Thomas Ice pre tribulation

[missmuffet]

 

[Omegaman 3.0]

I have read a bit of Dr. Ice, but I have never heard him speak before. Interesting to put a voice to his words. He is well spoken, I enjoyed listening to this.
From looking into his writings, I found him to be a bit tricky, but I won't go into that here.
I am somewhat surprised to hear him reference Hal Lindsey, considering all the damage Hal did to his own reputation with his failed predictions.

Thanks for posting this, I don't think it is convincing in a scriptural sense, but he made some salient points.
 
When Dr. Ice refers to a conversation he had with R.C. Sproul, it got me scratching my head. He said that Sproul thought the notion of the rapture was silly, and asked where Dr. Ice got such an idea. Ice then glibly says he got it from the Bible.

Sproul's position on the rapture is well known and he does not think it is silly. I seems to me, that Dr. Ice is either mis-remembering, mis-communication, mis-understanding. of perhaps being deceptive.

I can see Sproul asking Dr. Ice, "where did you get the idea of a pre-trib rapture?" because Sproul believes what the Bible says - namely that there will be a catching up (rapture) of the saints to be with Jesus, AFTER the resurrection of those who have died in Christ.

I 1st Thess. 4, Paul wrote:

15 By the word of the Lord, we declare to you that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a loud command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will be the first to rise. 17 After that, we who are alive and remain will be caught up  (raptured) together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord.

That is Sproul's position, that is Paul's position, that is the Bible's position, and that should be the position of every Christian who wants to accept what the Bible says.

[Starise]

Terminologies for the event aside the event is biblical. The order is stated in 1 Thess.4. The WHEN which is I think the larger issue is not discussed at least not in this video.

There's also the term 'tribulation' which some refer to as a set time of years. This is not expressly stated literally as in a Bible version simply saying, " there will be a 7 year tribulation". There are statements that say " a time, times and half a time" and other references that infer a certain length of time.

If we say Christians have gone or will go through tribulation I don't think this is debatable.

A " pre tribulation" rapture believer usually means a person that believes they will be 'raptured' before a time of trouble called the " tribulation"

If this is true first we need to define biblically if the rapture as described happens before the set time of tribulation, usually given as 7 years.

The largest thing I find missing in these descriptions is clarity ( at least for me).

 

[missmuffet]

30 minutes ago, Starise said:

Terminologies for the event aside the event is biblical. The order is stated in 1 Thess.4. The WHEN which is I think the larger issue is not discussed at least not in this video.

There's also the term 'tribulation' which some refer to as a set time of years. This is not expressly stated literally as in a Bible version simply saying, " there will be a 7 year tribulation". There are statements that say " a time, times and half a time" and other references that infer a certain length of time.

If we say Christians have gone or will go through tribulation I don't think this is debatable.

A " pre tribulation" rapture believer usually means a person that believes they will be 'raptured' before a time of trouble called the " tribulation"

If this is true first we need to define biblically if the rapture as described happens before the set time of tribulation, usually given as 7 years.

The largest thing I find missing in these descriptions is clarity ( at least for me).

 

Time will tell.

[Omegaman 3.0]

3 hours ago, Starise said:

There's also the term 'tribulation' which some refer to as a set time of years. This is not expressly stated literally as in a Bible version simply saying, " there will be a 7 year tribulation". There are statements that say " a time, times and half a time" and other references that infer a certain length of time.

I have generally preferred to refer to the 7 years as Daniel's 70th week. I suspect that is largely what Jesus was pointing readers to. Tribulation is not a period of time, it is what happens DURING a period of time. In the case of the week (7 years) there are events taking place, some of which are pretty bad. The main sign Jesus in that discourse (and other New Testament writings about the end times point to, is something in the middle. Jesus said literally:

"When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in (the) holy place:" 

That was the main answer to the disciple's question about the sign of His return and the end. Now, if there were to be a pre-trib rapture, then there is no one there to see the sign. Pre-tribbers of course have their excuse to ignore Jesus, and just say that this was for the Jews, not for Christians. That does not hold as much water when you consider that Paul, writing to believers, warns them of the same thing.

Jesus in that discourse says that there will be tribulation. Daniel, and other Bible passages divide the 7 years into two halfs, so that in the middle of the week, the major turning point come. I believe the abomination of desolation, the man of sin, and other title are alluding to this mid point when the anti-christ turns, breaking a covenant and then in the middle, as Jesus said:

"And alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath. For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be."

Daniel said almost exactly the same thing, about there never being a time like it, so it is easy to spot the part of Daniel the readers should be looking for.

What it boils down to mostly for me is, who do I want to believe, Thomas Ice, Tim LaHaye, and Hal Lindsey, or New Testament writers and Jesus?

I like the idea of the protestant reformation, where one attempts to return to the Bible and the early church. So first, the Bible. Then what did the early church thing about the end. The reformers clearly thought they were in the end times, since they viewed the pope as the anti-christ.

In around 1830, we got J.N. Darby and his notion of dispensations, and a pretribulation rapture. Schofield picked that up, and it was then taught in American seminaries, and from there to the pulpits, and eventually the mission field and we spread pre-tribism around the world. Fortunately, missionaries like to help people and teach the gospel, to errant eschatology is not high on their list of priorities.

I think it is poignant though, that Corrie Ten Boon realized the mistake they made, telling Chinese Christians not to worry, they rapture would come for them. They were unprepared for the persecution that followed, and that is on of the things that worries me, that we are teaching people to expect a soon, pre-tribulation rapture, that the  Bible never once mentions. That is what drives my passion on this subject.

Watch and be ready saints, but ready for what, watching for what? Look forward "while we wait for the blessed hope - the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ."

The glorious appearing, according to the Bible, is after the Great Tribulation!

Cheer up saints, it's going to get worse!

[Starise]

On 8/25/2021 at 4:54 PM, Omegaman 3.0 said:

That is Sproul's position, that is Paul's position, that is the Bible's position, and that should be the position of every Christian who wants to accept what the Bible says.

I have to be short here as I'm on my Android phone and these keys are small.....

I agree. I just don't see the clear argument for the end times explanation offered by the pre tribulation view.

What I DO see that could be argued is slightly similar is the ultimate safety of all believers. Just a whole lotta stuff needs to happen first.

I also see the pre tribulation narrative that came from Darby and similar about 1830 as  disingenuous to people who didn't know any better and took the 'word' of these Jesuit plants as truth.

Attempting to bring out the errors is a difficult thing to do for those who sat under men they trusted to give them the word as written. Some don't begin to grasp any study on the subject do they select preachers as their spokesmen like football teams and take sides.

 

 

 

.