#2 The Pre-Tribulation Rapture (PRT)

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

EE
"However, note TWO groups of saved people in Revelation 20:4 which DOES imply more than one general resurrection."

GE
Again, why must I quote the text - you read it! It says, "I saw thrones, and they - "the nations", "not deceived" of verse 3b - "I saw thrones and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them; I saw the souls of them (these very same) that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the Word of God and which (very same souls / nations not deceived / witnesses) had not worshipped the beast neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads or in their hands, that (they the very same souls / nations / witnesses) lived and reigned with Christ Thousand Years", -- glorious kingdom of God!

I and you have now here read with our own eyes, of ONE 'group'. All their properties together may be expressed by any single of their properties.

 

[BobRyan]

1Thess 4 shows BOTH the resurrection AND the rapture -- ONE event.

REv 20:4-5 speaks of it as "THE first resurrection" -- ONE event

By contrast -

Ed said

The first resurrection conists of these two events:

rapture2 - a resurrection1 followed shortly by
a rapture1 before the Tribulation Period
(many pre-mill, post-tribs deny a 'rapture2' exists
but think a 'rapture1 exists).
(this I frequently call 'a rapture/resurrection
in my old writings)

resurrection2 - a resurrection1 followed shortly by
a rapture1 before the Tribulation Period
(this I call generally this in my old writings:
the 'Second Coming of Jesus
in power & Glory, or just 'Second Advent', etc.)

rapture1 - an event held by Jesus where the living saints
get new eternal bodies like Jesus' body.

resurrection1 - an event held by Jesus where dead saints
get new eternal bodies like Jesus' body.

No question that you have stated well that you want to find in scripture the "resurrection2" happens 1000 years before the GWTJ - end of millennium and "resurrection1" happens 1007 years before the great white throne judgment.

But instead of that - what we actually find in scripture is that it is resurrection1 - THE FIRST Resurrection - that is 1000 years before the GWTJ -- not the second or even the seconf-first resurrection.

But as you say - you invent the idea of two first resurrections.

A first-first and a second-first that you call resurrection1 and resurrection2.

One has to wonder how far down that path you are willing to go before saying 'hey wait a minute!!'

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob always willing to offer some help.

The Bible speaks of THE First resurrection

RESURRECTION 3 -

New Testament Saints
​

WHO: Church age (AKA: times of the Gentiles) Saints; balance
of the Old Testament Saints
WHEN: Some date after 6 Oct 2007 AND after the Tribulation;
at the end of the Church Age;
Matt 24 "AFTER the Tribulation of those days.. he will gather his elect"
WHERE: Worldwide
WHY: The Lord God is a resurrecting God.
HOW: The Grace of God through Messiah Jesus
WHAT: Raised to Life Eternal;
this resurrection is followed in but a
moment by the translation of the living
saints into a glorified heavenly body like
that of Jesus
References: 1 Corinthians 15:52, 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17

ALSO called "THE FIRST Resurrection": of ALL Saints - POST Trib
​

WHO: All saints and martyrs from all ages; those
who reject the Mark of the Beast
WHEN: at the end of the Tribulation; at the
beginning of the 1,000-year reign of Jesus
WHERE: worldwide
WHY: The Lord God is a resurrecting God.
HOW: The Grace of God through Messiah Jesus
WHAT: Raised to Life Eternal
References: Revelation 20:4-6,

 

[Ed Edwards]

//One has to wonder how far down that path
you are willing to go before saying 'hey wait a minute!!'//

I was pretribulation rapture/resurrection person
when I was saved in 1952. I've found no reason
to disbelieve that. I've found more reasons to
beleive it.

All the way to the grave or the
pretribualation raputure2.
I don't know the date of the pretribulation
rapture1/resurrection1.

An athiest asked me how long I was going to wait
for Jesus to come get me before I give up.
It has been 2007-30 years since Jesus left (1,977 years)
I said well, 360 days times 7 years times 1 day = 1,000
years would be 2.5 million. "Check back with me in
2,500 millinnia and I'll recompute it for you."

But if Jesus comes today I'll be ready for Him.

 

[BobRyan]

No question that you have stated well that you want to find in scripture the "resurrection2" happens 1000 years before the GWTJ - end of millennium and "resurrection1" happens 1007 years before the great white throne judgment.

But instead of that - what we actually find in scripture is that it is resurrection1 - THE FIRST Resurrection - that is 1000 years before the GWTJ -- not the second or even the seconf-first resurrection.

But as you say - you invent the idea of two first resurrections.

A first-first and a second-first that you call resurrection1 and resurrection2.

One has to wonder how far down that path you are willing to go before saying 'hey wait a minute!!'

When I say "how FAR" I don't mean "for how many days or years" would you cling to the PTR idea. Rather I mean how many of those inconsistencies - how many of those Bible-pinch scenarios would you be willing to ignore.

It is very different from how long would one person hold to one opinion.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Ed Edwards]

The first resurrection conists of these two events:

rapture2 - a resurrection1 followed shortly by
a rapture1 before the Tribulation Period
(many pre-mill, post-tribs deny a 'rapture2' exists
but think a 'rapture1 exists).
(this I frequently call 'a rapture/resurrection'
in my old writings, this raptue2 is when Jesus
COMES to get the Christian)

(oops, I got this wrong in my initial definitions )
resurrection2 - a resurrection1 followed shortly by
a rapture1 AFTER the Tribulation Period
(this I call generally this in my old writings:
the 'Second Coming of Jesus
in power & Glory, or just 'Second Advent', etc.
This is called by the Bible /Rev 20-5&6/ 'the First'
Resurrection')

rapture1 - an event held by Jesus where the living saints
get new eternal bodies like Jesus' body.

resurrection1 - an event held by Jesus where dead saints
get new eternal bodies like Jesus' body.

//A first-first and a second-first that you call resurrection1 and resurrection2.//

I knew you wouldn't agree; but I thought you could
understand. (Oops, when I added the definitions
I see I missed one of the key words)
Here is your statement in terms
that I defined:

A first-first and a second-first that you
call 'rapture2' and 'resurrection2'

BTW, I hope you noted that I wasn't using
Bible language when I defined rapture1, rapture2,
resurrection1, and resurrection2.
My 1 and 2 are to made a difference between
the two meanings of the word 'resurrection'
-- people use the different meanings. At
lead here the number '1' means 'one;
by contrast, some folks think 'first'
means 'one' there are two words because there
are two sets of concepts.

BTW, did you notice that I believe that
the pretribualtion rapture2 and the post-tribulation
resurrection 2 BOTH include a rapture1 and
a resurrection2 in their definition?

BTW, did you notice that I believe that
the pretribualtion rapture2 and the post-tribulation
resurrection 2 BOTH happen the same day:
the rapture2 at the start of the day
and the resurrection2 at the end of the day?
The day the pretribualtion rapture2 and the post-tribulation
resurrection 2 BOTH happen is called:
the Tribulation Period & the 70th Week of Daniel.

So I see I'll have to show by all the scriptures that
show the Bible divides up the SECOND COMING OF THE LORD
into two parts by taking all the scriptures (which I'll list
first) and telling what they call either the rapture2 or
the resurrection2).

BTW, there is a danger doing that.
My clarifications will be damned by some people as
being confusing. But I have ALWAYS found that
people resist the truth I found - many times INSTEAD
of telling the truth they found (the two might conflict,
which most literalists have problems with???).

 

[DeafPosttrib]

John. 5:28; John 6:39,40,44, & 54 telling us very clear the resurrection shall come on the LAST DAY of this present age at the coming of Christ. There is not a single verse gives us a hint that there are gap of time-span like 7 years or 1000 years between two resurrection anywhere in the Bible.

Also, "the first resurrection" is apply to the saved people only, who believe in Christ have eternal life. "The first resurrection" pictured speaks of salvation -"have eternal life" in Christ.

Also, these people who do not have the part of 'first resurrection', because they do not believe in Christ. What happen to them? They shall have their part of 'second death'.

'Second death' is speak of everlasting punishment from God in lake oof fire, because they do not believe in Christ.

That what Revelation 20:4-6 is all talk about.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[Eliyahu]

3. Resurrection of the New Testament
Saints (mostly Gentiles)​

WHO: Church age (AKA: times of the Gentiles) Saints; balance
of the Old Testament Saints
WHEN: Some date after 6 Oct 2007;
at the end of the Church Age; at the beginning of
the Tribulation
WHERE: Worldwide
WHY: The Lord God is a resurrecting God.
HOW: The Grace of God through Messiah Jesus
WHAT: Raised to Life Eternal;
this resurrection is followed in but a
moment by the translation of the living
saints into a glorified heavenly body like
that of Jesus
References: 1 Corinthians 15:52, 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17

I like your way of questioning the polls. You are well experienced in the poll indeed.

But your post above sounds like another comedy in addition to your exegesis about Re 20:4-5 where you said the fornicators will be the Judges.
Will the fornicators like the one in 1 Cor 5:5 rule over the saints and the martyrs? Then we must yearn for being Forncators all, we must pursue to be great Casanova's !

Then you brought another comedy here.

If the whole church believers are resurrected, will they be seen by the Unbelievers?

Where is the statement on the scene of the Resurrection of ALL the NT church believers?

The scene of resurrection of Unbelievers are well described in Re 20:11-15. Is the Believers resurrection less important than the Unbelievers' ?

Why does Bible say " FIRST" Resurrection just before the 1000 years in Re 20:4-6?

I am enjoying your profound and interesting comedy here, brother Ed !

 

[Ed Edwards]

I've seen the following method of argument that
strained debaters use:

1. Attack the other personally (thank you who are posting
on this topic for not using that :applause

2. the Bait & Switch con:
this is where the con says one thing to 'bait' another
and 'switches' to another (usually chearper or wrong).
The classic on Religions Bulletin Boards (which I've been
doing for 23½-years) is: call the bait
a denomination a 'cult' (meaning 'don't agree with us')
then switch to 'cult' (group controled by one person
and nothing they say can possibly be right).
We are familiar with the SDA (7th day Adventists) 'discussions' in
discussions on this BB on the all religions debate forum.
The 'bait' is that the SDA is a cult because they believe
in worship on the 7th day of the week (aka: 'Saturday'
after the false god Saturn) but I like to worship most
on the 1st day of the week (which I call SONday
but the world calls 'Sunday' after the false god:
Sol Ivictus(usually pictured today as a yellow smiling face )

The switch is that the SDA is a non-Christian group
created by the Antichrist Pope and controled by
(nobody can figure out who can personally control a
world-wide group of some 15 million people???)
anyway, you can't trust a word they say since we
'switched'.

3. But the one I started this essay about it that is a
poor debating technique is acting like NOT UNDERSTANDING and
whe one does not agree. Sometime this goes to railing against
a person tying to simplify things. I read a book once (yes, I
did) about how some words (these can be spoken, written,
or signed) have different meanings.
People talk with their own meanings. If two people are using
the same meanings they can communicate. If two people
are using different meanings, they can have communication troubles.
Please don't yell "CAN'T UNDERSTAND' , read my explanations
and ask questions about how I said I believe.
BTW, I'm about three days behind (I know this topic has
only been open two days, but there was a #1 topic over here
that I'm still answering questions about.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=42747&page=35

(that is the last page (page 35 of the topic).

Search the page for a line of dashes, those are the
reprinted posts, some of which I first wrote back in 1992 --
15-years ago, you know. Most of the answers that people ask
have been asked before, so my writings answer a lot
of questions.

4A. I've promised to post a writing about three scripture passages
that show the two parts of the Second Coming of Jesus:
the pretrbulation rapture2 & the post-tribualtion resurrection2.

4B. I've promised to post a writing about all the different passages
and the nomenclature they use for both
the pretrbulation rapture2 & the post-tribualtion resurrection2

(BTW, 'resurrection1', 'resurrection2' and 'First Resurrection'
are all resurrections of the JUST in Christ.)

4C. I've promised to raise 2 Grandchildren,
be a Church Deacon, be the Lead Usher in a Church,
teach a Sunday School class, be nice to my wife, ect.

If the Lord taries His PreTribulation rapture2 (PTR)
(a rapture1 directly following a resurrection1)
I'll get it all done. If you re-ask, make sure you
give me enough information so I don't have to waste
time seaching for what the conversation is. Thank
you for your consideration.

4D. While you are being nice, you could be like
Brother DeafPosttrib (DPT) and tell me what your
stand is (he is a-mill & post-trib). Thank you.

-Ed Edwards,
futurist, pre-mill, pretrib blabber*

*note - blabber = talks|| a lot

|| note - talks - a verbal, signed, or written communication

 

[Ed Edwards]

...

Why does Bible say " FIRST" Resurrection just before the 1000 years in Re 20:4-6?

I am enjoying your profound and interesting comedy here, brother Ed !

I'm eternally serious, but thanks anyway.

The Bible says //"FIRST" Resurrection just before the 1000 years in Re 20:4-6//

because the FIRST Resurrection is completed in Revelation 20:4.

There is one FIRST Resurrection composed of two parts:
1A. the pre-tribualtion rapture1
1B. the postribulation resurrection2

There is one FIRST Resurrection on one day:
(that day is 7-years long and called the Tribulation
Period /Trib/, 70th Week of Daniel):
1A. the pre-tribualtion rapture1 - at the start of the Trib
1B. the postribulation resurrection2 -at the end of the Trib

The multiple phase FIRST Resurrection is a type of
resurrection - the resurrection of the just.

Sorry if one can't figure out the logic of that.
Try taking logic in school some day.
Logic lets you take basic definitions (called undefined
terms) and basic statements (now called assumptions*)
that people agree on and show
(if the logic is right) that there are other statements
that can be made.

Usually logic is taught in 9th or 10th grade Geometry
in the USofA. You start out talking about points,
lines, and planes and you end up with a lot
of Plane Geometry logic facts'.

* to the 19th Century they were called 'axioms'.

If you start with People, the State, and citizen responsibilites
you develop a logic of Government

If you start with God, people, and salvation you
develop a logic of religion.
(Baptists think you should get your undefined
terms from the Bible and your axioms from the Bible.)
But I know that 80% of the math teaching in Secondary
Schools in the USofA is done by incompetents
who may not know about logic &/or set theory.

Anyway, I tarry ....

 

[BobRyan]

Ed said -
BTW, did you notice that I believe that
the pretribualtion rapture2 and the post-tribulation
resurrection 2 BOTH include a rapture1 and
a resurrection2 in their definition?

Not sure what you mean when you talk about a pre-trib "rapture2" including a "rapture1" and a "resurrection2"???

I have no idea what you are talking about there.

I would have thought you had a pre-trib First Resurrection

rapture1 and resurrection1

AND THEN you would have a post-trib "First Resurrection" as in Rev 20

resurrection2 missing the associated rapture

What am I missing for your view?

BTW, did you notice that I believe that
the pretribualtion rapture2 and the post-tribulation
resurrection 2 BOTH happen the same day:

How can two events 7 years apart happen the same day?

Pre-trib anything is always 7 years away from post-trib something in your view - is it not?

the rapture2 at the start of the day
and the resurrection2 at the end of the day?
The day the pretribualtion rapture2 and the post-tribulation
resurrection 2 BOTH happen is called:
the Tribulation Period & the 70th Week of Daniel.

The 70th week of Daniel like the 69th week of Daniel 9 is 7 years long.

69 starts after 68 -- right after it.

70 starts after 69 -- right after it.

This is true with the 70 year prophecy in Dan 9 and each year starts right after the previous one.

It is also true with the 70 week 490-year vision in Dan 9

How in the world is 7 years "the SAMDE day pretrib AND posttrib"?

As I have said repeatedly - the convoluted gyrations that your view is forced into to solve the problems it has - are astounding. How many of those jumps are you willing to make before saying 'hey! Wait a minute!"?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Ed Edwards]

Then you brought another comedy here.

If the whole church believers are resurrected, will they be seen by the Unbelievers?

Where is the statement on the scene of the Resurrection of ALL the NT church believers?

I'm going to answer this in my
discussion of 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17
and 1 Corinthians 15:35-53


1Co 15:51-52 (KJV1611 Edition):
Behold, I shew you a mysterie:
we shall not all sleepe, but wee shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinckling of an eye,
at the last trumpe, (for the trumpet
shall sound, and the dead shall
be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.)

This is a beautiful picture of the pretribulation rapture2.
It does not mention if the changes will be
seen by unbelievers or not seen by unbelievers.

Some of my pretribulation rapture1/resurrection1
friends think there will be a full-scale nuclear war
where the USofA and sub-Sarahan Africa get
decimated (10% gone in the USofA) or duo-decimated
(20% gone in sub-Sarahan Africa) by nukes from
Russia & Ukraine (Kings of the North) and
China, India, Iran & Pakistan (Kings of the East)

Some of my a-mill post-tribualtion only friends
say "last trumpet" here means post-trib.
But they assume that '7th trumpet' in Revelation
is 'last trumpet' here. That is an interesting
assumption, but it leads nowhere
(taunt - how come five people are picking
on the pre-trib rapture2 guy? If i were like
the KJV Only folk I'd claim that proves that
pre-trib rapture2 is RIGHT. Tee Hee.

 

[Ed Edwards]

//As I have said repeatedly - the convoluted gyrations that your view is forced into to solve the problems it has - are astounding. How many of those jumps are you willing to make before saying 'hey! Wait a minute!"?//

you have misunderstood and misquoted
I shall ignore your comment cause I don'thave
time to answer it right now. I do have
answers.

//How in the world is 7 years "the SAMDE day pretrib AND posttrib"?//

I keep explaining this.
You have to right to say "I humbly disagree"
I believe they happen the same hour.
(But you need a scripture)

The rapture2 is at the beginning of the Tribulation
period day/week/7-years and the resurrection2
is at the end of the Tribulation
period/day/week/7-years.

//The 70th week of Daniel like the 69th week of Daniel 9 is 7 years long.

69 starts after 68 -- right after it.

70 starts after 69 -- right after it.

This is true with the 70 year prophecy in Dan 9 and each year starts right after the previous one.

It is also true with the 70 week 490-year vision in Dan 9//

And this told where in the Bible?
Why does Revelation 9 mention the divisions?
Why do you assume that they are stuck
end-to-end. You got scripture for that.
(Please don't assume that your assumptions
are:

1) never made, they were
2) are more holy than mine, they are not
3) give you a superior advantage, they do not.
All they do is make things different).

BTW, I'm not buying that you (a SDA) gets to use
a purely Roman Catholic (RCC) concept that
the ministry of Jesus was 3½-years. It was actually
2 maybe onlly 1½-years. the 3½-years was 'assumed'
in to explain the 70th Week of Daniel.

 

[Ed Edwards]

//BTW, did you notice that I believe that
the pretribualtion rapture2 and the post-tribulation
resurrection 2 BOTH include a rapture1 and
a resurrection2 in their definition?//



Not sure what you mean when you talk about a pre-trib "rapture2" including a "rapture1" and a "resurrection2"???//

My bad, I correct:

Did you notice that I believe that
the pretribualtion rapture2 and the post-tribulation
resurrection2 BOTH include a rapture1 and
a resurrection1 in their definition?

I make mistakes cause
I get to writing so fast to respond to the five
people questioning the things that were revealed
to me from the Holy Bible.
I would like to answer them all.
But it will take time.
If the Lord tarries, I'll get to them all.

//I would have thought you had a pre-trib First Resurrection
rapture1 and resurrection1//

See, you got me figured out!

 

[BobRyan]

//How in the world is 7 years "the SAME day pretrib AND posttrib"?//

I keep explaining this.
You have to right to say "I humbly disagree"
I believe they happen the same hour.
(But you need a scripture)

The rapture2 is at the beginning of the Tribulation
period day/week/7-years and the resurrection2
is at the end of the Tribulation
period/day/week/7-years.

Text that shows that two events seven years apart are Rapture and Resurrection and that this seven year period is called one day?


//The 70th week of Daniel like the 69th week of Daniel 9 is 7 years long.

69 starts after 68 -- right after it.

70 starts after 69 -- right after it.

This is true with the 70 year prophecy in Dan 9 and each year starts right after the previous one.

It is also true with the 70 week 490-year vision in Dan 9//

Ed

And this told where in the Bible?

Dan 9:1-3 mentiones the 70 years -- no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into that 70 year timeline.

Dan 7 mentions 1260 day-years no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into the 1260 day-year prophecy.

Dan 8 mentiones the 2300 day-years no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into that 2300 day-year timeline.

Dan 9 starts with the 70 year timeline of Jeremiah - no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into that 2300 year timeline.

Dan 9 ends with the 70 week-weeks-of-years timeline. But here is where some people hope to insert gaps of unknown lengths of time into that 490 day-year timeline.

Why does Revelation 9 mention the divisions?

Rev 9 makes no reference at all to slicing up the Dan 9 490 year timeline.

Why do you assume that they are stuck
end-to-end. You got scripture for that.

See the above list were ALL Bible scholars on the planet are in agreement. In fact I believe that even you agree with that list.

BTW, I'm not buying that you (a SDA) gets to use
a purely Roman Catholic (RCC) concept that
the ministry of Jesus was 3½-years. It was actually
2 maybe onlly 1½-years. the 3½-years was 'assumed'
in to explain the 70th Week of Daniel.

Daniel 9 says "in the midst of the week he is cut off" it does not say "at exactly 3.5 years to the very day"

The term used is not mathematically precise to the exact moment.

Hoever the end of the 69th week - 483 days -- is at the 483 year boundary from the building of the Temple to the start of the ministry of Christ.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Ed Edwards]

// BTW, did you notice that I believe that
the pretribualtion rapture2 and the post-tribulation
resurrection 2 BOTH happen the same day://

//How can two events 7 years apart happen the same day?//

When it is called by Daniel a week.
I define the prophetic 'day' = the appropriate time.
The appropriate time for the Tribualtion
Period is 7-years = one week = 7 days = 1 day.

//Pre-trib anything is always 7 years away from post-trib something in your view - is it not?//

Yes, it is. The post-trib stuff happens on a 7-year schedule
starting with the pretrib stuff. The pretrib stuff is
signless & unexpected 'as a thief in the night'.
The mid trib stuff is on a 3½- year schedule
from the pretrib stuff postrib stuff .
The post-trib stuff is on a 7-year schedule from
the pretrib start and a 3½-year schedule from
the mid-trib stuff.

What I get from my interpertation of Matthew 4-44
that no post-trib-only gets:
There is NO SIGN of the pretribulation rapture2.
The Tribulation Period (7 years = one day)
is the BIG SIGN of the post-tribulation
resurrection2.

 

[Ed Edwards]

//Dan 9:1-3 mentiones the 70 years -- no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into that 70 year timeline.//

This is speaking of a continuous time
of 70-calendar-years from the taking of
the slaves from Israel to Babylon until
some of them came back. I didn't claim
there was a gap in it.

//Dan 7 mentions 1260 day-years no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into the 1260 day-year prophecy.

Dan 8 mentiones the 2300 day-years no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into that 2300 day-year timeline.

Dan 9 starts with the 70 year timeline of Jeremiah - no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into that 2300 year timeline.//

Off hand I'm not familiar with these scriptures
and have all my back burners full. So I'll have
to pass on your point.

//Dan 9 ends with the 70 week-weeks-of-years timeline. But here is where some people hope to insert gaps of unknown lengths of time into that 490 day-year timeline.//

I've shown you how there is gap in Romans 11
that perfectly explains the space between
Daniel's 69th weeks and Daniel's 70th week.
The Jews in Large did NOT accept Jesus as their
Messiah 30AD when Jesus ascended
to 70AD when the Temple was destroyed.
So the Time of the Gentiles (unforseen by
folks in the O.T.) beg'in. Some people colorfully
say "God's clock ended for the Chruch Age,
it will start again at the pretribualtion rapture2."
Please don't leave Romans chapter 11 out of your
prophecies.

I would show you a comple analysis of Romans 11
but my back burners are all full of projects.

//Hoever the end of the 69th week - 483 days -- is at
the 483 year boundary from the building
of the Temple to the start of the ministry of Christ.//

I agree. This means the degree to rebuild the
temple was given in 450BC.

 

[BobRyan]

And so when Christ begins His ministry He announced that prophetic time had been fulfilled


Mark 1:15 - "The Kingdom of God is at hand – the time is fulfilled"

And so begins Christ's 3.5 year ministry in fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy.

So far the exact matching anti-type fulfillment in the NT is far more "explicit" in fulfilling the prophetic components of Daniel 9 - using this explicit and direct approach - than all other proposed solutions. None of them contain the direct references and language for Daniel 9 as we have seen here so far.

John Gill’s commentary on Dan 9:25

it is best therefore to interpret this of a royal edict, the order or commandment of a king of Persia to rebuild Jerusalem; and it seems correct to reckon the number given, either from the seventh, or rather from the twentieth, of Artaxerxes Longimanus before mentioned; and either these reckonings, as Bishop Chandler F3 observes, are sufficient for our purpose, to show the completion of the prophecy in Christ:

``the commencement of the weeks (as he remarks) must be either from the seventh of Artaxerxes, which falls on 457 B.C. or from the twentieth of Artaxerxes; (add to 457 B.C., twenty six years after Christ, which is the number that four hundred and eighty three years, or sixty nine weeks, exceeds four hundred and fifty seven years); and you are brought to the beginning of John the Baptist's preaching up the advent of the Messiah; add seven years or one week to the former, and you come to the thirty third year of A.D. which was the year of Jesus Christ's death[/b] or else compute four hundred and ninety years, the whole seventy weeks, from the seventh of Artaxerxes, by subtracting four hundred and fifty seven years (the space of time between that year and the beginning of A.D.) from four hundred and ninety, and there remains thirty three, the year of our Lord's death. Let the twentieth of Artaxerxes be the date of the seventy weeks, which is 455 B.C. and reckon sixty nine weeks of Chaldean years; seventy Chaldee years being equal to sixty nine Julian; and so four hundred and seventy eight Julian years making four hundred and eighty three Chaldee years, and they end in the thirty third year after Christ, or the passover following F4'';
the several particulars into which these seventy weeks are divided: unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and
two weeks;
http://www.studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=025

 

[BobRyan]

//Dan 9:1-3 mentiones the 70 years -- no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into that 70 year timeline.//

This is speaking of a continuous time
of 70-calendar-years

True. My argument is that all Bible timeline prophecies are contiguous. Each one forms a timline that will not survive the abuse of inserting unknown gaps of time into it.

Other examples of these timelines --


//Dan 7 mentions 1260 day-years no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into the 1260 day-year prophecy.

Dan 8 mentiones the 2300 day-years no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into that 2300 day-year timeline.

Dan 9 starts with the 70 year timeline of Jeremiah - no one on earth claims you can insert gaps of unknown time into that 2300 year timeline.//

Ed
Off hand I'm not familiar with these scriptures
and have all my back burners full. So I'll have
to pass on your point.

The point is that you have no stories about how we must insert uknown gaps of time into these timelines - and neither does anybody else.

It is only with the 70 weeks that such stories surface.


//Dan 9 ends with the 70 week-weeks-of-years timeline. But here is where some people hope to insert gaps of unknown lengths of time into that 490 day-year timeline.//

I've shown you how there is gap in Romans 11
that perfectly explains the space between
Daniel's 69th weeks and Daniel's 70th week.

Romans 11 makes no reference at all to the 490 years of Dan 9.

Ed
The Jews in Large did NOT accept Jesus as their
Messiah 30AD when Jesus ascended
to 70AD when the Temple was destroyed.

So we at least agree on several things on this topic.

Romans 11 contains no timeline at all. It predicts future events without actually providing any timeline at all -


//Hoever the end of the 69th week - 483 days -- is at
the 483 year boundary from the building
of the Temple to the start of the ministry of Christ.//

I agree. This means the degree to rebuild the
temple was given in 450BC.[/quote]

Or very near that point -- 457 as John Gill states -- (non-SDA non-Catholic).

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

BTW, I'm not buying that you (a SDA) gets to use
a purely Roman Catholic (RCC) concept that
the ministry of Jesus was 3½-years. It was actually
2 maybe onlly 1½-years. the 3½-years was 'assumed'
in to explain the 70th Week of Daniel.

BTW - I think you will agree that I never bring up the roots of the PTR rapture idea - nor do I try to associate it with the RCC. I just stick with the Bible problems that the PTR faces.

Having said that - and since you bring this RCC origins idea into the thread -- I will make this one exception.

If you will check the counter reformation move of Papal Rome in the 16th century after Martin Luther nailed his 95 thesis to the church door in Wittenberg on October 31, 1517.

You will find that Pope Leo X authorized three Jesuit Priests to reinterpret Daniel's 70 weeks of prophecy; the Book of Revelation; and Ezekiel. The goal of these jesuits was to take the heat of the reformation away from the papacy. The three Jesuits were: 1. Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) of Salamanca - futurism/rapturists 2. Luis de Alcazar (1554-1621) of Seville - praeterism 3. Cardinal Roberto Bellarmine (1542-1621) - followed Ribera's school of thought The futurists rapture doctrine originated and was submitted by Francisco Ribera in 1585. His Apocalyptic Commentary was on the grand points of Babylon and Anti-christ which we now call the futurists or rapture doctrine. Ribera's published work was called "In Sacram Beati Ionnis Apostoli & Evangelistate Apocoalypsin Commentari (Lugduni 1593). You can still find these writings in the Bodleian Library in Oxford England. ...

Ribera's futurist interpretation rocked not only the protestant church , but also the Catholic church so the Pope ordered it buried in the archives out of sight. Unfortunately, over 200 years later a librarian to the Archbishop of Canterbury by the name of S. R. Maitland (1792-1866) was appointed to be the Keeper of the Manuscripts at Lambeth Palace, in London, England. In his duties, Dr. Maitland came across Francisco Ribera’s futurists/rapture teaching and he had it republished for the sake of interest in early 1826 with follow ups in 1829 and 1830. This was spurred along with the Oxford Tracts that were published in 1833 to try and deprotestantize the Church of England.

John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) (A Leader of the Plymouth Brethren) became a follower of S.R. Maitland’s prophetic endeavors and was persuaded. Darby’s influence in the seminaries of Europe combined with 7 tours of the United States changed the eschatological view of the ministers which had the trickle down effect into the churches.

Darby’s/Ribera’s teachings were embraced radically by Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921). Scofield adopted Darby’s/Ribera’s school of prophetic thought into the Scofield Reference Bible of 1909 which was heralded as the “book of books”.

Another contributor to the rapturist’s chaotic prophetic line of thought came through Emmanuel Lacunza (1731-1801), a Jesuit priest from Chile. Lacunza wrote the “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty” around 1791. It was later published in London in 1827. The book was attributed to a fictitious author name Rabbi Juan Josafat BenEzra.

Reverend Edward Irving (1792-1834) contended that it was the work of a converted Jew and proved that even the Jewish scholars embraced a pre-tribulation rapture line of thought. It wasn’t long until he had persuaded others to follow his line of thought which gave birth to the Irvingites.

In March 1830, in Port Glasgow, Scotland, 15 year old Margaret McDonald made claim of her visions. Robert Norton published Margaret’s visions and prophecies in a book entitled, “The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets in the Catholic Apostolic Church” (London, 1861). Although the modern day view of every believer being taken away in a rapture is different from all of the thoughts that came before it, there is little doubt to it’s error.

Lacunza casserted that only thopse believers that partake of the sacrament of the Eucharist would be raptured; while Margaret McDonald said the rapture would only take those that were filled with the Holy Spirit; and Norton claimed that only those that had been sealed with the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands would be raptured. Definitely confusion ensued.

John Darby, an ordained deacon in the Church of England, was acquainted with Edward Irving and had visited Margaret McDonald during the time of her visions. Combined with the knowledge he had gained from S.R. Maitland/Ribera’s teachings and the new push from Irving/McDonald/Lucunza’s teachings, Darby used the rapture theory to bring a clean break from the lethargic Church of England. Ribera and Lacunza’s teachings find a meeting point in John Nelson Darby