50 Reasons for the Pre-tribulation Rapture

[Quasar93]

50 Reasons for the Pretribulation Rapture


1. While posttribulationism appeared as early as 2 Thessalonians 2, many in the early church believed in the imminency of the Lord's return, which is an essential doctrine of pretribulationism.

2. The detailed development of the pretribulational truth during the past few centuries does not prove that the doctrine is new or novel. Its development is similar to that of other major doctrines in the history of the church.
Hermeneutics

3. Pretribulationism is the only view that allows literal interpretation of all Old and New Testament passages on the Great Tribulation.

4. Pretribulationism distinguishes clearly between Israel and the church and their respective programs.
Nature of the Tribulation

5. Pretribulationism maintains the scriptural distinction between the Great Tribulation and tribulation in general that precedes it.

6. The Great Tribulation is properly interpreted by pretribulationists as a time of preparation for Israel's restoration (Deu. 4:29-30; Jer. 30:4-11). It is not the purpose of the Tribulation to prepare the church for glory.

7. None of the Old Testament passages on the Tribulation mention the church (Deu. 4:29-30; Jer. 30: 4-11; Dan. 8:24-27; 12:1-2).

8. None of the New Testament passages on the Tribulation mention the church (Matt. 13:30; 39-42, 48-50; 24:15-31; 1 Thess. 1:9-10; 5:4-9; 2 Thess. 2:1-11; Rev. 4-18).

9. In contrast to midtribulationism, the pretribulational view provides an adequate explanation for the beginning of the Great Tribulation in Revelation 6. Midtribulationism is refuted by the plain teaching of Scripture that the Great Tribulation begins long before the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11.

10. The proper distinction is maintained between the prophetic trumpets of Scripture by pretribulationism. There is no proper ground for the pivotal argument of midtribulationism that the seventh trumpet of Revelation is the last trumpet in that there is no established connection between the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11, the last trumpet of 1 Corinthians 15:52, and the trumpet of Matthew 24:31. They are three distinct events.

11. The unity of Daniel's seventieth week is maintained by pretribulationists. By contrast, postribulationism and midtribulationists destroy the unity of Daniel's seventieth week and confuse Israel's program with that of the church.
Nature of the Church

12. The translation of the church is never mentioned in any passage dealing with the second coming of Christ after the Tribulation.

13. The church is not appointed to wrath (Rom. 5:9: 1 Thess. 1:9-10; 5:9). The church therefore cannot enter "the great day of their wrath" (Rev. 6:17).

14. The church will not be overtaken by the day of the Lord (1 Thess. 5:1-9, which includes the Tribulation.

15. The possibility of a believer escaping the Tribulation is mentioned in Luke 21:36.

16. The church of Philadelphia was promised deliverance from "the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth" (Rev. 3:10).

17. It is characteristic of divine dealing to deliver believers before a divine judgment is inflicted on the world as illustrated in the deliverance of Noah, Lot, Rahab, etc. (2 Peter 2:5-9).

18. At the time of the translation of the church, all believers go to the Father's house in heaven (John 14:3) and do not immediately return to the earth after meeting Christ in the air as postribulationists teach.

19. Pretribulationism does not divide the body of Christ at the Rapture on a works principle. The teaching of a partial rapture is based on the false doctrine that the translation of the church is a reward for good works. It is rather a climactic aspect of salvation by grace.

20. The Scriptures clearly teach that all, not part, of the church will be raptured at the coming of Christ for the church (1 Cor. 15:51-52; 1 Thess. 4:17).

21. As opposed to a view of a partial rapture, pretribulationism is founded on the definite teaching of Scripture that the death of Christ frees from all condemnation.

22. The godly remnant of the Tribulation are pictured as Israelites, not members of the church as maintained by the posttribulationists.

23. The pretribulational view, as opposed to posttribulationism, does not confuse general terms like elect and saints, which apply to the saved of all ages, with specific terms like church and those in Christ, which refer to believers of this age only.
Doctrine of Imminency

24. The pretribulational interpretation teaches that the coming of Christ is actually imminent.

25. The exhortation to be comforted by the coming of the Lord (1 Thess. 4:18) is very significant in the pretribulational view and is especially contradicted by most posttribulationists.

26. The exhortation to look for "the glorious appearing" of Christ to His own (Titus 2:13) loses its significance if the Tribulation must intervene first. Believers in that case should look for signs.

27. The exhortation to purify ourselves in view of the Lord's return has most significance if His coming is imminent (1 John 3:2-3).

28. The church is uniformly exhorted to look for the coming of the Lord, while believers in the Tribulation are directed to look for signs.
The Work of the Holy Spirit

29. The Holy Spirit as the restrainer of evil cannot be taken out of the world unless the church, which the Spirit indwells, is translated at the same time. The Tribulation cannot begin until this restraint is lifted.

30. The Holy Spirit as the restrainer must be taken out of the world before "the lawless one," who dominates the tribulation period, can be revealed (2 Thess. 2:6-8).

31. If the expression "except there come a falling away first" (KJV) is translated literally, "except the "departure" come first," it would plainly show the necessity of the Rapture taking place before the beginning of the Tribulation.
Necessity of an Interval Between the Rapture and the Second Coming

32. According to 2 Corinthians 5:10, all believers of this age must appear before the judgment seat of Christ in heaven, an event never mentioned in the detailed accounts connected with the second coming of Christ to the earth.

33. If the twenty-four elders of Revelation 4:1-5:14 are representative of the church as many expositors believe, it would necessitate the rapture and reward of the church before the Tribulation.

34. The coming of Christ for His bride must take place before the Second Coming to the earth for the wedding feast (Rev. 19:7-10).

35. Tribulation saints are not translated at the second coming of Christ but carry on ordinary occupations such as farming and building houses, and they will bear children (Isa. 65:20-25). This would be impossible if the translation had taken place at the Second Coming to the earth, as posttribulationists teach.

36. The judgment of the Gentiles following the Second Coming (Matt. 25:31-

46) indicates that both saved and unsaved are still in their natural bodies. This would be impossible if the translation had taken place at the Second Coming.

37. If the translation took place in connection with the Second Coming to the earth, there would be no need of separating the sheep from the goats at a subsequent judgment, but the separation would have taken place in the very act of the translation of the believers before Christ actually sets up His throne on earth (Matt. 25:31).

38. The judgment of Israel (Ezek. 20:34-38), which occurs subsequent to the Second Coming, indicates the necessity of regathering Israel. The separation of the saved from the unsaved in this judgment obviously takes place sometime after the Second Coming and would be unnecessary if the saved had previously been separated from the unsaved by translation.
Contrast Between the Rapture and the Second Coming

39. At the time of the Rapture the saints meet Christ in the air, while at the Second Coming Christ returns to the Mount of Olives to meet the saints on earth.

40. At the time of the Rapture the Mount of Olives is unchanged, while at the Second Coming it divides and a valley is formed to the east of Jerusalem (Zech. 14:4-5).

41. At the Rapture living saints are translated, while no saints are translated in connection with the second coming of Christ to the earth.

42. At the Rapture the saints go to heaven, while at the Second Coming to the earth the saints remain in the earth without translation.

43. At the time of the Rapture the world is unjudged and continues in sin, while at the Second Coming the world is judged and righteousness is established on the earth.

44. The translation of the church is pictured as a deliverance before the day of wrath, while the Second Coming is followed by the deliverance of those who have believed in Christ during the Tribulation.

45. The Rapture is described as imminent, while the Second Coming is preceded by definite signs.

46. The translation of living believers is a truth revealed only in the New Testament, while the Second Coming with its attendant events is a prominent doctrine of both Testaments.

47. The Rapture concerns only the saved, while the Second Coming deals with both saved and unsaved.

48. At the Rapture Satan is not bound, while at the Second Coming Satan is bound and cast into the abyss.

49. No unfulfilled prophecy stands between the church and the Rapture, while many signs must be fulfilled before the Second Coming.

50. No passage dealing with the resurrection of saints at the Second Coming ever mentions translation of living saints at the same time.

From: "50 Reasons for the Pretribulation Rapture"

By: Dr. John F. Walvoord

 

Quasar93
 

[missmuffet]

12 minutes ago, Quasar93 said:

50 Reasons for the Pretribulation Rapture


1. While posttribulationism appeared as early as 2 Thessalonians 2, many in the early church believed in the imminency of the Lord's return, which is an essential doctrine of pretribulationism.

2. The detailed development of the pretribulational truth during the past few centuries does not prove that the doctrine is new or novel. Its development is similar to that of other major doctrines in the history of the church.
Hermeneutics

3. Pretribulationism is the only view that allows literal interpretation of all Old and New Testament passages on the Great Tribulation.

4. Pretribulationism distinguishes clearly between Israel and the church and their respective programs.
Nature of the Tribulation

5. Pretribulationism maintains the scriptural distinction between the Great Tribulation and tribulation in general that precedes it.

6. The Great Tribulation is properly interpreted by pretribulationists as a time of preparation for Israel's restoration (Deu. 4:29-30; Jer. 30:4-11). It is not the purpose of the Tribulation to prepare the church for glory.

7. None of the Old Testament passages on the Tribulation mention the church (Deu. 4:29-30; Jer. 30: 4-11; Dan. 8:24-27; 12:1-2).

8. None of the New Testament passages on the Tribulation mention the church (Matt. 13:30; 39-42, 48-50; 24:15-31; 1 Thess. 1:9-10; 5:4-9; 2 Thess. 2:1-11; Rev. 4-18).

9. In contrast to midtribulationism, the pretribulational view provides an adequate explanation for the beginning of the Great Tribulation in Revelation 6. Midtribulationism is refuted by the plain teaching of Scripture that the Great Tribulation begins long before the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11.

10. The proper distinction is maintained between the prophetic trumpets of Scripture by pretribulationism. There is no proper ground for the pivotal argument of midtribulationism that the seventh trumpet of Revelation is the last trumpet in that there is no established connection between the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11, the last trumpet of 1 Corinthians 15:52, and the trumpet of Matthew 24:31. They are three distinct events.

11. The unity of Daniel's seventieth week is maintained by pretribulationists. By contrast, postribulationism and midtribulationists destroy the unity of Daniel's seventieth week and confuse Israel's program with that of the church.
Nature of the Church

12. The translation of the church is never mentioned in any passage dealing with the second coming of Christ after the Tribulation.

13. The church is not appointed to wrath (Rom. 5:9: 1 Thess. 1:9-10; 5:9). The church therefore cannot enter "the great day of their wrath" (Rev. 6:17).

14. The church will not be overtaken by the day of the Lord (1 Thess. 5:1-9, which includes the Tribulation.

15. The possibility of a believer escaping the Tribulation is mentioned in Luke 21:36.

16. The church of Philadelphia was promised deliverance from "the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth" (Rev. 3:10).

17. It is characteristic of divine dealing to deliver believers before a divine judgment is inflicted on the world as illustrated in the deliverance of Noah, Lot, Rahab, etc. (2 Peter 2:5-9).

18. At the time of the translation of the church, all believers go to the Father's house in heaven (John 14:3) and do not immediately return to the earth after meeting Christ in the air as postribulationists teach.

19. Pretribulationism does not divide the body of Christ at the Rapture on a works principle. The teaching of a partial rapture is based on the false doctrine that the translation of the church is a reward for good works. It is rather a climactic aspect of salvation by grace.

20. The Scriptures clearly teach that all, not part, of the church will be raptured at the coming of Christ for the church (1 Cor. 15:51-52; 1 Thess. 4:17).

21. As opposed to a view of a partial rapture, pretribulationism is founded on the definite teaching of Scripture that the death of Christ frees from all condemnation.

22. The godly remnant of the Tribulation are pictured as Israelites, not members of the church as maintained by the posttribulationists.

23. The pretribulational view, as opposed to posttribulationism, does not confuse general terms like elect and saints, which apply to the saved of all ages, with specific terms like church and those in Christ, which refer to believers of this age only.
Doctrine of Imminency

24. The pretribulational interpretation teaches that the coming of Christ is actually imminent.

25. The exhortation to be comforted by the coming of the Lord (1 Thess. 4:18) is very significant in the pretribulational view and is especially contradicted by most posttribulationists.

26. The exhortation to look for "the glorious appearing" of Christ to His own (Titus 2:13) loses its significance if the Tribulation must intervene first. Believers in that case should look for signs.

27. The exhortation to purify ourselves in view of the Lord's return has most significance if His coming is imminent (1 John 3:2-3).

28. The church is uniformly exhorted to look for the coming of the Lord, while believers in the Tribulation are directed to look for signs.
The Work of the Holy Spirit

29. The Holy Spirit as the restrainer of evil cannot be taken out of the world unless the church, which the Spirit indwells, is translated at the same time. The Tribulation cannot begin until this restraint is lifted.

30. The Holy Spirit as the restrainer must be taken out of the world before "the lawless one," who dominates the tribulation period, can be revealed (2 Thess. 2:6-8).

31. If the expression "except there come a falling away first" (KJV) is translated literally, "except the "departure" come first," it would plainly show the necessity of the Rapture taking place before the beginning of the Tribulation.
Necessity of an Interval Between the Rapture and the Second Coming

32. According to 2 Corinthians 5:10, all believers of this age must appear before the judgment seat of Christ in heaven, an event never mentioned in the detailed accounts connected with the second coming of Christ to the earth.

33. If the twenty-four elders of Revelation 4:1-5:14 are representative of the church as many expositors believe, it would necessitate the rapture and reward of the church before the Tribulation.

34. The coming of Christ for His bride must take place before the Second Coming to the earth for the wedding feast (Rev. 19:7-10).

35. Tribulation saints are not translated at the second coming of Christ but carry on ordinary occupations such as farming and building houses, and they will bear children (Isa. 65:20-25). This would be impossible if the translation had taken place at the Second Coming to the earth, as posttribulationists teach.

36. The judgment of the Gentiles following the Second Coming (Matt. 25:31-

46) indicates that both saved and unsaved are still in their natural bodies. This would be impossible if the translation had taken place at the Second Coming.

37. If the translation took place in connection with the Second Coming to the earth, there would be no need of separating the sheep from the goats at a subsequent judgment, but the separation would have taken place in the very act of the translation of the believers before Christ actually sets up His throne on earth (Matt. 25:31).

38. The judgment of Israel (Ezek. 20:34-38), which occurs subsequent to the Second Coming, indicates the necessity of regathering Israel. The separation of the saved from the unsaved in this judgment obviously takes place sometime after the Second Coming and would be unnecessary if the saved had previously been separated from the unsaved by translation.
Contrast Between the Rapture and the Second Coming

39. At the time of the Rapture the saints meet Christ in the air, while at the Second Coming Christ returns to the Mount of Olives to meet the saints on earth.

40. At the time of the Rapture the Mount of Olives is unchanged, while at the Second Coming it divides and a valley is formed to the east of Jerusalem (Zech. 14:4-5).

41. At the Rapture living saints are translated, while no saints are translated in connection with the second coming of Christ to the earth.

42. At the Rapture the saints go to heaven, while at the Second Coming to the earth the saints remain in the earth without translation.

43. At the time of the Rapture the world is unjudged and continues in sin, while at the Second Coming the world is judged and righteousness is established on the earth.

44. The translation of the church is pictured as a deliverance before the day of wrath, while the Second Coming is followed by the deliverance of those who have believed in Christ during the Tribulation.

45. The Rapture is described as imminent, while the Second Coming is preceded by definite signs.

46. The translation of living believers is a truth revealed only in the New Testament, while the Second Coming with its attendant events is a prominent doctrine of both Testaments.

47. The Rapture concerns only the saved, while the Second Coming deals with both saved and unsaved.

48. At the Rapture Satan is not bound, while at the Second Coming Satan is bound and cast into the abyss.

49. No unfulfilled prophecy stands between the church and the Rapture, while many signs must be fulfilled before the Second Coming.

50. No passage dealing with the resurrection of saints at the Second Coming ever mentions translation of living saints at the same time.

From: "50 Reasons for the Pretribulation Rapture"

By: Dr. John F. Walvoord

 

Quasar93
 

Thanks, I like it. Have you ever read the book "Revelation" by Dr. John F. Walvoord? It is great. There is a newer edited version by Mark Hancock.

[Quasar93]

1 hour ago, missmuffet said:

Thanks, I like it. Have you ever read the book "Revelation" by Dr. John F. Walvoord? It is great. There is a newer edited version by Mark Hancock.

 

Hi sis, yes, I have a copy of John Walvoord's book an have indeed read it.  We lost our dear bro, around 2002.

 

Quasar93

Edited December 17, 2017 by Quasar93

[missmuffet]

1 hour ago, Quasar93 said:

 

Hi sis, yes, I have a copy of John Walvoord's book an have indeed read it.  We lost our dear bro, around 2002.

 

Quasar03

Yes, he did do you have the most recent one?

[brakelite]

I could respond to each individual point made, directly refute several, cast doubt on many, and dismiss some as nonsense. 

However, I neither have the time nor patience to deal with each point made, but I will propose two of my own, which if true automatically dismiss the majority of those points you have presented.

1. Has it occurred to you that we are called to be witnesses to the punishment of the wicked just as Noah, Lot, Rahab, and the first Christian generation were prior to 70ad in the destruction of Jerusalem?

2. 

Matthew 24:37-41  But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.  For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,  And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.  Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.  Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Now please note carefully what Jesus is saying here. First, the second coming will be affected in precisely the same way as the great flood. The unrighteous will not be aware of the signs of the times, they shall be living at ease, living life as normal with little or no thought of eternity, when they shall be taken all away.

Let us go to the parallel passage in the gospel of Luke. You will note that Luke adds a little more detail giving a slightly different perspective.

Luke 17:26-37  And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.  They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.  Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;  But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.  Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.  In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.  Remember Lot’s wife.  Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.  I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.  Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.  And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.

The people that Matthew says are taken away,  Luke adds that they are destroyed. Thus the ‘taken away’ aspect or context of what Jesus is telling His disciples equates to death or destruction. This is borne out later in Luke’s passage when the disciples ask Him, “where are they taken to?” Jesus answer concerning the gathering of eagles around the carcasse echoes the following:

Revelation 19:17  And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;  That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.  And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.  And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.  And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

I am beginning to think that being left behind isn’t such a bad alternative. But we shall see. We will now look at another passage and see how consistent Jesus is regarding the subject.

Matthew 13:24-30 ¶  Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:  But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.  So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?  He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?  But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.  Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

A little later Jesus explains the parable to His disciples.

Matthew 13:37-42  He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;  The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;  The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.  As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.  The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;  And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

So let us recap the main points:

The second coming of Jesus Christ is in like manner as the great flood. All scriptures that so many claim as pertaining  to a separate rapture event other than the second coming are deluding themselves. They occur simultaneously.

The wicked, who in Noah’s day were living their normal everyday lives in ignorance and sin, were all taken away by the flood (Matthew 24:39) therefore so also will the wicked be at the second coming.

They are taken away to their ultimate death, or destruction. (Luke 17:27,29)

The concept of the wicked being taken is repeated many times. (Matt. 24:39-41; Luke 17:34-36)

The taking away or removal of the wicked to be destroyed comes before the gathering of the righteous.

Now, let me ask a question. In Noah’s day, after the flood had removed the wicked from the face of the earth and destroyed them all, who was left behind?

Genesis 7:23  And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
Who was it that was left behind when fire and brimstone fell from heaven and destroyed Sodom and the other cities of the plain? Was it not Lot and his two daughters? The same could be asked of the survivors of Jericho and Jerusalem. Who were taken first?

[Diaste]

8 hours ago, Quasar93 said:

50 Reasons for the Pretribulation Rapture


1. While posttribulationism appeared as early as 2 Thessalonians 2, many in the early church believed in the imminency of the Lord's return, which is an essential doctrine of pretribulationism. Since no one know the day and hour of said return, it's imminent no matter when it happens.

2. The detailed development of the pretribulational truth during the past few centuries does not prove that the doctrine is new or novel. Its development is similar to that of other major doctrines in the history of the church. Not proof of veracity.

3. Pretribulationism is the only view that allows literal interpretation of all Old and New Testament passages on the Great Tribulation. Just a platform, like politics.

4. Pretribulationism distinguishes clearly between Israel and the church and their respective programs. Scripture refutes the distinction between the Jews and Gentiles. There is none, all are on in Christ. Not the first major error of Pretrib, and not the last.

5. Pretribulationism maintains the scriptural distinction between the Great Tribulation and tribulation in general that precedes it. There is no 'tribulation in general' there is only great tribulation in this context. Swing and a miss.

6. The Great Tribulation is properly interpreted by pretribulationists as a time of preparation for Israel's restoration (Deu. 4:29-30; Jer. 30:4-11). It is not the purpose of the Tribulation to prepare the church for glory.  "..properly interpreted by pretibulationists.."??? Self confirming bias. Logically fallacious.

7. None of the Old Testament passages on the Tribulation mention the church (Deu. 4:29-30; Jer. 30: 4-11; Dan. 8:24-27; 12:1-2). Proof by omission? How does one prove a negative or nonexistence? Another logically fallacious argument.

8. None of the New Testament passages on the Tribulation mention the church (Matt. 13:30; 39-42, 48-50; 24:15-31; 1 Thess. 1:9-10; 5:4-9; 2 Thess. 2:1-11; Rev. 4-18). See # 7.

9. In contrast to midtribulationism, the pretribulational view provides an adequate explanation for the beginning of the Great Tribulation in Revelation 6. Midtribulationism is refuted by the plain teaching of Scripture that the Great Tribulation begins long before the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11. Plain reading allows scripture to adequately explain everything about the last week. We don't need suits to tell us what the scripture teaches. We have the Holy Spirit to guide us.

10. The proper distinction is maintained between the prophetic trumpets of Scripture by pretribulationism. There is no proper ground for the pivotal argument of midtribulationism that the seventh trumpet of Revelation is the last trumpet in that there is no established connection between the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11, the last trumpet of 1 Corinthians 15:52, and the trumpet of Matthew 24:31. They are three distinct events. There are a great deal of similarities proving the trumps are the same. In Rev 11 the tribes of the earth mourn after the 7th trump as Christ appears for the end of the age, wrath of God and to reward His people. In Matt 24 we see the tribes of the earth mourn and the gathering of the elect at the sound of the great trumpet. In 1 Cor 15 we see the trump sound and the gathering of the dead, and living, in Christ occurs. Very similar.

11. The unity of Daniel's seventieth week is maintained by pretribulationists. By contrast, postribulationism and midtribulationists destroy the unity of Daniel's seventieth week and confuse Israel's program with that of the church. There is no difference between the Jews and the church. There are only believers and non believers. No Jew or Gentile all are one in Jesus Christ.

12. The translation of the church is never mentioned in any passage dealing with the second coming of Christ after the Tribulation. Proof by omission again. Can't prove a negative.

13. The church is not appointed to wrath (Rom. 5:9: 1 Thess. 1:9-10; 5:9). The church therefore cannot enter "the great day of their wrath" (Rev. 6:17). True. But pretrib confuses wrath and persecution so the argument falls flat.

14. The church will not be overtaken by the day of the Lord (1 Thess. 5:1-9, which includes the Tribulation. True, except the day of the Lord DOES NOT include the out of context and nonexistent "Tribulation".

15. The possibility of a believer escaping the Tribulation is mentioned in Luke 21:36. Only to flee while on earth. Nothing in the text suggests a removal from one place to another. The idea here is the be able to flee as an individual. To wit:

Luke 21:36, "...to escape..."

ekpheugó: to flee away
Short Definition: I flee out, away, I escape
Definition: I flee out, away, escape; with an acc: I escape something.

16. The church of Philadelphia was promised deliverance from "the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth" (Rev. 3:10).

Not accurate. This is setting a watch, not a removal from one place to another, to wit:

Rev 3:10, "...will keep..." 

téreó: to watch over, to guard

Short Definition: I keep, guard, observe
Definition: I keep, guard, observe, watch over.

17. It is characteristic of divine dealing to deliver believers before a divine judgment is inflicted on the world as illustrated in the deliverance of Noah, Lot, Rahab, etc. (2 Peter 2:5-9).

Yes, from divine judgement, but not persecution. Pretrib must conflate divine judgement with persecution to prove the viability of the doctrine.

18. At the time of the translation of the church, all believers go to the Father's house in heaven (John 14:3) and do not immediately return to the earth after meeting Christ in the air as postribulationists teach.

Agreed.

19. Pretribulationism does not divide the body of Christ at the Rapture on a works principle. The teaching of a partial rapture is based on the false doctrine that the translation of the church is a reward for good works. It is rather a climactic aspect of salvation by grace. This is like the 10th time you try to prove pretrib is truth because the other camps are wrong. That is a terrible way to prove a point. Because others may not be correct does not make you correct. The burden of proof is on Pretrib to prove their claims are accurate. 

20. The Scriptures clearly teach that all, not part, of the church will be raptured at the coming of Christ for the church (1 Cor. 15:51-52; 1 Thess. 4:17).

Agreed.

21. As opposed to a view of a partial rapture, pretribulationism is founded on the definite teaching of Scripture that the death of Christ frees from all condemnation.

If they confess the Lord Jesus and confess he came in the flesh, and they believe God raised Him from the dead.

22. The godly remnant of the Tribulation are pictured as Israelites, not members of the church as maintained by the posttribulationists.

Is this a shotgun debate? Ya just start firing and hope to score a bulls-eye? Talk, talk, talk....no proof.

23. The pretribulational view, as opposed to posttribulationism, does not confuse general terms like elect and saints, which apply to the saved of all ages, with specific terms like church and those in Christ, which refer to believers of this age only.

Again the illogic of, "I'm right because the others are wrong." argument. Prove it, keeping in mind negatives are notoriously illusive proofs.

24. The pretribulational interpretation teaches that the coming of Christ is actually imminent.

This is a repeat. The return of Jesus in imminent by nature, at any time, now and in the future, no matter what event occurs, as NO ONE knows the day or the hour.
25. The exhortation to be comforted by the coming of the Lord (1 Thess. 4:18) is very significant in the pretribulational view and is especially contradicted by most posttribulationists.

And? I think that promised comfort is pretty significant to every one waiting on Jesus return.

26. The exhortation to look for "the glorious appearing" of Christ to His own (Titus 2:13) loses its significance if the Tribulation must intervene first. Believers in that case should look for signs.

No. It actually gains in meaning and hope. There is greater relief in deliverance in acute situations. Do you fret over falling from a mountain when you are in your easy chair? This is another burden of proof fallacy. 

27. The exhortation to purify ourselves in view of the Lord's return has most significance if His coming is imminent (1 John 3:2-3). 

Repeat. Where's the proof? Even if signs are seen how does that make the return of Jesus less imminent? If we don't know the moment of His return then no calendar of events makes it more or less momentary. 

28. The church is uniformly exhorted to look for the coming of the Lord, while believers in the Tribulation are directed to look for signs.

This is the worst argument ever. So trib believers are not the church? Trib believers are not to look for the Lord's return? 


29. The Holy Spirit as the restrainer of evil cannot be taken out of the world unless the church, which the Spirit indwells, is translated at the same time. The Tribulation cannot begin until this restraint is lifted.

Incorrect interpretation of 2 Thess 2. What is being restrained is the return of Jesus. What is restraining is the apostasy and the advent of the beast.

30. The Holy Spirit as the restrainer must be taken out of the world before "the lawless one," who dominates the tribulation period, can be revealed (2 Thess. 2:6-8).

Repeat. Incorrect this time too.

31. If the expression "except there come a falling away first" (KJV) is translated literally, "except the "departure" come first," it would plainly show the necessity of the Rapture taking place before the beginning of the Tribulation.
Incorrect. This is a literal defection and even if the actual text allowed for 'departure' it's a departure from an ideology, not a removal from one place to another.

32. According to 2 Corinthians 5:10, all believers of this age must appear before the judgment seat of Christ in heaven, an event never mentioned in the detailed accounts connected with the second coming of Christ to the earth.

Proof by omission. Weak. Illogical as well. If all believers are to stand before the judgement seat, it's still true even if it isn't mentioned in other places. 

33. If the twenty-four elders of Revelation 4:1-5:14 are representative of the church as many expositors believe, it would necessitate the rapture and reward of the church before the Tribulation.

The lampstands are the 7 churches. Clearly. Explicitly. Rev 1:20, "...and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches." 

34. The coming of Christ for His bride must take place before the Second Coming to the earth for the wedding feast (Rev. 19:7-10).

True. But you still have the wrong conclusion.

35. Tribulation saints are not translated at the second coming of Christ but carry on ordinary occupations such as farming and building houses, and they will bear children (Isa. 65:20-25). This would be impossible if the translation had taken place at the Second Coming to the earth, as posttribulationists teach.

Whoa! The inaccuracies are legion! Rev 7,

"9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?

14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

15 Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them." I would say tribulation saints are not only translated but stand before the throne, forever.

36. The judgment of the Gentiles following the Second Coming (Matt. 25:31-

Judgement of unbelievers, you meant.

46) indicates that both saved and unsaved are still in their natural bodies. This would be impossible if the translation had taken place at the Second Coming.

I can't even respond to such absurdity

37. If the translation took place in connection with the Second Coming to the earth, there would be no need of separating the sheep from the goats at a subsequent judgment, but the separation would have taken place in the very act of the translation of the believers before Christ actually sets up His throne on earth (Matt. 25:31).

This just gets even more ridiculous. Of course there is a need. All the dead that were not raised in Christ at the second coming (untold millions), and the dead before Jesus was raised from the dead, (untold millions) will appear at the judgement seat. Since a judgement is specified as occurring in the future, who are you and your handlers to say this doesn't happen?

38. The judgment of Israel (Ezek. 20:34-38), which occurs subsequent to the Second Coming, indicates the necessity of regathering Israel. The separation of the saved from the unsaved in this judgment obviously takes place sometime after the Second Coming and would be unnecessary if the saved had previously been separated from the unsaved by translation.

Repeat. Only the dead and living, IN CHRIST, are raised at the second coming. The rest of the dead are not raised until later. 


39. At the time of the Rapture the saints meet Christ in the air, while at the Second Coming Christ returns to the Mount of Olives to meet the saints on earth.

Can ya prove that or is this just casting a net?

40. At the time of the Rapture the Mount of Olives is unchanged, while at the Second Coming it divides and a valley is formed to the east of Jerusalem (Zech. 14:4-5).

You cannot prove a negative. Where does scripture say what you contend?
41. At the Rapture living saints are translated, while no saints are translated in connection with the second coming of Christ to the earth.

Then who is gathered by the angels in Matt 24? Not saints? What would you call them? The elect? Those are the favorites of Jesus. That's people. 

42. At the Rapture the saints go to heaven, while at the Second Coming to the earth the saints remain in the earth without translation.

No. 2 Thess refutes this. The coming of Jesus and the gathering of the elect are linked in time and space. 

43. At the time of the Rapture the world is unjudged and continues in sin, while at the Second Coming the world is judged and righteousness is established on the earth.

So you say. Where is the scriptural proof. 

44. The translation of the church is pictured as a deliverance before the day of wrath, while the Second Coming is followed by the deliverance of those who have believed in Christ during the Tribulation.

This is more absurd speech. If the church is delivered before the wrath of God at the beginning of the last week, because of the major tenet of Pretrib, "believers are not appointed to wrath", which is true, how do you throw millions of believer into the wrath of God?

45. The Rapture is described as imminent, while the Second Coming is preceded by definite signs.

Repeat.

46. The translation of living believers is a truth revealed only in the New Testament, while the Second Coming with its attendant events is a prominent doctrine of both Testaments.

Whatever.

47. The Rapture concerns only the saved, while the Second Coming deals with both saved and unsaved.

Again, absurd. Since the 'rapture' has no biblical proof for timing or even existence, adding concepts to the nonexistent is just more fiction.

48. At the Rapture Satan is not bound, while at the Second Coming Satan is bound and cast into the abyss.

Satan is not bound until the very end sometime after the 2nd coming of Jesus. The events are unrelated in the provided context.

49. No unfulfilled prophecy stands between the church and the Rapture, while many signs must be fulfilled before the Second Coming.

Untrue. When the pretrib rapture was conceived at least one major prophecy was unfulfilled; The Jews returning  to Israel.

50. No passage dealing with the resurrection of saints at the Second Coming ever mentions translation of living saints at the same time.

Again, and again...proof through nonexistence. How is a truth supported by no evidence? 

From: "50 Reasons for the Pretribulation Rapture"

By: Dr. John F. Walvoord

 

Quasar93

 

Edited December 17, 2017 by Diaste

[Justin Adams]

Know your history.  (Pre-trib: the papacy's answer to remove focus from 'anti-Christ Roman power'.)

It seems that the Evangelical movement has taken the Jesuit bait and now features the Jesuit concepts in placing the seventieth week in a future tribulation. Why have they laid aside all the teachings of the Founding Fathers of Protestantism that the Papacy is the Antichrist? Why have they become bewitched with the Jesuit siren song causing the world to look for a literal man Antichrist instead of recognizing the historic Antichrist? Many Evangelicals fail to recognize they are perpetuating a Jesuit begotten error in the "left behind" deception and leaving many Christians unprepared for the last time deceptions of the true Antichrist.

"In 1590, Ribera published a commentary on the Revelation as a counter-interpretation to the prevailing view among Protestants that identified the Papacy as the Antichrist. Ribera applied all of Revelation but the earliest chapters to the end time rather than to the history of the Papacy. Antichrist would be a single person who would be received by the Jews and would rebuild Jerusalem" (George Eldon Ladd, The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1956, pp. 37-38).

"Ribera denied the Protestant Scriptural Antichrist (2 Thess. 2) as seated in the church of God—asserted by Augustine, Jerome, Luther and many reformers. He set on an infidel Antichrist, outside the church of God." (Ralph Thompson, Champions of Christianity in Search of Truth, p. 89).

"The result of his work [Ribera's] was a twisting and maligning of prophetic truth" (Robert Caringola,Seventy Weeks: The Historical Alternative, p. 32).
Subsequently, Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621) followed Ribera's teaching.

"The futurist teachings of Ribera were further popularized by an Italian cardinal and the most renowned of all Jesuit controversialists. His writings claimed that Paul, Daniel, and John had nothing whatsoever to say about the Papal power. The futurists' school won general acceptance among Catholics. They were taught that antichrist was a single individual who would not rule until the very end of time" (Great Prophecies of the Bible, by Ralph Woodrow, p. 198).

    Then Dr. Samuel Roffey Maitland (1792-1866), a lawyer and Bible scholar, became a librarian to the Archbishop of Canterbury. It is very likely that one day he discovered Ribera's commentary in the library. In any event, in 1826 he published a widely read book attacking the Reformation and supporting Ribera's idea of a future one-man Antichrist. For ten years, in tract after tract, he continued his anti-Reformation rhetoric. As a result of his zeal and strong attacks against the Reformation in England, the Protestantism of that very nation which produced the King James Bible (1611) received a crushing blow.

    Then came James H. Todd, a professor of Hebrew at the University of Dublin. Todd accepted the futuristic ideas of Maitland, publishing his own supportive pamphlets and books. Then came John Henry Newman (1801-1890), a member of the Church of England and a leader of the famous Oxford Movement (1833-1845). In 1850, Newman wrote his "letter on Anglican Difficulties" revealing that one of the goals in the Oxford Movement was to finally absorb "the various English denominations and parties" back to the Church of Rome. Newman soon became a Roman Catholic, and later even a highly honored Cardinal. Through the influence of Maitland, Todd, Newman, and others, a definite "Romeward movement was already arising, destined to sweep away the old Protestant landmarks, as with a flood" (H. Grattan Guinness, History Unveiling Prophecy or Time as an Interpreter, New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1905, p. 289).

    There was also a Scottish Presbyterian minister Edward Irving (1792-1834), considered to be the forerunner of both the Charismatic and the Pentecostal Movements. He accepted the one-man Antichrist of Todd, Maitland, Bellarmine and Ribera. He went a step further and invented a two-phase return of Christ. A secret rapture prior to the rise of Antichrist would constitute the first phase. In this first phase the Lord would rapture all saved Christians. This would be a wake up call to Christians who had not been saved and these would have to become saved during the "Great Tribulation." Where this idea originated is unclear. Journalist Dave MacPherson believes Irving accepted it as a result of a prophetic revelation given to a young Scottish girl named Margaret Mcdonald (The Incredible Cover-Up: Exposing the Origins of Rapture Theories, by Dave MacPherson, Omega Publications, Medford, Oregon. 1980). In any case, the fact is, Irving taught it!

    This brings us to John Nelson Darby (1800-1882). He was a bright lawyer, pastor and theologian who wrote more than 53 books on Bible subjects. Darby defended the infallibility of the Bible against a tide of liberalism. He became a leader of a group in Plymouth, England that later were called Plymouth Brethren. Dwight Eisenhower's father is credited with associating with this movement as well as with the Bible Students. Darby was a dispensationalist believing that God deals with mankind in major time periods called dispensations. He called the Gospel age the Church age. Darby laid much of the foundation for the present popular removal of Daniel's seventieth week away from history and from applying to Jesus Christ in favor of applying it to a future Tribulation after the Rapture. This locks Darby in with Francisco Ribera and the Jesuit agenda.

    What made John Nelson Darby so famous was the fact that Cyris Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921), a Kansas lawyer, who published his Scofield Reference Bible based largely on Darby's writings and his Futurism, also found his views in the writings of Todd, Maitland, Bellarmine and Ribera. This greatly assisted the Jesuits in their endeavor to convince the world that the Antichrist was a future literal man who would bring about seven years of tribulation. Wycliff, Huss, Luther, Knox and Wesley all declared Papacy was the Antichrist. For a list of over eighty reformers who identified Papacy as Antichrist, check Reformers' Interpretations of Anti-Christ.

Edited December 17, 2017 by Justin Adams

[Quasar93]

9 hours ago, missmuffet said:

Yes, he did do you have the most recent one?

 

No, the copy I have is quite old.

 

Quasar03

[Justin Adams]

9 hours ago, brakelite said:

The second coming of Jesus Christ is in like manner as the great flood. All scriptures that so many claim as pertaining  to a separate rapture event other than the second coming are deluding themselves. They occur simultaneously.

The wicked, who in Noah’s day were living their normal everyday lives in ignorance and sin, were all taken away by the flood (Matthew 24:39) therefore so also will the wicked be at the second coming.

They are taken away to their ultimate death, or destruction. (Luke 17:27,29)

The concept of the wicked being taken is repeated many times. (Matt. 24:39-41; Luke 17:34-36)

The taking away or removal of the wicked to be destroyed comes before the gathering of the righteous.

Now, let me ask a question. In Noah’s day, after the flood had removed the wicked from the face of the earth and destroyed them all, who was left behind?

Genesis 7:23  And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
Who was it that was left behind when fire and brimstone fell from heaven and destroyed Sodom and the other cities of the plain? Was it not Lot and his two daughters? The same could be asked of the survivors of Jericho and Jerusalem. Who were taken first?

2 Esdras agrees with this scenario.

[Justin Adams]

Why keep posting about the false pre-trib stuff? You know it aint real. You will not convince anyone except new Christians and the weaker members might falter. If it is real, you do not need to talk about it since you and your fellows will be all gone, just leaving the unfaithful behind.

If it is not real, which is why you must all keep harping on about it, then that means the believers experiencing the trials of the corrupt world systems in the future might be led to believe they were not worthy, or not saved. That is a heinous thing to do to them! 

This pre-trib is quite untrue. No man is greater than His Master - as Yeshua suffered, then He says we will also expect to experience suffering. To keep going on and on about something that was originally a papist smoke and mirrors ploy is wrong. Read your history. Find out why the modern evangelical movement is parroting Jesuit doctrine. Check out why this became popular. It was designed to remove the heat from Rome.

Sure there will be anti-Christ movements, and it will get really bad for believers, Yeshua said so; but there is no pre-trib rapture to look forwards to.

Take up you cross and follow the Lord Yeshua. He will return for His saints in the end, so be prepared to stick it out until then!

 

Edited December 17, 2017 by Justin Adams