What do you believe about the rapture and why?

Bob, I'm still waiting for an answer to the question of which sky do you look to? Dispies always say they will be watching the eastern sky, but Israel's east is west of us.

 

You might be waiting a while...he said a few days back he was leaving the bb.

 

revmac
hear are some sermons for you...have you heard them?
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1210314018

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=316111046411


http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=42306163751


http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=4220684831

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=517112135231

 

revmac.

there is no mention of that here...

 

I have never believed in the Pre-Trib rapture. It just never made sense to me. I believe the second coming and the rapture are the same event on the last day. There are only 2 resurrections. One of the righteous dead and then the second which is clearly the damned. I don't want to go through the tribulation like some accuse. I don't think that God's wrath will pour on the righteous either. Nobody ever thinks about this, but when God was judging Egypt, The Jews were not effected by the plagues. They were safe in Goshen. I believe it will be the same during the tribulation. Satan's wrath is another thing all together.

 

Here, here!!!! :applause::applause::applause::applause:

 

An individual reading this thread top to bottom with little or no understanding of the issues would be scratching his/her head trying to untangle the mess being created here. A person, looking to get to the heart of the matter should study the arguements in light of the Scriptures then make a decision.

Simply stated, the pre-mil rapture of the church is Christ coming to earth for his saints. The happens before the 70th week of Daniel Ch. 9. On the other hand, the second coming is defined as Christ coming to earth with his saints at the end of the 70th week to end the ongoing judgement of mankind and set up his kingdom on earth as promised in many OT passages and spoken about many times in the NT. A study of the pre-mil viewpoint by any of the numerous proponents of the system will provide the necessary scripture references to back up the claim.

However, it is my opinion that before anyone makes a decision on the validity of the pre-mil vs. post-mil, a-mil, preterist or what ever position you decide on two things must to be determined first and in this order.

1. Where do you stand on the inerrancy and authority of the Scriptures?

2. Do you believe that the Bible teaches what is commonly known as Covenant (reformed) Theology, that is are there 3 Covenants in the Bible that control God's dealings with man? Does the Bible teach them, the Covenant of Works, the Covenant of Redemption and the Covenant of Grace? In order to be post-mil, a-mil or preterist, you first must believe that those thee covenants are firmly established in the Bible.

It is a lack of a clear teaching on these three particular covenants in Scripture that make me doubt that Jehovah God intends that we should base our personal theology on them. Keeping in mind that the Bible contains many covenants which are easy to spot and understand, but not these three covenants I mention. It is ironic to me that one of the primary teachings of the reformation is the doctrine of sola Scripture, the Bible alone and yet modern covenant theologians appeal mainly to the writings of (some of) the early church fathers and the traditions of the post reformation church to make their case for covenant theology.

 

The early church fathers did not hold to what is considered present day Covenant theology.. that view is only slightly older than Pre-trib view, at least as main line. They try to state that some of the early church fathers held their view in 'infant' form though it was not yet formulated.. the fact is, they did not hold to the same views held today, in the same way they are held. Covenant Theology is primarily PostMil or Preteristic.. though some do hold to a Pre-mil view, it is a minority view. The early church fathers have unquestioningly more in common with Pre-mil dispensationalism than Covenant theology, especially since Dispensationalism is founded upon the same core views as Pre-mil, one being the distinction between the church and Israel. Others being:
1. The anti-christ (a person) would both arise and reign
2. Christ's return physically to earth and the overthrow of the anti-christ.
3. Christ establishing His physical Kingdom on the earth.
4. He would reign from Jerusalem both over and with His saints of all ages.
5. His reign would last a literal 1000 years.
6. There were distinct resurrections. That of the saints before the 1000 year reign and the general - those who would be raised up for Judgment.

Thus while a futurist (Pre-Mills) can be covenantal, they are a small minority and the claim to the early church fathers is fair stretch at best.

Here is a segment from from Church Historian Philip Schaff

The above shows just that the Pre-Mil view was the main early church, which is contrary to Covenant view which 'replaced' the Premil view with Augustine as it's poster boy (for lack of a better word).

 

There you go again, mixing truth with error. Dispy IS NOT founded on the same "core views" as Pre-Mil - Historic Premil does not make the radical distinction between Israel and the Church that dispy does. And for that matter, all forms of covenant theology admits that distinctions exist between Israel and the Church. Only dispensationalism teaches that Israel is the real and the Church is the shadow, completely reversing the biblical order. And Hisotric Premil IS covenantal, NOT CONTRARY TO IT.

 

Shallow. Very shallow. You need for me or someone provide you with proof texts? And you claim to have been raise in Presby'ism and Covenant Theology.
[edit: And if you think people reading this thread need to see the proof texts, why don't you provide them, seeing you are yourself very knowledgable of these things.]

 

No mixing at all. Though it is a truth many don't want to admit. Even Dispensationalists acknowledge the covenants and their place but that doesn't make us Covenental.

Also No.. not a radical distinction but a biblical one which takes place in the millennial Kingdom. This is what the Historic Premil holds, but the new found Covenant view 'denies' this distinction regarding the Millennium and Israel, or at least I haven't heard anyone.

Many of the Covenant theologians decry against the early Pre-mil and state they held to a JEWISH view and that the view is not consistent with scripture.. ie their views.

Yes revisionism states Historical Premil is Covenatal, but some still think we never landed on the moon as well :BangHead: The problem is, again the minority group of futuristic covenant viewers does not agree with Historic Pre-Mill views.

 

Let me put it this way, as I did once before if you'll remember: You show show me any creditable reference that proves that anyone before 1830 believed in a Pre-trib "rapture" in which the Church would be removed from the earth and return back to the earth after seven years, I'll eat my shoe.

 

To my knowledge you have never made any such statements to me. However..
I have posted this a time or two before so I'll do so again:
Here are some examples of those who held and proclaimed a pre-trib view BEFORE 1830 (other than John Darby 1800-1882)

Joseph Mede (1586-1638);
Edward Bickersteth (1786-1850);
James H. Frere (1779-1866);
William Cuninghame (1775-1849); amoung various others.

The above going 300 years further back.

Would you like some salt with your shoe, or Tabasco?

 

So you've read these men's books? Please give me the reference - name of book, page no., etc.

 

Is the resurrection of chapter 15 of the first book of Corinthians necessary for human beings dead or alive necessary in order to inherit the kingdom of God that is already within us or do you consider that resurrection to have already happened in some manner? Why was it, or was it necessary for the Word made flesh, a living soul that died be resurrected from the dead? Do we actually have to be resurrected from the dead if we die to receive what he received by being resurrected from the dead?

 

There are many reasons, but the primary one is that
Israel has a destiny to fulfill. A lot of the Scriptures
are yet future and unfulfilled (even in the New Testament).
They pertain to JEWS and NOT the "Bride of Christ". :thumbs:

Romans 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery,
lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel,
until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in (ie: the Bride of Christ).
Once the Bride of Christ is removed then Israel will become God's centerpiece once again!

 

copied and pasted from another post of mine :thumbsup: here's my view:

Just did alot of research on prewrath rapture this side by side comparison of verses in Matthew 24 talking about the rapture compared to verses in Rev 6 and 7.

Matthew 24:29-31
King James Version (KJV)
29Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Revelation 6:12-17
12And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;
13And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.
14And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
15And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
16And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
17For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Revelation 7
1And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
2And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea,
3Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

(Rev 7:4-8 Tribes of Israel get number 12,000 from each)
9After 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;
10And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.
11And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God,
12Saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen.
13And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?
14And 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.
15Therefore 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

 

Mede believe in a rapture before the last judgement, the "conflagration" of the world. This is what most covenantalists believe. To say that Mede supported the modern dispensational pre-trip secret rapture of the Church is preposterous.

The others you mention held doctrines that were at best vague except for Cuninghame (not a prominant theologian) whose theories were contemporary to Darby's.

http://books.google.com/books?id=p3...ge&q=mede's view of the conflagration&f=false

 

Then again we have these verses;

 

Thanks for that rebuttal J.D.. Surely Allan doesn't resort to disingenuous information in order to support his dispy views; surely not.