There will be no Rapture!!!

[TheDivineWatermark]

v.3 "that day [the day of the Lord FROM VERSE 2! (i.e. THE TRIB!!)] will not be present if not shall have come [/taken place] ____ *FIRST* [ONE thing *first*] AND [distinctly] the man of sin BE REVEALED [he's 'revealed' AT SEAL #1 at the START of the 7-yr period we call the TRIB]"--

...at THAT point (and THAT POINT ALONE) it can then legitimately be "claimed" (truthfully) "THAT THE DAY OF THE LORD *IS PRESENT*!" (the FIRST SECOND of the Trib! [that is, 2520 days prior to the END of the Trib / Second Coming to the earth / Rev19]).




Alas, it was a "false claim" at the time of Paul's writing to them about it in the first century.

But it SEEMED reasonable [deception does that] BECAUSE of their present circumstances per 1:4!!

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Study the apodosis / protasis of this vv.2-3 grammatical matter (if I'm remembering the terms correctly)

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Here we go.

• Ephraem the Syrian (c. 373): Ephraem's sermon "On the Last Times, The Antichrist, and The End of the World" is often cited as containing elements that some interpret as pre-tribulation rapture ideas.
• Brother Dolcino (1304): Dolcino and his followers, known as the Apostolic Brethren, held a belief similar to pre-tribulation rapture, teaching that they would be taken to paradise before the coming of the Antichrist

Oh, I'm sure there's more. So what was the assertion that Cyrus Scofield, John Darby, and Clarence Larkin came up with this concept, or am I imaging it and can continue on with my travel plans?

He wasn't the first to have similar ideas, but he was the first to develop a systematic theology that has been mass-marketed via his Scofield Reference Bible

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Hey, found a couple more from the 2nd century. It's a good thing to keep notes.

• The Shepherd of Hermas: This 2nd-century work speaks of the imminent return of Christ and the need for repentance to escape the coming tribulation. It emphasizes the imminence of Christ's return and the importance of living a pure and holy life.
• The Epistle of Barnabas: It's an anonymous work, often dated to the late 1st or early 2nd century, also discusses the end times and the coming judgment. It encourages believers to remain faithful and vigilant.

Am I posting too much proof, or do I need to dig deeper?

btw these don't necessarily promote pre-trib dispensationalism. IMO they probably don't at all

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Huh? That does not make sense. Jesus had not even left the earth in John 20:19. Try reading two verses prior for context, it's the same day as verse 19. Hadn't happened, still a future event.

John 20:17
17 Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

Christ ascended twice in fulfillment of the day of atonement in which the high priest would enter the holy of holies twice, first with blood for himself, then with blood for his people. So likewise, first Christ ascended to God to present his blood as proof of his death, returned to earth and then ascended again later to make reconciliation for his people, where he still remains. Notice that before his first ascension he tells Mary not to touch him, but after he exits heaven and returns to earth he instructs his disciples to touch him. He remained on earth for 40 days teaching the disciples and then entered the holy of holies the 2nd time in Acts 1, where he will remain until he exits the holy of holies to send off the scapegoat into the lake of fire and execute judgment on the world, ie day of wrath

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Jesus went to heaven where He is preparing a place for us. That is where He is and to where He promised to take us. He did not promise to take us to where we are already. That would mean we are not being taken anywhere.

Remind me never to go on a road rip with you.

The text doesn't say he will take us somewhere, it says he will receive us, ie, accept us, so that we can be with him. A badly translated word is leading you astray

G3880 παραλαμβάνω paralambano (pa-ra-lam-ɓa'-nō) v.
1. to receive near, i.e. associate with oneself (in any familiar or intimate act or relation).

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Christ ascended twice in fulfillment of the day of atonement in which the high priest would enter the holy of holies twice, first with blood for himself, then with blood for his people. So likewise, first Christ ascended to God to present his blood as proof of his death, returned to earth and then ascended again later to make reconciliation for his people, where he still remains. Notice that before his first ascension he tells Mary not to touch him, but after he exits heaven and returns to earth he instructs his disciples to touch him. He remained on earth for 40 days teaching the disciples and then entered the holy of holies the 2nd time in Acts 1, where he will remain until he exits the holy of holies to send off the scapegoat into the lake of fire and execute judgment on the world, ie day of wrath

While I agree with you that Jesus ascended twice (once on Firstfruit / His Resurrection Day and then again in Acts 1--some "40 days" later), I still believe it is important to note what was said in John 21 (AFTER the "John 20:19" ['came Jesus'] verse you had supplied to make your point).

In view of this, CONSIDER:

--John 21:14 (timing) says, "14This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead." So this setting is AFTER what happened in John 20:19, right?;


--Then John 21:23 (after Peter misunderstands "what" Jesus had just said), Jesus says to Peter, "23Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?";


--after Jesus says this to Peter, we don't see Peter saying something like, "um, Jesus, either you have forgotten what you already just DID [now recorded in John 20:19], some days back, or you've completely lost your marbles... coz, er, you uh... already 'came' [ ]."

Yeah, Peter was a bit *confused* about what Jesus had just said in this context, but I don't think he was confused about what Jesus meant regarding His coming [only its "timing" issue, as Acts 1 shows us]; IOW, he understood correctly the NATURE of the kingdom, he just didn't grasp its TIMING... which "question" Jesus actually answered in Acts [as to TIMING, not its nature]);




Hopefully you can see my basic point: If Jesus (at a LATER TIME from Jn20:19) is STILL talking to them about His "coming" (referencing it STILL in a "future" kind of way), then I don't see how you can consider John 20:19 to have been "what was being told about" earlier (the topic of this present convo). See what I mean?





____________

On a slightly different note (in that, the following verses speak to "our Rapture" event, and not His Second Coming TO THE EARTH, as the ABOVE-MENTIONED discussion / passages do): 1 Thessalonians 4:17 is in the same *context* as 1 Thessalonians 3:13 (that's "on up further / higher up" from "the meeting of the Lord IN THE AIR" location--and Rev5:9 AGREES [timing-wise and other-wise]--I rarely see comments regarding "1 Thess 3:13")

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

as the ABOVE-MENTIONED discussion / passages do):

... *esp. Acts 1:11b ('as'... referring to the circumstances of His Second Coming TO THE EARTH [not to "our Rapture" time-slot / event]).

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

While I agree with you that Jesus ascended twice (once on Firstfruit / His Resurrection Day and then again in Acts 1--some "40 days" later), I still believe it is important to note what was said in John 21 (AFTER the "John 20:19" ['came Jesus'] verse you had supplied to make your point).

In view of this, CONSIDER:

--John 21:14 (timing) says, "14This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead." So this setting is AFTER what happened in John 20:19, right?;


--Then John 21:23 (after Peter misunderstands "what" Jesus had just said), Jesus says to Peter, "23Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?";


--after Jesus says this to Peter, we don't see Peter saying something like, "um, Jesus, either you have forgotten what you already just DID [now recorded in John 20:19], some days back, or you've completely lost your marbles... coz, er, you uh... already 'came' [ ]."

Yeah, Peter was a bit *confused* about what Jesus had just said in this context, but I don't think he was confused about what Jesus meant regarding His coming [only its "timing" issue, as Acts 1 shows us]; IOW, he understood correctly the NATURE of the kingdom, he just didn't grasp its TIMING... which "question" Jesus actually answered in Acts [as to TIMING, not its nature]);




Hopefully you can see my basic point: If Jesus (at a LATER TIME from Jn20:19) is STILL talking to them about His "coming" (referencing it STILL in a "future" kind of way), then I don't see how you can consider John 20:19 to have been "what was being told about" earlier (the topic of this present convo). See what I mean?





____________

On a slightly different note (in that, the following verses speak to "our Rapture" event, and not His Second Coming TO THE EARTH, as the ABOVE-MENTIONED discussion / passages do): 1 Thessalonians 4:17 is in the same *context* as 1 Thessalonians 3:13 (that's "on up further / higher up" from "the meeting of the Lord IN THE AIR" location--and Rev5:9 AGREES [timing-wise and other-wise])

I don't agree that Christ's multiple appearances to the disciples during the 40-day period between his 1st and 2nd ascensions are what Jesus meant regarding his coming

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

--Then John 21:23 (after Peter misunderstands "what" Jesus had just said), Jesus says to Peter,

Sorry, I meant to write: after Peter misunderstands what Jesus had just said, THIS IS SAID / WRITTEN of Peter (not that Jesus spoke that to him, clarifying...) My point is to zero in on WHAT JESUS HAD SAID here in this context.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

I don't agree that Christ's multiple appearances to the disciples during the 40-day period between his 1st and 2nd ascensions are what Jesus meant regarding his coming

Okay, I likely am confusing you with another poster who seemed to be...??

My apologies!! (since you are saying that wasn't you), oops.



I'll try to go back and look at what it is I read in someone's post yesterday (and thought was you instead), regarding such a point.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Sorry, I meant to write: after Peter misunderstands what Jesus had just said, THIS IS SAID / WRITTEN of Peter (not that Jesus spoke that to him, clarifying...) My point is to zero in on WHAT JESUS HAD SAID here in this context.

Could you explain it to me in simpler, plainer terms? I'm having a hard time following the way you write

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Okay, I likely am confusing you with another poster who seemed to be...??
My apologies!! (since you are saying that wasn't you), oops.
I'll try to go back and look at what it is I read in someone's post yesterday (and thought was you instead), regarding such a point.

Oh OK, no worries

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

[...] getting back to the original point, Jesus told the disciples before he died that he would come back to earth and receive them, which he did in John 20:19. John 14:3 doesn't say he would take them to heaven. The place he prepares for us is the new Jerusalem that comes down from heaven to earth

Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. John 20:19

I thought you were using John 20:19 as support for the point you were making (in the part I enlarged, at top), no?






So what I am pointing out is that, in the LATER SETTING (John 21) Jesus is STILL talking ABOUT "till I come" (as tho it hasn't taken place yet--because it hasn't).

 

[Mem]

What comes "as a thief in the night" is [not Jesus' Person Himself] an early-located time period. (i.e. the Trib yrs)




So says 1Th5:1-3 and elsewhere making the same point.




[Jesus Himself comes "as a thief. [period]"... with NO "in the night" phrase accompanying this when referring to HE HIMSELF / HIS PERSON--Rev16:14-16 (His Second Coming to the earth point in time, i.e. Armageddon time-slot), etc]

Consider the that phrase I used earlier, "I like it a lot." The phrase has come to imply, and is common often said as "lots," to emphasize a bunch. But it is properly only "a lot." So, if I like anything a lot , that means that I'd like to reserve a lot (that is, a section of my estate) in my abode for it, i.e, where I am there you may be also.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Your spirit dwells within you otherwise you would be spiritually dead.

Heaven is within us

And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. Luke 17:20-21​

 

[The_Parson]

btw these don't necessarily promote pre-trib dispensationalism. IMO they probably don't at all

Dispensationalism no. Pre tribulational removal yes, that is except for the Shepherd of Hermas. I may have posted him by mistake because of his repentance stance and the mention of tribulation. I should have read deeper. But that was some years back since I even studied the subject. Forgive me for that.

The Epistle of Barnabas however is a different story. The Epistle of Barnabas is an early Christian Greek epistle written between AD 70 and 132.
He said:

"Seeing then that the days are evil, (speaking of the end times and coming tribulation) and that the Active One himself (Satan or the antichrist) has the authority, we ought to give heed to ourselves and to seek out the ordinances of the Lord." also: "The aids of our faith then are fear and patience, and our allies are long-suffering and self-restraint." and: "While these abide in a pure spirit in matters relating to the Lord, wisdom, understanding, science, knowledge rejoice with them."

 

[The_Parson]

Look, so you know, I believe dispensational teaching is a grave error in eschatology simply because among other errors, it teaches two forms of Grace. That's, for lack of a better word "silly". God's Grace is impartial, never ending, has no pause to it, and is free to all. No doubt about it in my thinking.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Dispensationalism no. Pre tribulational removal yes, that is except for the Shepherd of Hermas. I may have posted him by mistake because of his repentance stance and the mention of tribulation. I should have read deeper. But that was some years back since I even studied the subject. Forgive me for that.

The Epistle of Barnabas however is a different story. The Epistle of Barnabas is an early Christian Greek epistle written between AD 70 and 132.
He said:

Posting the actual quotes so I can review them would be nice. I suspect they are referring to pre-wrath removal and the tribulation that precedes that, but something gets lost in the wording/translation, or it is assumed or read into the text to be pre-trib removal by someone.

 

[The_Parson]

Heaven is within us

And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. Luke 17:20-21​

You seem quite the literalist.