Pre-Tribulational Rapture

[webdog]

Is the Pre-Trib a myth? Since y'all are not sure, what do you think? Personally, I don't think so. Blessings!

Is it a myth...it sure is! A myth doesn't mean it is not true, though.

myth (mth)
n.
1.
a. A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society: the myth of Eros and Psyche; a creation myth.
b. Such stories considered as a group: the realm of myth.
2. A popular belief or story that has become associated with a person, institution, or occurrence, especially one considered to illustrate a cultural ideal: a star whose fame turned her into a myth; the pioneer myth of suburbia.
3. A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology.
4. A fictitious story, person, or thing: "German artillery superiority on the Western Front was a myth" (Leon Wolff).

 

[Edward 1689er]

Is it a myth...it sure is! A myth doesn't mean it is not true, though.

OK. Thank you, Dear Friend. I just thought that someone might help us understand this topic. Thanks!

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Its not going to happen though. I would like to happen but I don't think scriptures support it.

 

[webdog]

Its not going to happen though. I would like to happen but I don't think scriptures support it.

You're close to Ohio...I'll be sure to high five you on the way up :wavey:

I believe in the "blessed hope" spoken of in Titus and the imminent coming of our Lord which is an impossibility in any model but the pre-trib, pr-mill view.

What "blessed hope" does any other position hold?

 

[OldRegular]

Titus 2:13. Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

Paul explained this very simply as follows:

2 Corinthians 5:1-4
1. For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
3. If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
4. For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

That clothing shall take place with the resurrection of the body at the end of time as we know it when God will tabernacle with man in the New Heavens and New Earth!


Now what does the expectancy of the return of Jesus Christ have to do with pre-trib, pre-mil? Nothing!

A study of the New Testament will show that an attitude of expectancy regarding the return of the Lord Jesus Christ is a recurrent theme throughout. For those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture there can be no question as to error or delusion on the part of the writers. Our Lord Himself, before His crucifixion, warned His disciples: Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh [Matthew 24:44].

 

[RustySword]

Back to the original question...

As has been pointed out already in this thread, the pre-tribulation rapture is an aspect of dispensational theology. If you believe in a pre-trib rapture, you are espousing dispensational theology whether you realize it or not, or whether you understand it or not.

As with so many other doctrines, the groundwork is laid though conclusions based on a lot of study, put forth by Bible teachers, and believed by those who they teach. This is true of other theological systems as well - not just dispensationalism.

While Darby and Scofield have been instrumental in popularizing dispensationalism, in my opinion it was really Lewis Sperry Chafer who systematized it. If you really want to understand dispensationalism, read his Systematic Theology, especially the volumes on Ecclesiology and Eschatology (he starts to lay it on hard and heavy in the Ecclesiology volume - it would be better to read that before the Eschatology volume).

The bane of systematic theology is its use of proof-texting and its reliance - especially in discussions such as this - on small "sound bite" (or maybe we should say "word byte") arguments.

As far as Scripture to support the pre-trib rapture, I would recommend a study of the epistles to the Thessalonians. Also, compare what Jesus said in His "Sermon on the Mount" and the "Olivette Discourse" (Matthew 5-7 and 24-25) to what He said in His "Upper Room Discourse" (John 14ff). Those are key passages that Chafer uses to show that there is a distinction between Israel and the church.

Time and space do not make it practical for me to go much more into it. But seriously, if you want to understand dispensationalism, read Chafer. If you want to understand reformed or covenant theology, read Hodge or Berkhof. They can explain their positions much better than I can in such a brief post.

I know that sounds like a lot of work, but it is rewarding work. In the end, the important question is, which system - if any - best takes into account the whole body of revelation? I have concluded, for the present time at least, that it's dispensationalism (although there are aspects of dispensationalism that I reject). You may come to different conclusions.

All the best to you...
Rusty Sword

 

[asterisktom]

But seriously, if you want to understand dispensationalism, read Chafer. If you want to understand reformed or covenant theology, read Hodge or Berkhof. They can explain their positions much better than I can in such a brief post.

May I suggest that there is also a door #3? My position - and that of many Baptists of the New Covenant stripe would say "None of the above" to the above choices. IMO both Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology (as it is called) read things into Scripture that are not there. John Reisinger said it very succinctly:

"Dispensational Theology cannot get Israel and the Church together in any sense whatever and Covenant Theology cannot get them apart."

 

[webdog]

I have no problem with dispensationalism. It's evident throughout Scripture, and contrary to popular belief, presents no problem between Israel and the Church.

Old Testament
New Testament

'nuff said

 

[OldRegular]

I have no problem with dispensationalism. It's evident throughout Scripture, and contrary to popular belief, presents no problem between Israel and the Church.

Old Testament
New Testament

'nuff said

That is your problem webdog!

'nuff said

 

[webdog]

That is your problem webdog!

'nuff said

You make no sense...what is my problem?

 

[TomVols]

I believe in the "blessed hope" spoken of in Titus and the imminent coming of our Lord which is an impossibility in any model but the pre-trib, pr-mill view.

I don't think this is accurate. I've never heard an Amil or postmil posit anything but an imminent return. I've heard many Historical Premils and Dispy premils argue against it, due to what "must happen" to precede the "rapture" and/or Second coming.

 

[OldRegular]

I don't think this is accurate. I've never heard an Amil or postmil posit anything but an imminent return. I've heard many Historical Premils and Dispy premils argue against it, due to what "must happen" to precede the "rapture" and/or Second coming.

True. According to some television would have to be available so every eye could behold Him. According to Lindsey the helicopter would have to be available since some of the locusts [ I believe] were actually helicopters. And then airplanes would have to be available to airlift certain jews to safety.

 

[Robert Snow]

I have no problem with dispensationalism. It's evident throughout Scripture, and contrary to popular belief, presents no problem between Israel and the Church.

Old Testament
New Testament

'nuff said

Unfortunately, according to Scripture, it isn't as cut-and-dried as you suppose.

 

[webdog]

Unfortunately, according to Scripture, it isn't as cut-and-dried as you suppose.

I think that would depend on which side of the fence you are on