Pre-Tribulation Proofs

[Diaste]

1 minute ago, OldCoot said:

Ok.  I have a bead on it now.  You are wanting to just be contentious.  I never implied there was a mention of the tribulation in 1 Thes 4.  I didn't even use that book as a pretext for my disputing your assertion that there is no mention of a Great Tribulation, or rather a tribulation that will exceed everything that came before it and never would occur that severe again.  

There isn't a mention of God in the Book of Esther either. Does that mean God doesn't exist?  That is the same reasoning you are using here.  

Yet that was the conversation you were forcing your way into, taking the reply in a different direction that had nothing to do with what was being asked or discussed. If anyone is being contentious it's you. Barging in, ignoring the thread and context, just to pick a fight. Again, some things never change.

[OldCoot]

2 minutes ago, Diaste said:

Watch his rapture timing vids. It's all Jewish tradition, Talmud, and ASTROLOGY. You know, where people put their belief in constellations and heavenly alignments? Astronomy does not consider planetary alignments with stars and constellations to have life changing or earth shattering meaning. Astronomy observes the heavens and makes a record of it and then makes predictions of future stunning and or rare alignments, but places no religious significance on such things. ASTROLOGY does. As does S. Clarke. Biggest enemy of the Lord pretending to be a sheep I have ever seen. 

You are as obtuse as ever. Some things never change.

You are wanting me to take your word for what Clarke has said.  I will take it under consideration if you will do what I asked of you.... point  out specific references of Clarke using the Talmud to support any position.  

All Clarke did when using the astronomical alignment was show how it might correlate to Rev 12 regarding the woman with 12 stars and moon under her feet.  As opposed to astrology which uses planetary alignments to explain things, a singular astronomical alignment was not an implication of anything.  Clarke did think that it was the Revelation 12 thing, but he never stated categorically that it would be some sort of earth shattering meaning.  Many took his pointing this alignment out to mean he was date setting, but the only date he proclaimed was the date the alignment would occur, not that it was the date of a rapture or something.  And he liked to show how the date of the alignment seemed to correspond to the Jewish feast of Yom Teruah.  

[OldCoot]

2 minutes ago, Diaste said:

Yet that was the conversation you were forcing your way into, taking the reply in a different direction that had nothing to do with what was being asked or discussed. If anyone is being contentious it's you. Barging in, ignoring the thread and context, just to pick a fight. Again, some things never change.

I appreciate your comments.  I do find it interesting how you categorize anything I posted as "barging in".  I am a member of this forum so not sure how posting is "barging in".  

Ignoring the thread? Look at the title of the thread.  How is anything I stated not in line with the thread title?  The title itself mentions tribulation.  

Pick a fight?  No.  I disagreed with your assertion and asked for you to point out specific references to Clarke using the Talmud as supporting text for his assertions.  That doesn't sound like picking a fight, that sounds like inquiry. 

You have some issues you need to work on.

[Dennis1209]

18 hours ago, OldCoot said:

1 Thes 4:17.  At least in the Latin Bible where the Greek "harpazo" is translated as Rapimier from which we get our English word Rapture.  Do an entomology study on the word Rapture.  Just because English translators did not use Rapture in that verse does not take away what harpazo or rapimier means.  Most English translators use phrases like "caught away" or similar.  States the same thing basically though it doesn't use the word "rapture" explicitly. 

No mention of tribulation? Are you serious?  

Matthew 24:21-22 (NKJV) For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.

Would be quite a stretch to find that Yeshua was referring to 70 AD or 135 AD events.  He stated explicitly that the "tribulation" He was referring to would be greater than anything preceding it and nothing like it would follow.  WW1 and WWII definitely far exceeded anything in the first century.

You are essentially correct on one point.... something like the Rapture is indeed a hope and a personal belief.  But it has some basis in scripture.  And Paul told us to comfort one another with these words.  If there isn't a catching away, Lord returning, etc doesn't sound too comforting.

^ This is how I interpret scripture, the blessed hope. Yes, I'm an escapist too. Christian's are appointed to tribulation, but not The Tribulation. It makes no sense for the bride-groom to severely beat up His bride before the wedding. The traditional Jewish wedding process appears to exactly mirror the "Rapture" process. Everything from the bride-groom leaving to prepare a place for his bride at his fathers house, to his unexpected return to get his bride, and everything in between. 

I think if a person studies the traditional Jewish wedding, it's a mirror image of the process of the Rapture and wedding supper. 

As you mentioned, if the bride is getting severely beat up, it makes no sense and fly's in the face of logic that the bride should comfort herself with these words. The preponderance of scripture is overwhelmingly in favor of a pre tribulation Rapture indeed, including types, shadows, references and obvious omissions of the church. The Lord's tribulation 'wrath' is not against His bride, we are not appointed unto wrath, but against those earth dwellers whom have rejected Him, and to bring His chosen people Israel back to repentance, for them to realize the One whom they pierced and have been partially blinded to that fact. 

I ask myself this; when has the Lord not removed or protected His faithful servants before His judgment and wrath? That is the "blessed hope". 

[Last Daze]

On 3/1/2018 at 10:52 PM, Steve Conley said:

A lot depends upon being prepared for great persecution. Any who take the mark to save their lives are eternally damned. The Scripture is quite clear on that matter regardless of how confident one may be that he or she is among the elect.

While I agree that the mark and the image should be shunned, even if it means being killed, receiving the mark is not blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and will be forgiven if repented of.  Jesus' words on forgiveness couldn't be more clear.  Worshiping the image is idolatry.

Those who utilize the mark and worship the image are the objects of God's judgment/wrath plagues.  Those who refuse to repent are the ones who blaspheme the Holy Spirit and are eternally damned.  I understand the gravity of the situation but overstating the consequences is ill-advised.

[Adstar]

3 minutes ago, Last Daze said:

While I agree that the mark and the image should be shunned, even if it means being killed, receiving the mark is not blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and will be forgiven if repented of.  Jesus' words on forgiveness couldn't be more clear.  Worshiping the image is idolatry.

 

They will not repent of it.. The Bible says that they shall all be cast into the eternal lake of fire..

 

Revelation 14: KJV

9 "And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, {10} The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: {11} And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name."

[Diaste]

20 hours ago, OldCoot said:

I appreciate your comments.  I do find it interesting how you categorize anything I posted as "barging in".  I am a member of this forum so not sure how posting is "barging in".  

Ignoring the thread? Look at the title of the thread.  How is anything I stated not in line with the thread title?  The title itself mentions tribulation.  

Pick a fight?  No.  I disagreed with your assertion and asked for you to point out specific references to Clarke using the Talmud as supporting text for his assertions.  That doesn't sound like picking a fight, that sounds like inquiry. 

You have some issues you need to work on.

You just don't get it. Or maybe you do and you decide to engage in that behavior. No matter, I have a question.

Who is the Lord? 

[Diaste]

20 hours ago, OldCoot said:

You are wanting me to take your word for what Clarke has said.  I will take it under consideration if you will do what I asked of you.... point  out specific references of Clarke using the Talmud to support any position.  

All Clarke did when using the astronomical alignment was show how it might correlate to Rev 12 regarding the woman with 12 stars and moon under her feet.  As opposed to astrology which uses planetary alignments to explain things, a singular astronomical alignment was not an implication of anything.  Clarke did think that it was the Revelation 12 thing, but he never stated categorically that it would be some sort of earth shattering meaning.  Many took his pointing this alignment out to mean he was date setting, but the only date he proclaimed was the date the alignment would occur, not that it was the date of a rapture or something.  And he liked to show how the date of the alignment seemed to correspond to the Jewish feast of Yom Teruah.  

This is the main problem with christianity; everything is allowed or explained away as the merest of issues. I know he says he isn't a date setter, but he chooses dates that correspond to specific dates many times. For instance he says the rapture will happen on the feast of trumpets. Well, that's the 1st day of the 7th month, a specific date. Further, Clarke says we can know the day and the hour and that scripture is wrong in saying we cannot.

But that's ok. Continue on your course. You'll see soon enough.

Who is the Lord?

[Diaste]

20 hours ago, OldCoot said:

point  out specific references of Clarke using the Talmud to support any position.  

For one Clarke uses the Talmud as the basis for the last trump, referencing Jewish tradition in the blowing of the trumps, to ascertain the last trump. This is NOT biblical. Lev 23 make no statement about a first or last trump on the 1st day of the 7th month of the Jewish calendar. The Talmud does.

Who is the Lord? 

[OldCoot]

17 minutes ago, Last Daze said:

While I agree that the mark and the image should be shunned, even if it means being killed, receiving the mark is not blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and will be forgiven if repented of.  Jesus' words on forgiveness couldn't be more clear.  Worshiping the image is idolatry.

Those who utilize the mark and worship the image are the objects of God's judgment/wrath plagues.  Those who refuse to repent are the ones who blaspheme the Holy Spirit and are eternally damned.  I understand the gravity of the situation but overstating the consequences is ill-advised.

That is a possible conclusion, if we had a clear understanding what the Mark actually is.  Speculation is all over the map..... a chip, a tattoo, whatever.  We just don't have enough information to make the conclusion that those who take the mark will have another opportunity to change their mind after doing so.  

The scripture implies that it is a conscious decision to do so and none change their mind about it. Read all those things that come upon the earth, and virtually every time, people refuse to repent.  They hide themselves in rocks and caves and what not, but they just don't want to repent. 

I have tended to think that the Mark is something way more sinister.   Yeshua told us that this perilous time would be characterized as being just like the days of Noah.  What was the one thing that stood out more than anything about those days.  Read Genesis 6.   You had genetic manipulation of the human race going on by fallen Angels.

And Moses told us in the same chapter that it was not limited to just that time, but also afterwards.  It is the reason that the Lord demanded that all men, women, and children be slaughtered in the land that the Hebrews were entering.  The Spies during that time said that there were giants in the land, just like giants during the days of Noah.  Og, the King of Bashan in the scripture, was roughly 13.5 ft tall and 6 ft across.  Sound like just a basketball player to you?  

So I have come to think that the mark in Revelation is more sinister than many suppose, and that it probably involves some form of DNA splicing or similar that changes a person's DNA so that they are no longer fully human.  And people would flock to that if the promise of longer lives thru prevention of diseases and cancers by just taking a mark.   You know, that mark is just a shortened version of marker.  And you hear or read almost every day of some idea of genetic markers.  If this is what will be going on, then those who take the mark could see their DNA changed in such a way that they are no longer truly human.  And only humans are eligible for salvation.  

It is speculation.  No better or worse than any other speculation.