Defense of the Post-Trib / Pre-Wrath Position

[hmbld]

4 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

 

 is the least supported . . .  on the basis of scripture and broadly accepted  exegetical principles.

 with any normal understanding,

 

lol, while I love how you point out it is your opinion, and you could be wrong, the statements such as these are used in some form by those arguing something different than what you believe.  With all the disagreements and opinions, I tend to think nobody has come to understand the correct view!  "normal understanding", "literal reading" etc.  I'm sorry but I can see many different opinions possibly being correct, without being able to prove any one opinion is correct.  I do appreciate you objective posts Mega, I just had to call you out on "normal understanding"  What does that even mean lol?  If I disagree with you, I have not normal understanding?  

[iamlamad]

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

It's clear you have attained the level of revelation man, more an enemy of the truth than an advocate. And far more interested in personal views than the words of God.

Good day.

What would YOU do if God spoke in what seemed to be an audible voice and told you that you could find "that exact midpoint clearly marked in Revelation?" I was just minding my own business, reading Daniel 9:27, and when my eyes and my mind got to the word "midst" God spoke. I was dumbfounded and could not speak. But my spirit man inside spoke and asked Him how I would find that, and He answered:

"Every time I mentioned an event that would start at the midpoint and go to the end of the week, I always included the 3 1/2 year period of time. When you find the mentions of the 3 1/2 years, you will be very close to the exact midpoint."

So God gave me a challenge: go and find the exact midpoint "clearly marked."

I ask you: what would YOU do? Just ignore Him? I obeyed Him and found that exact midpoint. It is marked with a 7: the 7th trumpet.

If you disagree, you just don't understand John's chronology. I am not going to apologize for hearing from God. We ALL should be hearing His voice: after all, He said, "my sheep hear my voice."

However, you bring up a good point. When someone says they heard from the Holy Spirit, but then say something you can't agree with, what do you do? Do you go back to the Word of God and study it, and see if perhaps you are wrong and they are right?

For example, with Revelation Man he insisted that Daniel nine was really talking about the Beast of Revelation when I am many bible Commentators believe it is talking about Antiochus Epiphanes. I don't know if he really heard from the Holy Spirit on that point. I must doubt he did, and guess for that part, he is using human reasoning.

I will freely admit, considering Revelation as a whole, God has taught me a very small percentage of what is written. I too use human reasoning to discover the rest.  All I can say is, do you go back and study the Word, and see of perhaps what I teach is truth? I know for a fact that preconceived glasses can absolutely blind people to the truth.

Do you disagree with everything? Or perhaps just some things? Perhaps you could pick one thing and we could examine the scriptures together.

Finally, I am NOT a someone that hears from God on a daily basis. I wish I did, but I do not. And He spoke to me about Revelation only for a few months, and that was years ago. But I still remember very well what He spoke. Now, if I would take the time to read say a chapter or two over and over, over and over, maybe a hundred times, and pray much in the Holy Spirit, He would speak again. That is the way to get Revealed knowledge from heaven. The truth is, few people do that.

[iamlamad]

8 minutes ago, hmbld said:

lol, while I love how you point out it is your opinion, and you could be wrong, the statements such as these are used in some form by those arguing something different than what you believe.  With all the disagreements and opinions, I tend to think nobody has come to understand the correct view!  "normal understanding", "literal reading" etc.  I'm sorry but I can see many different opinions possibly being correct, without being able to prove any one opinion is correct.  I do appreciate you objective posts Mega, I just had to call you out on "normal understanding"  What does that even mean lol?  If I disagree with you, I have not normal understanding?  

Now this is a post I can agree with! We each think "normal understanding" is something different on these verses! In fact, if we chose any verse in Revelation and consulted all the commentaries, we would discover they too disagree on "normal understanding." However, on some points in Revelation, most commentaries can agree.

[iamlamad]

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

And still no scriptures of proof. Just more regurgitating of commentators pursuing an agenda and vehement denial of the truth. 

I may well be denying YOUR "truth." but the fact is, Jesus did say "the end is not yet." And it is absolute truth that we are experiencing those things such as earthquakes and pestilences today and during the church age. You just don't want to admit it.

If you wish for scriptural proof, read again and this time UNDERSTAND:

Rev. 4:² And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.

³ And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone: and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald.

⁴ And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.

It is absolute truth: Jesus is NOT THERE. And there is a REASON. The Holy Spirit is telling you something. Don't let it go right over your head! These are verses that God SPOKE TO ME about. He said that He had ascended years before John saw this vision, and that there were a dozen verses telling us that He went to be at the right hand of the Father. Yet, here John saw into the throne room and Jesus was NOT THERE! Then He asked me WHY He was not immediately seen at the right hand of the Father."

So what would YOU answer if God asked you the same question?

⁵ And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.

Again I heard God speak, about this verse. He reminded me that He had told the disciples that as soon as He ascended, He would send the Holy Spirit down. He asked me, WHY is the Holy Spirit still seen here in the throne room, when I said I would send Him down?

So what would YOU answer if God asked you the same question?

³ And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.

It is an absolute truth, in this search John watched to find someone worthy to break these seals, NO MAN WAS FOUND. And again God spoke. He said if I would read ahead, HE was found worthy. So He asked me, "why was I not found worthy in THIS search?

So what would YOU answer if God asked you the same question?

You want scriptural proof? Here are three passages with three questions I could not at first answer. I wonder, what would YOU have done? How would YOU have answered Him?

[iamlamad]

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

Where is this in scripture? Paul does say, "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him," Both events are linked in time/space.

I have said before, we find information about the rapture ONLY in Paul's writing. No one else had a revelation about the rapture. The answer is in 1 Thes. 5. In chapter 4 Paul shows us how it will happen, but in chapter 5 Paul talks about TIMING. It will take some study to understand it.

[iamlamad]

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

By the way, with God the father on the throne in heaven, where would Jesus be? Right by His side. You have to imagine a coming at the 6th seal, for John certainly did not write of one.

The 6th seal is the 2nd coming.

Please try to prove this a "coming" with scripture. There is no word "coming." When Paul wrote of His coming, he actually wrote, "coming."

However, that being said, I too believe there is a coming, but I think it will be a moment before the 6th seal. Why? Because John shows us that His WRATH begins there, and Paul tells us we are out of here BEFORE His wrath. Next, seal 5 gives us a good hint of the timing of the rapture. Those martyrs are told they must wait for the very last martyr to be killed as they were killed, as church age martyrs: in other words, they most wait for the end of the church age before judgment will come. And how amazing: the very next thing John writes of is judgment: at the 6th seal. Therefore, I place the rapture between the 5th seal and 6th seal.

Are there still not martyrs being added to the list of martyrs of the church age? They we are still there at the 5th seal. the 6th seal is future, the 5th seal is ongoing.

So if you imagine there is a coming AT the 6th seal, please show us exact verses.

[iamlamad]

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

Rev 6

12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;

Matt 24

²⁹ Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

These describe the signs of the 2nd coming of Jesus. Deny it if you wish but this is the same event.

The people of the earth see the signs and know that the wrath has come, and God is looking directly at them.

Now we are getting to some verses that show why we disagree. I am so glad you chose these.

Joel 2:³¹ The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord.

Joel 3:1 “For behold, in those days and at that time, When I bring back the captives of Judah and Jerusalem,

² I will also gather all nations, And bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat; And I will enter into judgment with them there
On account of My people, My heritage Israel, Whom they have scattered among the nations; They have also divided up My land.
 

This tells us the timing of chapter 3: it is during the 70th week and very near the end of the week.

¹² “Let the nations be wakened, and come up to the Valley of Jehoshaphat; For there I will sit to judge all the surrounding nations.
¹³ Put in the sickle, for the harvest is ripe.  Come, go down; For the winepress is full, The vats overflow—For their wickedness is great.”

Notice how close this is to the harvest shown in Rev. 14.  This tells us the events in Revelation 14 are given as prophecy, and will happen later, at the battle of Armageddon. So the TIMING is of Jesus coming as shown in Rev. 19.

¹⁴ Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision!  For the day of the Lord is near in the valley of decision.
¹⁵ The sun and moon will grow dark, And the stars will diminish their brightness.
¹⁶ The Lord also will roar from Zion, And utter His voice from Jerusalem;
 

Notice carefully the wording: BOTH the sun and moon dark. In other words, they wil be invisible. It will be DARK. Does not Revelation tell us the very same story: that DARKNESS will come? In fact a very well known Prewrath teacher teaches that God will give the believers a warning of the time that no one will miss: DARKNESS before His coming as seen in Rev. 19. I agree.  And notice that Jesus will "roar from Zion," meaning, HE IS HERE on earth. It is His coming. And the SIGN for His coming to the battle of Armageddon will be DARKNESS: NO MOON AND NO SUN visible.

Matthew 24: ²⁹ “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. ³⁰ Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Now, WHICH of the two signs given in Joel does this scripture fit the closest: Joel 2 or Joel 3?  Of course, Joel 3.

Rev. 6: ¹² I looked when He opened the sixth seal, and behold,^[e] there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon^[f] became like blood.

Now, WHICH of the two signs given in Joel does this scripture fit the closest: Joel 2 or Joel 3?   Of course the Joel 2 sign.

So what is this saying? If you will take off your preconceived glasses and be honest with these scriptures, you will know that these are TWO DIFFERENT signs denoting TWO DIFFERENT scenarios:

1. The sun darkened and the moon into blood will be the sign at the 6th seal, which in Revelation comes before the opening of the 70th week.

2. Both the sun and moon dark = total darkness on earth = will be the sign for the Coming of Jesus Christ for the battle of Armageddon.

Conclusion? These two are NOT the same event, and the signs are different. And a further conclusion? These two signs are separate by all the events shown in Revelation in chapters 8 through 16. Further conclusion? That the Day of the Lord begins right where John shows it, before the 70th week of Daniel, and continues on throughout the entire 70th week and then to Jesus coming for the battle of Armageddon.

Final thought? REmember, when Jesus comes after the days of great tribulation, darkness will reign on earth for perhaps several days. Then suddenly a brightness like lightning lighting up a dark sky: it will be HIS COMING. Neither the sun nor the moon will be seen anywhere around the world. It will be as if God turned out the lights: HIS lights in the sky. Not even the stars will be seen. It will be TOTAL darkness.

 

[iamlamad]

4 hours ago, Diaste said:

Rev 6

¹⁶ And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:

¹⁷ For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Pretty much undeniable. And then Paul said before the coming of the Lord and the gathering to Him happen only after the revealing of the AC sitting in the temple.

If we study Isaiah 2, it seems John almost copied some of Isaiah word for word about the great earthquake and people hiding from God. But does this prove a coming? No, not at all, for God sees all, from His throne in heaven. And John even tells us He is on the throne. But these people KNOW from the signs (Joel 2 and Isaiah 2) that this is the start of the Day of the Lord.

Can the DAY start without His coming? Of course it can! It WILL!

Now, about 2 Thes. 2. Before we get into this scripture deeply, please answer one question: in verse 3b, in Paul's argument (not in reality) IS THE MAN OF SIN REVEALED?

A "yes" or "no" will suffice. But feel free to elaborate if you wish.

[iamlamad]

6 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Well, disagreements will occur, of course. However, personally, I do not believe that all reasons for understanding something one way versus another, are equal. Some people see a Hell of torment. Some people see Christians as able to lose salvation. Some people see no evidence for God as a plurality of persons. Others, take opposite positions.

If one person says A=1, and another says A=3, we know one thing . . .  they are not both correct, though both might be wrong.

I presume that all of the doctrinal examples I just gave, have some people who believe them, and think they have scriptural evidence for what they believe. We know though, that they are not all correct.

In the A=# example, we can look at the facts, that lead to the conclusions, and decide which conclusions are best supported by the facts. If we can get on the same page logically, and agree to rules of language, deduction and induction, mathematics, etc., that we can come to an agreement, and a conclusion.

In theology/eschatology, it is the same. Leaving out, for a moment, the spiritual discernment aspect, and just going with principles that people can agree to and follow, we can discover, which viewpoints, have the better evidence. It is not a toss of a coin, or an opinion, it is objective.

In interpreting scripture, we call this process exegesis. If we agree (and we may not) with the rules or principles of sound exegesis, we should come to the same conclusions, on which ideas are best supported by scripture. This of course assumes, that we can examine a passage, dispensing with our prejudices, and our wishful thinking, presuppositions, and unfounded inferences.

It is on that basis, that I claim that post-tribism or close variants of it, have the edge, have a better claim to assessing truth. It is not as though, all opinions are equal. At least one is wrong. If one is wrong, it is not the equal of the other, and should not be treated as though it is.

So, when you say "to say one say is based on speculation is just not fair and not true", I have to still disagree. Although it is just my opinion, it is my studied opinion, that the pre-trib rapture position, is the least supported premillennial understanding of eschatology, on the basis of scripture and broadly accepted  exegetical principles.

Therefore, I maintain that what I said is not only true, it is not unfair either. You do not have to like it, nor agree, but for me to pretend otherwise, would be untruthful of me. 

As I said (I believe), there is a return of Christ, to gather His church, specified in scripture, with any normal understanding, which will occur after the great tribulation. The alternative view that claims that there is also, a return of Christ to gather believers before the great tribulation, is one that has no equal support from scripture.

The idea is only inferred, and never stated, and to prove me wrong and to be able to justify what you said about me being unfair and saying something is not true, is to present a scripture or scriptures, that conclude a pre-trib rapture without speculation and inference.

Perhaps, you have not noticed, but there is an entire thread, devoted to the defense of the pre-trib rapture, and many other threads as well, where no one has yet, provided such passages. Why should that still be the case after 14 years?

" If we can get on the same page logically, and agree to rules of language, deduction and induction, mathematics, etc., that we can come to an agreement, and a conclusion. " 

Ha! This would indeed be great, but I doubt it will happen! What you have said explains all the different denominations, each with their own doctrines that frequently disagree with other denominations and their doctrines! And it is all because people look at scriptures differently. I might even say, it is also because people don't spend the time in praying in the Spirit to hear from the Holy Spirit on difficult passage and find HIS intent. Few believers in the WORLD do this. I have met perhaps two pastors that did it on a continual basis, and I could never find any scripture they preached on where I could disagree.

"In interpreting scripture, we call this process exegesis. If we agree (and we may not) with the rules or principles of sound exegesis, we should come to the same conclusions, on which ideas are best supported by scripture. This of course assumes, that we can examine a passage, dispensing with our prejudices, and our wishful thinking, presuppositions, and unfounded inferences."

This is VERY difficult, for each human has his or her own experiences and their dendrites and neurons are all formed differently so each human sees each verse differently.

It is on that basis, that I claim that post-tribism or close variants of it, have the edge, have a better claim to assessing truth. 

And I would say just the opposite!

So, when you say "to say one say is based on speculation is just not fair and not true", I have to still disagree.

Again I disagree. Your conclusion is based on how YOU see end-times scriptures. Perhaps if it was based on "human reasoning" we could both agree.

"it is my studied opinion, that the pre-trib rapture position, is the least supported premillennial understanding of eschatology, on the basis of scripture and broadly accepted  exegetical principles."

And I would say just the opposite! Just for a tiny example, I just cannot come up with any possible way to be honest with the scriptures and figure out how in a posttrib scenario believers will make it to the marriage and supper. I would have to rearrange scripture to accomplish that, and I simply will not do that. I think these events written in Rev. 19 are very sequential.

You do not have to like it, nor agree, but for me to pretend otherwise, would be untruthful of me.  I understand. But what you are really saying is that what I believe "is based on speculation." And you come to that conclusion first because it is not what you believe, and second, you believe you are looking at these scriptures in the only logical manner they can be looked at and understood.  A classic example would be 2 Thes. 2. I am convinced that what Paul meant by "apostasia" is the departing of the church as in the rapture: the church "taken out of the way" so that the man of sin will be revealed in God's timing. I see the man of sin revealed (past tense) in Paul's argument, in verse 3b. And verses 6 - 8 tell me that cannot possibly happen until the one restraining has been "taken out of the way." Therefore, logic tells me that in verse 3a, verses 6-8 must absolutely have taken place. In other words, what ever Paul meant by "apostasia" it has to be the one restraining being "taken out of the way."  however, I understand few people see it this way. Are they not being logical? I would say yes. But I am wise enough to know, no human can convince another human to change their mind on a scripture: ONLY the Holy Spirit can do that.

As I said (I believe), there is a return of Christ, to gather His church, specified in scripture, with any normal understanding, which will occur after the great tribulation.

And I say, there is a return of Christ, as shown in Rev. 19, where indeed there will be a gathering, but it is not Paul's gathering: it is probably the gathering of all of Jacob's descendants who are believers, back to Israel: a gathering from heaven and earth.  I just cannot logically conclude that the "elect" in Matthew 24 is in reference to the church. Apparently you have no problem believing it is the church. I would have to say you are speculating, when you say the elect here must reference the church. In my mind, this was Jesus answered the asked question about the end of THEIR age, that is the very age they were living in, meaning the age BEFORE the church. And in my mind, that age - THEIR age - will end with the 70th week of Daniel. There is proof of this, because Jesus covered the abomination that most certainly will happen IN the 70th week of Daniel. Furthermore, Daniel said that that period of time was for HIS people: the Jews and Hebrews. Therefore I cannot in any way see Jesus as talking about the rapture of the church.

Next, I cannot get around what Paul wrote about Christians and the wrath of God. I cannot put Christians on earth with His wrath at the same time. Again, it seems posttribbers have no problem doing that. In my mind, they are ignoring scripture to come to their conclusion.

The alternative view that claims that there is also, a return of Christ to gather believers before the great tribulation, is one that has no equal support from scripture.

How amazing! I can say the same thing for the Post trib viewpoint! in weighing all the end times scriptures, I conclude that the pretrib though is far more supported by scripture that any other viewpoint. You see, the difference is how we read each pertinent scripture. One side is NOT speculating and the other the only side using logic. That is just not truth. There are very good and wise people that love Jesus with all their heart,  on each side of this discussion. To say that one side is speculating is just not true.

Case in point? I see the great crowd shown in Revelation 7 as the raptured church, JUST raptured a moment before the 6th seal. I see that John is telling us that at the time of their rapture, there was great tribulation happening in the world. I DON'T see this as the days of GT that Jesus spoke of. I can with good conscience use the words "great tribulation" to me OTHER times on earth when tribulation is great. Such as when a line of Christians, with their hands tied behind their backs, are all murdered by beheading. In my mind, "tribulation" could not have been any greater for them: for they surely could not be killed twice!

It is kind of amusing, for it was Rosenthal and Van Kampen, the first two publicly known prewrathers that convinced me this group was the raptured church! Now, I see this group as appearing in heaven before John even starts the 70th week in his narrative. Others see no problem with just rearranging Revelation to make it fit their theory! I cannot, in good conscience, rearrange John's God given chronology. Is this "speculating?" I would rather think the speculating is done by those who imagine John wrote things in a mixed up order, and it is up to them to rearrange to fit their theory. I find my theory fits Revelation in the very order John wrote.

The idea is only inferred, and never stated,   This is simply not true. What is true is, you have just not seen it. For example, you read the 2 Thes. 2 passage and see postrib, while I read it and see pretrib. The truth is, NEITHER SIDE is clearly stated, or the church would not have been divided on this issue for so long!  Can you say honestly and with no doubt how I see scripture? No, of course not. ONLY GOD knows how each person understands scripture. The truth is, we see scripture differently. But I will agree with you on one point: BOTH points of view cannot be correct.

there is an entire thread, devoted to the defense of the pre-trib rapture, and many other threads as well, where no one has yet, provided such passages. 

Again, this is simply not truth. Every pretrib passage has been written ad infinitum! The problem is, you don't read these scriptures the same way we do. For example, I have written several times now how I read Paul in 1 Thes. 5. I don't think anyone has chosen to comment on it.

So, in the end, we disagree. I think very shortly all doubt will be gone, for He will come pretrib for those who are ready. Time will tell all. I might add, good post!

[iamlamad]

2 hours ago, hmbld said:

lol, while I love how you point out it is your opinion, and you could be wrong, the statements such as these are used in some form by those arguing something different than what you believe.  With all the disagreements and opinions, I tend to think nobody has come to understand the correct view!  "normal understanding", "literal reading" etc.  I'm sorry but I can see many different opinions possibly being correct, without being able to prove any one opinion is correct.  I do appreciate you objective posts Mega, I just had to call you out on "normal understanding"  What does that even mean lol?  If I disagree with you, I have not normal understanding?  

Eating popcorn and chuckling! : -))