Defense of the Post-Trib / Pre-Wrath Position

[WilliamL]

On 6/9/2015 at 1:34 AM, George said:

Hello saints,

As I was going over this forum, it occurred to me that there's another position that isn't listed -- the "Pre-Wrath" position which is closely associated with the Mid-Tribulation position with a few nuances.

If you are a post-tribulation / pre-wrath advocate, use this thread to defend your position.

Your brother in the Lord with much agape love,

George

5 hours ago, enoob57 said:

With all these views and what not, scurrying about like mice in a fresh mowed field, I would like to share this one little concept:
The time of Jesus coming is to be of personal import... For all positions surely have continuity of wanting to see Jesus   
That being said if you wish to believe you must suffer the wrath of God to do so then it is as you wish...

Just a reminder: this topic is a discussion site for advocates of pre-wrath, and no other position. Other positions have their own set-aside sites for their own discussions.

All other topics on the prophecy forum are open to all positions to debate each other -- just not these ones pinned to the top.

To enoob: pre-wrath holds that the Church will NOT "suffer the wrath of God," so your statement is completely without merit here.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

As to rest do inchrist' post, it'll have to wait until I get home.  It's just too hard to post off of this iPad.

The Great Multitude though are the Resurrected Dead and the Raptured Elect.  There is no conflict with the Martrys, a special category of Saints before the Father.  They still await the completion of their number which is at least Two, and only happens at the end of the one 'seven' when the Two Witnesses are called up after laying dead for three days.

There are also no "tribulation saints" who come to believe after God's Wrath begins to fall, nor during its falling mentioned anywhere in the Bible.  So there are no 'pre-wrath' saints who come to believe after the Rapture either.  There are several Biblical references to "survivors" and the Remnant Jews who DO live through God's time of Wrath.  They are even shepherded into the Millennium Peace of Christ Jesus by Him.  So there is discrepancy with Rev 9:4.  God has allowed that a third of the Jews live, and still others, the meek, will be so blessed to see His Kingdom come to fruition as a earthly reality.

[enoob57]

15 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

Just a reminder: this topic is a discussion site for advocates of pre-wrath, and no other position. Other positions have their own set-aside sites for their own discussions.

All other topics on the prophecy forum are open to all positions to debate each other -- just not these ones pinned to the top.

To enoob: pre-wrath holds that the Church will NOT "suffer the wrath of God," so your statement is completely without merit here.

 

seeing how you evidently misread topic header
Defense of the Post-Trib / Pre-Wrath Position
so meritless belongs to you I believe  and am
unaware of participation in debating excluded except
in one place  

[Marcus O'Reillius]

22 hours ago, enoob57 said:

With all these views and what not, scurrying about like mice in a fresh mowed field, I would like to share this one little concept:
The time of Jesus coming is to be of personal import... For all positions surely have continuity of wanting to see Jesus   
That being said if you wish to believe you must suffer the wrath of God to do so then it is as you wish BUT you must ignore
this passage of Scripture

1 Th 1:10
10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come
KJV
and this

1 Th 4:18
18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
KJV
Love, Steven

Actually, these verses are upheld in Pre-Wrath eschatology.

Pre-Wrath places the Rapture after the Great Tribulation IAW with Jesus' Olivet Discourse, and before any desolations (which have been decreed - and I think those are stored on the Scroll that only Jesus can unseal) befall the wicked who are burned in the field of this world.  Paul's two statements are upheld within this construct.

Rev 3:10 is then not seen as a blanket statement protecting the Church so that it is not subject to God's Wrath.  Rev 3:10 in my view allows that whoever keeps the faith, will not lose that faith no matter whether they survive the Great Tribulation (not God's Wrath) or not.

If any of the Elect are left after the Rapture, the only way they can receive their eternal inheritance in Heaven is to die because of that faith.  This is the case for the Two Witnesses, who figuratively are olive trees supplying the oil that lights that faith.  They are the last to be taken up, and then only at the end of the one 'seven' - and they complete the number of martyrs in the fifth Seal.  Once that is accomplished, then the fifth Seal Martyrs join the 24 Elders, the 144,000 First Fruits, and the Great Multitude which then equals the total sum of the First Resurrection.  And so John does not declare this accomplished until that point, when the Martyrs are 'made alive' - that is: given new, immortal, and imperishable bodies.

A picture form of the one 'seven' that I came up with is attached.

[enoob57]

That is true but in Revelation 4 itself indicates the rapture before prewrath stance....

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Actually, the "you" in Rev 4:1 in the Greek is singular.  Only John is called up, and he is called up serve as a witness so he can prophesize.

Nor does John, who is acting as a reporter - and he has a "writing kit" with him - ever record in the introductory chapters of Rev 4 & 5, where he writes everything he sees in the presence of the Father, a body of believers that fits the characteristics of the Elect: those chosen by God to receive their inheritance in Heaven based on their faith in God.

That is only done when we get to the Great Multitude of the sixth Seal in chapter 7, who 'wash their robes white in the blood of Christ.'  That's what you and I do.

Edited June 8, 2016 by Marcus O'Reillius

[Marcus O'Reillius]

17 hours ago, WilliamL said:

Just a reminder: this topic is a discussion site for advocates of pre-wrath, and no other position. Other positions have their own set-aside sites for their own discussions.

All other topics on the prophecy forum are open to all positions to debate each other -- just not these ones pinned to the top.

To enoob: pre-wrath holds that the Church will NOT "suffer the wrath of God," so your statement is completely without merit here.

 

As the OP is set up, I think defense means in relation to an attack.

Now I am quite ready to defend my Pre-Wrath view, as it does not have any internal inconsistency within the Bible to contradict it.  I know how other eschatologies do contradict this passage or verse or that one.  I have had to weigh each in coming to my understanding.

My particular study came about by looking at the "Big Picture" - organizing the end-times in their sequence order of events as given by the major linear narratives which are: portions of the book of Daniel, notably chapters 2, 7, 9:24-27, and chapters 10-12; the book of Revelation with its attendant parallel accounts (you cannot read the book of Revelation like a novel!); the Olivet Discourse, most notably that portion written in the book of Matthew, but Luke's split version has useful information which I do not neglect; and finally Paul's eschatological writing, particularly his first three books by date: 1st and 2nd Thessalonians, and 1st Corinthians, with his longest linear narrative being 2Th 2:1-8.

I dislike intensely any attempt to destroy any particular eschtology as being false doctrine or heretical.  I know of one person who posts on a different message board who is extremely combative and so motivated.  I also know that he argues from a simple theology whereby he doesn't need either the Rapture nor the Millennium.  I note that he conveniently ignores all passages and/or verses which contradict his own Amillennial view.  Instead he just attacks, attacks, and attacks.  That type of "discussion" is not beneficial to the body of Christ.

If I were to attack another eschatology here, I would do so on the basis of their internal inconsistencies, and with the motive of not destroying their eschatology, but of leading them to question how they put end-time prophecy together.

So, in conclusion, as my avatar suggests, I am ready to defend, being something of a warrior in my younger years.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

27 minutes ago, enoob57 said:

That is true but in Revelation 4 itself indicates the rapture before prewrath stance....

As I replied, I see no evidence for what you state.  I had a classical Pre-Trib (meaning a Rapture before the initiation of the one 'seven') preacher (I won't call him a pastor) who also pointed to Rev 4:1 and the 24 Elders as being symbolic of the Raptured Church.

Would you point to the specific language you see as stating the Rapture happens before the one 'seven'?

[enoob57]

12 minutes ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

As I replied, I see no evidence for what you state.  I had a classical Pre-Trib (meaning a Rapture before the initiation of the one 'seven') preacher (I won't call him a pastor) who also pointed to Rev 4:1 and the 24 Elders as being symbolic of the Raptured Church.

Would you point to the specific language you see as stating the Rapture happens before the one 'seven'?

happens before the one 'seven'?  please clarify this so I can answer you...

[Marcus O'Reillius]

The one 'seven' is defined in Daniel 9:27.
Most people (erroneously) call it the "Tribulation Period."
This is how classical Pre-Trib usually terms it among those that subscribe to that eschatology.