying to make 'in haste' (G5034 modified by G1722) mean something devoid of the relative time-frame part of the definition.

"... things which must - "in haste" (hurried movement through a brief/short span of time) - 'come to be'..."

"... things which must/will soon begin to happen/occur/transpire..." (modern english equivalent)
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,112
113
Peter also said that Jesus would remain in heaven until the time of restoration of all things. It is a big stretch to say that all that destruction during the tribulation is the restoration of all things.
You're tending to do what FreeGrace2 also tends to do with this verse, and that is, mis-quote a very important word--sometimes even leaving it out altogether when quoting this verse as your support (...as well as leaving off the ending phrase).

You think it is saying, "until the TIME of restoration of all things." (as though it occurs at a moment-in-time / point-in-time). But it says, "until the TIMES of restoration of all things having been spoken by the mouth of His prophets from the age"... and that INCLUDES Israel once again being called by God "My people" (or, "My people, Israel"--whereas presently they are "Lo Ammi" / "not My people") which, as I've stated in past threads, starts at some point WITHIN the Tribulation period (not commencing upon its conclusion, as many suppose).

--"the TIMES of restoration" involves more than merely the point in time of His Second Coming to the earth; it also involves the "blindness [/a hardening]... UNTIL" (and again, that "UNTIL" thing is not referring to the point in time of His Second Coming to the earth / Return... it's too late at that point!!)
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,112
113
'begin' is inherent in the 'come into being' definition of G1096
'come into existence' - 'begin to be'
'begin' describes the transition from the non-existence state to the existence state
At the core of the definition is the 'action' of something "coming into being" or "beginning to be"...
So what you're saying is that Luke 21:28's saying "begin [G756] to come to pass / to become / come to be / etc [G1096]" is redundant?

I'm not seeing it so.

That's because the "things" in this passage (and the other) take time to unfold ("become" / "come to pass"); but in Lk, it's exhorting regarding the "BEGIN" part (for them to start looking up when those "things" BEGIN)
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,807
4,308
113
mywebsite.us
The 'FROM NOW' is inherent in the relative time-frame part of the definition of G1722+G5034.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,112
113
The 'FROM NOW' is inherent in the relative time-frame part of the definition of G1722+G5034.
Not really... coz it doesn't mean that in either Luke 18:8 (G1722+G5034 are used), nor in Rom16:20 (where used); rather, means that, when it takes place / occurs / happens (whenever that is slated to take place), it will be "IN QUICKNESS" that they occur. Not that they will "SOON" take place (in any of those three passages).
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,112
113
All of it - the whole thing - 'The Revelation of Jesus Christ'.
"The Revelation of Jesus Christ WHICH GOD GAVE UNTO HIM [unto Jesus] TO SHOW UNTO His servants things which must come to pass in quickness..." is talking about the things which take place "after these [things]"... that is, after "the things WHICH ARE" of chpts 2-3.

Chapter 4 verse 1 is the next occurrence of this word "TO SHOW" and speaks of "after these [things]" (after the things which ARE, of chpts 2-3), John is then called up, and it is said to him at that point, "and I WILL SHOW YOU what things must take place after these [things]" - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/4-1.htm (what is being "SHOWN" to John [and beyond him to the other "servants"--see Rev7:3-4 for example] is the "future" aspects of the Book, not what comes before chpt 4).




[let the readers note what John is told to "Write" per 1:19... and recall that the Greek word "mello" (v.19c) also carries the meaning of "[is] SURE [to]" (meaning the same basic meaning as "MUST" in vv.1:1 and 4:1)]
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,807
4,308
113
mywebsite.us
So what you're saying is that Luke 21:28's saying "begin [G756] to come to pass / to become / come to be / etc [G1096]" is redundant?
It is not redundant.

Look more closely at the definitions of G756 and G1096.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
That's not what either 1Cor15:23 says, nor Rev10:6 says. = )
You haven't proven your claims. They are only opinions.

If you are such an expert on a pre-trib rapture, why can't you quote ANY verse that shows Jesus clearly taking resurrected, glorified believers to heaven?

That is the crux of the "rapture"; Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven. There are NO verses.

That would be the ONLY WAY your view gets any cred.[/QUOTE]
This isn't your quote. It was mine. Please figure out how to better format your posts.

Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father en ho epouranios (g2032 epouranios) post-resurrection per Eph 1:20 correct?
Why don't you quote the verse so everyone can see? I don't believe your claim. Prove it by quoting the verse.

I mean nobody's going to argue against that right?
Wrong. Quote the verse and THEN we'll see.

Well then see Eph 2:6.......we, the Church the Bride are sygkathizo en epouranios.
Yeah, real helpful. Just quote Greek as if that does it. Quote the verse, and then explain the Greek words.

Do I have that right bro? Because if I am right you are wrong.
Of course you aren't right. You are DEAD wrong. You have NO verse showinsg Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven.

Why doesn't that bother you? That is the main focus of the pre-tribbers; that glorified trip to heaven after the resurrection.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
In FACT, the mission is to get the 2W up to heaven. And they will get up there. So no mission will fail. Sheeeesh.
Same words (G305 G1519) that are used in references to these "2 Witnesses" are used in a passage saying this:

"...they went up [G305] into [G1519] the upper room, where they were staying, both Peter and John, and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James."
Exactly !! Same words. And NONE of those mentioned in the UNNAMED verse you quoted were glorified or received resurrection bodies.

And NEITHER will the 2W.

Now, one could say (as you are) that the rest of the verse (following those two words) never states that they actually ARRIVED there (at the time being referenced) WHERE the others were located... but I think that would be to grossly misunderstand the text.
Totally irrelevant.

No, this Acts 1:13 means that they actually "went up INTO" the upper room (at that time)
Are you trying to be dense. Of course the 2W went back up to heaven. Why would you think I don't think they did?

My only point was that they were NOT glorified when they went up. Don't you even know what you are debating about?

As to your earlier point about not having the definite article with "resurrection" one can't assume there will be only 1 is ridiculous.

You may check this out yourself, but doing a word search in the entire Bible there are NO uses of the plural of "resurrection". It is ALWAYS in the singular.

Here is what else I found:

"the resurrection"

ESV = 144 times
Berean Study Bible = 137
NKJV = 183

"a resurrection"

ESV = 22
NIV = 19NKJV = 25

So you have no point. The Bible screams just 1 resurrecction for the saved and 1 for the unsaved, and that is very clear from Rev 20:4-6.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
cv5 said:
The thing is bro.....the pre-trib rapture doctrine is the eschatological component (related quintessentially and uniquely to the Church alone) that never contradicts Scripture. Really its breathtaking in its all-encompassing perfection.

Post-trib is a bull in the china shop. Daniel's seventy weeks gets trampled, as do the words of Jesus, Paul, and pretty much everything else.
I notice your posts tend to be like this, as opposed to actual detailed reasons for believing in pre-trib, or even specific problems you think you see with Daniel or elsewhere with post-trib.

It comes off as eschatological puffery, but where is the substance?
That's a very good word for all of the posts on the theory of pre-trib rapture: puffery. There is NO substance at all.

I keep asking for the verse that describes Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven but they just ignore it. Because they know.
 

Maey

New member
Oct 4, 2022
1
1
1
God bless u. God always with u. May God use u for his glory
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
But you CAN'T exegete any glorified trip to heaven because there aren't any.

What chapters? And what is your question?
"What chapters? And what is your question?"

Rev 4 & 5. The nature and identity of the 24 Elders bro. Still waiting for your......"opinion".
Since the Bible doesn't 'identify" any of them, who cares? And what is the importance of them to your theory anyway?

According to Henry Morris, who is unfortunately a pre-tribber like you, he suggests that the 24 elders are the 24 patriarchs listed listed in the line of of the promised seed. page 88 in his book "The Revelation Record", an excellent verse by verse commentary except for his silly notions about a retrib rapture.

So what do you suppose they represent or are? And back up your claim with Scriptural evidence.

"But you CAN'T exegete any glorified trip to heaven because there aren't any."

Here are a few helpful thoughts pertaining to our heavenly destination. With obvious rapture connotations. Pretty clear bro.

1Co 15:40
There are also celestial G2032 bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial G2032 is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.

1Co 15:48
As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, G2032 such are they G2032 ➔ also that are heavenly. G2032

1Co 15:49
And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. G2032
Seriously? You actually think these verses support Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven before the Tribulation?

Why? Paul is simply explaining the difference between mortal and immortal bodies.

You are definitely straining through a very narrow straw.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
22,846
8,324
113
FreeGrace2 said:
Since the Bible doesn't 'identify" any of them, who cares?
OK bro have it your way....

Rom 1:18
But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness.

Rom 1:19
They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
22,846
8,324
113
You haven't proven your claims. They are only opinions.

If you are such an expert on a pre-trib rapture, why can't you quote ANY verse that shows Jesus clearly taking resurrected, glorified believers to heaven?

That is the crux of the "rapture"; Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven. There are NO verses.

That would be the ONLY WAY your view gets any cred.
OK bro. Enjoy the tribulation.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
22,846
8,324
113
And, regarding G5034:

G1722 + G5034 = "in haste"

You are dancing around a pinhead trying to make 'in haste' (G5034 modified by G1722) mean something devoid of the relative time-frame part of the definition.

"... things which must - "in haste" (hurried movement through a brief/short span of time) - 'come to be'..."

"... things which must/will soon begin to happen/occur/transpire..." (modern english equivalent)
So what are we talking about here in Rev 1:1? 24 hours? The entire Church age? Or seven years? Because Rev 6 thru 19 is seven years bro. Which, by some cosmic coincidence, happens to be precisely the same time period as Daniel's 70th week. Which YOU say has already happened.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
Since the Bible doesn't 'identify" any of them, who cares?
OK bro have it your way....
Of course. Why not? What is the importance of who the 24 elders are anyway? Do you have a clue?

Rom 1:18
But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness.

Rom 1:19
They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them.
As if this somehow answers my question. :ROFL::ROFL::ROFL:

In fact, IF you really did have a clue, you would have explained HOW the identity of the 24 elders relates to a pre-trib rapture.

But you don't, as you have clearly indicated with verses irrelevant to my question.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
You haven't proven your claims. They are only opinions.

If you are such an expert on a pre-trib rapture, why can't you quote ANY verse that shows Jesus clearly taking resurrected, glorified believers to heaven?
OK bro. Enjoy the tribulation.
All you guys seem able to do is make totally senseless comments when asked for evidence for your view.

Why would anyone enjoy the Tribulation? You seem to think my view is based on WANTING to go through it. That would be nuts, and any sane person would agree with me on that.

So you can save all your silly, petty, etc snarks for someone else.

I have given solid proof of ONE resurrection for the saved and ONE for the unsaved, which you cannot refute. All you can do is disagree, but so what? Without any evidence for your disagreement, you have nothing.

I have given solid proof that the ONE resurrection of the saved is "when He comes", and the word "comes/coming" in relation to the Lord can ONLY refer to the Second Advent, since the OT prophesied about the 2 comings of the Messiah.

So, I have proven from Scripture that the ONE resurrection of the saved will be at the Second Advent when King Jesus comes back to earth to reign in His Millennial kingdom.

And you have no evidence at all for your theory.