EddieM

Please provide evidence for your position. It does no good to say "that's just a presumption" and think you have given enough information to show where I am wrong. I don't mean a one-sentence statement, but counter each point with several paragraphs of showing where i am wrong.

The Greek here is 'to set a watch'. Nothing in the text suggests a leaving from one place to go to another or, being taken from one place and brought to another What Greek word are you referring to? You wrote without support: Nothing in the text suggests a leaving from one place to go to another. Note that is also says: I will keep you from the hour (We will be taken out of the area of the event) of trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth.” Not to try us, but to try THOSE who dwell on the earth. (We will be removed from the earth.) Those who are "earth dwellers" (used of unbelievers) will not be kept from the hour of trial, they remain on earth.

Who is redeemed? Those believing/abiding. Not those who aren't. YES, His work will always remain, He will always be faithful but that doesn't transfer to mean WE will. All believers' sins are paid for (that is what redeem means), never to be brought up again. But when you take 2 Pt.2.1. There are no sins mentioned at the Judgment Seat of Christ (better translated, Rewards Ceremony) nor are sins mentioned at the Great White Throne Judgment. Regarding the comment a couple of lines above that says "Who is redeemed? Those believing/abiding. Not those who aren't. So, the statement that Who is redeemed? Those believing and abiding is not true. Everyone is redeemed. Most people think that they go to hell because of their personal sins. That is not true. Sins have nothing to do with Salvation. The payment for all sins does not mean salvation for anyone. Salvation is given to anyone who accepts God's offer of Salvation. DeighAnn, it may have been Alive who made that statement, not you. So, I am the one who should apologize. I was simply adding other close theological issues that I saw. No pre trib rapture either....

2 Peter 2.1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who redeemed them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.

It is interesting to me that even all unbelievers are redeemed. Understanding this may help you draw correct conclusions.

PROOFS FOR A PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE 1 – Jesus made a promise to the church in Philadelphia – Jesus said, “Because you have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth” (Rev. 3:10). In his book, Jesus and the End Times, Ron Rhodes states, “According to the Greek language…the phrase, ‘hour of trial’ is described in Revelation 4-18. It is this timespan that the church is to be kept from itself.” 2 – We are not appointed to wrath – This is a crucial reason the Rapture must occur before the Tribulation. Romans 5:9 says, “We shall be saved from wrath through Him.” 1 Thessalonians 1:10 declares, “And to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.” And Revelation 3:10 states, “Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.” This reference speaks of a worldwide, global judgment. Clearly, the seven-year Tribulation is the wrath of God. For seven years, twenty-one judgments will befall the whole world. By reading Revelation 4-18, it’s clear that things go from bad to worse as the judgments of God literally tear this world apart. Those caught in the middle will suffer “A day of wrath-a day of distress and anguish, a day of trouble and ruin, a day of darkness and gloom, a day of clouds and blackness” (Zeph. 1:15). 3 – We are covered by the blood – Few could argue that the Tribulation is a time of pain, wrath, God’s judgment, darkness, and destruction over evil, the Antichrist, and the earth. Because of the cross, the church has been cleansed by the blood of Jesus. Therefore, those who have been cleansed by confession of their faith in Jesus are not under condemnation and judgment (Rom. 8:1). Therefore, heaven awaits them, not the wrath of God. Those who genuinely walk and live. It is rather odd that the Rev. 19 passage is the most precise picture of the Second Coming of Christ, yet it does not mention a resurrection? Furthermore, the rapture will be the most significant event since the resurrection of Jesus, where hundreds of millions of Christians will be resurrected and translated. Yet, there isn't any mention of it here. That seems to be an essential part to leave out. The resurrection of the dead isn't mentioned because it doesn't occur at the Second Coming but 7-years earlier at the rapture. 4 – Zechariah 14:1-15 doesn’t mention a resurrection – This is an Old Testament picture of Jesus returning to earth at the Second Coming; yet again, there is no mention of any resurrection. 5 – Two unique pictures are painted – The Old Testament paints two different pictures of the coming Messiah. First, in Isaiah 53:2-10 and Psalm 22:6-8, 11-18, Jesus is the suffering servant. Then in Psalm 2:6-12, Zech. 14:9, 16 He is the reigning King. Looking back at both, one predicted the Messiah's first coming as suffering, dying on the cross for us. The future Second Coming, He comes as the reigning King of Kings. The New Testament also points to two pictures and two different descriptions of Jesus' coming. Under close examination, these two separate events are called the Rapture and the Second Coming. 6 – The known day and the unknown day – Concerning the return of Jesus, the Bible presents a day we can't know, and a day we can know. Look at Matthew 25:13, which declares, "For you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming." So, Jesus will return at an unknown time, while Revelation 12:6 tells us another story; the Jews will have to wait 1,260 days for the Lord to return. The 1,260 days begins when the Antichrist stands in the Temple and declares himself to be God (Matt. 24:15-21, 2 Thess. 2:4). This event will take place at the mid-point of the seven-year Tribulation (Dan 9:27). The Antichrist has authority to rule for 42 months, which is 1,260 days (Rev. 13:4). Ultimately, he will be destroyed by Jesus at His Second Coming (Rev. 19:20, 2 Thess. 2:8). The known and unknown days happen at different times, meaning they are two separate events. 9 – Two doors in Heaven – In the Revelation of Jesus Christ chapter 4:1, a door is opened. John the revelator is told, “Come up here.” As John is called to heaven to witness the Tribulation events unfold. This calling to heaven is prophetic of the church being caught up in the Rapture. Then, in Revelation 19:11, heaven is opened again. This time the armies of heaven are called out. Similarly, the church comes into play, which had spent the last seven years in heaven. Both doors, at the beginning and end of the book of Revelation, involved Jesus’ return; first, the Rapture, and second, the Second Coming. 10 – Revelation 4:1 John is called into Heaven – The words "Come up here" in Revelation 4:1 strike a similar chord with the Rapture of the Church. A voice out of heaven calls the apostle John to "Come up here," "Come up here.” Immediately he appears in heaven, ready to witness the future. This upward calling seems to be a prophetic reference to the Rapture of the Church. Similarly, in Revelation 11:12, the familiar phrase, "Come up here," is used to call back to heaven the two witnesses murdered in the middle of the Tribulation. Therefore, these three words could mean the church is raptured in Rev. 4:1. The word "church" is mentioned 22 times in Revelation 1-3 but is not mentioned again until Revelation 22:17. 11 – The 24 Elders in heaven have their crowns – Once John is called into heaven, he notices that the 24 elders have crowns on their heads (Rev. 4:4-10). According to 2 Timothy 4:8 and 1 Peter 5:4, it is clear that Christians will receive their rewards (crowns) at the Rapture. Furthermore, Luke 14:14 indicates that believers will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous. Therefore, the elders could not have received their crowns unless the resurrection (Rapture) had occurred. 12 – The Holy Ones are already in Heaven – Zechariah 14:5 indicates that the saints are already in heaven. They are “The armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses” (Rev. 19:14) at the armies of the end of the Tribulation. Paul speaking to the church in Colossae, told them, “When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory” (Col. 3:4). Dressed in fine linen confirms that these are not angels but the righteous saints. Clearly, in order to come out of heaven, the saints had to first go in, indicating a previous Rapture.

The reaction of Jesus' critics to his statement-attempting to stone him (John 8:59)-confirms that they thought he was making a divine claim. Had Jesus stated only that he had been alive longer than Abraham, they might have regarded such a claim as crazy (as they apparently did with regard to his earlier comments, vv. 48-57), but not as an offense meriting stoning. Of the offenses for which Jews practiced stoning, the only one that seems to fit the context here is blasphemy. Claiming to be older than Abraham might have been judged crazy, but it would not have been judged as blasphemy. Speaking as if one were Abraham's eternal God, on the other hand, would be quickly deemed blasphemous by Jesus' critics, who of course did not recognize his divine claims as valid. In another passage in his Gospel, John comments on the failure of many of the people to believe in Jesus despite the many miracles they had witnessed him perform. Although he had performed so many signs in their presence, they did not believe in him.... And so they could not believe, because Isaiah also said, "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, so that they might not look with their eyes, and understand with their heart and turn-and I would heal them." Isaiah said this because he saw his glory and spoke about him. (12:37, 39-41) The quotation in this passage is from Isaiah 6:10, part of the passage in which Isaiah recounts his call to the prophetic ministry. When John says that Isaiah "saw his glory," he means the glory of Jesus as the context makes clear (vv. 36-38; see also 1:14). But in the context of Isaiah 6, the glory that Isaiah saw was the glory of the Lord. In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lofty; and the hem of his robe filled the temple. Seraphs were in attendance above him; each had six wings: with two they covered their faces, and with two they covered their feet, and with two they flew. And one called to another and said: "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory." Here again, John speaks of Jesus not only as having existed during Old Testament times but also as having been the glorious Lord who spoke to and through the prophets. Thus this passage is another affirmation in the New Testament of the divine preexistence of Jesus Christ. The New Testament pushes the existence of the Son of God back long before the days of Israel. It teaches that Christ was around-and involved-in the creation of the world! We will explore this point later when we discuss the deeds or works of God that Christ performs, but we should take some notice of the main biblical statements now. Paul wrote that "in him [God's Son] all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers-all things have been created through him and for him" (Col. 1:16). Paul's statement here clearly means that the Son existed before all things were created. What Paul says, of course, also distinguishes God's Son from the entire realm of all creation. The apostle John agreed: "All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being.... He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him" (John 1:3, 10). The book of Hebrews says that God "has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also created the worlds" (1:2). The logic is simple enough: "If indeed everything came into being through Christ, then there is no option other than that he existed before that creation." In all three of these passages, the authors make other statements that confirm their meaning-the person known as Jesus Christ preexisted creation. After saying that all things were created in, through, and for the Son, Paul adds, "He himself is before all things, and in him all things hold together" (Col. 1:17). Paul here states emphatically that the Son exists prior to all creation." Since the creation of the universe is also the beginning of time (Heb. 1:2), to say that "If indeed everything came into being through Christ, then there is no option other than that he existed before that creation." Christ exists "before" creation is to say in effect that he has always existed-that his existence had no beginning. Paul's statement in an earlier epistle that Christians believe in "one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist" (1 Cor. 8:6) should likewise be understood to entail his existence before creation. Just before John states that all things came into existence through Christ-whom he calls the "Word" (logos)-John says, "In the beginning was the Word" (John 1:1). Here, John asserts that the Word already existed "in the beginning," hearkening back to the beginning of creation (cf. Gen. 1:1). That "the Word" was a person, and not some abstraction, is made clear by John's next statement, "and the Word was with God" (pros ton theon, 1:1). The word pros (here translated "with") in this context denotes personal association with someone else, as is confirmed later in the same Gospel when John says that Jesus was going "to depart from this world and go to the Father [pros ton patera]" and that he "had come from God and was going to God [pros ton theon]" (John 13:1, 3; see also John 7:33; 14:12, 28; 16:5, 10, 17, 28; 20:17). The one who was close to God the Father in the very beginning had come from him and was about to depart and go back to be close to him again. The Gospel of John also reports that Jesus referred to his preexistence before creation in his majestic prayer to the Father: "So now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had in your presence before the world existed" (John 17:5). It is difficult to imagine a more explicit affirmation of Christ's existence before creation. To these statements we may add Jesus' statement, "Before Abraham came into being, I am" (John 8:58), which we discussed earlier.

Accusing me of using the literal interpretation method is one of the greatest compliment you could pay me.

All the promises where given in the OT for the Nation of Israel. During the Tribulation (the resumption of the Jewish Dispensation) various promises will be fulfilled, and of course during the Millennial Reign of Christ Israel will be God's possession living in their Nation's entire boundaries.

I take Revelation the same way I take any other book, the literal interpretation method. I only take something "symbolic" if the literal method is obviously not the intent of the author. For example, Paul used the allegorical method in a passage, but he warned the readers that he was now not using the literal method, but the allegorical method. For example, I think there is only 1 number in Revelation that is not to be taken literally. The beast mentioned in Revelation was actually what John saw. I always start with the literal interpretation method, if the context is not literal then I will ask myself is this metaphorical or symbolism. Daniel can be looked at to assist John in its proper interpretation. Daniel saw beasts also, but he further explain what/who the beast is.

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 very common way of speaking/writing. But when the Gospel is presented to an unbeliever (that includes all unbelievers) today it is believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved. So, the gospel presented today, if rejected, is not rejecting the Holy Spirit, but the Son of Man. The unbeliever today would have no concept of the Holy Spirit convicting him of sin., righteousness, and judgment.

No. Jesus lived during the Old Testament times (the Gospels are Old Testament Writings). Christ did not live in the Church Age. The Church Age began at Pentecost, and goes until the Rapture.

I really don't think so because one can reject the Lord for 30 years and then finally accept him as Savior. I feel this is a national sin based on how Matthew developed the context. Per Matthew, up to this point, discussed the nation of Israel as the central point. The disciples were not to go to the Gentiles, only to Israel. After they rejected Christ, the next chapter (13) begins to discuss the Kingdom of God in its mystery form (discussed with Parables). After this, Jesus begins to include the Gentiles now that Israel has declared its rejection of Christ as their Messiah.

The Davidic Covenant Thus it may be said that the land promises of the Abrahamic covenant are developed in the Palestinian covenant, the seed promises are developed in the Davidic covenant, and the blessing promises are developed in the new covenant. This covenant, then, determines the whole future program for the nation Israel and is a major factor in Biblical Eschatology. This shows that the Abrahamic Covenant is all inclusive of the other 3 eternal covenants. The Davidic covenant, as stated above, is an extension of the Abrahamic Covenant. It deals with the seed promises to Abraham. The ultimate seed that will reign on David ‘s Throne is Christ. Christ will reign as the King of Israel, just like David did. David would be considered the royal seed while Christ is considered the Final King in the royal line. Solomon was king after David, then other kings followed suit, and finally Christ is the prophesied Seed. Christ is not reigning now. Christ ultimately fulfills the Davidic Covenant when he reigns in the Millennium. Remember, this is the literal hermeneutic. In the eternal state, the Son of David will rule from the heavenly city called New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:2). Before censuring the Jews…for believing that Jesus would literally restore the Davidic throne and Kingdom, we must consider in fairness, that they were justified in so doing by the very language of the covenant. It is incredible that God should in the most important matters, affecting the interests and the happiness of man and nearly touching His own veracity, clothe them in words, which, if not true in their obvious and common sense, would deceive the pious and God-fearing of many ages. (Pentecost) Five things to help understand the covenant: (1) The words and sentences in their plain grammatical acceptation, do expressly teach their belief. This is denied by no one, not even by those who then proceed to spiritualize the language. (2) The covenant is distinctively associated with the Jewish nation and none other. (3) It is called a perpetual covenant, i.e. one that shall endure forever. (4) It was confirmed by oath (Ps. 132:11, and 89:3, 4, 33), thus giving the strongest possible assurance of its fulfilment. (5) To leave no doubt whatever, and to render unbelief utterly inexcusable, God concisely and most forcibly presents His determination (Ps. 89:34): “My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.” The above points indicate that Covenant Theology is out of line. It diametrically opposes the literal nature of the David Throne. If the Davidic throne and Kingdom is to be understood literally, then all other promises necessarily follow, and as the reception of this literal fulfilment forms the main difficulty in the minds of many, a statement of reasons why it must be received, is in place. 1. It is solemnly covenanted, confirmed by oath, and hence cannot be altered or broken. 2. The grammatical sense alone is becoming a covenant. 3. The impression made on David, if erroneous, is disparaging to his prophetical office. 4. The conviction of Solomon (2 Chron. 6:14-16) was that it referred to the literal throne and Kingdom. 5. Solomon claims that the covenant was fulfilled in himself, but only in so far that he too as David’s son sat on David’s throne…6. The language is that ordinarily used to denote the literal throne and Kingdom of David, as illustrated in Jer. 17:25 and 22:4. 7. The prophets adopt the same language, and its constant reiteration under Divine guidance is evidence that the plain grammatical sense is the one intended. 8. The prevailing belief of centuries, a national faith, engendered by the language, under the teaching of inspired men, indicates how the language is to be understood. 9. This throne and Kingdom is one of promise and inheritance and hence refers to the incarnate Christ. 10. The same is distinctively promised to David’s son “according to the flesh” to be actually realized, and, therefore, He must appear the Theocratic King as promised. 11. We have not the slightest hint given that it is to be interpreted in any other way than a literal one; any other is the result of pure inference…12. Any other view than that of a literal interpretation involves the grossest self contradiction. 13. The denial of a literal reception of the covenant robs the heir of His covenanted inheritance…14. No grammatical rule can be laid down which will make David’s throne to be the Father’s throne in the third heaven. 15. That if the latter is attempted under the notion of “symbolical” or “typical,” then the credibility and meaning of the covenants are left to the interpretations of men, and David himself becomes “the symbol” or “type” (creature as he is) of the Creator. 16. That if David’s throne is the Father’s throne in heaven (the usual interpretation), then it must have existed forever. 17. If such covenanted promises are to be received figuratively, it is inconceivable that they should be given in their present form without some direct affirmation, in some place, of their figurative nature, God foreseeing (if not literal) that for centuries they would be preeminently calculated to excite and foster false expectations. 18. God is faithful in His promises, and deceives no one in the language of His covenants. 19. No necessity existed why, if this throne promised to David’s Son meant something else, the throne should be so definitely promised in the form given. 20. The identical throne and Kingdom overthrown are the ones restored. 21. But the main, direct reasons for receiving the literal covenanted language [is that] …David’s throne and Kingdom [are made] a requisite for the display of that Theocratic ordering which God has already instituted (but now holds in abeyance until the preparations are completed) for the restoration and exaltation of the Jewish nation This whole proposition is supported by certain additional evidence. 1. The portions of the covenant that have been fulfilled have been fulfilled literally. As has been seen before, the partial fulfillment determines the method to be used in the unfulfilled portions. Ryrie says: It is only necessary to mention briefly that David had a son, that David’s throne was established, that David’s kingdom was established, that Solomon built the temple, that his throne was established, and that he was punished for disobedience. 2. Evidence is added from the way in which David was led to understand it. It is seen that he had no thought but that it was a literal covenant, to be fulfilled literally. Peters says: How did David himself understand this covenant? This is best stated in his own language. Read e.g. Ps. 72, which describes a Son (Descendant) infinitely superior to Solomon; reflect over Ps. 132, and after noticing that “the Lord hath sworn in truth unto David, He will not turn from it; of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne” (which Peter, Acts 2:30, 31, expressly refers to Jesus); That David himself expected a literal fulfilment of the promise is evident from his language which follows the giving of the covenant; and in this literal anticipation of the promise he returns thanks to God and praises Him for thus selecting his house for honor and in thus establishing it for the ages, even forever (2 Sam. 7:8, etc., 1 Chron. 17:16, etc.). It is presumption to suppose that David returned thanks, and thus prayer under a mistaken idea of the nature of the covenant. The New Testament has in all 59 references to David. It also has many references to the present session of Christ. A search of the New Testament reveals that there is not one reference connecting the present session of Christ with the Davidic throne…it is almost incredible that in so many references to David and in so frequent reference to the present session of Christ on the Father’s throne there should be not one reference connecting the two in any authoritative way. The New Testament is totally lacking in positive teaching that the throne of the Father in heaven is to be identified with the Davidic throne. The inference is plain that Christ is seated on the Father’s throne, but that this is not at all the same as being seated on the throne of David. We could go on from here to add more details to this covenant, but all I wanted to accomplish is an introductory article on it.