Featured A Doctrine for Cowards

Amen DHK!:thumbsup:

 

Sounds like Peter before he denied Christ 3 times.

 

From Wikipedia, and validated by other sources:

He was a man that criticized the Bible and attacked its authority. He spent most of his life doing that. At the end of this article it comes out and says that he was post-tribulational--a biased point of view to start with. It was the accepted point of view without questioning in the mid-1800's. He probably just copied everyone else.
The main problem is his attitude toward God's Word--a critic. I wouldn't trust his work with a ten foot pole (or longer).

 

The Scripture you have been posting has to do with Christian living; not final warnings. They are out of context. Learn to rightly divide the Word of truth.

Not so. Do you think with millions of Christians missing world wide it will be "secret"? Hardly! It will be anything but secret! I have posted Scripture for this already in another forum. Neither is the doctrine secret. It is irrefutable.

There is no such promise. He will come for his own--a coming of comfort (1Thes.4:16-18--comfort one another)
He will come in vengeance for the unbeliever (2Thes.1:6-10). You can't reconcile those two passages can you?

Yes, but not the rapture. There will be no believers in the Great Tribulation, also known as Jacob's Trouble. They will be raptured before that time begins. God has not appointed us to wrath.

"The trump of God" in 1Thes.4 is not necessarily the last trump. Do you have solid evidence that it is?

They happen at relatively the same time. Paul, in 1Cor.15 describes the event, time wise, "in the twinkling of an eye." In 1Thes.4, Paul describes the order, but to us it happens so fast that order has no relevance.

But who is that referring to? Do you really think that is referring to the Bride of Christ? Or are you part of the Bride?

So the first resurrection is the resurrection of the unsaved. That is not what my Bible teaches. You are so confused.

In Ephesians Paul teaches that we are all one in Christ.
In 1Cor.10 Paul teaches that we are all one in Christ.
In 2Cor.5 Paul teaches that we are all one in Christ.
Do you have a problem with Paul's teaching?
Don't make false accusations.

That is absurd. You just mentioned a coming antichrist that will be revealed before the Coming of Christ. The Coming Tribulation will come after the revealing of the Antichrist and will last for 7 years--Daniel's seventieth week.

That is the heretical teaching of allegory introduced by the heretic Origen.
It is not the historical method of interpretation of the Early Church Fathers.
All who live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.
That doesn't mean all will go through the Great Tribulation.

You are one confused person.

 

It is very strange that you quote an article that extols the virtues of Tregelles as a erudite scholar and a warm-hearted Evangelical and yet make determinations that are completely at variance with your "support."

You ought to be ashamed of yourself DHK. I rebuked you for your lies about Tregelles, Westcott, Hort and others back in 2011. Yet you still persist.

It was just a day or so ago that I was moved when Dan Wallace spoke of his admiration of Samuel Tregelles --then you come along and demean the man --as is your fashion.

Tregelles needs to be respected as a man who loved God's Word. He was a conservative textual critic --a man who sought to please the Lord in his work.

 

I admit I am not the expert on the man's life. I read about half a dozen biographical sites to find out what he believes and the main thing that I found in common was information like this:

IMO, this is an attack on the Word of God. Others may not see it that way, but I do.

 

And your main source was...let me guess...KJVO sites.

He certainly did not attack God's Word. He was a textual critic --not a higher critic. He was not the Bart Ehrman of his day. He was devoted to the Lord and worked hard at his craft.

I know you are a fan of David Sorenson who wrote "Touch not the unclean thing." But in a review, here is a snip of what Doug Kutilek said about Tregelles:

"His contribution to Christian scholarship was immense and his theological orthodoxy is beyond quibble or dispute."

Aside from textual matters, here is what Spurgeon said:

"Tregelles is deservedly regarded as a great authority upon prophetical subjects." (Commenting on Commentaries,pg,130)

 

From Tregelle's book "The hope of his coming" I will submit a snip from his piece "Sentiment and emotion."

"The English Bible is thought to be enough for teachers. Exact scholarship is deemed superfluous if the original languages are looked at. How different is this from the real study of God's Word; from using and valuing each portion, however minute, as being from Him; as being that of which He can unfold to us the meaning by the teaching of His Spirit. How different is this from the practical application of the most definite rules of grammar which lead to absolute persuasion that the apostles and evangelists wrote nothing at random, but that even as to the delicate shades of thought they used the right cases, moods, and tenses. All diligent and careful inquiry, all laborious examination of authorities so as to know what were the very words in which the inspired writers gave forth the Scripture, is regarded as merely intellectual and secular.
--This is not healthy. Should not those who believe in the Divine authority of Holy Scripture know better than to neglect its critical study? And if it be truly inspired, ought they not feel it is of some importance to inquire what is its true text, and, as far as existing evidence can show, what were the very words in which the Holy Ghost gave it forth? It is most difficult to arouse Christians in general to a sense of the full importance of critical study of Scripture, especially when dreamy apprehensions are cherished and vague idealism has taken the place of truth, and sentimental asceticism is the substitute of Christian holiness.
--He who truly loves the Lord Jesus Christ and is guided by His Spirit will be the most subject to that which is written in the Word. True acquaintance with Scripture is the best check to mere sentimental emotion."

 

Not one was KJVO. The first site was the old familiar Wikipedia. That is the one I posted from. Another was an Encyclopedia. They were mostly neutral and objective sources. Face it. The majority of his life was spent in attacking the TR and building a text based on the CT. We both know that.

Even devoted people can be deliberately misled in their work.

A total non sequitor.

From what I read he spent some time toward the end of his life writing about prophecy. He was a writer. But the great majority of his life was given to textual criticism with a great distaste for the TR. He started with that bias.

 

Peter's blood was shed.

He was crucified.

What's your point?

Were all the martyrs deniers of Christ, as well?
Or are you just a scorner?

 

Quoted by Protestant:

So, what is you point?

You prove post-tribulationism through a post-tribulationist?? Duh.
He wasn't always a Plymouth Brethren.

 

Certainly (though this is purely 'anecdotal evidence, the story of one confused Bible scholar, pointing out the errors of another ), Darby did affect the Fundamentalists who followed after, helped in large part by Scofield, DTS, and the Protestant anti- NCC Fun.Movement.

We can't build a case for Pre-Wrath Post-Trib on his testimony, but we can build a case against Pre-Trib.

PWPT was the accepted belief of the day, prior to Darby.
Darby had issues with Textual Criticism.

This is indisputable.

This much we can glean from Protestants' posts.

 

He was quoting from Tregelles. Tregelles was not pre-trib; he was post-trib. It has nothing to do with the beliefs of Darby. That is a red herring. Deal with the facts at hand.
It is like Rippon saying I am going to prove that the ASV is the better translation because it is from the Critical text. The CT is the better text. Can't you see that the ASV is translated from it and therefore it is the better translation. "rolleyes"
--The circular reasoning used by Protestant is nonsense.
I am going to prove post-trib to by using a post-trib. Right!!

 

Ok, you didn't understand my post, sorry, I'll write it in crayon next time.

I excused Tregelles' testimony as anecdotal evidence.

But History tells us that Darby was the vehicle for change ( from PW/PT to PreTrib) among Protestants and specifically Fundamentalist Movement Groups.

We are looking for a reason, in the Scriptures, for the change.

Everytime the light is shined on that period, it reveals that this change was interwoven with the onset of CT mania.

Darby and Tregelles had common ground, in the Nestle/Aland.

They didn't agree in how it affected eschatology.

Scofield backed up Darby in both.

These are the points worth looking at.

 

I disagree. Those who argue against dispensationalism would have us falsely believe that but it is not true. Why reiterate a falsehood over and over again.
Read this link:
http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/dispensation.htm

Dispensationalism was believed by many of the ECF and other scholars that preceded Darby. To say that Darby was the "inventor" of it is a falsehood, showing careless study, and the parroting of others.

What change are you talking about. We look to the Scriptures for the truth.

That doesn't make it right. An unsaved university professor with nothing to lose in this argument was presented with the evidence for the TR and then with the evidence for the CT. He concluded that the evidence for the CT would be laughed "out of court." The CT has no text, so to speak. It is completely eclectic or piecemeal, drawing from a piece here and a piece there. It isn't a text at all.

The textual issue isn't worth looking at. Take it to the versions forum where it belongs. The fact that Tregelles is a post-trib is the only fact that counts.
Protestant brought Tregelles into this argument. Rippon backed him up. The fact remains he is post-trip. The entire argument is moot. This discussion is not a textual issue. That is simply a red herring and derailing the thread. Go back to the OP.

 

You are answering a post with the word "dispensational" in it.

Mine was not that post.

 

I agree with Protestant on one point.

I believe that people want to believe in a Pre-Trib Resurrection, and gathering of those alive in Christ, because they fear the events detailed in the pouring out of God's Wrath.

We are not appointed to Wrath, and will not ever face it, and all who do are damned, anyway, cause they took the mark of the False christ.

Are Christians who experience fear, damned?
No, positionally, they have no imputed iniquity on their record, and will be Judged by that Record, and not their actions.

But....

2Th 2:1-4
Chapter 2
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means:for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Who is falling away here?

Unbelievers? Nowhere to fall from.

Since Eternal Security is a no-brainer, than this can only be believers, who adhere to some wind of doctrine, germaine to the end of the World.
IMO, this could be the falling away of the PreTrib doctrine, that began ( this major falling away, not the actual doctrine....there's nothing new under the sun) With Darby, and was catapulted into prominence by Scofield, Dallas Theological Seminary, MBI (Torrey), and Rice (SotL).

Here's where I stand...

Baptists need to back right back out of the Movement, largely fueled by the above mentioned Bible Correctors, and take a look at the Scriptures again.

I also believe that dispensational teaching, Darby and Scofield style,
are poisoned by the CT adherents who put them back on the Map.

 

You have just made your case for a pre-trib rapture. We are not appointed to wrath. We will never face it. Well; all those in the Tribulation will face it. It is a time of God pouring out His wrath upon all the earth without discrimination. There will be no "land of Goshen" for the believers.

The "falling away."
Jesus himself said, "When I come will I find faith on this earth."
It could be gradual, as it is now. Percentage wise fewer and fewer are coming to the Lord. Our nations are becoming more and more wicked, secular and anti-Christian. The falling away is gradual not sudden. It is happening now.

Christians have faced sever persecution ever since the time of the apostles. Read about how they suffer in Islamic nations. Get a copy of "Voice of the Martyrs," and read it. There were more Christians persecuted and martyred for their faith in the 20th century then in all other centuries combined! But that doesn't put us in the Tribulation now, does it?

Again you make the mistake of attributing Biblical truth to Darby. That is wrong. Have you ever heard of Chiliasm? That which the early church fathers believed? It is basic dispensationalism. Some of them also believed in a pre-trib rapture. I keep providing a link that no one pays attention to, probably because they don't want and it goes against their theology.

Dispensationalism has been around well over a thousand years longer than they were born.

 

Please don't use hypotheticals involving my handle. When I use your handle it deals with things you have actually said.