Defense of the Pre Trib Rapture

[Uriah]

35 minutes ago, Mary8 said:

Thanks for your kind words.    I kept noticing the repetition of "in that day" and felt it was linking those chapters together, and sort of linking those events of the end times.   (I skimmed some earlier and later chapters around Isaiah 26, and some of them have "in that day" but about words that pointed to other events, not to end time things.)    I'm hoping to get more insights on some of the Scriptures that I quoted (or some that I left out).    Sometimes there will be something that really seems to jump out, not fit, or be repeated, and it triggers more interest and thinking about the words.

I understand very well what you are saying. Sometimes "in that day" means "at that time" and sometimes it can be nothing but an actual single day. But yes, the writings of the prophets often tends to move on from one thing to the next. And there are cases where it is as though the prophet may be in a place where he can see the future as though seeing a timeline, so he speaks about what he sees and rushes into the future and then comes back to fill things in.

[Mary8]

16 minutes ago, OldCoot said:

I have seen the same correlation for quite some time.  Isaiah 26 has been a real nugget.  You are on target and fit things together well.  

Take it a wee bit further.....  look at the word for indignation in Isaiah 26:20.... za'am .... which also means wrath.  Then take a look at Daniel 8:19.   The same word is used.  And following the passage in Daniel, it talks about a king who will arise in the future and describes the man of sin / lawless one / antichrist.  And it Daniel 8:19, it says this guy is revealed later in the wrath, not before the wrath.  Go back to Isaiah 26 and the righteous are hidden their rooms (see John 14) before the wrath starts.    This is an "in your face" confirmation of the pre-trib removal of the righteous.

Many attribute this fierce king that arises with Antiochus, but there are many learned expositors that show the passage is talking about the final fierce king that will come upon the earth.... the antichrist.  Antiochus was a forerunner, but what is described goes beyond anything Antiochus was.

Thanks for this about wrath.   I had been so excited yesterday or so to see your words about Come into thy chambers, then leviathan, then the trumpet that I didn't check out what you had said about wrath, so now I looked up Daniel 8:19, and you have spotted another encouragement.    I am enjoying studying typology, and believe that the stories of Ruth (including Obed) and also of Barak and Deborah give such a great amount of detail about the Church in the end times.     

[Uriah]

43 minutes ago, OldCoot said:

But like I stated, for that to be the case it has to meet the evidentiary requirement set forth in the Torah... it has to be confirmed by two witnesses and the Bereans affirmed this and set forth the requirement of the OT and NT being those two witnesses.  Not two from the same section, passage, book, etc but both OT and NT.  Thus far, you have shown no support for your position from the OT.

It is the reason that Yeshua did not condemn the woman caught in the act of adultery.  After he had told the nincompoops that had come to stone her, that anyone without sin could cast the first stone, they walked away leaving no other witnesses to condemn her.  Yeshua knew what she had done, but was only one witness.  And according to the Torah, she could not be condemned on the testimony of one witness, so Yeshua told her to go and sin no more.

On the other hand, I and others have provided many examples of how the redeemed that make up the body of Messiah are caught away before the tribulation period begins.  Equally in both OT and NT.   Nothing you have presented has negated the testimony of those two witnesses.

So unless you can provide support from the OT for your assertion, it does not meet the evidentiary requirement of scripture and is invalid.   Therefore, due to lack of evidence.... case dismissed.

But I keep on telling you it is the assertion of Jesus. You seem not to like it because you mis-characterize as mine. All you do is ignore evidence.

So no problem, brother. I get it if you want to end it.

Thanks and God (will) bless you!

[OldCoot]

35 minutes ago, Uriah said:

But I keep on telling you it is the assertion of Jesus. You seem not to like it because you mis-characterize as mine. All you do is ignore evidence.

So no problem, brother. I get it if you want to end it.

Thanks and God (will) bless you!

Everything that Yeshua taught lined up with the Tanakh.   Even the story of the woman caught in adultery, so many speculate what Yeshua wrote in the dirt and yet Zechariah told us all along.  The names of those who had come against the woman and rejected Yeshua.

Jeremiah 17:13 (NKJV) O Lord, the hope of Israel,
All who forsake You shall be ashamed.
“Those who depart from Me
Shall be written in the earth,
Because they have forsaken the Lord,
The fountain of living waters

Just earlier in the passage of John 7, at the final day of the feast of tabernacles when the high priest would take water from the pool of Siloam as "living water" to the alter, Yeshua stood up and made the claim that He was the source of living water and later He was rejected by the authorities.  

Even His very name was revealed in the OT before Gabriel announced it to Mary.  The branch of David's name would be.....

Zechariah 6:11-13 (NKJV) Take the silver and gold, make an elaborate crown, and set it on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest. 12 Then speak to him, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts, saying:
“Behold, the Man whose name is the BRANCH!
From His place He shall branch out,
And He shall build the temple of the Lord;
13 Yes, He shall build the temple of the Lord.
He shall bear the glory,
And shall sit and rule on His throne;
So He shall be a priest on His throne,
And the counsel of peace shall be between them both

There is nothing that Yeshua did or taught that is not in the OT.  Even the Revelation that was revealed direct to Him by the Father and He revealed it to John via an angel.   Revelation is 404 verses with over 800 references to the OT alone.

Edited June 23, 2019 by OldCoot

[Mary8]

On 6/23/2019 at 5:51 PM, OldCoot said:

I have seen the same correlation for quite some time.  Isaiah 26 has been a real nugget.  You are on target and fit things together well.  

Take it a wee bit further.....  look at the word for indignation in Isaiah 26:20.... za'am .... which also means wrath.  Then take a look at Daniel 8:19.   The same word is used.  And following the passage in Daniel, it talks about a king who will arise in the future and describes the man of sin / lawless one / antichrist.  And it Daniel 8:19, it says this guy is revealed later in the wrath, not before the wrath.  Go back to Isaiah 26 and the righteous are hidden their rooms (see John 14) before the wrath starts.    This is an "in your face" confirmation of the pre-trib removal of the righteous.

Many attribute this fierce king that arises with Antiochus, but there are many learned expositors that show the passage is talking about the final fierce king that will come upon the earth.... the antichrist.  Antiochus was a forerunner, but what is described goes beyond anything Antiochus was.

I think the verse Psalm 27:5 "For in the time of trouble He shall hide me in His pavilion,  in the secret of His tabernacle shall He hide me, He shall set me up upon a rock" meshes great with Isaiah 26:20, 21, Isa. 27:1.

Ps. 50:3 Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence: a fire shall devour before him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about him.    4 He shall call to the heavens from above, and to the earth, that he may judge his people.  5 Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice.....  15 And call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me.... 23 Whoso offereth praise glorifieth me: and to him that ordereth his conversation aright will I shew the salvation of God.

Edited June 27, 2019 by Mary8

[OldCoot]

14 minutes ago, Mary8 said:

I think the verse Psalm 27:5 "For in the time of trouble He shall hide me in His pavilion,  in the secret of His tabernacle shall He hide me, He shall set me up upon a rock" meshes great with Isaiah 26:20, 21, Isa. 27:1.

 

You and I are on the same page!   I didn't post it but I am glad you did!   It is definitely apropos.   Well done!

[JLB]

For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. 1 Thessalonians 4:15

 

The resurrection and rapture will happen at His coming. 

 

The other her main thing that will happen at His coming is the destruction of the antichrist.

 

• destroy with the brightness of His coming

 

And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 2 Thessalonians 2:8

 

 

JLB 

 

Edited June 27, 2019 by JLB

[OldCoot]

Well, there are several passages that establish the pre-trib hook, line, and sinker.  This is one.

Revelation 5:9-10 (NKJV) And they sang a new song, saying:
“You are worthy to take the scroll,
And to open its seals;
For You were slain,
And have redeemed us to God by Your blood
Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,
10 And have made us kings and priests to our God;
And we shall reign on the earth.

Now I know that some versions have "them", "they", etc instead of "us", "we", so we have to look at that.  it comes down to textual criticism methodology of the translators.   

Some, like the NASB folks, use a methodology that if something is omitted in the earliest documents, then they leave it out and just modify the passage to make it readable.

Some, like the KJV, use a majority text approach.  They follow the lead of what the majority of manuscripts say.

Presently, there are 24 main manuscripts that translators use.  In this case, all but one have the Greek "ego" which is 1st person possessive. It gives us the "us", "we" of the translation.  The only manuscript to leave it out is the Codex Alexandrinus.  And for some bizarre reason, some translators decided that since "ego" was not in this manuscript, it must be left out of their translation. 

But 23 to 1 manuscripts are in favor of the "us" / "we" translation.  So it pretty well shows that a  pre-trib rapture has occurred if one relies on the majority text method.   If something has happened, and 23 people describe it to me and only one person in the group doesn't say anything happened, more than likely I will listen to the 23.  And on that note, the majority of texts on the topic support that it is "us"/"we" in the passage.  So it affirms the pre-trib concept.   Game.  Set.  Match.

 

Edited June 27, 2019 by OldCoot
Spelling. Stupid spell checker!

[Uriah]

On 6/27/2019 at 7:42 AM, OldCoot said:

Well, there are several passages that establish the pre-trib hook, line, and sinker.  This is one.

Revelation 5:9-10 (NKJV) And they sang a new song, saying:
“You are worthy to take the scroll,
And to open its seals;
For You were slain,
And have redeemed us to God by Your blood
Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,
10 And have made us kings and priests to our God;
And we shall reign on the earth.

Now I know that some versions have "them", "they", etc instead of "us", "we", so we have to look at that.  it comes down to textual criticism methodology of the translators.   

Some, like the NASB folks, use a methodology that if something is omitted in the earliest documents, then they leave it out and just modify the passage to make it readable.

Some, like the KJV, use a majority text approach.  They follow the lead of what the majority of manuscripts say.

Presently, there are 24 main manuscripts that translators use.  In this case, all but one have the Greek "ego" which is 1st person possessive. It gives us the "us", "we" of the translation.  The only manuscript to leave it out is the Codex Alexandrinus.  And for some bizarre reason, some translators decided that since "ego" was not in this manuscript, it must be left out of their translation. 

But 23 to 1 manuscripts are in favor of the "us" / "we" translation.  So it pretty well shows that a  pre-trib rapture has occurred if one relies on the majority text method.   If something has happened, and 23 people describe it to me and only one person in the group doesn't say anything happened, more than likely I will listen to the 23.  And on that note, the majority of texts on the topic support that it is "us"/"we" in the passage.  So it affirms the pre-trib concept.   Game.  Set.  Match.

 

Yes it is easy to go with the sheer number of times a word may be translated a certain way. The next level is understanding how 24 +4 = people from EVERY nation tribe kindred tongue etc. But pre trib teachings presumptuously declare what the scriptures do not say- that they are representatives. 

The only room for the pre trib version for this to be all of the redeemed that the verse describes is to understand the non linear nature of the book of Revelation. This is made clear in an number of places in Rev. But by relying on a simple "this is said first" mentality, of course the teaching will in error. 

[OldCoot]

29 minutes ago, Uriah said:

Yes it is easy to go with the sheer number of times a word may be translated a certain way. The next level is understanding how 24 +4 = people from EVERY nation tribe kindred tongue etc. But pre trib teachings presumptuously declare what the scriptures do not say- that they are representatives. 

The only room for the pre trib version for this to be all of the redeemed that the verse describes is to understand the non linear nature of the book of Revelation. This is made clear in an number of places in Rev. But by relying on a simple "this is said first" mentality, of course the teaching will in error. 

Well, let’s look at it this way.  Anytime 24 is mentioned in scripture, it pertains to priests. David divided the priests into 24 divisions.  Were there then only 24 priests?  Hardly.  We can only make assumptions based on other examples in the scripture.   And the circumstantial evidence supports viewing these 24 elders as divisions of the priesthood, and of course, there would be one in that division that would be representing the division.  Peter says we are a royal priesthood.  

Yahweh is One who established order.  This is not some sort of hippie commune.

Edited June 28, 2019 by OldCoot