The False Doctrine of a 7-year Tribulation

[Eleanor]

I am looking for the word trinity, but I'm just not finding it.

Where do you find the word "sovereignty"?

Yet God is sovereign (Da 4:35).

if you can't be specific on the trinity, and show this word somewhere in scripture, then you have your answer.

Likewise regarding God's sovereignty. . .

 

[Eleanor]

Yes, it is the second coming. Assuming meeting him in the air precludes him coming to earth is a logical and exegetical error. It also contradicts the many texts reporting Christians go through the tribulation.

Not when you know the meaning of Biblical words.

Not to mention that prophecy is given in riddles (Nu 12:8) and not clearly, and is subject to more than one interpretation,
the only rule being that all interpretation must be in agreement with NT apostolic teaching authoritative to the church.
The Book of Revelation is prophesy and is not literal.

However, the apostolic teaching of 1 Co 16:22 is literal, where we have the parousia (coming) of Jesus mentioned, which parousia meant: the citizens going out of the city to meet an incoming dignitary and accompanying him back into the city, as in Jesus' entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday.

And that is what will happen at the parousia of Jesus (1 Co 16:22); i.e.,
he will appear in the skies,
mankind will be resurrected,
the saints will be caught up together in the clouds (rapture) to meet the Lord in the air (1 Th 4:17) and will
then accompany him back to earth for the final judgment,
which according to apostolic teaching occurs in the last day along with the resurrection:

Jesus locates the resurrection in the last day (Jn 6:39),
Paul locates the resurrection with the rapture (1 Th 4:16).
Jesus locates the rapture with the second coming (Mt 24:39-41).
Jesus locates the second coming with the judgment of the sheep and goats (Mt 25:31-33).

So in terms of the time of their occurrence, the necessary conclusion is:
second coming = resurrection = rapture = final judgment of sheep and goats (all mankind)

Scripture plainly states Christians endure the great tribulation.

Because it is metaphorical (prophetic riddle) of the church age.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

We can easily find the origin of this false idea of 7 year of tribulation that has been spread among Christians...

And where the error and deception came from

"The Origins of the Pretribulation Rapture Theory

The pretribulation rapture theory is a relatively recent development in Christian theology, with its roots in the 19th century. John Nelson Darby, a British evangelist and influential figure in the Plymouth Brethren movement, is often credited with popularizing this idea. Darby’s teachings, along with the widespread distribution of the Scofield Reference Bible in the early 20th century, helped to promote the pretribulation rapture theory among Christians in the United States and beyond.

That is a blatantly false statement. It has been proven to be false many, many times. Everything else that follows is incorrect.

 

[Josheb]

Not when you know the meaning of Biblical words


Not to mention that prophecy is given in riddles (Nu 12:8) and not clearly, and is subject to more than one interpretation,
the only rule being that all interpretation must be in agreement with NT apostolic teaching authoritative to the church.
The Book of Revelation is prophesy and is not literal.

However, the apostolic teaching of 1 Co 16:22 is literal, where we have the parousia (coming) of Jesus mentioned, which parousia meant: the citizens going out of the city to meet an incoming dignitary and accompanying him back into the city, as in Jesus' entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday.

And that is what will happen at the parousia of Jesus (1 Co 16:22); i.e.,
he will appear in the skies,
mankind will be resurrected,
the saints will be caught up together in the clouds (rapture) to meet the Lord in the air (1 Th 4:17) and will
then accompany him back to earth for the final judgment,
which according to apostolic teaching occurs in the last day along with the resurrection:

Jesus locates the resurrection in the last day (Jn 6:39),
Paul locates the resurrection with the rapture (1 Th 4:16).
Jesus locates the rapture with the second coming (Mt 24:39-41).
Jesus locates the second coming with the judgment of the sheep and goats (Mt 25:31-33).

So in terms of the time of their occurrence, the necessary conclusion is:
second coming = resurrection = rapture = final judgment of sheep and goats (all mankind)

Because it is metaphorical (prophetic riddle) of the church age.

Lots of good stuff there but be careful.

This op is specifically about the false doctrine of the 7-year tribulation, specifically the pre-tribulational rapture view of the tribulation. Nothing more. It's not about any alternative views. This is important because those holding to an incorrect view of the tribulation like it when the subject gets changed. They delight in it because they can then shift the onus away from the false doctrine and make the entire thread about debating whatever alternative gets asserted. The proverbial "heat" is off them and now on you (or whoever got baited into asserting an alternative). You or I could spend pages of posts defending your position, maybe proving its veracity, but still never disproving the pre-trib pov described in this op.

If you would like to spend the rest of your time here defending Post 62 then do so, but don't expect my cooperation. I don't need an alternative to prove the pre-trib rapture incorrect. All anyone needs is scripture read exactly as written. And neither will I get distracted and digress far afield of the op so some pre-tribber can find relief.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

Lots of good stuff there but be careful.

This op is specifically about the false doctrine of the 7-year tribulation, specifically the pre-tribulational rapture view of the tribulation. Nothing more. It's not about any alternative views. This is important because those holding to an incorrect view of the tribulation like it when the subject gets changed. They delight in it because they can then shift the onus away from the false doctrine and make the entire thread about debating whatever alternative gets asserted. The proverbial "heat" is off them and now on you (or whoever got baited into asserting an alternative). You or I could spend pages of posts defending your position, maybe proving its veracity, but still never disproving the pre-trib pov described in this op.

If you would like to spend the rest of your time here defending Post 62 then do so, but don't expect my cooperation. I don't need an alternative to prove the pre-trib rapture incorrect. All anyone needs is scripture read exactly as written. And neither will I get distracted and digress far afield of the op so some pre-tribber can find relief.

The pre-tribulational rapture is not false doctrine. It's established as accurate and was what was believed by the apostles and the very early church. Anything else is revisionist history. Not going to let you get away with blatantly false and easily refuted statements.

 

[TMSO]

Where do you find the word "sovereignty"?

Yet God is sovereign (Da 4:35).

Likewise regarding God's sovereignty. . .

So... I guess my point stands, but now affects more parts of God's nature? Just because we don't find it explicitly in scripture, does not mean it is not covered/taught in scripture. We stamp a name on it, and people use that to say, well it isn't in scripture. It is there. You just choose to ignore it because the terminology used to express it is not explicitly present in scripture. However, when it comes to one's own beliefs, one will gloss over the fact that that terminology isn't present, since it is their opinion/belief. (the two words are interchangeable here.)

 

[TMSO]

The pre-tribulational rapture is not false doctrine. It's established as accurate and was what was believed by the apostles and the very early church. Anything else is revisionist history. Not going to let you get away with blatantly false and easily refuted statements.

I believe that he is a hyper-preterist, which is someone who does not believe in the second coming of Christ before the world is destroyed, as he is clear he believes Jesus returns in Revelation 21, which makes it clear the world that Jesus is to return to has been destroyed. (Very first verse in fact.)

 

[Eleanor]

So... I guess my point stands, but now affects more parts of God's nature? Just because we don't find it explicitly in scripture, does not mean it is not covered/taught in scripture. We stamp a name on it, and people use that to say, well it isn't in scripture. It is there. You just choose to ignore it because the terminology used to express it is not explicitly present in scripture. However, when it comes to one's own beliefs, one will gloss over the fact that that terminology isn't present, since it is their opinion/belief. (the two words are interchangeable here.)

Actually, it is quite the opposite. . .

That God is sovereign (Da 4:35) though the word "sovereignty" is never used in the Bible,
likewise, God is Trinity (Mt 28:19) through the word "Trinity" is never used in the Bible.

 

[TMSO]

Actually, it is quite the opposite. . .

That God is sovereign (Da 4:35) though the word "sovereignty" is never used in the Bible,
likewise, God is Trinity (Mt 28:19) through the word "Trinity" is never used in the Bible.

By saying it isn't found explicitly in scripture, I mean that the word is not found in scripture. The concepts are very clearly present in scripture, but the word itself does not appear. The arguments I have dealt with say that such and such can't be true, because the word is not explicitly present in scripture. This is why I bring up, well what about the trinity. That word is also not explicitly present in scripture, but you accept it and say that it is present in scripture. The concept is, the word is not.

 

[CrowCross]

By saying it isn't found explicitly in scripture, I mean that the word is not found in scripture. The concepts are very clearly present in scripture, but the word itself does not appear. The arguments I have dealt with say that such and such can't be true, because the word is not explicitly present in scripture. This is why I bring up, well what about the trinity. That word is also not explicitly present in scripture, but you accept it and say that it is present in scripture. The concept is, the word is not.

That is true.

The word antediluvian isn't found in scripture but it refers to a time prior to the flood of Noah.

 

[Eleanor]

I am looking for the word trinity, but I'm just not finding it. You are talking about inferences, and implication. You aren't accepting that for the rapture, but you are pushing it for the trinity.

The rapture is clearly stated, not inferred, in 1 Th 4:16-17 to occur at the second coming, which is at the end of time:

Jesus locates the resurrection in the last day (Jn 6:39),
Paul locates the resurrection with the rapture (1 Th 4:16).
Jesus locates the rapture with the second coming (Mt 24:39-41).
Jesus locates the second coming with the judgment of the sheep and goats (Mt 25:31-33).

So in terms of the time of their occurrence, the necessary conclusion is:
second coming = resurrection = rapture = final judgment of sheep and goats (all mankind)

Any "inferences" regarding the rapture must be in agreement with what is clearly stated.

All I am saying is that you are holding a double standard. You are pushing your beliefs, whether or not the Bible is explicit or not.

Apples and oranges. . .

The Bible is explicit on the rapture (see the above, which locks it in). . .it is not explicit on the Trinity.

 

[TMSO]

The rapture is clearly stated, not inferred, in 1 Th 4:16-17 to occur at the second coming, which is at the end of time:

Jesus locates the resurrection in the last day (Jn 6:39),
Paul locates the resurrection with the rapture (1 Th 4:16).
Jesus locates the rapture with the second coming (Mt 24:39-41).
Jesus locates the second coming with the judgment of the sheep and goats (Mt 25:31-33).

So in terms of the time of their occurrence, the necessary conclusion is:
second coming = resurrection = rapture = final judgment of sheep and goats (all mankind)

Any "inferences" regarding the rapture must be in agreement with what is clearly stated.

Apples and oranges. . .

The Bible is explicit on the rapture (see the above, which locks it in). . .it is not explicit on the Trinity.

The Bible is clear on the trinity, and in fact, John in his letters says if you don't accept it, you are the antichrist. If you deny Christ's nature, you are not one of His.

 

[TMSO]

The rapture is clearly stated, not inferred, in 1 Th 4:16-17 to occur at the second coming, which is at the end of time:

Jesus locates the resurrection in the last day (Jn 6:39),
Paul locates the resurrection with the rapture (1 Th 4:16).
Jesus locates the rapture with the second coming (Mt 24:39-41).
Jesus locates the second coming with the judgment of the sheep and goats (Mt 25:31-33).

So in terms of the time of their occurrence, the necessary conclusion is:
second coming = resurrection = rapture = final judgment of sheep and goats (all mankind)

Any "inferences" regarding the rapture must be in agreement with what is clearly stated.

Apples and oranges. . .

The Bible is explicit on the rapture (see the above, which locks it in). . .it is not explicit on the Trinity.

So please show me the verse that explicitly uses the word rapture. I can wait. Again, I mean show the word rapture explicitly stated. I believe that it is present in concept, and clearly, however, it is not explicitly mentioned. The same as the trinity.

 

[Mr GLee]

Not to mention that prophecy is given in riddles (Nu 12:8) and not clearly, and is subject to more than one interpretation,
the only rule being that all interpretation must be in agreement with NT apostolic teaching authoritative to the church.
The Book of Revelation is prophesy and is not literal.

I think you meant the Holy Spirit 's teaching. The authority of invisible head .We gain nothing from the apostles "messengers "

Every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labor.

 

[Eleanor]

The Bible is clear on the trinity, and in fact, John in his letters says if you don't accept it, you are the antichrist. If you deny Christ's nature, you are not one of His.

Scripture?

 

[Eleanor]

So please show me the verse that explicitly uses the word rapture. I can wait. Again, I mean show the word rapture explicitly stated. I believe that it is present in concept, and clearly, however, it is not explicitly mentioned. The same as the trinity.

You think the original manuscripts are in English. . .that explains a lot.

However, in the Greek the word is harpazo (snatch or catch away) in 1 Th 4:17.

 

[Eleanor]

I think you meant the Holy Spirit 's teaching. The authority of invisible head .We gain nothing from the apostles "messengers "

Every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labor.

There is no Holy Spirit teaching not in agreement with the NT, for God does not contradict himself in his own word written.

 

[Mr GLee]

There is no Holy Spirit teaching not in agreement with the NT, for God does not contradict himself in his own word written.

Amen .we need no men to teach us.. called antichrists'

 

[Eleanor]

There is no Holy Spirit teaching not in agreement with the NT, for God does not contradict himself in his own word written.

Amen .we need no men to teach us.. called antichrists.

We need that which the men who penned the NT teach us in the Holy Spirit.

 

[Hobie]

That is a blatantly false statement. It has been proven to be false many, many times. Everything else that follows is incorrect.

The Bible shows what is true, not what men may say or tell others, need to show from scripture what is true.