Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mike Mclees

Two trbulations and the truth about them

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

I don't know.  But it will likely not be terribly long. 

Do you see the pretrib rapture as the end of the new covenant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest shiloh357
4 minutes ago, Last Daze said:

Do you see the pretrib rapture as the end of the new covenant?

No, just the end of the church age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you may or may not know, Dispensationalists are the one group that consistently and invariably hold to the pretribulation rapture doctrine. Other groups, like the Reformed churches hold diverse opinions on eschatology ranging from pretribulation rapture to post tribulation rapture to post millennial and even amillennialism.  So there must be something about Dispensationalism that causes this.  

Here is my meager attempt to summarize.  Dispensationalists are usually literal in their interpretation of scripture.  In other words, if the literal sense makes common sense, than seek no other sense.  So, for example, an earthquake is an earthquake and not an allegory for political upheaval.  The Bible uses symbols and types, but they are easily recognized.  For example, the woman that rides the beast is not a natural woman riding a horse, the Bible itself interprets these symbols and types as symbols and types.  

Dispensationalists further rightly divide the word of truth.  By this, they refer to the dispensations of times in which God dealt differently with man. Eg: The dispensations of innocence, conscience, government, promise, law, grace, etc. As a consequence, one dispensation MUST end before the next one begins.  And thus, the "Seven Year Tribulation Period" cannot begin until the "Church Age" ends, because Israel and the church are in different dispensations.  The church age ends with the rapture of the church.

This is why mid-trib, post-trib, and pre-wrath trib folks cannot reconcile their views with most pre-trib folks.  Each uses scripture to posit their views and cannot fathom why the other folks cannot understand.  Believe it or not, I am a Dispensationalist, but apparently not a good one, because I am also pre-wrath in my view of the resurrection.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest shiloh357
12 minutes ago, JoeChan82 said:

As you may or may not know, Dispensationalists are the one group that consistently and invariably hold to the pretribulation rapture doctrine. Other groups, like the Reformed churches hold diverse opinions on eschatology ranging from pretribulation rapture to post tribulation rapture to post millennial and even amillennialism.  So there must be something about Dispensationalism that causes this.  

Here is my meager attempt to summarize.  Dispensationalists are usually literal in their interpretation of scripture.  In other words, if the literal sense makes common sense, than seek no other sense.  So, for example, an earthquake is an earthquake and not an allegory for political upheaval.  The Bible uses symbols and types, but they are easily recognized.  For example, the woman that rides the beast is not a natural woman riding a horse, the Bible itself interprets these symbols and types as symbols and types.  

Dispensationalists further rightly divide the word of truth.  By this, they refer to the dispensations of times in which God dealt differently with man. Eg: The dispensations of innocence, conscience, government, promise, law, grace, etc. As a consequence, one dispensation MUST end before the next one begins.  And thus, the "Seven Year Tribulation Period" cannot begin until the "Church Age" ends, because Israel and the church are in different dispensations.  The church age ends with the rapture of the church.

This is why mid-trib, post-trib, and pre-wrath trib folks cannot reconcile their views with most pre-trib folks.  Each uses scripture to posit their views and cannot fathom why the other folks cannot understand.  Believe it or not, I am a Dispensationalist, but apparently not a good one, because I am also pre-wrath in my view of the resurrection.

It's not only that, but we also hold to a prophetic future for Israel, whereas the Covenant Theology/Amillennial proponents (generally speaking) do not.  We see the Church and Israel as radically separate in terms of their prophetic roles according to God's purposes.   We do not hold to two plans of salvation, as we are often accused, but only two separate prophetic futures for both the Church and Israel.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

We do not hold to two plans of salvation, as we are often accused, but only two separate prophetic futures for both the Church and Israel.  

What precludes these two prophetic futures from running concurrently?

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

No, just the end of the church age.

So, if the new covenant is still in effect after the pretrib rapture then is the Holy Spirit still "here" after the rapture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Davida said:

Pretrib view never stated that. You guys watch too  much nonsense on youtube.

I have heard people say that sort of thing on this forum. They don't realize the ramifications, but they do say it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest shiloh357
4 minutes ago, Last Daze said:

So, if the new covenant is still in effect after the pretrib rapture then is the Holy Spirit still "here" after the rapture?

Of course He is.  He is omnipresent.  How could an omnipresent God not be on the earth?

Quote

What precludes these two prophetic futures from running concurrently?

Nothing precludes that at all.  In fact Israel and the Church DO operate concurrently in terms of God's prophetic plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest shiloh357
2 minutes ago, Diaste said:

I have heard people say that sort of thing on this forum. They don't realize the ramifications, but they do say it.

Like who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

No we don't.

Actually, what you are doing is called "poisoning the well."   You assign malicious motives to our argument and color it the way you want and that is both unfair and dishonest.   The pri-trib rapture states that the Church age ends with the rapture and the Church is taken out.  Nothing in that view holds the Chruch to be "elite" over either OT saints or Tribulation saints.   

Again, that is unfair and probably untrue characterizations of us.   You have to resort to stuff like that because you lack an honest, rational argument. 

 

No, rather it is your false accusations and mischaracterizations of us that fall into the category of slanderous speech.  

 

Since you are the one engaging in such behavior, you should check your own heart.

Proabably should follow your own advice, then. 

 

Unfortunately, casting unfair and untrue aspersions on us who don't see things your way is anything but acting with dignity, integrity, understanding or truth.  It is you that is acting in a manner that is nothing but heaping blanket, indiscriminate and undeserved condemnation and you are doing the very thing you are accusing  pre-tribbers of doing.

I realize the meaning of the pretrib doctrine is not understood by the advocates of pretrib. You are showing that in your reply. Indeed pretrib does hold to an elevated status. It has to based on the belief system. The only way you are taken to heaven is if you are righteous. This means every pretrib believer is right now, at this moment, righteous in God's eyes. This ascribes a characteristic to a group, because they belong to that group. What do you call that? 

Worse, pretrib claims some will be left behind to endure the wrath of God, when no believer is assigned to God's wrath. So we have a greater, righteous group of believers that do not experience wrath, and a lesser, unrighteous group of believers that do experience wrath. Isn't that the whole argument for pretrib, 'not appointed to wrath'? But apparently some believers are. This is why I say pretrib doctrine is elitist in their views. 

And I have seen the prejudice and bigotry right here on this forum. I have been the object of intolerance in rapture themed threads. And honestly the entire doctrine is prejudicial. How is it reasonable that pretrib allows for the departure of some believers to escape the wrath of God, yet assigns other believers to the very wrath they escape? This isn't based on rationale, it's wishful thinking.

"You have to resort to stuff like that because you lack an honest, rational argument. " Yes. You have never seen me present rational arguments in rapture discussions. I stand by what I said.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...