Peter on the Last Days - Part One

[missmuffet]

There are Bible verses which support what I posted.You are just interpreting those verses differently than I am and "Got Questions".

[Omegaman 3.0]

On 9/7/2015 at 5:30 PM, bopeep1909 said:

There are Bible verses which support what I posted.You are just interpreting those verses differently than I am and "Got Questions".

bopeep1909, there is a huge difference, between interpreting, and noticing what is not being said. I do not know why you cannot see that your are using verses to imply things that they do not say, but you most certainly are. Personally, I think that calls for repentance, but you do what you think best!

Also, if there are verses which support what you are saying, you should actually post those instead!

 

[missmuffet]

You are Post trib right?Are you saying that I need to repent because I am pre-trib?You are saying that "Got Questions" is interpreting those verses wrong?

Edited September 8, 2015 by bopeep1909

[Omegaman 3.0]

Why no Bopeep, not at all. What I am saying, is that I think when a person, uses a verse and implies that it says one things, that is is not saying, or when a person does that with the Bible as a whole, that needs to be changed. Wrong or erroneous conclusions, I feel certain, are things we all do from time to time. I was once a pre-triiber, so either I was wrong then, or I am wrong now, or I am wrong either way.

Of course, once I came to the conclusiong that pre-trib was an error, I repented of that position, but you have not reached that conclusion, so no, there is no need to retreat from your position as an act of repentance. Of course, once and if you think that is an error, then yes, that would be a reason to repent. Make sense?

If I say, that Jesus believed in a post-trib rapture, and said that Matt 24 says that, then, I am guilty of assigning something to a passage, that it does not say. That, I would need to repent of. As a matter of fact, I do believe that Jesus was post-trib, but that is a conclusion that I draw, and is just an opinion. So:

"In my opinion, Jesus was post-trib" is just a statement of my own belief, and stating a fact like that, is not a reason to repent.

If I say "Matt 24 tells us, that Jesus was post-trib", that I think would be me being too presumtuous and might be deceptive to some who would take my word for it. That would require repentance.

Bottom line I think it is sin to say that X is a fact, and Verse Y says so, when in fact, one might infer that Verse Y emplies X. So, that is how I see statements like The Rapture is "such and such" and then post a verse address that says no such thing. Our pet doctrines, beleifs, assertions, understandings are okay to have and too repeat, but it is not okay to assert that a given verse actually says, what we think it means. That is the problem.

 

Is that clearer? or just more confusing?

Oh, to the question about if I am saying that Got Questions is interpreting it wrong . . . .

I do not know if Got Questions has an official position, They are a bit like a Christian Wikipedia. I say this, because the writes can be anyone, and they do not even let you know who the writer is. They give some excuses for that, and while the excuses might have some validity, I find it a little bit of a concern that there is no accountability for what the writers say, but of course, I am not giving out my real name here either, so I cannot say much.

In anycase, Got Questions is not the author of the answers, do  do not know what they have to say about anything. 

You quote them frequently but you distrust those who are Calvinists. Got Questions, has some pretty good answers from a Calvinist position, so it sort of surprises me that you go with Got Questions so much.

All of that being said, I think they do a pretty good job, have a valuable ministry.

To answer what I think you are asking though, I have to say, that topics on Got Questions (or any website, radio program, book, magazine, TV program, movie, sermon or whatever) that maintain that the Bible teaches a pre-trib rapture, is making a false statement.

Let me be very clear, and please pay close attention to this next thing I say, as it is important to avoid misunderstanding what I am saying:

The pre-tribulation rapture theory MIGHT be true, it MIGHT be a correct interpretation, Is that part of what I just said, understood? I cannot say it is a wrong interpretaion. What I am saying is this, ragardless of how on interprets the Bible, the Bible does not say, there will be a pre-trib rapture. Nothing in the Bible that I have ever been shown or seen in my own examoiations, would point to a pre-trib understanding, using any sort of normal, interpretive method (sound exegesis) applies to the text. People who see a pre-trib rapture in the Bible, see it there for some other reason. Either they are pre-diposed to understand the Bible in that way, or the are looking to see what they wish is true, or they are making assumptions and inferences for reasons of their own that only they might know. It is even possible that the Spirit is revealing something to their spirits, that is not reveals in a plain understanding of the Biblical text.

As for Got Questions . . .  I would not cite them as though they had any special authority, scholarship, or other qualifications, any more that I would cite myself as an authority or you as an authority. I think they are a well intentioned and generally good website. I just would never think to say something like "Well, Got Questions says . . . . "  All I care about is What God says, through the scriptures. What others think about  what the bible teaches, is how we get in trouble. You, and I, and Got Questions and others, can try to understand the Bible, and repeat what we think we understand, and people can learn from that, we can learn from each other. However, none of us is the authority, and anyone who thinks they have all the answers, is someone I am most cautious about.

However, I hope never to assume that just becuase I disagree with something someone says, that they are not to be listened to. When you mine for gold, you pick the nuggets out from the dirt, keep the nuggets, and throw out the dirt. Our opinions are all that way, some dirt, and some nuggets. Just because someone hands me a dirt clod, will not keep me for looking closer to see if they do not also, have an occasional nugget as well.

If we reject everything someone says, because of some error they made, we will miss a lot, and stop learning from others. If we accept everything that someone says, we are going to get some dirt clods, and be deceived.

 

 

[missmuffet]

One of the problems I have with Post Trib Omega is those who are in Christ are not under condemnation and will never experience the wrath of God Romans 8:1.Do you believe that the judgments during the tribulation will reach both the saved and the unsaved?Why is the word Church absent in all passages relating to the tribulation?Even in Revelation 4-21 the word Church is absent.

[Omegaman 3.0]

On 9/7/2015 at 6:38 PM, bopeep1909 said:

One of the problems I have with Post Trib Omega is those who are in Christ are not under condemnation and will never experience the wrath of God Romans 8:1.Do you believe that the judgments during the tribulation will reach both the saved and the unsaved?Why is the word Church absent in all passages relating to the tribulation?Even in Revelation 4-21 the word Church is absent.

Well, that is a legitimate consideration, and requires a bit of disecting. A lot of confusion there exists because of how we define our terms

For example, Christ paid the penatly for our sins, past, present and future, if we are beleivers. So, from that principle alone, I think that it is impossible for God to judge us and execute His wrath upon the church - assuming by church we mean true beleivers, not tares.

So, if the the tribulationg period is the wrath of God, then Christians will not be the objects of His Wrath. However, it is not that simple. The Hebrews were not the subjects of God wrath in Egypt, but they were present during it. The escaped, by the blood of the lamb, right! Lot escaped, by fleeing Sodom, Noah in an Ark, etc. God is able to execute His wrath on unbelievers, and if His wrath is the Great Tribulation, then He could presumably seal them for protection by some means as well.

However, Christians, just a true and sincere and devoted, die at the hands of sinners, some of them perhaps Satanically inspired, and I do not see why that could not be the case that Christians could die during the Great Tribulation, at the hands of anti-christ and his minions, in the actions of wars etc. In that case, they  would die, during the tribulation but not as an act of God's wrath.

That is how it has always been, the prophets, the apostles, other martyrs die, and sometimes for the Glory of God. To me, dying in such a way, is an honer and act of devotion and service, that is, after all, what jesus did Himself, died at the hands of Evil people, in fact, that was God's plan, that the innocent should die. The tribulation is in the world, we are in the world, but not of the world, our reward is not here, but in Heaven.

Not only that, but those who are persecuted for righteousness, have GREAT reward in heaven.

So then, when all of that is understood, why would we not take Jesus' words to heart:

      24“A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a slave above his master. 25“It is enough for the disciple that he become like his teacher, and the slave like his master. If they have called the head of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign the members of his household!

      26“Therefore do not fear them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. 27“What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim upon the housetops. 28“Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

From what I think I understand about the tribulation, it is NOT the wrath of God, though I have room for Him to inject his wrath into it in the latter part of Daniel's 70th week (Rev 14 and Rev 6 for example). That wrath would not be directed at believers though, even if they are present.

Consider this passage when thinking about wrath:

  “Now the salvation, and the power, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down, he who accuses them before our God day and night. 11“And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life even when faced with death. 12“For this reason, rejoice, O heavens and you who dwell in them. Woe to the earth and the sea, because the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, knowing that he has only a short time.”

      13And when the dragon saw that he was thrown down to the earth, he persecuted the woman who gave birth to the male child. 14But the two wings of the great eagle were given to the woman, so that she could fly into the wilderness to her place, where she was nourished for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent.

That is in Rev 12. It seems to me, that that "time, times, and half a time" is familiar - like 3/12 years - part of Daniel's 70th week (v 14). Also, not that verser 12, shows us that not all wrath, belongs to God.

I know you are aware, that there are believers during the tribulation, pre-tribbers usually refer to them as the tribulation saints. I think the term is an apt term actually. But I see no reason to think that they all became believers during the tribulation, some may have entered the trib as believers. We know from Rev 20 that some believers lose their lives during the trib:

 4Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

Now, if the Spirit is absent during the Trib as many pre-tribbers assert, don't you find it odd, that some unbelievers find Jesus, when the Spirit is absent, and do so duriing the trib, the hardest time ever, to become believers, and they get killed, while others, who came to believe when things were easy, get whisked away to safety? That idea, is not a proof of anything of course, but it strikes me as odd - sort of like "no good deed goes unpunished"

While I do not think that believers are under God's wrath, I do beleive that God still punishes sin in the lives of believers, just not eternally. I also beleive that  God uses trials and tribulations to help perfect us, in that sense if is not a bad thing, it is a good thing, and perfectly within His will.

As far as the word church being absent in portions of Revelation, let me ask this. Does the absence of a word, prove that the thing the word describes, does not exist? That is an argument from silence, generally considered to be a logical fallacy and extremely weak evidence of anything. As to why it is not mentioned, I cannot say, I am not the author of scripture.

I have not done this, so I do not know what the results would be, but it might be interesting to search for words like servants or bond servants, saints, holy ones, elect, chosen and the like, to see if anything pops up.

However, since we already saw that there are believers in Christ during the Tribulation in Rev 20, are not the  part of the church, the called-out ones for Jesus. If we can see and admit that, then I think the word missing, means nothing, but that is just my opinion.

Your question was short, and my response was long, and I apologise that I am so often wordy. I find that it is difficult to just have on liner sound-bite answers sometimes, and to be truthful, I am not even sure if I really addressed your question, did I?

If not, that is okay, I am pleased to respond anyway, as it might answer some questions others might have, and that is a good thing.

Thanks for asking, I think that was a good question.

 

[tigger398]

Why do people think Matt. 24 is second coming - Judgement and Rapture is separate event.

[Omegaman 3.0]

Why do people think Matt. 24 is second coming - Judgement and Rapture is separate event.

Wrong question. Matt 24 is clearly the second coming. We know Jesus returns then. Some speculate that there is a secong coming, part A (rapture), and a secong coming part B (His visible, glorious return) The correct, or better question is: "Why do some people think that there is a two part coming, or and invisible secret coming at the rapture, and a visible one later, when the Bible never says any such thing? "

Where can you find, a verse that says Judgement and Rapture are events separated by significant time? Answer: You cannot, there is no such verse, or combination of verse that compel such a belief. Now, there is a way you can, if you look at the conclusion of Matt 24, which is Jesus returning after the tribulation where He gathers the elect to join Him in the clouds, exaclty as it says He does, and the final judgment after the Millenium, described in Revelation, but that is not what they mean.

Bottom line Tigger, is that no Bible verse describes a coming of Jesus before the tribulation, except for the one that happened about 2000 years ago. Anyone who says otherwise (though it is conceivably possible) is not getting that idea from the Bible, it just is not there!

There are literally hundred of posts, perhaps thousands of post here, from people who beleive in a pre-trib rapture, yet in over a decade, no one has ever offered a single verse that says that, why do you suppose that is?

1 Tim 4:3:

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, NASB

For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. NIV

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears KJV
 

[missmuffet]

Omega Post trib is a very popular view right now.I have studied all the eschatology views.The two discrepancies I showed you bothered me.

[Esther4:14]

One of the problems I have with Post Trib Omega is those who are in Christ are not under condemnation and will never experience the wrath of God Romans 8:1.Do you believe that the judgments during the tribulation will reach both the saved and the unsaved?Why is the word Church absent in all passages relating to the tribulation?Even in Revelation 4-21 the word Church is absent.

Those in Christ might not be under condemnation, but that does not mean they can't experience persecution.  Therefore, this very would not confirm a rapture for the sake of avoiding wrath directed towards the ones who continue to persecute the church.  

Personally, I do not believe there will be a rapture, but I do think that there will be an escape.   

For one, I think He will shorten the days for the sake of the elect, and this will be an escape for those who are in Christ and not under condemnation because this will allow people to survive (Mark 13:20).  

Revelation 18:8 says, "her plagues will come in a single day."  

Luke 21:36 says to, "keep on the alert at all times, praying that you may have strength to escape all these things that are about to take place, and to stand before the Son of Man"

It is important to note that Luke says that we are to pray for the strength to escape, which implies that we will have to persevere through the tribulation that the wicked will not be able to escape.  But, He will give strength to those who ask Him and they may escape all these things.   

So, this is my present survival kit to escape the things to come.  

I am presently of the opinion that rapture theory is the same thing that Paul warned about.  He said that people would come saying, "Peace and safety!" then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape," (1 Thessalonians 5:3).  Rapture theory is like saying peace and safety because we will be raptured before the tribulation.  

I also think that there is still much to understand about what the prophecy actually says that will be revealed soon the way that He revealed to Daniel understanding of the prophecy from Jeremiah before the time of it's fulfillment came (Daniel 9:2).  

The same way that Peter was able to understand the prophecy of Joel when the fulfillment had manifested (Acts 2:14-21).  

There is a lot more that we can know about the prophecy that we do not understand yet.