Church sans Tribulation (Reposted and reedited from 2013 for new viewers)

[WordSword]

One disadvantage in studying Scripture is the unknowingly over-paralleling the dispensations of God’s administrations concerning God’s people, Israel and God’s children, the Christians. Though much teaching within the prior Covenant typified and “shadowed” the coming “very image” (Heb 10:1), there is a point at which proper understanding between the prior and the present Everlasting Covenant (Heb 13:20) can breach into misunderstanding concerning the designed intentions contained within the truths of each!

Among the many Biblical subjects that seem to be a bit unclear for immediate understanding, the issue concerning the translation or “change” of the Church (1Co 15:51, 52; 1Th 4:13-18) is surly not least among them. Of this subject, only the chronology of its occurrence concerning “that day and hour” is unrevealed (Mat 24:36). Though for the learned and discerning, there appears to be the possibility of approximating its season (Mat 24:32, 33). But knowing when of its transpiration is secondary to knowing of its “blessing,” which is towards “he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it” (Rev 1:3).

While an unbeliever can only await the grave, believers can await the rapture, or translation! Whichever of the two believers choose to await can significantly determine the quality of their walk. Be it dread or joy, one thing is for certain, the majority of the world can only await the prior; and for those of this company whose lives will tarry, there first “shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be” (Mat 24:21).

NC

 

 

 

Church sans Tribulation (Reposted and reedited from 2013 for new viewers)

 

Not only is the Church a product of this specific age with no relation whatever to any other age, but each believer is perfectly accepted now and forever before God on the ground of his position in Christ, and, being saved out of this world, he is no more of this world than Christ is of this world (Jhn 15:18, 19; 17:14, 16).

The coming tribulation (not even remotely related to Acts 14:22, noting the words “coming tribulation”—NC) is the judgement of this world. Israel has her part in it since, being not yet saved (Rom 11:26), she is of the world. The believer, being what he is in Christ, has no more a rightful place in this world’s judgements than Christ Himself or any unfallen angel. Back of the theories that the Church (Body of Christ) will enter or pass through the tribulation is the Arminian heresy that the believer contributes something to his own acceptance before God, and, having failed to some extent is this responsibility, he will be purged by the suffering which the tribulation affords.

There is a line of truth which concerns the believer’s personal faithfulness; but this is consummated before Christ at His judgment seat in heaven. As for any condemnation, or other judgment, the Christian is wholly delivered forever on the most righteous ground that a Substitute bore the condemnation and judgment and has provided a perfect standing before God. It is established by Scripture that the believer is delivered from all condemning judgments (John 3:18; 5:24; Rom 5:1; 8:1, 33, 34; 1 Cor 11:31, 32).

In general, those who contend that the Church will experience the tribulation assert that all believers—spiritual and unspiritual (carnal babes-in-Christ - 1Co 3:1, unlearned but not “carnally minded” because that is “death” Rom 8:6—NC) will enter that period of suffering, though there are those believing in a partial rapture who assert that the Church will be divided and the spiritual element, which always includes those who advance this notion, will go directly to heaven, while the unspiritual will suffer for their sins in the tribulation.

This constitutes a Protestant purgatory. The answer to all such conceptions is the recognition of the truth that, when members of this sinful race go to heaven, it is not on the ground of their own merit, but only through the merit of Christ. It is to be remembered that each believer is already perfectly justified forever (Rom 5:1; 8:30, 33, 34; Heb 10:14), and this wholly within the range of divine justice (Rom 3:26). Thus the contention that the Church will enter or pass through the tribulation becomes and insult to, and unbelief towards (though ignorantly—NC) the measureless grace of God in His Beloved Son.

Those who entertain the idea that the Church experiences the great tribulation must reckon with the fact that of upwards of seventy-five generations (2,250 years, given a generation is about 30 years—NC) who comprise that company, all but the present generation have entered Glory without the supposed benefits of that purging experience. Why, then, should the last generation suffer that from which the vast host have been spared?

On this point a specious argument has been advanced, namely, that as the Church has suffered martyrdom in certain periods of her history she may be expected to suffer thus again at the end of her age; but back of this claim is the failure to recognize that past sufferings were due to the attack of wicked men upon the Church, while the great tribulation is God’s judgment upon wicked men. Wholly justified believers have no place among evil men who are destined to eternal doom.

 

- L S Chafer (1871-1952)

[wingnut-]

I guess he didn't bother to read this part, the great tribulation, and what it really is about.

 

Revelation 13:5 And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months. 6 It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven. 7 Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. And authority was given it over every tribe and people and language and nation, 8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain. 9 If anyone has an ear, let him hear:

10 If anyone is to be taken captive,
    to captivity he goes;
if anyone is to be slain with the sword,
    with the sword must he be slain.

Here is a call for the endurance and faith of the saints.

[WordSword]

15 hours ago, wingnut- said:

I guess he didn't bother to read this part, the great tribulation, and what it really is about.

 

Revelation 13:5 And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months. 6 It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven. 7 Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. And authority was given it over every tribe and people and language and nation, 8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain. 9 If anyone has an ear, let him hear:

10 If anyone is to be taken captive,
    to captivity he goes;
if anyone is to be slain with the sword,
    with the sword must he be slain.

Here is a call for the endurance and faith of the saints.

Hi, and thanks for your applicable reply! Your point is clear considering this and numerous passages like it in Revelation, but this book is the most difficult to make certain conclusive determinations, and when one refers to Bible commentators it will be noticed that much of the book has varying conclusions to many who scholastically over many years have studied it. It's also common knowledge among the commentators that much of the material presented in this Book cannot (more than all the other Books except Daniel) base most conclusions on what is read, but must coalesce Revelation and Daniel to parallel all of Scripture.

If my reply sounds like I'm dodging your reply it's only because Revelation is often misinterpreted due to taking the readings as they are seen (at face value) without any true sense of learning apart from the community of Bible commentators, who know and understand the Word more than most, because God has used most of them to research, and learn its languages, customs and traditions more than most who merely just read it and study it on their own or in a Church setting. Even in this scholastic setting of commentators there is often differences of opinions, which IMO can lead to more misinterpretations by unlearned Bible readers.

It's commonly known and respected that Christians can have varying opinions of what they believe the Word is saying to them, so one can believe one way concerning a Biblical issue, while another can believe differently, which is expected because believers very in their understandings and this is accepted. 

[Alive]

33 minutes ago, WordSword said:

Hi, and thanks for your applicable reply! Your point is clear considering this and numerous passages like it in Revelation, but this book is the most difficult to make certain conclusive determinations, and when one refers to Bible commentators it will be noticed that much of the book has varying conclusions to many who scholastically over many years have studied it. It's also common knowledge among the commentators that much of the material presented in this Book cannot (more than all the other Books except Daniel) base most conclusions on what is read, but must coalesce Revelation and Daniel to parallel all of Scripture.

If my reply sounds like I'm dodging your reply it's only because Revelation is often misinterpreted due to taking the readings as they are seen (at face value) without any true sense of learning apart from the community of Bible commentators, who know and understand the Word more than most, because God has used most of them to research, and learn its languages, customs and traditions more than most who merely just read it and study it on their own or in a Church setting. Even in this scholastic setting of commentators there is often differences of opinions, which IMO can lead to more misinterpretations by unlearned Bible readers.

It's commonly known and respected that Christians can have varying opinions of what they believe the Word is saying to them, so one can believe one way concerning a Biblical issue, while another can believe differently, which is expected because believers very in their understandings and this is accepted. 

Well said---I have thought a time or two years ago, that I had some understanding of the scriptures mentioned--nowadays, that is not the case.

I have read a great many ideas over the years from extra-biblical books and the commentators as I have a great many of them in my Accordance collection.

Just as you say--there are lots of different interpretations expressed by hearts just as true as the next one who differs. The subject is beyond me because the Lord simply hasn't taught me about it as He has other things. I have been asking Him about that very thing, lately.

Time will tell.

:-)

[wingnut-]

25 minutes ago, WordSword said:

Hi, and thanks for your applicable reply! Your point is clear considering this and numerous passages like it in Revelation, but this book is the most difficult to make certain conclusive determinations, and when one refers to Bible commentators it will be noticed that much of the book has varying conclusions to many who scholastically over many years have studied it. It's also common knowledge among the commentators that much of the material presented in this Book cannot (more than all the other Books except Daniel) base most conclusions on what is read, but must coalesce Revelation and Daniel to parallel all of Scripture.

If my reply sounds like I'm dodging your reply it's only because Revelation is often misinterpreted due to taking the readings as they are seen (at face value) without any true sense of learning apart from the community of Bible commentators, who know and understand the Word more than most, because God has used most of them to research, and learn its languages, customs and traditions more than most who merely just read it and study it on their own or in a Church setting. Even in this scholastic setting of commentators there is often differences of opinions, which IMO can lead to more misinterpretations by unlearned Bible readers.

It's commonly known and respected that Christians can have varying opinions of what they believe the Word is saying to them, so one can believe one way concerning a Biblical issue, while another can believe differently, which is expected because believers very in their understandings and this is accepted. 

 

I agree it is very misunderstood, but I guess where we differ is you are of the opinion it was better understood in the past than it is today.  What I read above to me is a recipe for disaster, in that the inference that I need to rely on another mans understanding is the exact way I see cults born.  From scripture alone we are told to "lean not on our own understanding", and you imply that I should lean on someone else's?

The biblical model is that we are to test all things against scripture.  There was in fact a group that Paul spoke to, the Bereans, who were commended for their approach in not simply taking Paul's word on a matter, but taking what he said and searching it out for themselves in scripture.  This is how one avoids being misled or chasing after false teachers, so I respectfully disagree with your above assertion.  The body of Christ is alive and well today, and all parts are functioning as they should.

 

John 16:13  When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.

 

As the passage I originally posted says, along with what the Spirit says to the 7 churches, if anyone has an ear let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

 

God bless

[Alive]

25 minutes ago, wingnut- said:

 

I agree it is very misunderstood, but I guess where we differ is you are of the opinion it was better understood in the past than it is today.  What I read above to me is a recipe for disaster, in that the inference that I need to rely on another mans understanding is the exact way I see cults born.  From scripture alone we are told to "lean not on our own understanding", and you imply that I should lean on someone else's?

The biblical model is that we are to test all things against scripture.  There was in fact a group that Paul spoke to, the Bereans, who were commended for their approach in not simply taking Paul's word on a matter, but taking what he said and searching it out for themselves in scripture.  This is how one avoids being misled or chasing after false teachers, so I respectfully disagree with your above assertion.  The body of Christ is alive and well today, and all parts are functioning as they should.

 

John 16:13  When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.

 

As the passage I originally posted says, along with what the Spirit says to the 7 churches, if anyone has an ear let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

 

God bless

What you say is also true--however, one member cannot stand alone. That is contrary to the reality of the 'Body' that you mention.

I suspect this is at the core of what Wordsmith was getting at, as well as the difficult nature of Daniel and Revelation in general.

This is obvious as it is born out by the experience of so many sons over the years right up to today.

Many were absolutely certain that the end was immediate back in the days of Jimmy Carter. Many are certain that they understand the players on the stage today. I very much doubt that they do. I am not sure exactly why this is, but it has been this way all of my life.

[wingnut-]

2 minutes ago, Alive said:

What you say is also true--however, one member cannot stand alone. That is contrary to the reality of the 'Body' that you mention.

I suspect this is at the core of what Wordsmith was getting at, as well as the difficult nature of Daniel and Revelation in general.

This is obvious as it is born out by the experience of so many sons over the years right up to today.

Many were absolutely certain that the end was immediate back in the days of Jimmy Carter. Many are certain that they understand the players on the stage today. I very much doubt that they do. I am not sure exactly why this is, but it has been this way all of my life.

 

I assure you I am not alone, and with each passing day more and more people who are willing to take the matter to God themselves are finding the truth.  I would not want you to believe me or take my word on anything, that's the whole point, but it is advisable to weigh everything said against scripture.

If you think that when Jesus said in Matthew 24, following the abomination of desolation, that then there would be great tribulation as never seen before has nothing to do with the passage from Revelation 13, then so be it.  It would be prudent however to consider the matter, and let God be your guide.  If you believe that the 3.5 yr authority and the war against the saints is not to be taken literal, I would love to hear what you believe John is expressing there.

God bless

[Alive]

5 minutes ago, wingnut- said:

 

I assure you I am not alone, and with each passing day more and more people who are willing to take the matter to God themselves are finding the truth.  I would not want you to believe me or take my word on anything, that's the whole point, but it is advisable to weigh everything said against scripture.

If you think that when Jesus said in Matthew 24, following the abomination of desolation, that then there would be great tribulation as never seen before has nothing to do with the passage from Revelation 13, then so be it.  It would be prudent however to consider the matter, and let God be your guide.  If you believe that the 3.5 yr authority and the war against the saints is not to be taken literal, I would love to hear what you believe John is expressing there.

God bless

I didn't touch any of those things you mention, wing.

Of course all things are weighed with scripture in mind.

I have known many individuals who were quite sure they were correct and also not alone. Do you see my point?

The mark of a Christian is to realize the possibility of error. You may grouse to that comment and you could cite scriptures to prove me wrong, but it won't change the truth of the statement. As in most things spiritual--its a state of heart and mind that counts to our Father.

I am not suggesting your certainty is wrong--only that it may be.

Can you assent to the reality that many well meaning and honest seeking sons read the same scriptures and come to different conclusions all the while relying on 'God to be their guide'. These things all test us and that my friend is where the importance lies.

 

[OneLight]

11 minutes ago, wingnut- said:

I assure you I am not alone, and with each passing day more and more people who are willing to take the matter to God themselves are finding the truth.  I would not want you to believe me or take my word on anything, that's the whole point, but it is advisable to weigh everything said against scripture.

If you think that when Jesus said in Matthew 24, following the abomination of desolation, that then there would be great tribulation as never seen before has nothing to do with the passage from Revelation 13, then so be it.  It would be prudent however to consider the matter, and let God be your guide.  If you believe that the 3.5 yr authority and the war against the saints is not to be taken literal, I would love to hear what you believe John is expressing there.

God bless

You are not alone, Wingnut.  Trying to determine what theology fits best with scripture is a very long process in biblical studies, a study that very few take the time to endeavor.   Many would rather be fed the information than to do their own research.  I was guilty of this for many years and held to one belief because it was a common belief.  It was not until I was challenged to provide scriptural proof did I step outside of the excepted norm and seek a deeper understanding.  Still, to this day, the only timing of the rapture I have found is "at the last trumpet" - 1 Corinthians 15:52.  Everything else people point to are only indicators of what is or is not to happen to believers.  Just like the meaning of the last trumpet, many try to determine the full meaning behind vague passages, as it is human nature and need to understand mysteries.

My final take is if it is true we will not see the tribulation, Good!  If it is true that we will live through part of the tribulation, Good!  God will provide for those who live during this time just as He did the Israelite's during the plagues in Egypt.  If we are to live through the tribulation period until the 7th trumpet is blown, Good!  Again, God will provide those who are His until then.  If we are to live through all the tribulation until Jesus's Second Coming, Good!  Again, God will provide for His children.  Through all this, no matter which is His timing, those who are His He will provide for.  We are to continue in Him, doing His will for us, until we are taken from this life.  To do this, I also agree with you that it is key to follow Proverbs 3:5-6.

Trust in the Lord with all your heart,
And lean not on your own understanding;
In all your ways acknowledge Him,
And He shall direct your paths.

People forget that we see through a glass darkly, or in a mirror dimply, until we leave this life and are with Christ, face to face (1 Corinthians 13:12).  Due to either ego or pride, people argue their personal understanding as if it were the final word and salvation depends on acceptance, which I was also guilty of until I stopped depending on other peoples understanding and started searching scripture for myself.  Then I realized that God did not give us all the information we would need to determine when the event will happen as He wants us to have Faith in Him, not in our own understanding.

[wingnut-]

11 minutes ago, Alive said:

I didn't touch any of those things you mention, wing.

 

In my response to the OP, I posted the passage from Revelation 13 in response to the assertion that the great tribulation is about God's wrath, meaning that the church would be removed because the fight is not with them.  Revelation 13 says exactly the opposite, that the great tribulation is about the enemy persecuting the followers of Christ, precisely why the OP suggests the church would be removed.

The response I got was to suggest that I misunderstand what Revelation 13 says.  You agreed with it, so that is why you received the response I gave inquiring about it.  If I am misunderstanding Revelation 13, then it would seem someone who disagrees should explain why that is.

 

18 minutes ago, Alive said:

The mark of a Christian is to realize the possibility of error. You may grouse to that comment and you could cite scriptures to prove me wrong, but it won't change the truth of the statement. As in most things spiritual--its a state of heart and mind that counts to our Father.

 

That's why we're having this discussion isn't it?  Because I was told that these commentators couldn't possibly be in error?  If you think I believe I have all the answers, let me save you the suspense, I don't.  I already know that.  You're making assumptions about me that are way off base.

 

God bless