No, I never met a dispensationalist who believed in the post-trib rapture. They are all emphatic that good Christians have a ticket to escape the Tribulation, to get out of jail free.
I don't doubt your own experience.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
No, I never met a dispensationalist who believed in the post-trib rapture. They are all emphatic that good Christians have a ticket to escape the Tribulation, to get out of jail free.
I don't doubt your own experience.
I understand dispensationalism. I also understand that not all dispensationalists hold the exact view you are sharing. Some see the dispensation switching at the mid-trib and some see the dispensation switching at the end of the tribulation.
Whether you can accept it or not, there are many different views in dispensationalism. Some get labeled hyper-dispensationalists because they break up the Bible into even more different modes by which God changes his process with his creation.
Not just "good' Christians, all Christians.No, I never met a dispensationalist who believed in the post-trib rapture. They are all emphatic that good Christians have a ticket to escape the Tribulation, to get out of jail free.
Not just "good' Christians, all Christians.
The disarray in the ranks of dispensationalism must be staggering. Maybe it is crumbling after 200 years. To me myself, pre-trib and mid-trib are almost alike but I think that Dallas teaches pre-trib. It is illogical that Dallas would teach post-trib as dispensationalism since it contradicts Darby and Scofield, for example. I do not find any definitions that follow your formula so if you find one, please post it.
First, 200 years is generous regarding dispensationalism. It truly is a USA theology that tends to view the Bible as though the United States is the promised land and its citizens are the people of God. It's prideful and arrogant at its core.
Second, the rapture is just a small part of dispensationalism. That post-trib is a smaller view, not in the mainstream, does not mean it's not a part of dispensational theology. It's simply not mainstream.
Third, you are wanting a formula, which is very much what happens when the Bible is broken down into a legalistic document and God is explained as one who continually changes approaches over time.
What I find in dispensationalism is that people say "grace," but then they create legalism as the process of life.
You can believe what you want. It doesn't matter. No matter the position of dispensationalism, the whole group is wrong.So you don't have any evidence to support your viewpoint.
You can believe what you want. It doesn't matter. No matter the position of dispensationalism, the whole group is wrong.
Meh.
I always leaned towards "Post-Trib" myself since God has a track record of not being shy about allowing saints to suffer and Jesus sort of PROMISES that we will suffer if we follow him in all of the Gospels. The so called "signs of the end times" are pretty common events. When have nations not risen up against nations? When have there not been earthquakes? When has the world not known hunger and disease?
A-Mil also makes some sense if we view everything leading up to Jesus' return as the "tribulation" and "last days" of other verses.
Pre-Trib based on the division within the structure of Revelation seems more "wishful thinking", and both Pre-Trib and Mid-Trib sort of seem to have too many returns of Jesus to align with simpler verses in other parts of the Bible.
That said, living in readiness for our Lord's return is never a bad idea.
Honestly, there is zero need for anyone to agree with your version that only pre-trib or mid-trib can only be in the dispensational camp.You have no evidence even defining what dispensationalism is or is not so your statement becomes meaningless.
Honestly, there is zero need for anyone to agree with your version that only pre-trib or mid-trib can only be in the dispensational camp.
I have met dispensationalists who argue whether it's a post-trib or pre-millenial rapture. Dispensationalists become so trapped in the minutia of their timeline that they end up arguing over silly things.
That's not THE tribulation. Thats being light in the world.I was raised on pre-trib, but as I have read the Bible, I don't see any "rapture" in scripture. I see God returning when all his saints have been brought to redemption. After this, Jesus returns to justly burn the world in fire and prepare a new heaven and earth for his family.
@atpollard has, in my opinion, correctly identified the trials of the saints, globally, in this world. No one can deny the great suffering of the saints, throughout history, at the hands of wicked people. Even today we see brothers and sisters being horribly martyred. Their blood cries out to God before the throne room. Their tribulation was very real.
Pre trip is inevitable if you are rightly diving the bible .Meh.
I always leaned towards "Post-Trib" myself since God has a track record of not being shy about allowing saints to suffer and Jesus sort of PROMISES that we will suffer if we follow him in all of the Gospels. The so called "signs of the end times" are pretty common events. When have nations not risen up against nations? When have there not been earthquakes? When has the world not known hunger and disease?
A-Mil also makes some sense if we view everything leading up to Jesus' return as the "tribulation" and "last days" of other verses.
Pre-Trib based on the division within the structure of Revelation seems more "wishful thinking", and both Pre-Trib and Mid-Trib sort of seem to have too many returns of Jesus to align with simpler verses in other parts of the Bible.
That said, living in readiness for our Lord's return is never a bad idea.
No rapture, no pre-trib. Just tribulation and then the King returns.Pre trip is inevitable if you are rightly diving the bible .
Isaac Newton tried to hold the "dogs" at bay for 300 years? I do not think it worked out that well. This year or next being 40 years sooner must mean his data points were in error and not his math. If he was "guessing" that far off, why not just use a round number like 2000 urars from the Cross? 30AD + 2000 = 2030; the most important day on earth + 2 Lord's Days.If I had to pick an end time date I would go with the scientist, Isaac Newton...
"And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half. " - Daniel 12:7
From a folio cataloged as Yahuda MS 7.3g, f. 13v:
"So then the time times & half a time are 42 months or 1260 days or three years & an half, reckoning twelve months to a year & 30 days to a month as was done in the Calendar of the primitive year. And the days of short lived Beasts being put for the years of lived kingdoms, the period of 1260 days, if dated from the complete conquest of the three kings A.C. 800, will end A.C. 2060." - Isaac Newton
As Charlemagne was crowned king on December 25, 800 by Pope Leo the III so the day of Christ's coming will be on Christmas Day, 2060. If the rapture of the saints (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17) occurs seven years before the time of Christs coming the date of the rapture 12.25 2053. Which would all fall around 5820 on the Jewish calendar. However Isaac Newton notes, and I must add along with any of my calculations....
"It may end later, but I see no reason for its ending sooner. This I mention not to assert when the time of the end shall be, but to put a stop to the rash conjectures of fancifull men who are frequently predicting the time of the end, & by doing so bring the sacred prophesies into discredit as often as their predictions fail. Christ comes as a thief in the night, & it is not for us to know the times & seasons which God hath put into his own breast." - Isaac Newton
The 7th Trumpet covers the whole 42 months of Satan's authority. So at the sound the Victory was complete and the sound was to go on the whole 8 days. Then there is an interruption. A 42 month interruption. The 7th Trumpet continues until the battle of Armageddon is complete. It only last 1 hour on the 8th day. So mid and post are not even relative to time. The 7th Trumpet covers both events. No one can prove a rapture happens prior to during or after the 1 hour battle of Armageddon. It is nonsense because the last trumpet started it's blast before the 42 months even started. The battle of Armageddon is the end of it's sounding. All is over by that time. Christ is on earth. It would be a tiptoe, not a rapture into the clouds. Actually all would be on their knees wishing they had been in the army with Christ instead of on earth with Satan. But that all is fantasy teaching about a post event."But now the next meeting was coming. What was I to say? I need not point out that there is no pretribulation Rapture in Matthew 24. The Second Coming is unmistakably placed “immediately after the Tribulation” (verse 29), and I was forced to the conclusion that if the Rapture was to be “before” the Tribulation, the Lord Jesus Christ would certainly have given some hint of it at least. He was dealing with the End-Time of the Age. It is unthinkable that He would have spoken so minutely of the Tribulation without stating that the Church would escape. Instead, He purposely led His hearers to the belief that His followers would be in it. Hence, I was staggered, nor could I honestly defend my previous position."
Any dispensationalist knows that the church and the church age were still a mystery at this point - hence their absence in the passage. That he doesn't even address that foundational principle of dispensationalism tells me he was not much of a dispensationalist, which is why he was so shocked by Matthew 24 in the first place.
"And that the Resurrection is always placed at the time of the sounding of the Last Trump (1 Cor. 15:51-54). This Trump, without doubt, closes the Tribulation."
This is Bible 101. The last trump is not the last trumpet. They're 2 different words with 2 different meanings,
A trump is a sound emitted by a trumpet.
This has nothing to do with the 7th trumpet of Revelation 10 & 11.
That's precisely the order laid out, with corresponding thoughts, in 1Corinthians 15.
- The 1st trump awakens the dead.
- The 2nd-and-last trump changes the living.
Paul says he was revealing a mystery at this point precisely because Christ had not spoken of it in the gospels since - and watch the beautiful match - the church itself was still a mystery then, and therefore so was its own rapture.
I won't read more because there are post-tribbers who do a far more convincing job of "dismantling" the pre-trib rapture.
It is. 150 years ago the shift went even further south than a separation between the rapture and second coming.But the Rapture and second coming seem to be described as being same event though.