The Rapture or the Second Coming

[Eleanor]

Always?

I don't think so...the 1,000 year reign is presented as quite literal.

You're going to need much more than a riddle theory to convince me.

That's how it works for you?

Those who do nor believe in Jesus Christd are condemned already (Jn 3:18). . .always?

 

[Arial]

I don't think so...the 1,000 year reign is presented as quite literal.

You read it as literal. That is not the same thing as being literal. Big difference.

 

[Eleanor]

First of all, you're changing the topic, again. If you wanted or intended to stay on topic then what you shoudl be doing is quoting Ice's view on "in the days of Noah."

Second, Thomas Ice is a biased source (and a sloppy exegete and irrational apologist). He is not honest, either. He commonly baits and switches historical views of dispensation with Dispensational Premillennialism, treating the two as if they are identical or synonymous when they are not. Pre-1830 references to a pre-tribulational viewpoint does not mean they were Dispensational Premillennial viewpoints. Acting as if they might be synonymous is dishonest. Furthermore, anytime any past theologian or theological viewpoint contradicts scripture that theologian/viewpoint is wrong. This is particularly applicable to Ice because he often cites extra-biblical source, some of which are known to be heretical (like the Shepherd of Hermas). When a godly man cites an extra-canonical source (like the Epistle of Barnabas), his argument has no merit if his use of the extra-canonical source contradicts scripture (as does the Epistle of Barnabas' view of the tribulation). When a godly man cites a heretic, he's being heretical. When a heretic cites another heretic that's twice heretical. You should read that Ice article critically, with the same sense of criticism you have for my posts. If and when that happens, you'll find Ice is not reliable and has led you astray. Don't trust Ice any more than you trust me. Measure us both by scripture correctly rendered. What you've done is make an appeal to authority and for every Dispensationalist you cite I can cite two non-Dispensationalists. Shall we play who can cite the most theologians? No! That will get us nowhere. Nothing Thomas Ice or ANYONE else (whether they be Dispensation ally Premillennial or not) says in contradiction to those facts can be true. Let God be true and all men liars! Sound doctrine never contradicts God's word. Ice's view contradicts God's word.

The FACTs of scripture are...

• Jesus explicitly stated the disciples would be handed over to tribulation.
• Jesus explicitly stated after the great tribulation the disciples would see the sign of his coming.
• Jesus explicitly states those clothed in white robes were Christians who had gone through the great tribulation.
• John stated he was a partaker in the tribulation!

The "tribulation" is the church age (Jn 16:33), particularly in the martyrdom of the early Christians.

.....and scripture is authoritative. It overrules anyone and everyone you might ever think to reference. Christians cannot be removed from the planet to escape the tribulation if they are delivered to the tribulation, go through it with robes washed in Christ's blood, and see the sign of Christ's coming afterwards.

That is irrational.

 

[EarlyActs]

For those who put the Rapture and the Second Coming at roughly the same time, I offer this list of contrasts between the Rapture and the Second Coming. Each number in one section corresponds to the same number in the other section. This is also a list that supports the Rapture happening before the Tribulation, and the Second Coming happening at the end of the Tribulation. You will find a list like this one in many Prophecy books.

At the Rapture:
1. Christ comes FOR His own in the air
2. All believers are translated into new bodies
3. Christians are taken to the Father's House
4. There is no judgment on the earth
5. The Church will be in Heaven
6. It is an imminent occurrence
7. There are no signs preceding it
8. It affects believers only
9. It is a time of joy
10. it occurs before the day of Wrath
11. No mention of Satan
12. The Judgment Seat of Christ happens next
13. There is the marriage of the Lamb
14. Only Christ's own will see him
15. The Tribulation begins

At the Second Coming:
1. Christ comes WITH his own
2. No Translation of bodies
3. resurrected saints remain on earth
4. Christ judges the inhabitants of the earth
5. Christ sets up his kingdom on earth
6. It can not occur until the seven-year Trib period
7. The are numerous signs preceding it
8. It affects all humanity
9. It is a time of mourning
10. It occurs after the Tribulation
11. Satan is bound in abyss 1,000 years
12. No judgment seat of Christ
13. His bride descends with him to earth
14. Every eye will see him
15. The millennial reign of Christ begins


This is a pretty solid chart for Pre Tribbers

The trib being spoken of in Mt24 etc was in that 1st century generation. There is a time of harrassment at the end of the 'long reign of Christ' which is resolved swiftly by the coming in judgement.

The NT does see the end of this world following right after the turmoil in Israel (and nearby) in that generation, except for the fact that God decided to delay. We see this delay in 2 Peter 3, in Mark's parable of 4 possible times of return, and in 'only the Father knows' in Mt. 24.

 

[EarlyActs]

The term 'amillenial' is generally unclear. In most debate today, it actually means 'a-dispensational-millenial'--a lack of belief of how dispensationalism treats the millenium, which is Judaic and future.

If the reign of Christ began with his enthronement (the resurrection, Acts 2:30,31) and that was Davidic (as that quote says), then there is a long reign that is currently in effect, which is not 'proved' by newspaper headlines, but rather by God's declaration that it is imperative; it is what should be true; that all people, all rulers, must obey the Son, lest they be dashed to pieces, Ps 2, 110.

 

[Eleanor]

The term 'amillenial' is generally unclear. In most debate today, it actually means 'a-dispensational-millenial'--a lack of belief of how dispensationalism treats the millenium, which is Judaic and future.

If the reign of Christ began with his enthronement (the resurrection, Acts 2:30,31) and that was Davidic (as that quote says), then there is a long reign that is currently in effect, which is not 'proved' by newspaper headlines, but rather by God's declaration that it is imperative; it is what should be true; that all people, all rulers, must obey the Son, lest they be dashed to pieces, Ps 2, 110.

And is true. . .

 

[Arial]

LOL......you simply declared it to be symbolic.

No, it demonstrates itself to be symbolic by presenting the text with the use of symbols and metaphors. Symbols are symbolic of something concrete. Metaphors are figures of speech that represent an idea or truth.

 

[Arial]

I see a lot of hate on this forum. Venom.

It is interesting that when all else has run its course, the one who has been unable to sway anyone with unsupported claims and declarations of their own indisputable rightness, finally turns and calls the disagreement with them "hate", "venom". It is interesting because it never fails to happen eventually, whether the disagreement be with other aspects of theology that are traditional Christian doctrine, or dispensationalism and the idea of a pre-trib rapture, seven year tribulation and a literal thousand year reign of Christ (the two kingdoms of God theory). It happens like clockwork.

I have shown where the rapture/resurrection will be pre-trib.

What you haven't shown is that there is a seven year tribulation and therefore there is a removal from the earth of Christians before that. Until you are able to do that nothing you say is the basis for considering that you have shown anything.

How christians escape the wrath....and a few people absolutly hate that escatology...

It is phony eschatology is why it is hated. WHen the martyrs mentioned in Revelation were/are/possibly will be, were beheaded, were they facing God's wrath? Or were they enduring to the end?

when they should be comforting each other with the truth of the pre-trib rapture.

You have missed all the comfort that is in Revelation and the entire purpose for which it was written and put within the canon. The view you present is no comfort at all and does not look forward to the actual Christ, actualling returning, but is trying to be comforted by being gone before he returns. His return, in the view you present, is a terrible thing for the Christian. It looks forward to the day prior to his return.

 

[CrowCross]

That's how it works for you?

Those who do nor believe in Jesus Christd are condemned already (Jn 3:18). . .always?

Yikes, that responce was a riddle.

 

[CrowCross]

No, it demonstrates itself to be symbolic by presenting the text with the use of symbols and metaphors. Symbols are symbolic of something concrete. Metaphors are figures of speech that represent an idea or truth.

As I said...you simply declared it to be symbolic without support.

 

[CrowCross]

It is phony eschatology is why it is hated. WHen the martyrs mentioned in Revelation were/are/possibly will be, were beheaded, were they facing God's wrath? Or were they enduring to the end?

Sounds like you want to be a martyr.

 

[Arial]

Sounds like you want to be a martyr.

I asked a couple of questions. Why is the above what I get instead of answers to the questions? You are not posting in good faith. You are instigating deflective arguments. A person might as well go over to CARM and try and carry on a conversation with Shroom. If you have run out of steam, and I certainly can understand why you might have, then let the sleeping dog lie, rather than do this sort of thing.

 

[Arial]

As I said...you simply declared it to be symbolic without support.

It isn't as you said. I pointed out that scripture that is presented using symbols and metaphors is declaring itself to not be literal. A literal truth is expressed but the symbols and metaphors are not themselves literal. You said nothing about that. You just took up another shovel full of dirt. (That is a metaphor).

It is the NT that declares that Zech 14 is not literal but is expressing a profound truth of Christ's second advent at the time of restoration and renewal, when it identifies his second advent in 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15, and Rev 21. And Psalm 104 which you used to show it was literal, is not itself literal.

 

[CrowCross]

It isn't as you said. I pointed out that scripture that is presented using symbols and metaphors is declaring itself to not be literal. A literal truth is expressed but the symbols and metaphors are not themselves literal. You said nothing about that. You just took up another shovel full of dirt. (That is a metaphor).

It is the NT that declares that Zech 14 is not literal but is expressing a profound truth of Christ's second advent at the time of restoration and renewal, when it identifies his second advent in 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15, and Rev 21. And Psalm 104 which you used to show it was literal, is not itself literal.

In 1 Thess 4....Jesus doesn't come to the earth. It is a different event than the literal Zech 14.

 

[Arial]

In 1 Thess 4....Jesus doesn't come to the earth. It is a different event than the literal Zech 14.

There are two problems with that, and it shows your inconsistency. They are found in the following two scriptures.

1. Acts 1:9-11 And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight, And while the were gazing into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white robes, and said "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus , who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven."

2. 1 Thess 4:14-17 For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Chris will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, 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.

You say these two passages match Christ's return (and they do). However you say both passages are referring to, not his actual return, since in the second we do not see him touching the earth. Therefore you take 1 Thess 4 and shove it into your pre-trib rapture theory of the saints being removed from the earth and say both are speaking of a pre-trib rapture. (You do not assign the Acts passage itself directly as mentioning a pre-trib rapture, but you insert it into the passage with 1 Thess.

But lets test that by looking at the passages again.

Acts: "This Jesus who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven." That says nothing about taking anyone anywhere. It states, he went up to heaven, and he will come back to earth down from heaven.

1 Thess actually expands on his return. And what does it say? But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep.

The theory that in Acts, Jesus never touches the ground but only comes to remove the saints from the earth falls apart when it says God will bring with Jesus the resurrected saints and in 1 Cor 15 also those who remain alive at his coming and all will be changed from mortal to immortal. So the resurrected and changed saints meet him in the air and come with him when he returns.

And you have a preposterous assertion that in Acts 1, the angels are speaking to the apostles of a "pre-trib" rapture that would be the reason they (and all believers) would not face God's wrath, instead of comforting them with the knowledge that, "Yes, he left for a time, but he will return."

 

[Eleanor]

Yikes, that responce was a riddle.

Nu 12:6-8 (God gives prophecy in riddles) is as "always" as is Jn 3:18.

 

[CrowCross]

There are two problems with that, and it shows your inconsistency. They are found in the following two scriptures.

1. Acts 1:9-11 And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight, And while the were gazing into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white robes, and said "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus , who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven."

2. 1 Thess 4:14-17 For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Chris will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, 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.

You say these two passages match Christ's return (and they do). However you say both passages are referring to, not his actual return, since in the second we do not see him touching the earth. Therefore you take 1 Thess 4 and shove it into your pre-trib rapture theory of the saints being removed from the earth and say both are speaking of a pre-trib rapture. (You do not assign the Acts passage itself directly as mentioning a pre-trib rapture, but you insert it into the passage with 1 Thess.

But lets test that by looking at the passages again.

Acts: "This Jesus who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven." That says nothing about taking anyone anywhere. It states, he went up to heaven, and he will come back to earth down from heaven.

1 Thess actually expands on his return. And what does it say? But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep.

The theory that in Acts, Jesus never touches the ground but only comes to remove the saints from the earth falls apart when it says God will bring with Jesus the resurrected saints and in 1 Cor 15 also those who remain alive at his coming and all will be changed from mortal to immortal. So the resurrected and changed saints meet him in the air and come with him when he returns.

And you have a preposterous assertion that in Acts 1, the angels are speaking to the apostles of a "pre-trib" rapture that would be the reason they (and all believers) would not face God's wrath, instead of comforting them with the knowledge that, "Yes, he left for a time, but he will return."

One thing we know is that those verses don't refer to the coming of Jesus on the white horse.
The reason why has been pointed out to you dozens of times.

You need to stop grazing around the edges.

 

[CrowCross]

Nu 12:6-8 (God gives prophecy in riddles) is as "always" as is Jn 3:18.

If so many of the riddles have been solved.

 

[Eleanor]

If so many of the riddles have been solved.

Who made that rule?

 

[CrowCross]

Who made that rule?

Who said it was a rule?