Pre Tribulation Rapture Questions

[David Kent]

Yes, the Christians heeded the warning Jesus gave them, and fled to Pella. I thought Jerusalem was surrounded by General Titus, or is Cestius another name that he is known by? Anyway, the Christians went through 3 1/2 years of tribulation before leaving Jerusalem. Daniel 12 does speak of the tribulation that came upon Jerusalem in AD 66-70.

Cestius was the first general to surrouned Jerusalem in AD 66, but when he was on the point of taking the city and the rulers were about to open the gates to him, Josephus said "He withdrew without a reason in the world." One of the strangest military decisions in History,. The Jews persued his armies and inflicted a defeat on them. Nero considered suicide, but Vespasian had just defeated the revolt of the Germans and so Nero put him in charge of the Jewish campaign. On the death of Nero the legions in Judah proclamed Vespasian Emperor and he left for Rome and made his son Titus General, to continue the war. The Christians left when Cestius withdrew, so did not go through the tribulation.

 

[church mouse guy]

I definitely believe in the Second Advent, when Jesus will physically return to Earth some day. I don't believe that all the Christians alive at His Coming will be "raptured" away like in the "Left Behind" series, where they will disappear and "join the Lord in the air".

You don't believe in pre-trib, then.

Not to change the subject but Obama could be the Antichrist imo.

 

[Lodic]

Cestius was the first general to surrouned Jerusalem in AD 66, but when he was on the point of taking the city and the rulers were about to open the gates to him, Josephus said "He withdrew without a reason in the world." One of the strangest military decisions in History,. The Jews persued his armies and inflicted a defeat on them. Nero considered suicide, but Vespasian had just defeated the revolt of the Germans and so Nero put him in charge of the Jewish campaign. On the death of Nero the legions in Judah proclamed Vespasian Emperor and he left for Rome and made his son Titus General, to continue the war. The Christians left when Cestius withdrew, so did not go through the tribulation.

Thank you. You obviously know your history well. Now that you bring that up, I do remember that the Romans withdrew unexpectedly, at which time the Christians were able to escape to Pella.

 

[Lodic]

You don't believe in pre-trib, then.

Not to change the subject but Obama could be the Antichrist imo.

Actually, I believe the "great tribulation" was during the Jewish War of AD 66-70, ending with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. You will notice that is only 3 1/2 years. The Bible doesn't specify a 7 year tribulation. "Pre-trib" only makes sense in context of "the Rapture", which I don't believe in.

While Obama is "anti-Christ" as defined in John's epistles, I don't believe there is any such person as "the Antichrist". The closest the Bible has to this character is the Sea Beast of Revelation 13 and the Son of Perdition (aka "Man of Sin") of 2 Thessalonians 2. "Antichrist" is capitalized and "the" was added before antichrist in modern translations of the Bible in 1 & 2 John. I believe this was done to fit the "futurist" doctrine.

 

[HankD]

Cestius was the first general to surrouned Jerusalem in AD 66, but when he was on the point of taking the city and the rulers were about to open the gates to him, Josephus said "He withdrew without a reason in the world." One of the strangest military decisions in History,. The Jews persued his armies and inflicted a defeat on them. Nero considered suicide, but Vespasian had just defeated the revolt of the Germans and so Nero put him in charge of the Jewish campaign. On the death of Nero the legions in Judah proclamed Vespasian Emperor and he left for Rome and made his son Titus General, to continue the war. The Christians left when Cestius withdrew, so did not go through the tribulation.

David, where is this from Josephus writings? Is this excerpt all from Josephus and what other history books do you recommend.


Thanks
HankD

 

[Steve of Brownsburg]

Brother Hank, I heard Jacob Prasch make that statement and I assume this is the book and page number.

Anyone looking for direct scripture support of the famed Pre-Trib Rapture will come up empty handed. Admits Rapture heavyweight John Walvoord in his book called The Rapture Question (Findlay, OH:1957, p.148). He agrees with G. E. Ladd saying;

"Ladd, in contrast to Jones, concedes that post-tribulalional rapture is an inference rather than an explicit revelation of Scripture in the following statement:

"Nor does the Word explicitly place the Rapture at the end of the Tribulation."

The fact is that neither posttribulalionism nor pretribulationisim is an explicit teaching of Scripture. The Bible does not in so many words state either.

 

[HankD]

Brother Hank, I heard Jacob Prasch make that statement and I assume this is the book and page number.

Anyone looking for direct scripture support of the famed Pre-Trib Rapture will come up empty handed. Admits Rapture heavyweight John Walvoord in his book called The Rapture Question (Findlay, OH:1957, p.148). He agrees with G. E. Ladd saying;

"Ladd, in contrast to Jones, concedes that post-tribulalional rapture is an inference rather than an explicit revelation of Scripture in the following statement:

"Nor does the Word explicitly place the Rapture at the end of the Tribulation."

The fact is that neither posttribulalionism nor pretribulationisim is an explicit teaching of Scripture. The Bible does not in so many words state either.

Thanks brother.

Yes many/most eschatology dogma is by inference.

That's what makes it so interesting.

We shouldn't make it into an MMA Caged fight! Not you of course.

 

[church mouse guy]

Actually, I believe the "great tribulation" was during the Jewish War of AD 66-70, ending with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. You will notice that is only 3 1/2 years. The Bible doesn't specify a 7 year tribulation. "Pre-trib" only makes sense in context of "the Rapture", which I don't believe in.

While Obama is "anti-Christ" as defined in John's epistles, I don't believe there is any such person as "the Antichrist". The closest the Bible has to this character is the Sea Beast of Revelation 13 and the Son of Perdition (aka "Man of Sin") of 2 Thessalonians 2. "Antichrist" is capitalized and "the" was added before antichrist in modern translations of the Bible in 1 & 2 John. I believe this was done to fit the "futurist" doctrine.

Oh, dear, you are a preterist, aren't you?

 

[Lodic]

Oh, dear, you are a preterist, aren't you?

A Partial Preterist, to be precise. Other than that, I am a pretty good Baptist, though .

 

[SovereignGrace]

In the amill view, the 1,000 years is not not literal, but symbolic. I know they use the cattle on a 1,000 hills as proof. However, John, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, writes 1,000 years 4 times in Revelation 20. So, it appears to me this is not symbolic but literal.

Furthermore, the amill view says we are in this symbolic 1,000 years now. If so, then Satan is bound now, and can not deceive the nations until these symbolic 1,000 years are up. In the amill view, when the Christ returns, it’s all over. Yet, in Revelation 20, it says he is loosed for a short season after the 1,000 years.

Yes, I am historic premill.

 

[Lodic]

In the amill view, the 1,000 years is not not literal, but symbolic. I know they use the cattle on a 1,000 hills as proof. However, John, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, writes 1,000 years 4 times in Revelation 20. So, it appears to me this is not symbolic but literal.

Furthermore, the amill view says we are in this symbolic 1,000 years now. If so, then Satan is bound now, and can not deceive the nations until these symbolic 1,000 years are up. In the amill view, when the Christ returns, it’s all over. Yet, in Revelation 20, it says he is loosed for a short season after the 1,000 years.

Yes, I am historic premill.

Regardless of how many times "1,000 years" is used in Rev. 20, it is still symbolic of a very long time. Satan was loosed per verses 7-8, and he did deceive the nations. Gog and Magog are symbolic references to a battle in Ezekiel 38-39, not a future battle. There are no references to Gog and Magog in the "Great Tribulation" chapters (Rev. 4-15).

If we go back to Rev. 6:9-11, we see the martyrs asking how long before they will be vindicated. These are the same martyrs in Rev. 20:4. We have a comparison between the short amount of time they would have to wait for vindication vs Christ's reign of a very long time.

Having said all that, I do realize that my view is in the minority (especially since this is a Baptist forum). I do not expect anyone to agree with me, but it does make for an interesting conversation. As my wife likes to tell me, it's not like any of us can change God's plan.

BTW - I am not a typical Amillennialist in that I don't believe in dispensations such as "the church age".

 

[church mouse guy]

Regardless of how many times "1,000 years" is used in Rev. 20, it is still symbolic of a very long time. Satan was loosed per verses 7-8, and he did deceive the nations. Gog and Magog are symbolic references to a battle in Ezekiel 38-39, not a future battle. There are no references to Gog and Magog in the "Great Tribulation" chapters (Rev. 4-15).

If we go back to Rev. 6:9-11, we see the martyrs asking how long before they will be vindicated. These are the same martyrs in Rev. 20:4. We have a comparison between the short amount of time they would have to wait for vindication vs Christ's reign of a very long time.

Having said all that, I do realize that my view is in the minority (especially since this is a Baptist forum). I do not expect anyone to agree with me, but it does make for an interesting conversation. As my wife likes to tell me, it's not like any of us can change God's plan.

BTW - I am not a typical Amillennialist in that I don't believe in dispensations such as "the church age".

One uses the literal explanation at all times if it is a logical possibility. So a thousand years has a literal meaning within the realm of logical possibility. Repeated 4 times means that it is emphatically literally true. Period.

 

[Lodic]

One uses the literal explanation at all times if it is a logical possibility. So a thousand years has a literal meaning within the realm of logical possibility. Repeated 4 times means that it is emphatically literally true. Period.

Round numbers generally mean either an approximation or a large amount. It's really no different from us saying that there must have been a million people at an event. As you noted earlier, Scripture uses the same type of language in Psalm 50:10, Psalm 85:10, Deuteronomy 32:30, Joshua 23:10, etc. This is only "literal" in that we need to read all Scripture according to its "literal" sense - whether it's historical narrative, poetry, didactic, prophetic symbolism, etc.

 

[church mouse guy]

Round numbers generally mean either an approximation or a large amount. It's really no different from us saying that there must have been a million people at an event. As you noted earlier, Scripture uses the same type of language in Psalm 50:10, Psalm 85:10, Deuteronomy 32:30, Joshua 23:10, etc. This is only "literal" in that we need to read all Scripture according to its "literal" sense - whether it's historical narrative, poetry, didactic, prophetic symbolism, etc.

Yes, there is something different between an American crowd estimate and Scripture.

A thousand years means a thousand years. Period.

 

[Lodic]

Yes, there is something different between an American crowd estimate and Scripture.

A thousand years means a thousand years. Period.

The reason John repeated the phrase "1,000 years" in Rev. 20 was to use the same "point of reference". That is, he kept referring to the same "long period of time". Since he used "1,000 years" to begin with, he stayed with it. That doesn't make it a literal 1,000 years.

I don't believe we are going to agree on this issue. Not that big a deal. I certainly see why you hold your view. You've been very cordial, and you've stuck to the point of our disagreement. I can admire that. I have to leave in a few minutes. Hope to catch you tomorrow. Blessings, Brother.

 

[David Kent]

One uses the literal explanation at all times if it is a logical possibility. So a thousand years has a literal meaning within the realm of logical possibility. Repeated 4 times means that it is emphatically literally true. Period.

I make it five times

 

[David Kent]

The only mentions of the word Dispensation in the scriptures are

• 1 Corinthians 9:17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
• Ephesians 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
• Ephesians 3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
• Colossians 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

In each of these except perhaps the second, they all refer to dispensing or giving something, not a period of time.

 

[percho]

One of the more interesting passages from my aged mind is that presented by Paul:

51Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,52in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. 53For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. 54When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written...
​

The sequence is interesting.

When one sees the term "sleep" often one considers that which is dead and buried. However, consider the presentation of "absent from the body, present (to be home) with the Lord."

Then there is the passage that states "...God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep."

Taking then these presentations as factual, the following may be consistent with the timeline presented by Paul.

Those already "present with the Lord" having their eternal form will be brought with him, and we "who are alive" and "persevere" (remain) being preserved by His grace, will be immediately changed into His likeness, and "raptured." The dead already in His presence "imperishable" and those alive changed, not two raptures but a single one effecting only those "changed" the "perishable body" putting on "incorruptible" is the rapture.

There is one such event, and it takes place prior to the millennium reign.

That calls into question the "rapture" that is popularly taught by some who would desire to escape that great tribulation.

I remain unconvinced that such teaching is merited, and have been drawn into the conclusion that the teaching may very well lead to dismay and delusion when it doesn't happen according to how some have presented.

Perhaps ,

"4They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.”​

preceded by,

" 2that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, 3knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires."​

is really all part of that time line which Paul also was presenting.

If I do not remain, I shall be with Him at His coming, and to those who do remain, do not let scoffers and mocking dismay and distract from the truth.

I would like to ask a couple of questions. Do you not see any similarity in the following ? Actually are they not speaking of the very same thing?

For, if we have become planted together to the likeness of his death, so also we shall be < vi Fut vxx 1 Pl ) of the rising again; & And if we died with Christ, we believe that we also shall live < vi Fut Act 1 Pl ) with him, Rom 6:5,8

for if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, so also God those asleep through Jesus he will bring with him, for this to you we say in the word of the Lord, that we who are living -- who do remain over to the presence of the Lord -- may not precede those asleep,

Those living will not precede those asleep in Jesus, the dead in Christ? Precede where. Into the kingdom.
So also, They will go into the kingdom as the firstborn from the dead. They will be raised again then joined together with those alive unto his coming.

I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Tim 4:1

I believe this will take place post Jacob's trouble. The great tribulation.

 

[percho]

I take it you mean the physical resurrection of believers as opposed to that of Jesus. On that point, I must admit some confusion. I mean, don't the spirits of all who die before Christ returns go straight to Heaven? Is everyone going to receive a new physical body with His return?

I thought and think the spirit of all men of all times returned to God who gave it?

Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it. Ecc 12:7

 

[HankD]

The only mentions of the word Dispensation in the scriptures are

• 1 Corinthians 9:17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
• Ephesians 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
• Ephesians 3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
• Colossians 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

In each of these except perhaps the second, they all refer to dispensing or giving something, not a period of time.

How many times is the word Trinity used in the scriptures?