Last Trump

[BrianT]

Hi Dr. Steve,

I appreciate your long response about Rev 3:10, and we can disect the Greek all you want, but I think you're missing the bigger picture here: the verse is part of the letter to the church of Philadelphia. If this verse is a "proof text" of the promise of a pretrib rapture, then it was a total lie to the Philadelphians, plain and simple, because they were not raptured. Since this cannot be the case without us abandoning the validity of scripture altogether, we *must* conclude that the promise contained in this verse is about something else.

whereas posttribulationalists argue that it is preservation in the tribulation that is promised. Most posttribulationalists would teach that the tribulation martyrs are members of the church the body of Christ, if this is so then one is compelled to ask, in what sense are we to understand preservation then? If multitudes of Christians are to be martyred as a result of the fierce persecution of Antichrist, how can we say that they are preserved. The posttribulational position here seems quite ludicrous.

I cannot speak for all posttribulationists, but I personally believe "preservation" is not speaking of purely physical protection. Psalm 37:28 says the Lord preserves saints *for ever*. Psalm 121:7-8 says he will preserve our soul for ever. 2 Tim 4:18 says he will preserve us unto his heavenly kingdom, and even Christ himself said that whoever seeks to save his life will lose it, but whoever will *lose their life* for his sake will save (or "preserve", Luke 17:33) it.

As well, getting back to the Philadelphians: are they not still "kept", even though they have physically died? The very fact that they have died, yet the promise to them cannot be false, proves that the keeping mentioned in the verse is NOT about being kept from physical death.

God bless,
Brian

 

[Optional]

Dr Steve,
If I may be so bold...what is your doctorate in?
Also, your profile says you are a pastor. May I ask - pastor of what?
Thanks

 

[Dr Steve]

Hi Brian T.
Thanks for your response. If you discount this verse as a possible proof text for the pre trib position purely because of its context within the letter to the church at Phil,then you must also discount it as a proof text for post tribers for the same reason you can't have it both ways.
God Bless
Dr Steve.

 

[Bible-belted]

Originally posted by Dr Steve:
Hi Brian T.
Thanks for your response. If you discount this verse as a possible proof text for the pre trib position purely because of its context within the letter to the church at Phil,then you must also discount it as a proof text for post tribers for the same reason you can't have it both ways.
God Bless
Dr Steve.

Not so. I believe you misunderstand BrianT's point. I believe he is simply pointing out that as a fact of hsitory the Philkadelphians were not raptured. Hence if you are right and Rev 3:10 promises a rapture, then it lies for such am event did not take place. This understanding does not preculde other means of "being kept from the hour of trial", such as that arguedfor by post-tribulationists.

A posttribulationist view would see the protection as divine safekeeping through a period of great trouble. The nearst parallel phraseology occurs, as noted a number of times now, in John 17:15. In that context it is clear that what is being pormised is a divine preservation from Satan's influence while remaining in the world, which is where Satan carries out his activity. It seems natural to see this kinbd of preservation in Rev. 3:10 as well.

This becomes all the more likely when we comsider that in th eonly other examples of the verb tereo involving believers and Christ (or God) occur in John 17 as well (v.11, 12,15) and in all cases refer to that same kind of spiritual protection or preservation.

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Dr Steve:
Hi Brian T.
Thanks for your response. If you discount this verse as a possible proof text for the pre trib position purely because of its context within the letter to the church at Phil,then you must also discount it as a proof text for post tribers for the same reason you can't have it both ways.

I agree. I don't think it is a "proof text" for posttrib either, for it doesn't speak of the rapture at all. It simply speaks of God's protection, and does not specify what form it will take (and it doesn't even have to be physicial protection). All I'm saying is that it cannot be talking about a pretrib rapture. Pretribbers read way too much into this verse (and others like it).

 

[Dr Steve]

Let me deal with the question of wrath deferred from before, which is connected to the tribulation and the day of the Lord.
The issue of the “day of the Lord” which I believe is equated with the Great tribulation, and its relationship to the rapture pretribulationalism and posttribulationalism stands or falls. Though this period is designated as “the day of the Lord” it is quite clear that what is in view is not a twenty four hour period of time but an extended period lasting for many years. The proof of that is seen in the fact that the events predicted to take place on this “day” are impossible to fit into a twenty four hour time period, and which other Scriptures identify as happening over an extended period of time. But the question is exactly over what period of time do the events of “the day of the Lord” take place? The day of the Lord follows (the rapture). It will be the time when the judgements of God are poured out upon the earth. It includes the decent of the Lord with all his saints to execute judgement on His foes and to take possession of the kingdom and to reign in righteousness for a thousand glorious years. So the day of the Lord spans the tribulation and the millennium. This would certainly fit the frame of the Old Testament prophecies concerning this period, which predict both judgement and blessing for this day, cf Zeph 1v7-18, 3v14-17. The main emphasis of the references concerning this period are on the judgement aspects of it, especially those which precede the second advent of Christ to the earth. Most pretribulationalists teach that the judgements in view cover the entire tribulation period or Daniel’s seventieth week, posttribulationalists usually limit them to the events immediately preceding the second advent of Christ to the earth. The question is who is right? If it can be shown that the judgement phase of the day of the Lord is equated with the tribulation period, also known as Daniel’s seventieth week and the time of Jacob’s trouble, then it is clear that pretribulationalists are right. It can be demonstrated that the day of the Lord, the time of Jacob’s trouble and the tribulation period are equated.
The Scriptures indicate that the Day of the Lord, the Time of Jacob’s Trouble, and the Great Tribulation have several things in common.
First, the concept of trouble or tribulation is associated with all three.
All three passages use the same Hebrew word for trouble.
The concept of an unparalleled time of trouble is identified with all three.
The term “great” is used for all three. Zeph1v14, Jer30v7, Mt24v21and Rev7v14).
The concept of birth pangs is associated with all three Isa 13v6-9 and 1Thess5v2-3, Jer30 v6-7
The expression “that day” is used for all three Isa 2v12, 17, 19-21 and Zeph1v7, 9-10, 14-15, Jer30v7.
Israel’s future repentance or spiritual restoration to God is associated with all three.
I have demonstrated that the phrase “the day of the Lord” covers the same period as the Tribulation and the “time of Jacob’s trouble
The significance of this is obvious when we look at the promise of 1Thess 5 v9 the apostle assures these Thessalonian believers that they had been selected for salvation not wrath. Since that was so they could not enter the tribulation period which is designated as the “wrath of the Lamb,” cf Rev6v15-17.
In order to escape the obvious implications of this verse posttribulationalists limit the judgement phase of the “day of the Lord” to the end of the tribulation period, and seek to deny that the tribulation is a time of divine wrath. The revelation of the judgement phase of the day of the Lord as synonymous with the time of Jacob’s trouble, the seventieth week of Daniel, and including the Great Tribulation, together with the promise that the Church is not subject to divine wrath, which will be manifest during the tribulation period, I believe is a death blow to posttribulationalism.

 

[Bible-belted]

What is the Day of the Lord?

The term "Day of the Lord", which has several permutations, refers to God's action for jusdgment and deliverance in history. It can refer to an near event or an event that ocurs in the far future, that is, the final judgment.

All agree on these points. The question is: Is the Tribulation included in the Day? I think not. However does this mean that believers are not a part o the Day? No. In fact Christians ARE associated with the Day. For one thing the resurrection of the saints is associated with the Day. (Jn. 6:39,40,44, 55; 11:54). Since the Rapture occurs at the same time as the Resurrectionof the Saints, the Rapture is also part of the Day. Paul offers confirmation of this (1Co. 1:8; Phil. 1:6, 10; 2:16; 2Tim. 4:8 etc.)

Therfore we conclude that on the NT the Day includes that all those things associated with the Parousia of Christ, but the fact that Tribulation is NOT part of the Day is evidence that the Tribulation precedes the parousia.

Specifically in 1Thess. 5 we see Paul associating believers with the Day ina contexty that clearly indicates that the Tribulation has already begun. This coheres well with the words of Christ in Matt. 24:42-44 and Lk. 21:34-36. In both these passgaes it is unquestionably a posttribulational coming thatis in view. Note particularly the parallels between the Lucan [assage and the Thessalonian passage.

In short it is to misunderstand the Day to assert that the Rapture is anyting but Post-tribulational.

 

[Bible-belted]

Why is the Geat Tribulation ot to eb considered part of the Day?

Several exegetical factors are worth considering:

1) There is not a single reference in the NT to the Day that can be said to clearly include th Tribulation. So there is a lack of positive evidence.

2) The events of Malachi 4:5 and Joel 2:30,31 refer to events that are to be considered part of the Tribulation before the Day of the Lord. See Acts 2:20.

3) In 2Thess 2 we see Paul clearly describing events which he says must precede the Day but which are tribulational. If the Day cannot come until the Tribulation has haooened, we cannot say that the Day and the Trib are the same thing.

 

[BrianT]

Hi Dr. Steve,

Latreia has already done some great responses, but I wanted to add a couple of comments.

I read you post carefully, but I fail to see how you've proven that the "day" of the Lord covers the tribulation. You've noted some similarities, but nothing conclusive. I also don't understand when you say "the events predicted to take place on this “day” are impossible to fit into a twenty four hour time" - can you be specific?

I fully believe the "day" of the Lord is literally a 24 hour day. Which is ironic, because I was arguing on the other side of the fence in the 6-"day" creation thread a couple weeks ago. One of the main reasons, is because of a verse Latreia mentioned:

Joel 2:31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.

compare with:

Rev 6:12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;

and

Matt 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

I think these verse comparisons make it *clear* that the sixth seal comes immediately after the tribulation, and before the "day of the Lord". And, as I've pointed out previously, it is at the 6th seal that "wrath" is first mentioned. This all fits posttribulationism to a 'T'. The trib ends, and in a 24-hour period the Lord returns, resurrects/raptures the saints, and dispenses the destructive wrath on the unrighteous.

I've asked before, and don't recall an answer: if the "wrath" is the entire trib, are trib saints "appointed to wrath" or to "obtain salvation"???

 

[C.S. Murphy]

I know this may seem out of character for me but at first glance I think I agree with Brian but I call it Mid trib not post, as it is indeed after the first part but before the wrath of the grat trib.

Murph

 

[BrianT]

Murphy,

What are the first four words of Matt 24:29?