Featured Did Paul teach the Pre-Trib view?

How can say that with any assurance?
You just defined one verse with "world" as in "the first century only."
Why not this one? What makes you so sure that the author was not writing to just the elect of the first century? Of course if he was, then you can't be sure if you are one of the elect.

 

It is the elect from all ages....ALL THE FATHER Has Given to the Son 1st century ,2nd, third, 4th...every century

This is clear even if you try your best to confuse it....[It seems you only confuse yourself}

ALL of the elect were chosen by God before the world was and everyone of them will be saved.

9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:

 

My belief is different than yours as you know.

In such simple scriptures as:
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

I believe the world encompasses all the world, saved and unsaved alike.

I don't have the problem you do of having to redefine words of "world" "whosoever" etc. The words say what they mean and mean what they say.

I can't imagine you having to teach a class of grade one through four Sunday School children. Have the class to read John 3:16. Ask them what it means when the Bible says: "God so loved the world that he gave his only son..."
Do those children--the world over--think that the "world" will be redefined as the "world of the elect." How many people reading that verse would naturally come to that conclusion if they had not been first indoctrinated with Calvinism?
It obviously is not a natural translation. In fact it is entirely unnatural and outside of the context. It is forced into it.

Thus with such forced definitions one must wonder, how can a Calvinist be sure that he is one of the elect when he keeps on changing the very definitions of the words that define "the elect" at his own whim and will?

 

still waiting for a response to this from OldRegular.

 

DHK

Yes it is....but the differences are troubling

I believe that also....

No...I just understand the context as it changes

The children if properly instructed will understand it clearly.All the people in all the world are spiritually dead....God reaches down and chooses to save a multitude in His Son.
He does not have to save any, He saves All he has planned to save...Evewn a child can grasp this concept.

The natural man will not naturally come...that is the whole point,

Spiritual truths are God given, not natural.

When God reveals truth a certain way...it is not forced but Spiritually discerned...
That is why The Spirit gives a new heart and indwells the elect believer.

 

Notice that Jesus Christ says the hour "NOW IS". HE is speaking of those who are spiritually dead, not the dead in the graves. BIG DIFFERENCE. Jesus Christ is talking here about the new birth, regeneration, spiritual resurrection. Those who experience it should understand!

It blows nothing apart. In John5: 28, 29 Jesus Christ is talking about the resurrection of those in the graves. All you need do is read!

 

Iconoclast;

That is exactly what you did but I am not going to argue with you on that point again.

Your sense of timing is absolutely awful. Let me explain why.
.

So? He did not become King of Israel even though they offered to put Him on the throne at that time and so the prophecy of Isaiah was NOT fulfilled. Jesus would not permit them to make Him King......at THAT time.

Joh 6:15 ¶ When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone.

That is an enormous lie, friend. You gave no historical documentation for this nor named the people who repented and accepted Jesus at or after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. The kingdom did not come and Jesus did not sit upon the throne of David as promised. Things only got worse for the Jews, not better as the prophets said would happen after Messiah was to take the throne.

How does that help you? Paul wrote those words several yearsbefore the destruction of Jerusalem AND.......he was, in fact in Rome and not in Jerusalem.

That kingdom is the same invisible kingdom of God that Jesus spoke of to Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world." The visible, physical kingdom that Isaiah spoke of in which Jesus will literally sit on the throne of David has not arrived in the world yet.

True. ...........And?

What are you laughing about? 'All the world' in Roman times is NOT 'All the world' in modern times. But those living in the Roman Empire certainly thought that Rome 'ruled the world' in that time even though they did not have control of the whole planet.

To escape the snare that is to come upon the entire world and to stand before the Lord IS the rapture described in II Thess 4...to meet with Jesus in the air. Nothing could be more obvious.

The Greek word in I Thess 4:17 is Harpzo 'a catching away' a 'siezing'....as in a thief in the night who comes covertly to 'sieze' what He wants. Tell us, does a thief come noisely with great fanfare or does a thief come quietly? You should understand what I am driving at. The verse DOES teach an escape and that escape is the same one described by Luke in 21:36.

Not so. The scriptures are plain enough about these matters but you are treating the Bible like it's a rubber band you can play with and stretch any which way you please. The words of scripture, like as in any language on earth have different meanings depending upon their context. We know that Jesus was talking about THE generation that would experience the wrath of God and the literal, visible 2nd coming at the end of the world. The destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 was not the end of the world nor was there ANY indication that Christ had come to sit on the throne of David.

You and those who believe as you are stretching scripture horribly. Why, I don't know.

That's not the truth. Not even close. The details of the war in A.D. 70 did NOT match the details of the battle described by Zechariah. I listed those details for you. It should have been easy to see that they were two different events......one historical and the other yet future.


I must depart now but I might answer the rest later. Best wishes.

 

Calypsis4

Why do you dismiss what you do not understand?
The King coming to Zion is no small matter....
4 David was thirty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned forty years.

5 In Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months: and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty and three years over all Israel and Judah.

6 And the king and his men went to Jerusalem unto the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land: which spake unto David, saying, Except thou take away the blind and the lame, thou shalt not come in hither: thinking, David cannot come in hither.

7 Nevertheless David took the strong hold of Zion: the same is the city of David.

22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

23 This is the Lord's doing; it is marvellous in our eyes.

24 This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.

25 Save now, I beseech thee, O Lord: O Lord, I beseech thee, send now prosperity.

26 Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the Lord: we have blessed you out of the house of the Lord.

27 God is the Lord, which hath shewed us light: bind the sacrifice with cords, even unto the horns of the altar.

28 Thou art my God, and I will praise thee: thou art my God, I will exalt thee.

29 O give thanks unto the Lord; for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever.

Jesus was not interested in an earthly kingdom offered by men.

He is the Divine King.......He comes as King....Look clearly at this verse that was quoted of our Lord;
zech
9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

THY KING cometh unto thee.... matthew quotes it quite directly


Matthew 21 King James Version (KJV)

21 And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem, and were come to Bethphage, unto the mount of Olives, then sent Jesus two disciples,

2 Saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose them, and bring them unto me.

3 And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them.

4 All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying,

5 Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.

Be careful there C4.....because you have it wrong does not mean that I post a lie

The people here who saw the triumphal entry were part of the elect remnant...Paul also quotes from Isa 1 which you scoff at and totally miss the point he makes.

You miss it because you are trying to defend a system that is flawed. Some of us have found some of those flaws....perhaps you have not seen anyone question the ideas you have imbibed.....but nevertheless many of us now question what we were first exposed to and are still searching it out..

The bible does it for me...observe;

8 And a very great multitude spread their garments in the way; others cut down branches from the trees, and strawed them in the way.

9 And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.

We do not have a list of names but you get the idea as they quote from psalm118...... now watch how paul speaks of them;

27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.

29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.


isa1:9 Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah

 

pt2

The language of "accepting Jesus" is not scriptural. That being said...the book of Hebrews was written to 1st century Jewish Christians , part of the elect remnant...so you attempts to discredit what I posted have failed big time.

It did indeed come and it is ongoing right now...It is the reign of the Heavens...here over the earth.

.

Did Peter mention David and the throne on the day of Pentecost?

let's see;
29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.

30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.




[

It helps establish that there was already an elect remnant during the Apostolic age...the first 10.000 Christians were Jews...that's how!

the only passage that speaks of the 1000 yrs does not say Jesus is physically on earth...it does speak of Him ruling...but he rules and speaks from heaven....right now....

25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:
26 Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven.

27 And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.

28 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:

29 For our God is a consuming fire.

Hal Lindsey and tim lahaye say so...but scripture does not.

Jesus said this happens on the last day...very clearly;


39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven.

42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves.

44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

No...we do not "know"that...Jesus spoke to those he spoke with face to face and said there are some standing here, He said...This generation

The word spoke of the "end of the age"....not the end of the world

it seems that way to you now.....but you keep looking...start by looking up the word for age/world

Topic: Age
<A-1,Noun,165,aion>
"an age, era" (to be connected with aei, "ever," rather than with ao, "to breathe"), signifies a period of indefinite duration, or time viewed in relation to what takes place in the period. The force attaching to the word is not so much that of the actual length of a period, but that of a period marked by spiritual or moral characteristics. This is illustrated in the use of the adjective [see Note (1) below] in the phrase "life eternal," in John 17:3, in respect of the increasing knowledge of God.
The phrases containing this word should not be rendered literally, but consistently with its sense of indefinite duration. Thus eis ton aiona does not mean "unto the age" but "for ever" (see, e.g., Heb. 5:6). The Greeks contrasted that which came to an end with that which was expressed by this phrase, which shows that they conceived of it as expressing interminable duration.

The word occurs most frequently in the Gospel of John, the Hebrews and Revelation. It is sometimes wrongly rendered "world." See COURSE, ETERNAL, WORLD. It is a characteristic word of John's Gospel.

Notes: (1) Aionios, the adjective corresponding, denoting "eternal," is set in contrast with proskairos, lit., "for a season," 2 Cor. 4:18. It is used of that which in nature is endless, as, e.g., of God, Rom. 16:26, His power, 1 Tim. 6:16, His glory, 1 Pet. 5:10, the Holy Spirit, Heb. 9:14, redemption, Heb. 9:12, salvation, 5:9, life in Christ, John 3:16, the resurrection body, 2 Cor. 5:1, the future rule of Christ, 2 Pet. 1:11, which is declared to be without end, Luke 1:33, of sin that never has forgiveness, Mark 3:29, the judgment of God, Heb. 6:2, and of fire, one of its instruments, Matt. 18:8; 25:41; Jude 1:7. See ETERNAL, EVERLASTING.

(2) In Rev. 15:3, the RV has "King of the ages," according to the texts which have aionon; the AV has "of saints" (hagion, in inferior mss.). There is good ms. evidence for ethnon, "nations," (AV, marg.), probably a quotation from Jer. 10:7.

 

Iconoclast:

No way. You don't know what you're talking about, sir. Conversion to Jesus Christ by acceptance is the very heart of the gospel.

Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out...
Acts 3:19.

A person will neither repent nor therefore be converted without an acceptance of the truth that Jesus Christ as God's Son who was crucified for all our sins.

I believe that I have been communicating with a true heretic in terms of Titus 3:10 for you are clearly not being led by the Holy Spirit in your remarks, so I will break off any further discussion because this discussion is going nowhere.

 

Paul wrote under the guidance of GOD, therefore, Paul could not teach a pre-trib-"snatching away" of the Church!

 

His own words say otherwise:

1 Corinth. 15:51 ¶ Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

1 Thess 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

How can you believe in such an incredible falsehood in light of Pauls own teaching as he described it above?

Since Paul was a devoted follower of Jesus who taught that,

Lu 21:35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.

36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

So to 'escape' is to stand before the Son of Man...and that my friends matches what Paul said in the above quoted verses concerning the rapture.

 

That is not about the-so-called-pre-trib-"snatching away" of the Church. You, just as all Darbyites, wrest Scripture to support the his false doctrine. Paul is simply talking about the resurrection of the Saints at the LAST DAY!

To say that Jesus taught a pre-trib-"snatching away" of the Church for which HE died is a lie. Jesus Christ did teach the following:

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.

John 6:39. And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at theLAST DAY..

John 6:40. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the LAST DAY..

John 6:44. No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the LAST DAY..

John 6:54. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the LAST DAY.

Now I understand that the disciples of Darby will invent a multitude of last days in an attempt to justify their false doctrine but that is your problem. The Apostle Peter says of these people just after he gives us a picture of the Return of Jesus Christ at the LAST DAY:

2 Peter 3:15, 16
15. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16. As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Peter says it well!

 

Caly4

translation.......I cannot answer what you have asked me.....I am not equipped to answer any of these things........it is easier to just call you a name......very politely of course........I will say you are a heretic even though I caly4 cannot produce one verse that uses the word to accept Jesus.
I am also afraid that you will point out that real Christians are made accepted in the beloved in eph1........so I will sneak away citing titus3 with no basis in fact........

 

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

 

You are acting like a KJVO, that the King James is more accurate and even inspired then the original languages. That of course is very foolish.
If that isn't the case then how do you know the word "accepted" isn't in the original "Greek" text. Can you read it fluent enough to tell us that there are places where words could have been translated that way?
So either you are an extreme and rabid KJVO, or you are a Greek expert that can read the Greek fluidly without any Greek aids whatsoever. Which is it?

Your hypocritical theological box of Calvinism is really what is getting in the way of the truth and leading you to call Calypsis a heretic (which is against the rules).
Of course you know such scripture as:
Joh 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
--A synonym for "receive" is to "accept." Thus your claim is wrong, unless you are one of those extreme KJVO where you believe the KJV corrects the Greek? Is that the case Icon? Is that what you really believe?

"If the KJV was good enough for Paul, it is good enough for me." Is this your belief?
Or does John 1:12 allow for "As many as "accepted" him..."

 

This bizarre rejection of "accepting Christ" goes way beyond Calvinism. Even the 1689 Confession, which some here supposedly "hold to" describes:

(19:3, WCF also has "accepting...Christ")