The Return of Christ

I'm pretty sure Jim was only referring to the *pretrib* view of Christ's return, not Christ's return in general. His comments were in response to WisdomSeeker's, who was listing the "fundamentals" of her church, and her last "fundamental" described the typical pretrib/premill viewpoint. C.S. Murphy then said that viewpoint "is clearly proclaimed in teh word of God". SheEagle said "By your own admission, Jim, you are not a fundamentalist."

The pretrib view is neither a "fundamental", nor is "clearly proclaimed" in the Bible. Many Baptists today and *all* Baptists a couple hundred years ago would scoff at such a notion. It amazes me that somehow pretrib has become a "fundamental" in the minds of some.

 

Actually Jim was quoting me.

"Jesus Christ Himself will soon come again in the air to catch up His Church to reward their service. The unbelievers left behind will go through a period called the Tribulation, after which Christ will return to the Earth to set up His Kingdom of one thousand years of righteous rule. After this, the unbelievers of all ages will stand at the Great White Throne to be judged and cast into the Lake of Fire, separated from God forever, while the believers spend eternity in the fullness of joy in Heaven with the Lord. Matthew 24:29-42, I Thessalonians 4:16-18, Revelation 19:11-20:13"

This is what I quoted from the "What we believe" link in my churches website in answer to the original question in the other forum, which insighted Jim's comment that you quoted here.

[ July 28, 2003, 05:41 PM: Message edited by: WisdomSeeker ]

 

Dr. Bob,

It's good that you were sheltered. Like you I never knew people who claimed to be independent Baptist, not believe in the pre-trib doctrine. It's the same questioned that was brought to Jesus in Mk.9:10, "from the dead". They only understood the term "of the dead". They have the post view like Jn.11:24, "resurrection in the last day". I think where a lot of people have a hard time this, because this doctrine has only been around less that 200 years. What they don't understand is God works with progressive revelation. It's always been there, but now God opens our eyes to truths that pertain to us. Remember how Daniel was told to close the book, while John was told to open the book. The last days did not pertain to Daniel so it was told to him to close it(Dan.12:9). It was also told him that in the end knowledge shall be increased(Dan.12:4) and to them shall the book be opened. What I don't understand, is the people who reject the pre-trib doctrine, don't study the verses you provide. If they studied themselves approved, they would know the truth.

 

Dr. Bob Griffin

you say,

Not true.

I let you know I am truly fundamentalist, while I do not agree with pre-trib abd dispensationalism.

Please defintion 'fundamentalist', what it means?

 

Pretribulationism doctrine was not being exist during Early Church till 19th Century. None of the Early Church Fathers taught on two phases of the second advent for the first of 18 centuries.

In fact, the Bible does not teach there are two phases of the second advent.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 - Amen!

 

The vast majority of Southern Baptists(In my opinion) do not really know that they are premills! Its because of two things--(1) Their pastor does not preach on the subject enough--either because he wants to steer away from controversy--or because he just don't want to get down to the nitty gritty and actually study the subject---it takes hours and hours of fine tunin' to get the plane to the end of the runway for to "take off" on Sunday mornin' or (2) He IS preaching on it enough--its just they ain't payin' no attention to what he's preachin'. The vast majority are so busy being "clock watchers" that they can hear the second hand tick louder than the preacher can preach!!

If I had to choose between the above two--I would have to say its number 2!!

I guess when the time comes for the rapture--all of the supposed Post and Amill preachers--on their way up will be worried about who they're gonna get to preach for um the following Sunday after the rapture---some will be amazed that they're still hangin' around after the rapture themselves!!

Blackbird

 

How can someone be premill and not know it?!? Someone is premill if they believe in the premill viewpoint.

 

Folks who are saved are premills--its just they don't know it because they never take time to study it and understand it!

Blackbird

 

Um, right. Whatever you say. It must be nice to know what everyone else has studied.

 

Unchained,

Pretrib and the rapture is clear in the Scriptures. As I was telling Dr. Bob, I never knew an Independant Baptist not believe in the pre-trib doctrine until I joined the BB. Don't be offended. By the way, I did not just believe it because someone told it to me, I studied the whole thing out. I have preaced this message with numerous Scriptures in Old Testament and New.

 

Actually this is not true. I do grow tired of reading the same rhetoric about this.

The early church was unquestionably premillenial (chiliast). This was such a common belief, that they hardly spoke on it.

The early church also believed in the IMMINENT return of Christ. Whether what they were going through was the tribulation or not, isn't the issue. They believed he could return at any moment.

Let me stress something, AMILLENIALISM BELIEVES IN IMMINENCE. The failure on the part of amills is to embrace the fact that Christ will extend his kingdom to an all-encompassing earthly reign.

So, the SYSTEM known as dispensationalism was not developed like today, a strong case can be made for pre-trib, pre-mill.

Finally, one does not have to be a dispensationalist to be pre-trib, pre-mill.

 

Actually this is not true. I do grow tired of reading the same rhetoric about this.

The early church was unquestionably premillenial (chiliast). This was such a common belief, that they hardly spoke on it.
</font>[/QUOTE]DeafPosttrib's comments ARE true. You are confusing pretribulationism with premillennialism. Deafposttrib's comments about the nature of the rapture. Your comments are about the nature of the millennium. The early church was premillennial, but they were POSTtribulational, not pre.

The early church quotes that indicate this, do so because they believed they were *in* the tribulation. I.e. his imminent coming would be his final coming at the end of the trib.

Actually, amills DO believe this. They just believe that it will be eternal from the get-go, not initiated by a 1000-year reign before it becomes eternal.

True, but it's pretty uncommon. The whole basis for being pretrib is because of one's view of dispensations, the purpose of the tribulation. I think that those who are pretrib but not dispensational, don't really understand their own view in too much detail.

Brian

 

OK, so I haven't been checking out the postings all week, and am a little behind. What else is new?

As far as the Rapture's timing (pre- , mid-, or post-), it seems rather clear to me. I am unashamedly pre-trib, with the reason being that (as I understand what the Bible has to say about it) Paul wrote about it to the Thessalonians. Paul was not vague in his mentioning the forthcoming Rapture of the church. So why all the confusion?