Pre-tribbers, what do you have

[ARGOSY]

 

 

I referred to 1 Thes 3:13. Here it is:

To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.

Here, Christ comes with His saints.

 

Hi Persuaded, surely that verse is referring to the dead who rise first at the resurrection?  Because the dead rise first, they will already be with Jesus when we the living rise up to meet them.

 

I hope you realize the verse you quoted seems to contradicts your pre-trib position, because you have so-called pre-trib saints (Thessalonian church) being blameless when Jesus arrives with another earlier group of saints.  (or do you believe in a staggered pre-trib rapture     )  The Thessalonian church are obviously not tribulation saints, how then do you explain the verse you quoted?

[Persuaded]

I can't think of a place where Paul writes that our blamelessness (righteousness) is a future event. "Being blameless when Jesus arrives" is the wrong way to look at this!

 

If we are unrighteous (as Paul uses the term), we stand guilty already before God, and we won't make it to the wedding feast, and we will not be coming with the Lord and all His saints.

 

Righteousness is a present reliance (grace through faith) on a past event (the cross). Have a quick read through Rom 3, 4, 5, 6, 8. Indeed, at the end of the 1 Thes, he says that they should be "preserved blameless".

 

The Thessalonian, and our, righteousness before God is already secured (established, sterizo, "to make stable, place firmly, set fast, fix"). If it is already secured, it will still be secured "before God, even the Father, at the coming".

 

His coming doesn't secure their blamelessness, they don't have to work to be blameless in time for His coming.

 

God's imputed righteousness is a far more important topic than pre- vs post-trib! I'd agree with a thousand posties if it meant they got this topic right instead!

 

And "saints" here, is hagios, meaning holy ones or saints, and I treat it more expansively than just "the dead"- it says "all his hagios", and that is taken to include the dead, raptured, and even angels. (1 Thes 4:14, 2 Thes 1:7, Mat 25:31, Zech 14:5)

[ARGOSY]

I can't think of a place where Paul writes that our blamelessness (righteousness) is a future event. "Being blameless when Jesus arrives" is the wrong way to look at this!

 

If we are unrighteous (as Paul uses the term), we stand guilty already before God, and we won't make it to the wedding feast, and we will not be coming with the Lord and all His saints.

 

Righteousness is a present reliance (grace through faith) on a past event (the cross). Have a quick read through Rom 3, 4, 5, 6, 8. Indeed, at the end of the 1 Thes, he says that they should be "preserved blameless".

 

The Thessalonian, and our, righteousness before God is already secured (established, sterizo, "to make stable, place firmly, set fast, fix"). If it is already secured, it will still be secured "before God, even the Father, at the coming".

 

His coming doesn't secure their blamelessness, they don't have to work to be blameless in time for His coming.

 

God's imputed righteousness is a far more important topic than pre- vs post-trib! I'd agree with a thousand posties if it meant they got this topic right instead!

 

And "saints" here, is hagios, meaning holy ones or saints, and I treat it more expansively than just "the dead"- it says "all his hagios", and that is taken to include the dead, raptured, and even angels. (1 Thes 4:14, 2 Thes 1:7, Mat 25:31, Zech 14:5)

 

Thanks  for explaining, I understand what you are saying.  I would say from a post-trib point of view, we are resurrected and then also join the holy procession, this entire "day of the Lord" is seen as the second coming.   So during the second coming we are resurrected, we have the wedding feast, and also join the angelic procession. 

[Salty]

The Church Age lies between the two.

 

In Christ

Montana Marv

 

 

What "Church Age"? That's really just a doctrine of man, because God's Church, which is Christ's Church, first began in the Old Testament with Israel, and has continued unto Christ after His death and resurrection having made a change with The New Covenant. This is why Apostle Paul explained in Galatians that those of Faith like Abraham have become the "children of Abraham".

[ENOCH2010]

Wonder what the 500'000 Christians who use to live in Mosul Iraq think about the pre-trib doctrine?

[Montana Marv]

 

The Church Age lies between the two.

 

In Christ

Montana Marv

 

 

What "Church Age"? That's really just a doctrine of man, because God's Church, which is Christ's Church, first began in the Old Testament with Israel, and has continued unto Christ after His death and resurrection having made a change with The New Covenant. This is why Apostle Paul explained in Galatians that those of Faith like Abraham have become the "children of Abraham".

 

Salty

 

Who was commanded to go into all the world and preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  And when was this command issued.

 

In Christ

Montana Marv

[Montana Marv]

Wonder what the 500'000 Christians who use to live in Mosul Iraq think about the pre-trib doctrine?

I wonder what they think about the post trib docrine.  For they are still under the tribulation which Satan has been inflicting on us since Pentecost.  No different than a pastor being killed in China or Missionaries being killed in the jungles of South America.

 

In Christ

Montana Marv

[ENOCH2010]

So the pre-trib doctrine doesn't apply to the Christians under persecution now ??? Post -trib doctrine teaches, we will go through tribulations before the second coming. That is where the faith to endure comes into play, we don't expect to be raptured, right when the world needs our testimony.

[Salty]

 

 

The Church Age lies between the two.

 

In Christ

Montana Marv

 

 

What "Church Age"? That's really just a doctrine of man, because God's Church, which is Christ's Church, first began in the Old Testament with Israel, and has continued unto Christ after His death and resurrection having made a change with The New Covenant. This is why Apostle Paul explained in Galatians that those of Faith like Abraham have become the "children of Abraham".

 

Salty

 

Who was commanded to go into all the world and preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  And when was this command issued.

 

In Christ

Montana Marv

 

 

I realize what you mean, and I know the history of the first Church at Antioch where believers on Christ were first called Christians. But The Gospel is first revealed in the Old Testament, especially with Abraham. This is why Jude 1 quotes Enoch about Christ's second coming with ten thousands of His saints. It shows that even back to then God made His Plan of Salvation known to some. They just didn't live to the time when our Lord Jesus died on the cross and The Father raised Him.

 

The Church Ages doctrine is really just a doctrine that came from Dispensationalism, when those like John Darby sought to separate certain event eras in The Bible. Nothing wrong with recognizing God's Plan of Salvation that has come in stages per His Word, but that's not all what that doctrine is about. It takes our Lord's Messages to the seven Churches in Revelation and wrongly creates time period eras out of each one of them also, which is not Biblical. Christ's Messages to the Churches in Revelation are for from the time He gave them through John all the way up to His second coming, and thereafter. That means the principles and warnings of all seven of them still fully apply today to all of Christ's Church, minus their historical context.

[Persuaded]

I'm probably a small 'd' dispensationalist, and I somewhat agree that Scofield went a little too far when he took "rightly dividing the Word of God" and used that verse to justify a system of dispensations that have become almost a religion unto themselves. As simple observations, I think the divisions he came up with are perfectly fine. I have a Scofield reference Bible, and his notes are generally very sound.

 

I in no way see dispensations linked to Rev 2-3. The seven letters were to seven real churches, addressing real problems, but in such a way that they are applicable to every other church, and person. "He that hath an ear (that's us, too), let him hear what the spirit says to the churches (each letter to each church has application to every church, today as well)." But it isn't a coincidence that the seven churches also lay out church history from apostolic times to the present. This isn't at all related to big-D or little-d dispensationalism, but it should have application to our interpretation of Revelation. As time goes on and history unfolds, we shouldn't ignorantly hold to established dogmatic interpretations. We shouldn't change with every whim or newspaper headline either (I'm trying to stay out of those threads!). But we've seen 6 and probably 7 of the Rev 2-3 churches revealed, we shouldn't ignore that; we've seen Israel regathered a second time in the land and miraculously preserved for a long time now, we shouldn't ignore that; knowledge is increasing. If you want to call dispensationalism a recent theory (it isn't), I don't care.

 

Church doctrine has been held captive for most of church history by the catholic system, and the reformers were generally too busy trying to get salvation by grace sorted out to address eschatology. If grace is new since Luther (broadly speaking), I don't have a problem with the rapture coming a few years later into the mainstream vernacular. It fits the totality of the scripture, and it fits the history we've seen revealed so far.

 

Paul, arguably the brightest intellect of the NT, a pharisee (professional law keeper) that trained under Gamaliel, said the doctrine of the gentile church was a mystery that he was privileged to reveal.

Eph 3:3-6 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

 

Of course, with hindsight we can find hints of the gospel and even foreshadowings of the church. But if Paul wasn't aware of it in his day, I think it is safe to say that it was pretty well hidden to OT eyes.