Featured Did Paul teach the Pre-Trib view?

What is your fetish with Darby?
Who here admits to following him?
If no one here admits to following him, why do you keep quoting him. He is an obsession to you, almost as an idol.
I have never thoroughly read his works, and am totally unaware of his views on the atonement. Neither do I care. Darby is not a reference, nor an authority in my books. I don't quote from him, but you are obsessed with him.

There are good pre-mill sources well before his time. '
You deny that. But the fact remains.

 

Premillennialism is not dispensationalism. Charles Spurgeon was a premillennialist but I have already presented some of his remarks about Darby's heretical beliefs on the atonement. Following are some additional thoughts by Spurgeon:

 

From what Spurgeon says Darby is a heretic so I could care less about him. However, I have shown repeatedly quoting dispensational scholars that Darby is the father of pre-trib-dispensationalism and that he claims new revelation in developing that doctrine. You may not like it but that is the truth.

I don't deny it. But that is not dispensational premillennialism. There is a vast difference between historic or covenant premillennialism which has the correct view of the Church and dispensational premillennialism which teaches that the Church, for which Jesus Christ died, is a "parenthesis" in GOD's program for Israel!

 

Thanks for that article Old Regular!... Now I know!

The four views are historicist, preterist, futurist, and idealist.

I hold to ALL views!... I am a partial preterist, ahmillennialist, historical, idealist or spiritual and futurist!

II Timothy 2:15 Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

To me embracing all views is essential in studying Revelation. Each view has validity and not one view alone inconclusive devoid of all the others. To understand one view is tunnel vision but to understand all and put them in their proper place is to see the big picture of Gods redemption alone... Brother Glen

 

No, it is not the truth. You have been corrected numerous times from the clearly worded statements of the early Christian church scholars but that makes no difference to you. You either diss what you are given or just ignore it altogether, a la Luke 21.

I have a question for you: At His return is Jesus coming like a lion roaring or will He come as a thief in the night(quietly, covertly as thieves always do)?

 

Amen. I have preached that very point for many years. You're right on target. :thumbsup:

 

His claim to "new revelation" has as much veracity to it as our current claim to the "new revelation" given to you to denounce him as a heretic. Both are just as fallacious.
You have a fetish with him. If we count the number of times you have used his name of pronouns referring to his name in a thread like this one they no doubt number more than "Jesus Christ" or than "God."

 

That is Pathetic. I present a passage of Scripture when interpreted literally {the method supposedly preferred by Darbyites} can only be mean a general resurrection and general judgment of all the dead.

John 5:28, 29
28. Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29. And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Yet you say:

Now please tell me when the Darbyites have adopted a doctrine that the unsaved are raised prior to the so-called-GrrreeaaT-Tribulation.

The TRUTH is that NO SCRIPTURE shows a pre-trib-"snatching away" of the Church. If one did it would have been presented 10 years ago!

 

That pretty much fits what I told Brother Hank earlier:

A little history and certainly the idealist approach includes the time until Jesus Christ returns!

 

What does the "by which" refer to?


God bless.

 

It was revealed almost 2,000 years ago. Being a mystery it cannot refer to the general resurrection which itself is a limited revelation in the Old Testament. That demands the Rapture is not that which was revealed in the Old Testament.

By the way, the word we get the word rapture can be found in the Catholic translation. I would think that would be common knowledge.

While it is balancing of Scripture that show the snatching away will be prior to the Tribulation, the fact remains the catching away is a first century doctrine and it cannot be found in the resurrections described in Revelation.

If we take the popular Catholic tradition, as you do, then we can equally question that Zechariah 14 depicts Christ's Second Coming, because, after all...the text doesn't say it is.


God bless.

 

How can the Old Testament reveal the rapture of the Church when the Church is a mystery according to Darbyites? But Darbyites will make any asinine statement if they think it proves the unprovable! The Roman Catholics are no more slavish to the pope than you people are to the false doctrine of Darby!

 

Second picture: the problem with making this the Return of Christ is it places His Return before the Tribulation ends. The seventh Trumpet judgement can be distinguished from the Seal and Vial judgements unless we suppose John forgot how to describe the prior judgements.

Third picture: I guess Catholic Doctrine see the Lord ordered about by an Angel, and collecting His own by killing them, or worse...missing some who are then killed in the second harvest...


https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+14:13&version=KJV


Fourth picture: While we get closer to, not a picture of, but the Return which is so clearly presented in Revelation 19, the obvious question we have for the Catholic view is...what about the period during the Seventh Trumpet Judgement, which they have just told us depicts Christ's Return? lol

That would explain when those that died in faith died.

And I will just throw in that its hard to reconcile their proposal this is the last shaking when Christ has not returned and numerous prophecies, including those made by Christ, show that His enemies will physically die and their corpses fed upon in the Supper of. The Great God.

Fifth picture: amazing. They have, as they have in each of these "pictures," imposed the Lord's return despite the fact that none of them depict Christ's Return. And they only say it's the end of the Age. Where is the Return?

Just not there.

Sixth picture: finally, something we can agree with the Catholic view. This is the Scriptural presentation of the Return of Christ.

Unfortunately, they go on to...

...seventh picture, which is, according to them a reiteration of the previous Return.

What is interesting is they acknowledge Satan is released but they will not acknowledge the thousand years he was bound and Christ's return prior to that binding.

Simply amazing.

The reference to Ezekiel 38-39 is a nice touch. It "might" correspond...lol.

It does. It corresponds to the only reference to Christ's Return in Revelation 19, and it is no coincidence, but the harmony of Biblical Prophecy, that we see the phys8cal destruction of the enemies of God who are left for carrion.

This corresponds to Christ's teaching here...

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+17:30-37&version=KJV


The Catholic method of interpretation, which is where these "pictures" come from, leave much to be desired.

Anyone who can read Revelation and not see the differences in the events is simply not paying attention to what all Prophecy is teaching us.


God bless.

 

Apparently you did not understand...that's the point.

The resurrection of the dead was revealed in the Old Testament, but in a limited manner. Despite that we see in the Gospels it was well enough known that several reference it. The Sadducees, who are equivalents to Rapture deniers, denied the resurrection of the dead.

Now here is the point: Paul revealed the Rapture as a mystery which negates the possibility Paul was referring to the resurrection referred to in Daniel 12:1-2.

Secondly, you will find nowhere that I say the Old Testament revealed the Rapture. That is the opposite of the point itself.

Your infatuation with Darby is almost as humorous as your pseudocontempt for Catholicism, which is without question the source of your doctrine.

Only by study of the Word of God will you ever come to actually possess a faith that is actually yours. Until such time as you do so, you are merely adopting the faith of other Catholics.


God bless.

 

I have responded to them as much as possible.

Spurgeon's End Times Theology

C.H. Spurgeon
CHARLES SPURGEON CONTEMPORARY OF JOHN NELSON DARBY
John Darby's ideas formed the foundation upon which the pre-tribulation rapture (Left Behind) doctrine stands. The following quote is taken from a post that Charles Spurgeon's grandson, Tommie Spurgean, posted on his own website in order to awaken Darby's followers to the fact that the Baptist Movement had initially rejected Darby's proposals, and today it has chosen to honor Darby instead of Spurgeon when it comes to eschatology.

CHARLES SPURGEON AND END-TIME PROPHECY

“Charles Spurgeon believed that the Baptist faith was exactly the same as the early Church under the Apostles and he taught that. Yet today if he was applying for a job as a pastor in a Baptist church and he told them how he believed about the Rapture and the Resurrection he would be rejected. His scriptural understanding and messages are praised by many and they often place him at the top of the list for their spiritual leadership. But there are things in Prophecy that he taught that the Baptist would reject as heresy. One of the reasons many do not know what CH Spurgeon taught on Prophecy was the fact that he never preached in direct messages such as a sermon on the rapture or end times. But we know what he believed by what he included in his messages of salvation and enlightenment because he often included his belief in prophecy in the message itself rather than it being the main topic of his sermon.

What most believers do not know is that Charles Spurgeon believed that the Rapture and Resurrection would happen at the same time following the Great Tribulation. That the judgement seat of Christ would happen and Satan would be bond for a thousand years He also believed that Jesus would then literally set up his kingdom on earth and rule for a thousand years. He believed that a second resurrection would occur after the thousand-year reign for the unrighteous dead. This would be followed by the great white throne judgement of God and then there would be a new heaven and a new earth.

During Spurgeon’s day there was another preacher that people today believe was a knowledgeable man on prophecy. His name was John Darby. It is amazing to me that the Baptist organization would accept his teachings over Charles Spurgeon. Charles did not care for the teachings of Darby and if he were alive today would be preaching in direct opposition to him. He did it back then and he would continue to do it today. What I am referring to is the belief that the Rapture and Resurrection would occur before the tribulation. How could anyone believe that Darby had a greater understanding than what CH Spurgeon did? Spurgeon was not ignorant when it came to prophetic teachings and took them just as serious as his teachings on grace because he wanted his listeners to know the truth. However his main focus was on the cross of Christ and Salvation because he felt that it was more important than prophecy, however he did include prophecy teachings in his preaching and teaching. He did not reject end-time prophecy or think that it was wrong to be enlightened by it.”

An article at www.spurgeon.org/mainpage.html had the following to say:[/quote]
Obviously little Tommie, the son of the “Great Spurgeon” could not see how anyone could even dare to question his FATHER’s beliefs!! How dare he! C.H. was an idol, like “god.”
Note again:
How could anyone believe that Darby had a greater understanding than what CH Spurgeon did.
And yet Tommie had just finished writing that Spurgeon rarely spoke on prophecy. He didn’t study prophecy much. He wasn’t a student of prophecy, unlike Darby who gave much of his life to it.
Please, let us knock Spurgeon off this idol-like pedestal.

Since we don’t know exactly what they are we are not in a position to judge one over the other.
Quite frankly I reject Calvinism also.

If this is true about Darby it is not true about Dispensationalism today.

All of the above is based on the timing of the resurrection of the righteous (rapture).
This is not as a big a deal as you make it out to be. They are both pre-mil. Even today there are pre-trib, mid-trib and post-trib positions, but all are pre-mill. All were pre-mill dating back to the Waldenses to the Apostles. And that is dispensationalism. It existed far before Darby. There is only a slight difference as to when the “rapture” takes place.

SPURGEON IS NOT GOD!!
Perhaps there is good reason to believe people like Larkin over Spurgeon in some areas.

 

An overstatement.

This is grave error, if not total ignorance.

He is showing ignorance of dispensationalism and in doing so making libelous statements.
We pray for the salvation of the Jews/Israel, even as Paul did in Romans 9 and 10.
In this “dispensation” they must come to Christ the same way we must come to Christ.

Or how ignorant this man is who wrote this. He doesn’t know what he is speaking about.

Let’s get this straight.
John Hagee is no more a representative of Baptist beliefs than OR is a representative of my Baptist beliefs.
I would hate for either one to represent me as a Baptist.

And I believe most of us would agree with that. I personally have witnessed to many Jews.

This man is as confused as Hagee is confused.
Most dispensationalists would not agree with how he portrays Hagee. If that is what Hagee believes I certainly don’t agree with it. It is not what most dispensationalists believe.
Thus what he has written is a mischaracterization of dispensationalism.

 

hello Darrel C
The Holy Spirit.........when those people were alive in the preflood days of Noah. Now they are in torment awaiting the White Throne Judgement:thumbs:


Then we see 1st Peter 3:18 "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."