Joshua David

I think that people who believe OSAS is false take scriptures out of context on a daily basis. One of the interesting things is that the bible does not talk about being saved in the Old Testament in the same sense as it does in the New Testament. Whenever the bible uses the word saved in the Old Testament it is talking about their physical life being saved. But as we often find, what is external and physical in the Old Testament becomes internal and spiritual in the New. While the Old Testament doesn't really talk about salvation, it does talk about God expectation of obedience to the Law for the Children of Israel. If you did not obey the Law, or failed to bring a suitable sacrifice when you did sin, then you were cut off from the Children of Israel, and were forbidden to partake of the blessings of Israel. So are there scriptures in the New Testament that seem to indicate that you can lose your salvation? Yes there are, and ironically enough, Jesus talked more about losing your salvation than any other person in the New Testament. Let's look a just a few examples.... Matt 24:13 But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved. Also let's consider the parable of the 10 virgins. Because of space, I won't type the entire parable, but just the highlights.... All 10 virgins start with oil in their lamps. All ten virgins fall sleep. When the call came in that the Bridegroom was coming, the five wise virgins, who maintained their supply of oil were allowed to enter the wedding feast. The five foolish, who let their supply of oil run out was not allowed to enter the wedding feast. There are some others but these two are the two strongest arguments that is always used to support the idea that you can lose your salvation. So let's take a closer look at both of these. Matt 24 is often referred to as the little apocalypse, since it gives such a good summary of the Book of Revelations. Almost the entire chapter is Jesus' reply to his disciples questions concerning the endtime, his second coming, and the end of the age. We start in verse 4-8 with the birth pains, then increase in lawlessness, and starting at verse 15 it talks about the abomination of desolation. When happens in the middle of the tribulation. Then we get to the Second Coming of Christ. Right in the middle of all this we have that little verse that states he who endures until the end shall be saved. Based on my first post, I think everyone knows that I believe that during this current age, once a person is saved, their salvation is secure, and I believe that the evidence of this is very very strong. But Jesus says here that only he who endures until the end will be saved. This shows a great fundamental shift. As great a fundamental shift as when we moved from the Age of Law to the Age of Grace. The entire context of Matt 24 is the Tribulation period up until the Second coming. Therefore it shows that during the Tribulation period, the Age of Grace, and the promise of eternal security is not in effect. Therefore, since we are sealed by the Holy Spirit until the day of redemption, ( rapture) then the only way that all these verses can be true is that the day of redemption ( the rapture ) happens before the Tribulation period, and this is why the Saints must endure until the end to be saved. The very next chapter Matt 25 starts out with the parable of the 10 virgins. There are a lot of commentaries out there that suggest that this parable is about the church. I disagree. Again for the same reasons as above. Matt 24 and 25 are about the time of the tribulation. The virgins are not the bride, we would call them bridesmaids today. These are the tribulation saints. In fact the one thing that no one should question is the timing of this parable, it is the second coming. Yes, I agree that all 10 virgins had oil to start with, they were all 'saved' but the wise maintained their oil, while the foolish did not. This parable is about the fundamental shift in the conditions of salvation during the tribulation period vs the conditions of salvation during the church age. Therefore the church age must come to a close ( day of redemption ) before this parable takes place ( the Tribulation preceeding the second coming of Jesus ) Does anyone have any other point to raise?? As Iron sharpens Iron, Joshua David

When I was young, my mom carried me to different churches, looking for one that felt 'right' to her. She took me to different kinds of denominations, and I sat and listened to what all these preachers had to say. The one thing I understood for sure was that all these churches taught something different and they all thought it was correct. The reason that they all thought it was correct, was because they all 'proved' their position by scripture. They would use this scripture and that scripture, and they all seemed to make really good points. Needless to say, I was confused. How could the same bible be used to 'prove' different things. So I stopped accepting what other people taught about the bible, and started studying it for myself. I would still listen to what people were saying, I started reading the entire chapter of the scriptures so that I could get the context of what was being said. I started doing word studies on the scriptures, so that I understood what the scripture meant in the original language that it was spoken or written. But most of all, I started to form my own opinions, that were based on my own study, and stopped relying on other people's interpretation. Because what I discovered, was that EVERYONE had their own interpretation, EVERYONE believed that the Holy Spirit led them to 'their' conclusion, and very few were actually honest enough to admit even the possibility that what they believed could be wrong. They believed what they believed, and everyone else was wrong. I will fully admit that I could be wrong. I don't think I am, but I could be. One of the topics that came up most often was the subject of salvation. Some churches believed that you could lose your salvation, ( and had scriptures to 'prove' it ) and other churches were equally convinced that you could not lose your salvation ( and had scriptures to 'prove' it. ) What I found was that the churches that believed you could lose your salvation NEVER talked about the scriptures that seemed to indicate otherwise. They never addressed them, they never explained them, they never quoted them, and most of the Christians that went to the church never even knew that those scriptures were in the bible. The exact same thing could be said for the churches that believed that you could not lose your salvation. And what end up happening is that most Christians could 'parrot' what their church believed, and could quote scripture supporting their position, but very few could actually defend what they believed. They couldn't explain how those 'troubling' verses ( the ones used to support a different position ) fit into what they believed. So I am going to start a series of topics that have led me to my conclusions on the end times. I am going to try not only show how I arrived at my conclusions, but will try to show how those 'troubling" verses fit into what I believe. The reason that I put this topic here is because all of these subjects led me to the conclusion that the pretrib rapture is true, and that is the central point to this series. So now that the intro is complete lets' get started.... Salvation. There is probably not another topic that has been more divisive than this one. This topic has been debated throughout the entire church history. If you have never taken the time to really study the history of the doctrine of Salvation I highly encourage you, because it is a fascinating study. It would surprise some people to learn that what is believed about salvation today is not what the church had always taught. But that is outside the scope of this thread. I want to talk about how my understanding of salvation affects my understanding of the timing of the rapture. Let's start with the big question. Once you become saved, can you lose your salvation? The one question has divided more Christians than any other topic in history. Why? Well let me ask you a question? Does the bible contain verses that seem to indicate that you can lose your salvation? What do you think? Does the bible contain verses that seem to indicate that you can not lose your salvation? I personally believe that the answer to both questions is that it does. And we are going to look at both groups. Let's look at the verses that defend OSAS first. 1 Cor 1:21-22 21 Now he which establisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; 22 Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts. Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Eph 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. John 10:27-29 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. And first verses really clinched it for me when I was studying this topic. Consider this question. Who is the responsible party in us standing firm in Christ? If you can lose your salvation, then the question is obviously We are the responsible party. If you can't lose your salvation, then the answer is God is the responsible party. And the scripture clearly says that God is the responsible party. Not only that but consider verse 22 in Eph 1. God seals us with his Spirit. And the Spirit is the "earnest". What is the earnest? The original word that Paul used was the Greek word arrabon. Arrabon means money which is purchases is given as a pledge or downpayment that the full amount will subsequently be paid. Now I ask you, who makes the pledge? Us or God? So let me paraphrase just a little. It is God that annoints us, it is God that seals us, it is God that makes us stand fast in Christ, it is God that pledges to complete the purchase. When is it completed? Eph 4:30 tells us, the day of redemption. When is that? At the rapture. So what is the security of our salvation based on? Us or God? It is God. He is the one that made the pledge. He is the one that sealed us, He is the one that promises to complete our redemption. So what do you think? Do you agree so far? Why or why not... As Iron sharpens Iron, Joshua David

In my last post, I posted some of the scriptures that I believe prove that once we are saved, our salvation is secure because it is based on the promises of God, not on our behavior. In this post I will explore some of the scriptures that indicate that you can lose your salvation. One of the interesting things is that the bible does not talk about being saved in the Old Testament in the same sense as it does in the New Testament. Whenever the bible uses the word saved in the Old Testament it is talking about their physical life being saved. But as we often find, what is external and physical in the Old Testament becomes internal and spiritual in the New. While the Old Testament doesn't really talk about salvation, it does talk about God expectation of obedience to the Law for the Children of Israel. If you did not obey the Law, or failed to bring a suitable sacrifice when you did sin, then you were cut off from the Children of Israel, and were forbidden to partake of the blessings of Israel. So are there scriptures in the New Testament that seem to indicate that you can lose your salvation? Yes there are, and ironically enough, Jesus talked more about losing your salvation than any other person in the New Testament. Let's look a just a few examples.... Matt 24:13 But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved. Also let's consider the parable of the 10 virgins. Because of space, I won't type the entire parable, but just the highlights.... All 10 virgins start with oil in their lamps. All ten virgins fall sleep. When the call came in that the Bridegroom was coming, the five wise virgins, who maintained their supply of oil were allowed to enter the wedding feast. The five foolish, who let their supply of oil run out was not allowed to enter the wedding feast. There are some others but these two are the two strongest arguments that is always used to support the idea that you can lose your salvation. So let's take a closer look at both of these. Matt 24 is often referred to as the little apocalypse, since it gives such a good summary of the Book of Revelations. Almost the entire chapter is Jesus' reply to his disciples questions concerning the endtime, his second coming, and the end of the age. We start in verse 4-8 with the birth pains, then increase in lawlessness, and starting at verse 15 it talks about the abomination of desolation. When happens in the middle of the tribulation. Then we get to the Second Coming of Christ. Right in the middle of all this we have that little verse that states he who endures until the end shall be saved. Based on my first post, I think everyone knows that I believe that during this current age, once a person is saved, their salvation is secure, and I believe that the evidence of this is very very strong. But Jesus says here that only he who endures until the end will be saved. This shows a great fundamental shift. As great a fundamental shift as when we moved from the Age of Law to the Age of Grace. The entire context of Matt 24 is the Tribulation period up until the Second coming. Therefore it shows that during the Tribulation period, the Age of Grace, and the promise of eternal security is not in effect. Therefore, since we are sealed by the Holy Spirit until the day of redemption, ( rapture) then the only way that all these verses can be true is that the day of redemption ( the rapture ) happens before the Tribulation period, and this is why the Saints must endure until the end to be saved. The very next chapter Matt 25 starts out with the parable of the 10 virgins. There are a lot of commentaries out there that suggest that this parable is about the church. I disagree. Again for the same reasons as above. Matt 24 and 25 are about the time of the tribulation. The virgins are not the bride, we would call them bridesmaids today. These are the tribulation saints. In fact the one thing that no one should question is the timing of this parable, it is the second coming. Yes, I agree that all 10 virgins had oil to start with, they were all 'saved' but the wise maintained their oil, while the foolish did not. This parable is about the fundamental shift in the conditions of salvation during the tribulation period vs the conditions of salvation during the church age. Therefore the church age must come to a close ( day of redemption ) before this parable takes place ( the Tribulation preceeding the second coming of Jesus ) As Iron sharpens Iron, Joshua David

When I was young, my mom carried me to different churches, looking for one that felt 'right' to her. She took me to different kinds of denominations, and I sat and listened to what all these preachers had to say. The one thing I understood for sure was that all these churches taught something different and they all thought it was correct. The reason that they all thought it was correct, was because they all 'proved' their position by scripture. They would use this scripture and that scripture, and they all seemed to make really good points. Needless to say, I was confused. How could the same bible be used to 'prove' different things. So I stopped accepting what other people taught about the bible, and started studying it for myself. I would still listen to what people were saying, I started reading the entire chapter of the scriptures so that I could get the context of what was being said. I started doing word studies on the scriptures, so that I understood what the scripture meant in the original language that it was spoken or written. But most of all, I started to form my own opinions, that were based on my own study, and stopped relying on other people's interpretation. Because what I discovered, was that EVERYONE had their own interpretation, EVERYONE believed that the Holy Spirit led them to 'their' conclusion, and very few were actually honest enough to admit even the possibility that what they believed could be wrong. They believed what they believed, and everyone else was wrong. One of the topics that came up most often was the subject of salvation. Some churches believed that you could lose your salvation, ( and had scriptures to 'prove' it ) and other churches were equally convinced that you could not lose your salvation ( and had scriptures to 'prove' it. ) What I found was that the churches that believed you could lose your salvation NEVER talked about the scriptures that seemed to indicate otherwise. They never addressed them, they never explained them, they never quoted them, and most of the christians that went to the church never even knew that those scriptures were in the bible. The exact same thing could be said for the churches that believed that you could not lose your salvation. And what end up happening is that most Christians could 'parrot' what their church believed, and could quote scripture supporting their position, but very few could actually defend what they believed. They couldn't explain how those 'troubling' verses ( the ones used to support a different position ) fit into what they believed. So I am going to start a series of topics that have led me to my conclusions on the end times. I am going to try not only show how I arrived at my conclusions, but will try to show how those 'troubling" verses fit into what I believe. The reason that I put this topic here is because all of these subjects led me to the conclusion that the pretrib rapture is true, and that is the central point to this series. So now that the intro is complete lets' get started.... Salvation. There is probably not another topic that has been more divisive than this one. This topic has been debated throughout the entire church history. If you have never taken the time to really study the history of the doctrine of Salvation I highly encourage you, because it is a fascinating study. It would surprise some people to learn that what is believed about salvation today is not what the church had always taught. But that is outside the scope of this thread. I want to talk about how my understanding of salvation affects my understanding of the timing of the rapture. Let's start with the big question. Once you become saved, can you lose your salvation? The one question has divided more Christians than any other topic in history. Why? Well let me ask you a question? Does the bible contain verses that seem to indicate that you can lose your salvation? YES it does. Does the bible contain verses that seem to indicate that you can not lose your salvation? YES it does. And we are going to look at both groups. Let's look at the verses that defend OSAS first. 1 Cor 1:21-22 21 Now he which establisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; 22 Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts. Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Eph 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. John 10:27-29 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. And first verses really clinched it for me when I was studying this topic. Consider this question. Who is the responsible party in us standing firm in Christ? If you can lose your salvation, then the question is obviously We are the responsible party. If you can't lose your salvation, then the answer is God is the responsible party. And the scripture clearly says that God is the responsible party. Not only that but consider verse 22 in Eph 1. God seals us with his Spirit. And the Spirit is the "earnest". What is the earnest? The original word that Paul used was the Greek word arrabon. Arrabon means money which is purchases is given as a pledge or downpayment that the full amount will subsequently be paid. Now I ask you, who makes the pledge? Us or God? So let me paraphrase just a little. It is God that annoints us, it is God that seals us, it is God that makes us stand fast in Christ, it is God that pledges to complete the purchase. When is it completed? Eph 4:30 tells us, the day of redemption. When is that? At the rapture. So what is the security of our salvation based on? Us or God? It is God. He is the one that made the pledge. He is the one that sealed us, He is the one that promises to complete our redemption. In the next post I will discuss the scriptures that deal with people losing their salvation. As Iron sharpens Iron. Joshua David

This is a very valid argument, and to be honest, I dearly wish there was a single scripture that clearly and distinctly stated that there was a pretrib rapture, but I am honest enough to say that there isn't. Yes I realize that there can be a strong argument made for the case for a post trib rapture, and if I was to build my doctrine on one or two verses then, yes,I would believe in a post tribulation doctrine. But I try to the best of my ability to build my doctrine by examining all the scriptures. By constantly checking my understanding of the scriptures by examining all the verses. I see scripture like a lock, with only the correct key being able to unlock it. Now there are many different keys that will 'slide' into the lock, but there is only one key that will line up with all the tumblers that will allow the key to turn and unlock it. The reason that I have this 'logical fallacy', as you put it, is because this is exactly what the scripture says. Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and theGreek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. But, I do not want to derail this thread, and this is not my intention. I want you to see that I see all of these 'bits' of scripture, as evidence of a pretrib rapture. For a pretrib rapture is the only key that will turn all the tumblers on the lock. ( at least that I see ), if you wish to start another thread, I will be more than happy to move to that one. I can't start a thread, as I am still on 'probation' by not having enough posts. As Iron sharpens Iron, Joshua David Joshua, I really appreciate your honesty and your tone, I like your contributions so far. I like also the key/lock analogy. I think though, that a problem most of us have (and I will not exclude myself) is that we tend to read scripture through filters of prior belief. As a former pre-tribber I never assumed anything other than pre-trib, I did not know there were even other positions. One I heard there were, I took 8 months reading from Gen 1:1 to Rev 22:21 looking for the groove and bumps that go on that key. Mind you, I only looked for one thing on that project, sequence of events from the destruction of the temple, to the 2nd advent of Christ, I did not at that time, seek to understand the millenium etc. I had a bedroom desk and table, even part of the floor covered in scraps of paper - notes - anything that could be seen as indicating sequence. I took these notes and layed them out on a story board essentially, and tried to arrange them in a way that no verse or passage, contradicted another, or at least so that my understanding of verses, had no contradictions. At that time, 1986-1987, a post-trib sequence was all I could make work. So, what was I to do, continue to believe Hal Lindsay and my pastor? I couldn't, my allegiance was to scripture. If I were to take on that project again, I might come to a different conclusion, but I have had this discussion here on Worthy, since 2004, and have not seen a convincing (to me) reason to go my pre-trib or any other persuasion. It is not that I do not think there are no difficulties in my position, but I personal find them addressable without feeling like I am really having to stretch scripture or add to it to make it work. One thing that maybe I should have added to the OP, was a request for a convincing argument of the doctrine of Jesus imminent return, but that is addressed in other threads plenty. The reason I am tempted anyway, is that it seems like it is a necessary component to pre-tribism, and I find it equally missing in scripture, but that is another story. - Omegaman Thank you for your kind words, and let me say that I am glad that you shared your story. In fact if you can believe it, I had a very similar story, in that I came to a point in my life that I stopped trusting what other people said about the bible and seriously started studying what the bible said for myself. This is the reason that I don't get hung up on what Darby taught, because I have never even read one single thing that Darby wrote. I took my bible, my Greek and Hebrew lexicon ( for word studies on the original language ) and really look at not just about the rapture, but about everything that I had been 'taught' in church. I studied salvation, the trinity, the end times, ect. Basically everything that I could get my hands on. I have through the course of my study poked many holes in the theory of pretribulation rapture, or at least in the reasons that some of its supporters give. This is the reason that most of my 'evidence' is not based on just one or two scriptures. You can truly tell the difference between someone who has really and truly studied this topic for themselves, and someone who is just parroting what their 'pastor' is saying or bible teacher is saying. For instance, I don't believe in the doctrine of Imminence, because this doctrine is based on just a couple of scriptures that deal that basically say, "No man knows the day or the hour", and I see a different meaning to this phrase all together. Also the scripture about one man taken and one man left. Any one who has really and truly studied this scripture in detail will know that this scripture deals with the second coming, and not the rapture That being said, my belief in a pretribulation rapture is not about Imminence, or a few scriptures here or there, but based on a totality of my understanding of many different doctrines. It is based on my understanding of Salvation during the church age compared with the salvation that is during the tribulation. It is based on the study of dispensations, the differences between Israel and the church. what is taught about the millennium, the judgement of the sheep and goats, the repopulation of the earth, the different destinies of the Church vs. Israel. Ect. Ect.... I could very easily be a post tribulation rapture, if the Post Tribulation rapture answered all the questions that I had about the endtimes. But there are too many tumblers that a post tribulation do not turn. And yet, if you look at a pretribulation rapture it answers all the questions that I have, and I have yet to find one scripture that when you look closely at the scriptures, and perform word studies on the 'problem' scriptures, that is contradicted. As Iron sharpens Iron, Joshua David

Omegaman, This is a very valid argument, and to be honest, I dearly wish there was a single scripture that clearly and distinctly stated that there was a pretrib rapture, but I am honest enough to say that there isn't. Yes I realize that there can be a strong argument made for the case for a post trib rapture, and if I was to build my doctrine on one or two verses then, yes,I would believe in a post tribulation doctrine. But I try to the best of my ability to build my doctrine by examining all the scriptures. By constantly checking my understanding of the scriptures by examining all the verses. I see scripture like a lock, with only the correct key being able to unlock it. Now there are many different keys that will 'slide' into the lock, but there is only one key that will line up with all the tumblers that will allow the key to turn and unlock it. The reason that I have this 'logical fallacy', as you put it, is because this is exactly what the scripture says. Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and theGreek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. But, I do not want to derail this thread, and this is not my intention. I want you to see that I see all of these 'bits' of scripture, as evidence of a pretrib rapture. For a pretrib rapture is the only key that will turn all the tumblers on the lock. ( at least that I see ), if you wish to start another thread, I will be more than happy to move to that one. I can't start a thread, as I am still on 'probation' by not having enough posts. As Iron sharpens Iron, Joshua David

Enoch, As far as your first statement, I agree with you, but when we are considering doctrine, we must consider all scripture from the entire bible, not just from the book of Revelation. As far as your second 'fact', it is nothing more than your opinion or interpretation. Again, why don't you address the points that I raised in my previous post. Please explain how 1 Cor 15:51, Matt 25:31-46, and Isaiah 65:20 can all be true in a post tribulation rapture. Isaiah 65:20 20 There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. Matt 25:45-46 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. 1 Cor 15:51 51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, Because, if you can't make your interpretation fit with all of scripture, then it is time to change your interpretation. As Iron sharpens Iron, Joshua David

And the statement of the dead in Christ being raised at the 'First Resurrection' described in Rev 20, is as must opinion as all the statements that the pretribbers state. I understand that is your interpretation, but if we are going to refrain from stating opinion as fact in this thread, shouldn't that rule apply post tribbers as well as pretribbers? Enoch, why don't you address the points I raised in my post, I am sure that would be more productive to the discussion. As Iron sharpens Iron, Joshua David

Ok, let me try my hand in this... First let me say that I do understand where you are coming from and I try very hard not to state opinion as fact. And pre-tribbers are all guilty of using all the 'evidence' that you have stated in your OP. But, I would have to say that posttribbers are just as guilty of this as pretribbers are. Before I get started, let me qualify something. I have yet to meet or talk with a single pretribber who does not belief that Jesus returns to the earth at the end of the tribulation. Both pretribbers and posttribbers believe this to be true. I have yet to meet a single pretribber who has really studied this topic who does not believe that there is a resurrection at the end of the tribulation. If we both believe that Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation, then proving that Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation does not prove either point. This would be like one person saying that the ocean is wet and salty, and the other says that it is wet and fresh, and the second one spending all of his time proving that the ocean is wet. One of the main differences is that a posttribber believes that this resurrection is the rapture, and pretribbers do not. ( stating that they are the same is just as much opinion as the 'evidence' that you are trying to stay away from ) So if there is scriptural evidence for believing that the resurrection that takes place at the end of the tribulation is not the rapture, then it by definition is evidence for a pretribulation rapture. or at least a non posttrib rapture. So this is where I will be directing this post. First lets consider the nature of the rapture. What is the rapture? The rapture is the 'catching away' of the Bride of Christ. Who is the Bride of Christ? Everyone who is saved. They make up the 'Church' and the 'Church' is 'Bride'. In the old Testament, you had two types of people, the Children of Israel and the Gentiles. If you were not part of the Children of Israel, then you were a Gentile, plain and simple. In the New Testament, we also have two types of people. The Church, those people who are saved, and everyone else. You are either saved or not saved. If you are saved, then you are in the Bride, if you are not, then you are not. There is no such thing as being partially saved. No matter what you believe as far as OSAS, most Christians believe that you are either saved or lost. At the moment of the rapture, you are either saved or lost. If you are saved, then you go up in the rapture, if you are lost, then you don't. Pretrib or posttrib, doesn't matter. 1 Cor 15:51 51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, So whether you are dead or alive, if you are saved you will go into the rapture. At this moment in time, there will be two types of people in the world. Glorified believers, and lost unbelievers. Now when Christ returns, he fights the war of Armageddon, after which, he has the Judgment of the Sheep and Goats. Matt 25:31-46. If you believe in a post-tribulation rapture, then by definition, the sheep would be the glorified believers, and the goats would be everyone else. What does he tell the Goats? Matt 25:45-46 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. So all the unbelievers are sent away into everlasting punishment. And we begin the Millennium Reign of Christ with all believers, and if you are a post tribber, then everyone left has a glorified body, because the scripture says, we will all be changed. But if that is true, then how is the earth repopulated during the Millennium? People in glorified bodies do not marry, and since sex outside of marriage is a sin, we know that glorified bodies will not procreate. Where do the children come from? Isaiah 65:20 20 There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. Does the post trib rapture explain this verse? no it does not. Does a pretrib rapture explain it? Yes it does. We are raptured before the tribulation, God's focus turns again to Israel. At the end of the tribulation, you have believers who have died during the tribulation, believers in their natural bodies who are still alive, and the glorified saints of the church in Heaven. The Bride returns with Christ, the tribulation believers who have died are resurrected at the end of the tribulation, and the believers who are still alive in their natural bodies. Every man woman and child who is still alive on the earth will be brought before Christ, and He will separate them like the sheep from the goats, the unbelievers are sent away, but the sheep, the ones still in their natural bodies are allowed to marry and repopulate the earth. Their children will have children, and so on and so forth. A pretrib rapture satisfies the Jesus' statement of the Judgment of the Sheep and Goats in Matt 25, it satisfies Paul's statement of all being changed in 1 Cor, and allows for the children of the Millennium in Isaiah. A Post tribulation rapture by it's definition must violate one of these statements. As Iron sharpens Iron, Joshua David