False Doctrine of the "Secret Rapture".

[Josheb]

It is true when I look at scripture I try to figure out what's going to happen using current events, technology and so on.

Yes, we all do that (hopefully). Our means of doing so are not, however, identical (when they should be). The modern futurist is using a hermeneutic that was quite literally invented in the mid-19th century. The modern futurist uses a hermeneutic different from all the rest of Christendom. It is that new and different hermeneutic that creates the divide, not the facts of scripture and not the facts of history.

What is the "great mountain burning with fire"??? Who knows.

1) Change of topic.
2) Someone knows.
3) The best means of knowing is other scripture, not a hermeneutic invented in the 19th century.

I can make a guess.

I will likely reject it simply because it is a guess. Sound exegesis is not a guess. Furthermore, this example is a red herring. We're not discussing guesses. What can be known should be known and known exactly as reported in scripture without additions or subtraction based on a hermeneutic invented in the 19th century.

What I do know is that in the last 2,000 years this event has not happened.

According to you and the modern futurist model. Someone from a different model might prove the event happened but the modern futurist would deny that view AND deny the possibility of that view ever being correct simply because it does not match the modern futurist interpretation. As I stated in the previous post, it could fit perfectly with scripture, but simply and solely because it does not fit with the hermeneutically-prejudiced view of the modern futurist it will be rejected.

It is still future along with the other events mentioned in Revelation.

Prove it!



This is a huge problem with modern futurism. Modern futurists are constantly saying, "Look! Here it comes! Here it comes! This is the sign! This is the sign! It's coming! It's coming! It hasn't yet happened but here it comes!" and not once in the last 200 years has single prognostication from a single prognosticator ever come true. The entire model and every teacher of that model, every prognosticator of that model has a 100% fail rate. That problem is, in turn, made worse because no one within that model ever does anything to stop the falsehoods. Millions of dollars are made off of false teaching and no one in-house ever does anything to address the problems of a prejudiced interpretation of scripture, post hoc and question begging defenses, and the chronic false prognostication so the only explanation remaining is the profit motive.

Philippians 1:15-18
Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some also from good will; the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition rather than from pure motives, thinking to cause me distress in my imprisonment. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice.

Oops! My bad. Perhaps the worst part of modern futurism is that it teaches its adherents to be ever hopeful of things that are said not have happened instead of believing God has already kept His promises and fulfilled His prophecies wherever God has said He's done so or waiting upon future events as God stated they would occur, not as an invented hermeneutic says they will occur. This leads to never-satisfied delusional living.

Scripture plainly states Christians go through the great tribulation and explains the rapture to coincide with Christ's last coming on the last day. Only modern futurists believe differently. Everyone else disagrees. The modern futurist bases his/her disparate view on a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century. Everyone else endeavors to read scripture as written despite the differences in their respective models. Modern futurism is a radically different model than everything else believed in Christendom.

 

[CrowCross]

Yes, we all do that (hopefully). Our means of doing so are not, however, identical (when they should be). The modern futurist is using a hermeneutic that was quite literally invented in the mid-19th century. The modern futurist uses a hermeneutic different from all the rest of Christendom. It is that new and different hermeneutic that creates the divide, not the facts of scripture and not the facts of history.

The facts of history don't support the "theology" that Revelation has already happened.

1) Change of topic.
2) Someone knows.
3) The best means of knowing is other scripture, not a hermeneutic invented in the 19th century.

I will likely reject it simply because it is a guess. Sound exegesis is not a guess. Furthermore, this example is a red herring. We're not discussing guesses. What can be known should be known and known exactly as reported in scripture without additions or subtraction based on a hermeneutic invented in the 19th century.

Yes, it is somewhat of a guess. I, and others may be right or we might be wrong. One thing I do know for sure is that Revelations hasn't happened yet.

According to you and the modern futurist model. Someone from a different model might prove the event happened but the modern futurist would deny that view AND deny the possibility of that view ever being correct simply because it does not match the modern futurist interpretation. As I stated in the previous post, it could fit perfectly with scripture, but simply and solely because it does not fit with the hermeneutically-prejudiced view of the modern futurist it will be rejected.

Prove it!

You will never be able to prove it until after the fact. The modernist knows what has been written in Revelations hasn't happened yet. The modernist look as what is currently happening and can easily draw a scenario and present a path that is very probable.
For example until modern times Rev 13 would not be possible. With the current technology for the first time in history Rev 13 could be fulfilled.

This is a huge problem with modern futurism. Modern futurists are constantly saying, "Look! Here it comes! Here it comes! This is the sign! This is the sign! It's coming! It's coming! It hasn't yet happened but here it comes!" and not once in the last 200 years has single prognostication from a single prognosticator ever come true.

I agree, many have guessed and got it wrong.
Then again 1948 happened.

The entire model and every teacher of that model, every prognosticator of that model has a 100% fail rate. That problem is, in turn, made worse because no one within that model ever does anything to stop the falsehoods. Millions of dollars are made off of false teaching and no one in-house ever does anything to address the problems of a prejudiced interpretation of scripture, post hoc and question begging defenses, and the chronic false prognostication so the only explanation remaining is the profit motive.

Perhaps what the "modernist" say will once again fail...but there will be a generation that will experience Revelation.

Philippians 1:15-18
Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some also from good will; the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition rather than from pure motives, thinking to cause me distress in my imprisonment. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ is about His birth, life, sacrificial death, burial, resurrection, ascension our resurrection and His return. Should I not rejoice in the hope of Jesus' return?

Oops! My bad. Perhaps the worst part of modern futurism is that it teaches its adherents to be ever hopeful of things that are said not have happened instead of believing God has already kept His promises and fulfilled His prophecies wherever God has said He's done so or waiting upon future events as God stated they would occur, not as an invented hermeneutic says they will occur. This leads to never-satisfied delusional living.

Yes, it is your bad. The Old Testament Saints knew of Christ first appearance and hoped and looked forward to it. Many would have said this Jesus isn't the one you hoped and looked forward to. Concerning the return of Christ you seem to be mirroring them.

Scripture plainly states Christians go through the great tribulation and explains the rapture to coincide with Christ's last coming on the last day.

I've shown that to be wrong as Christ second coming has Him riding a white horse...which is not how Christ ascended.
The great tribulation is for the Jews (and the unsaved). Christians are not destined for that wrath and will be delivered from it.

Only modern futurists believe differently. Everyone else disagrees. The modern futurist bases his/her disparate view on a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century. Everyone else endeavors to read scripture as written despite the differences in their respective models. Modern futurism is a radically different model than everything else believed in Christendom.

If, that is if Christians are to go through the tribulation very, very few will make it to the end. The only christians that will experience the tribulation is those who become christians after the pre-trib rapture.

The sad part is you speak of Revelations...and fail to see the signs that it is very near. This event will overtake you like a thief in the night.

 

[Josheb]

The facts of history don't support the "theology" that Revelation has already happened.

Post hoc argument.

Try subordinating history to scripture instead of scripture to (secular) history.

 

[CrowCross]

Post hoc argument.

Try subordinating history to scripture instead of scripture to (secular) history.

I have...the following hasn't happened yet ...

Revelation 8....
6 And the seven angels with the seven trumpets prepared to sound them.

7Then the first angel sounded his trumpet, and hail and fire mixed with blood were hurled down upon the earth. A third of the earth was burned up, along with a third of the trees and all the green grass.

8 Then the second angel sounded his trumpet, and something like a great mountain burning with fire was thrown into the sea. A third of the sea turned to blood, 9 a third of the living creatures in the sea died, and a third of the ships were destroyed.

The above has not happened yet.

The mark of the beast hasn't happened yet...but is now pretty much possible.

 

[Josheb]

The facts of history don't support the "theology" that Revelation has already happened.

Yes, it is somewhat of a guess. I, and others may be right or we might be wrong. One thing I do know for sure is that Revelations hasn't happened yet.

If you are guessing then you do not know ,

In case my earlier point was missed because I did not make it sufficiently clear: Anyone who appeals to history must also face the fact of modern futurism's history: It has a 100% fail rate. The only reason it makes ever-failing, never-coming-true predictions is because it does not believe anything has happened and all its predictions uniformly fail.

You will never be able to prove it until after the fact.

That is correct but that says nothing about the other facts, like the fact it's only the modern futurist's guesses (masquerading as predictions, prognostications and warnings) built on an invented hermeneutic by which the modern futurist claims things haven't happened. That is a fact just as true and factual as any other fact of history. The modern futurist does not basis his facts of scripture, but on a post hoc argument built on an invented hermeneutic that denies what is plainly stated and routinely adds things nowhere stated (like a separated rapture).

The modernist knows...

No, s/he does not. He guesses.

I agree, many have guessed and got it wrong.

No, not "many." ALL

Then again 1948 happened.

EXCELLENT example of exactly what I'm talking about.

The facts of scripture are that God made everlasting promises AND among those promises are BOTH promises of life and restoration AND destruction. The modern futurist ignores all the promises of destruction and chronically belabors only the good promises haranguing anyone who disputes the hermeneutically-prejudiced selective reading of scripture with, "It's everlasting! It's everlasting!"

Yes, God's promise of destruction is everlasting. It is just as everlasting as His promise of life.

The modern futurist then - based solely on an invented hermeneutic claims modern Israel is a fulfillment of prophetic promise when modern Israel looks nothing like covenant Israel. This is an example of the delusional thinking I mentioned in my previous post. Adherents are led to believe something that does not reconcile with scripture and the only reason they are led to do so by their teachers is because of a man-made hermeneutic literally invented in the 19th century.

So appeals to 1948 serve only as an example of the 100% fail rate among modern futurists. WHEN modern Israel regains all the land God promised AND becomes a theocratic state without a monarchy AND abides by the Mosaic Law as prescribed in scripture then and only then will the modern futurist be able to appeal to the existence of a restored Israel as a fulfillment of scripture.

Perhaps what the "modernist" say will once again fail...but there will be a generation that will experience Revelation.

No, there is no "perhaps." Stop dodging the actual facts of history while appealing to supposed facts of history. And stop trying to change the subject. This is something else the modern futurist does when faced with the blunt reality of an invented hermeneutic and the facts of scripture and history: he changes the topic and won't stick to any one change, either. The leaves the person pointing to scripture chasing the modern futurist around the conversation from ever-changing topic to ever-changing topic getting further and further and further away from the one, single, solitary, lone point originally being discussed.

It is uniquely insidious.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ is about....

We're not discussing what the gospel of JC is about. We're discussing the rapture and the bad practices unique to modern futurism as evidenced in this thread.

The sad part is you speak of Revelations...and fail to see the signs that it is very near.

ROTFLMBO!

Pin it down. You say "it" is "very near". How near exactly. Do not now back away from your claim. Be specific. Do it so that this does not end up serving as an example of exactly what I posted.

This event will overtake you like a thief in the night.

ROTFLMBO!

This veiled ad hominem is another commonly employed fallacy of the modern futurist. The facts of scripture are that those in Christ get raptured. It's not a doctrine that decides that but God. When the modern futurist says, "It will overtake you," what he actually means is "It will overtake you because you do not subscribe to the man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century," not "It will overtake you because you do not believe in Jesus." If the modern futurist does intend to imply a person is not saved then s/he sits in the place of God, arbitrating everyone else's eternal disposition.

If the rapture comes for those in Christ, then it comes for those in Christ regardless of their eschatological doctrine. What this means is that the modern futurist then gets to tell all the other Christians meeting him/her and Jesus in the air their views were wrong. We'll ALL be raptured, not just the modern futurist. So, as far as this thread goes, the modern futurist then proves inconsistent with his own eschatology. Either ALL Christians will be raptured or only the modern futurist Christian will be raptured.


Only modern futurism does this.


None of the other end-times views have ANY of these problems. They all share much more in common with each other than apart, and it is only modern futurism that does the things listed in Posts 59 and 61, and objectively demonstrated in throughout this thread. There are better, scripturally consistent and historically veracious alternatives.

 

[Josheb]

I have...the following hasn't happened yet ...

I am not going to baited into off-topic subterfuge that ignores the underlying presuppositional failures of modern futurism. Whether something has or hasn't happened does nothing to change the fact the only reason the modern futurist even entertains the post hoc fallacy is because a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century teaches him to subordinate scripture to history in a never-ending game of chase the modern futurist around the conversation of ever-changing topics.

The rapture.

The rapture has not happened. Everyone but the full-preterist agrees. What we are discussing is the false doctrine of a separated rapture, a doctrine held ONLY by the modern futurist. The only reason that position is held is because of a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century. When the modern futurist puts aside the modern invention s/he then sees scripture as everyone else sees it and then possesses much more agreement with the rest of Christendom and s/he is no longer subject to the ever-failing prognostications of false teachers.

His entire life changes for the better.

 

[CrowCross]

If you are guessing then you do not know ,

In case my earlier point was missed because I did not make it sufficiently clear: Anyone who appeals to history must also face the fact of modern futurism's history: It has a 100% fail rate. The only reason it makes ever-failing, never-coming-true predictions is because it does not believe anything has happened and all its predictions uniformly fail.

That is correct but that says nothing about the other facts, like the fact it's only the modern futurist's guesses (masquerading as predictions, prognostications and warnings) built on an invented hermeneutic by which the modern futurist claims things haven't happened. That is a fact just as true and factual as any other fact of history. The modern futurist does not basis his facts of scripture, but on a post hoc argument built on an invented hermeneutic that denies what is plainly stated and routinely adds things nowhere stated (like a separated rapture).

No, s/he does not. He guesses.

No, not "many." ALL

EXCELLENT example of exactly what I'm talking about.

The facts of scripture are that God made everlasting promises AND among those promises are BOTH promises of life and restoration AND destruction. The modern futurist ignores all the promises of destruction and chronically belabors only the good promises haranguing anyone who disputes the hermeneutically-prejudiced selective reading of scripture with, "It's everlasting! It's everlasting!"

Yes, God's promise of destruction is everlasting. It is just as everlasting as His promise of life.

The modern futurist then - based solely on an invented hermeneutic claims modern Israel is a fulfillment of prophetic promise when modern Israel looks nothing like covenant Israel. This is an example of the delusional thinking I mentioned in my previous post. Adherents are led to believe something that does not reconcile with scripture and the only reason they are led to do so by their teachers is because of a man-made hermeneutic literally invented in the 19th century.

So appeals to 1948 serve only as an example of the 100% fail rate among modern futurists. WHEN modern Israel regains all the land God promised AND becomes a theocratic state without a monarchy AND abides by the Mosaic Law as prescribed in scripture then and only then will the modern futurist be able to appeal to the existence of a restored Israel as a fulfillment of scripture.

No, there is no "perhaps." Stop dodging the actual facts of history while appealing to supposed facts of history. And stop trying to change the subject. This is something else the modern futurist does when faced with the blunt reality of an invented hermeneutic and the facts of scripture and history: he changes the topic and won't stick to any one change, either. The leaves the person pointing to scripture chasing the modern futurist around the conversation from ever-changing topic to ever-changing topic getting further and further and further away from the one, single, solitary, lone point originally being discussed.

It is uniquely insidious.

We're not discussing what the gospel of JC is about. We're discussing the rapture and the bad practices unique to modern futurism as evidenced in this thread.

ROTFLMBO!

Pin it down. You say "it" is "very near". How near exactly. Do not now back away from your claim. Be specific. Do it so that this does not end up serving as an example of exactly what I posted.

ROTFLMBO!

This veiled ad hominem is another commonly employed fallacy of the modern futurist. The facts of scripture are that those in Christ get raptured. It's not a doctrine that decides that but God. When the modern futurist says, "It will overtake you," what he actually means is "It will overtake you because you do not subscribe to the man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century," not "It will overtake you because you do not believe in Jesus." If the modern futurist does intend to imply a person is not saved then s/he sits in the place of God, arbitrating everyone else's eternal disposition.

If the rapture comes for those in Christ, then it comes for those in Christ regardless of their eschatological doctrine. What this means is that the modern futurist then gets to tell all the other Christians meeting him/her and Jesus in the air their views were wrong. We'll ALL be raptured, not just the modern futurist. So, as far as this thread goes, the modern futurist then proves inconsistent with his own eschatology. Either ALL Christians will be raptured or only the modern futurist Christian will be raptured.


Only modern futurism does this.


None of the other end-times views have ANY of these problems. They all share much more in common with each other than apart, and it is only modern futurism that does the things listed in Posts 59 and 61, and objectively demonstrated in throughout this thread. There are better, scripturally consistent and historically veracious alternatives.

With all due respect...I kinda feel sorry for you.

Now, if you don't want to believe in the rapture...then have at it. Your problem is when you try to demonize those who do. As if you got it all correct and know that you have it correct.

I never admitted to having it all correct. What I have done is looked at Revelation and other books and read what was described. THEN I and others have looked at current events and said....does technology provide a way for a one world government? Does technology provide a way to establish the mark of the beast? Is Israel now a nation? Does the UN have on display a "Peace and Security" statue? Is there an Abraham accord being written? Do they have red heffers? Are they trying to build the 3rd Temple? Do people travel to and fro? Has knowledge increased? Do you need more? The answer is Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

It's going to take a lot more than your argument to show I'm way out in right field.

 

[CrowCross]

I am not going to baited into off-topic subterfuge that ignores the underlying presuppositional failures of modern futurism. Whether something has or hasn't happened does nothing to change the fact the only reason the modern futurist even entertains the post hoc fallacy is because a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century teaches him to subordinate scripture to history in a never-ending game of chase the modern futurist around the conversation of ever-changing topics.

The rapture.

The rapture has not happened. Everyone but the full-preterist agrees. What we are discussing is the false doctrine of a separated rapture, a doctrine held ONLY by the modern futurist. The only reason that position is held is because of a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century. When the modern futurist puts aside the modern invention s/he then sees scripture as everyone else sees it and then possesses much more agreement with the rest of Christendom and s/he is no longer subject to the ever-failing prognostications of false teachers.

His entire life changes for the better.

Perhaps you missed it....Christ returns twice. At the rapture the way He left....and a second time riding a white horse. That's biblical.

 

[Josheb]

With all due respect...I kinda feel sorry for you.

Stow it. Not interested.

It's going to take a lot more than your argument to show I'm way out in right field.

I know. That is usually the case where ideology ensues and the allegiance to the ideology is greater than the allegiance to scripture correctly rendered.

Perhaps you missed it....Christ returns twice.

The Bible says otherwise.

At the rapture the way He left....and a second time riding a white horse.

...and that is an EXCELLENT example of what I previously posted about modern futurists ignoring what is actually stated and adding invented hermeneutic-driven interpretations. Randomly splicing together Acts 1:11, 1 Thes. 4:17, Heb. 9:28, and Rev. 19:11-14 is irrational - especially in contradiction to many other scriptures, like Mt. 24:9 and 20, and Rev. 7:14 (which state Christians go through the great tribulation). The gathering of people occurs once, and only once, and both Christians and non-Christians are gathered at the same time, at that separated at that time. That is how all the other verses into which modern futurism reads unstated separation should be understood.


1 Thessalonians 4:17
Then we who are alive, who remain, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.


The rest get shipped off to a fiery lake, not left behind on the earth. That verse does NOT state Christians are gathered separately. A separated gathering is read into the text that does not actually report any such thing, and the only ones who read it that way are the modern futurists working from a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century.

Revelation 19:11-16
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. His eyes are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on Him which no one knows except Himself. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses. From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty. And on His robe and on His thigh He has a name written, "KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS."

Not once in the entire chapter (or the one after that) does Revelation state Jesus leaves heaven. Not once. His leaving heaven to gather Christians before the last day is an invention of modern futurism based on a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century.

But it is implied, Josh.

No, it's not, and the only reason anyone thinks it is implied is because....... that man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century is employed to make the text say things it does not actually state! Modern futurists read things into the Rev. 19 text and then splice that together eisegetically with things read into other texts and the entire pile of eisegetically inferred implications is far removed from what scripture actually states: Christians go through the great tribulation. They do NOT get raptured away so as not to endure it.


Revelation 7:13-14
Then one of the elders answered, saying to me, "These who are clothed in the white robes, who are they, and where have they come from?" I said to him, "My lord, you know." And he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.


They went through it. They were not raptured away to avoid it. Modern futurists who lay aside the ideological allegiance and look at scripture for what it explicitly states see they have been way out in right field. I know because I used to be one of them.

That's biblical.

The Bible says otherwise.


The only ones who see it differently ate the modern futurists who work from a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century.

 

[Josheb]

It's going to take a lot more than your argument to show I'm way out in right field.

What, specifically, would it take for you to see the view(s) expressed is way out in right field?

 

[Mr GLee]

It is true when I look at scripture I try to figure out what's going to happen using current events, technology and so on.
What is the "great mountain burning with fire"??? Who knows. I can make a guess. What I do know is that in the last 2,000 years this event has not happened. It is still future along with the other events mentioned in Revelation.

Mountain of fire = the judgment of Christ.

Mountains are used to represent kingdoms.The fire that began the last days under the Sun is still burning .

 

[CrowCross]

Stow it. Not interested.

I know. That is usually the case where ideology ensues and the allegiance to the ideology is greater than the allegiance to scripture correctly rendered.

The Bible says otherwise.

...and that is an EXCELLENT example of what I previously posted about modern futurists ignoring what is actually stated and adding invented hermeneutic-driven interpretations. Randomly splicing together Acts 1:11, 1 Thes. 4:17, Heb. 9:28, and Rev. 19:11-14 is irrational - especially in contradiction to many other scriptures, like Mt. 24:9 and 20, and Rev. 7:14 (which state Christians go through the great tribulation). The gathering of people occurs once, and only once, and both Christians and non-Christians are gathered at the same time, at that separated at that time. That is how all the other verses into which modern futurism reads unstated separation should be understood.


1 Thessalonians 4:17
Then we who are alive, who remain, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.


The rest get shipped off to a fiery lake, not left behind on the earth. That verse does NOT state Christians are gathered separately. A separated gathering is read into the text that does not actually report any such thing, and the only ones who read it that way are the modern futurists working from a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century.

Revelation 19:11-16
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. His eyes are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on Him which no one knows except Himself. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses. From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty. And on His robe and on His thigh He has a name written, "KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS."

Not once in the entire chapter (or the one after that) does Revelation state Jesus leaves heaven. Not once. His leaving heaven to gather Christians before the last day is an invention of modern futurism based on a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century.

But it is implied, Josh.

No, it's not, and the only reason anyone thinks it is implied is because....... that man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century is employed to make the text say things it does not actually state! Modern futurists read things into the Rev. 19 text and then splice that together eisegetically with things read into other texts and the entire pile of eisegetically inferred implications is far removed from what scripture actually states: Christians go through the great tribulation. They do NOT get raptured away so as not to endure it.


Revelation 7:13-14
Then one of the elders answered, saying to me, "These who are clothed in the white robes, who are they, and where have they come from?" I said to him, "My lord, you know." And he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.


They went through it. They were not raptured away to avoid it. Modern futurists who lay aside the ideological allegiance and look at scripture for what it explicitly states see they have been way out in right field. I know because I used to be one of them.

The Bible says otherwise.


The only ones who see it differently ate the modern futurists who work from a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century.

Not only did Jesus not leave on a white horse...which totally shows problems with your false belief....we also have the Noah prophecy.

You know the prophecy...just as in the days of Noah...people getting married, eating, drinking...hving a grand old time when Jesus returns.
Now, you want to place the return solely at the end of the tribulation..it won't work. DO YOU really think people will be having a grand old time at the end of the trib? That answer you very well know is NO!
Now, the pre-trib rapture on the other hand...the answer is YES!

So, no white horse and people having a grand old time.....shouts pre-trib rapture.

 

[CrowCross]

Mountain of fire = the judgment of Christ.

Mountains are used to represent kingdoms.The fire that began the last days under the Sun is still burning .

Call it what you want....a huge meteor, nuke bomb or judgement...we haven't seen the destruction mentioned...NEVER. The event is future and after the pre-trib rapture.

 

[CrowCross]

What, specifically, would it take for you to see the view(s) expressed is way out in right field?

Christ leaving on a white horse.....a means for people to have a grand old time near the end of the tribulation.

Jesus returns TWICE. Get ready for the first return.

 

[Josheb]

Mountain of fire = the judgment of Christ.

Mountains are used to represent kingdoms. The fire that began the last days under the Sun is still burning .

Don't let him bait you into getting off topic. You'll end up debating the mof and never the "false doctrine of the secret rapture.


Besides, when scripture is used to render scripture, it is not difficult to find a mount ablaze with fire elsewhere in scripture.

Exodus 19:18
Now Mount Sinai was all in smoke because the LORD descended upon it in fire; and its smoke ascended like the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain quaked violently.

Exodus 24:16-17
The glory of the LORD rested on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it for six days; and on the seventh day He called to Moses from the midst of the cloud. And to the eyes of the sons of Israel the appearance of the glory of the LORD was like a consuming fire on the mountain top.

Deuteronomy 4:11
You came near and stood at the foot of the mountain, and the mountain burned with fire to the very heart of the heavens: darkness, cloud and thick gloom.

Deuteronomy 5:4-5
"The LORD spoke to you face to face at the mountain from the midst of the fire, while I was standing between the LORD and you at that time, to declare to you the word of the LORD; for you were afraid because of the fire and did not go up the mountain.

Deuteronomy 9:10-11, 15
"The LORD gave me the two tablets of stone written by the finger of God; and on them were all the words which the LORD had spoken with you at the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly. It came about at the end of forty days and nights that the LORD gave me the two tablets of stone, the tablets of the covenant............. So I turned and came down from the mountain while the mountain was burning with fire, and the two tablets of the covenant were in my two hands.

There about two dozen OT verses similar to the above,

Ezekiel 28:14-16
"You were the anointed cherub who covers, And I placed you there. You were on the holy mountain of God; You walked in the midst of the stones of fire. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created until unrighteousness was found in you. By the abundance of your trade, you were internally filled with violence, and you sinned; therefore, I have cast you as profane from the mountain of God. And I have destroyed you, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.

So, there are two clear options. The first is the Law, and the second is the more generic mountain of the LORD. Given what scripture already provides, which of the two alternatives makes sense for Revelation 8:8?



Revelation 8:1, 6-9
When the Lamb broke the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour..... Then the angel took the censer and filled it with the fire of the altar and threw it to the earth; and there followed peals of thunder and sounds and flashes of lightning and an earthquake. And the seven angels who had the seven trumpets prepared themselves to sound them. The first sounded, and there came hail and fire, mixed with blood, and they were thrown to the earth; and a third of the earth was burned up, and a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up. The second angel sounded, and something like a great mountain burning with fire was thrown into the sea; and a third of the sea became blood, and a third of the creatures which were in the sea and had life, died; and a third of the ships were destroyed.


One other potentially relevant text.

Hebrews 12:18-24
For you have not come to a mountain that can be touched and to a blazing fire, and to darkness and gloom and whirlwind, and to the blast of a trumpet and the sound of words which sound was such that those who heard begged that no further word be spoken to them. For they could not bear the command, "Even if a beast touches the mountain, it will be stoned." And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, "I am full of fear." But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.


So, it is obvious a new, man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century is unnecessary. All that is needed is scripture and a little knowledge of exegetical basics. As far as this op goes, the question is not, "What is the 'mountain of fire'?" but why is the meaning of the mountain of fire is not already understood and why is it we cannot have a cogent topical conversation without constant digressions being injected into the thread?


Just saying

 

[Josheb]

Not only did Jesus not leave on a white horse...

Prove it.

Quote the verse explicitly stating Jesus left heaven. Then quote the verse explicitly stating Jesus left heaven on a white horse specifically to gather the elect in a rapture and then either stayed in the air or return to heaven. Do not give me inferential eisegesis explanations; give me explicitly stating scripture. Do it without obfuscation. Do it without delay.

Or..... be forthcoming and acknowledged, "Josh, either I cannot find such a verse or there is none, but this is what I believe."

You say Jesus left heaven on a white horse to rapture the Church. Prove it, and prove with something explicitly stated in scripture.

 

[Josheb]

Christ leaving on a white horse.....a means for people to have a grand old time near the end of the tribulation.

Jesus returns TWICE. Get ready for the first return.

Lame. You know what was asked. What is it anyone here in this discussion could provide that would be found persuasive?

 

[CrowCross]

So, it is obvious a new, man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century is unnecessary.

The above statement isn't true....so why do you continue to use it?

Evidence of pretribulationism surfaces during the early medieval period in a sermon some attribute to Ephraem the Syrian, but more likely the product of one scholars call Pseudo-Ephraem, entitled Sermon on The Last Times, The Antichrist, and The End of the World.5 The sermon was written some time between the fourth and sixth century. The rapture statement reads as follows:
Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? . . . For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.

Now, this is but one example. If you read the link from which I cut and pasted it, you will find other pre-19th century rapture theology

I trust you stand corrected.

 

[CrowCross]

Prove it.

Quote the verse explicitly stating Jesus left heaven. Then quote the verse explicitly stating Jesus left heaven on a white horse specifically to gather the elect in a rapture and then either stayed in the air or return to heaven. Do not give me inferential eisegesis explanations; give me explicitly stating scripture. Do it without obfuscation. Do it without delay.

Jesus doesn't leave heaven on a white horse to gather the elect in the rapture. That's the point....as we all know Jesus will return at the rapture in the same way in which He left....and He didn't leave riding a white horse.

As pointed out...when the rapture occurs people will be getting married, eating, drinking...having a grand old time. Seriously, does this sound like the end of the tribulation? Of course not...and you know it.

Or..... be forthcoming and acknowledged, "Josh, either I cannot find such a verse or there is none, but this is what I believe."

You say Jesus left heaven on a white horse to rapture the Church. Prove it, and prove with something explicitly stated in scripture.

 

[CrowCross]

Lame. You know what was asked. What is it anyone here in this discussion could provide that would be found persuasive?

lame? It appears to be YOU who is claiming Jesus ascended on a white horse. (Acts 1)

Can you prove that?