Scripture Supporting a Pretrib Removal of the Church

Pastor Larry: //Why do you ignore Rev 20 and its teaching on what appear to be at least three resurrections?//

Amen, Brother Pastor Larry -- Preach it!

I'm still looking for an evangelical a-mill post
from this poster.

 

Larry,

Not correct.

During church history, Christians already been through so many tribulations and persecutions, even, while unbelievers having good times and peace. 'Peace and safety' already been happening for a long time since early Church to today. America is more clearly picture of 'peace and safety' because America is the wealthiest nation in the world, and America is the safest nation in the world. People in America have pleasure life than any nations today.

You continued,

Not correct.

Please look in Revelation 11:9-10 "And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves, And they that dwell upon the earth shall REJOICE over them, and make MERRY, and shall send gifts one to another, because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth."

This passage telling us, people are tired and sick hearing of Christians preaching and warning them of sins. They want to rid them away, by persecute against Christians by killed them. They not allow Christians to be buried in the graves, but leave Christians bodies lie outside anywhere for 3 1/2 years, while many Christians killed and lie outside, sinners are celebrating and laughing because of many Christians are being killed daily, this is "peace and safety" during great tribulation. People will continue to saying 'peace and safety' during in the great tribulaiton just like as they saying today.

'Peace and safety' does not equal with wrath. Wrath shall come AFTER 'peace and safety' as Christ shall come like as thief in the night to SHOCKED people of the world, by being grabbing them away in the air by the angels (Matt. 24:40-41; Matt. 25:31-33; and Luke 17:34-37). Same as what happened to the world in the flood, that people were not expecting of the flood came and took them away suddenly.

Wrath is speak of the day of the Lord IS Christ's coming to judge the world on the last day of the age.


You mentioned of Acts chapter 15 of verse 14-17 quote from Amos 9:11-12. Premils intepreting Amos 9:11-12 & Acts 15:14-17 into literally that they believe 'tabernacle' shall be restored again in Millennial kingdom. Ther intepreting is error.

Understand, New Testament make manifest or revealed the mystery of Old testament to fulfilled and understand. Acts 15:14-17 already fulfilled 2,000 years ago. Verse. 16 says, "After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of david, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up." Word, 'tabernacle' does not take it literally as physical building, but it is a figurative meaning of spiritual. Tabernacle of Acts 1:15 is type of Jesus Christ, that Christ is the tabernacle, as Christ IS the temple. Christ already destroyed tabernacle, and he already built it again. How do I know? Look in John 2:19-21 "Jesus answered and said unto them, 'Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.' Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his BODY."

When Christ was on earth, he was in Jerusalem, he told them, that he will destroy that temple(physical building) where it was lie locate near the Dome of Ark is, and in three days he shall raise it up. Jews said to him, 'Three days? Impossible!, That buiding of temple was built, it took 46 years to be completed. Jews were not understand what Christ was talking about. Christ was speak of the temple is Christ's Body. In three days Christ shall raise it up, speak of his resurrection, NOW Christ IS is the temple. Christ does not need physical building of temple.

While Christ was on the cross, he yelled a, "It is finished." At the same time the viel of the temple was tore from top to bottom, it shows that Christ no longer need physical building of temple, and He already ceased daily sacrifices of Daniel 9:27. Now Christ is the temple, we are the priests. We have rights ask Christ to forgive us our sins through his blood 24 hours everyday.

That what Acts 15:14-17 talking about. I hope that you understand what my point of Acts 15:14-17 talking about.

Also, both Amos 9:11-12 & Acts 15:14-17 say nothing about 'a thousand years'.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

Times of "tribulations and persecutions" is not what we are talking about. We are talking about The Tribulation, the seven year period described in Revelation as God's judgment on the earth.

Exactly, which is tied in to the imminence of the Rapture. That is not in dispute.

Right ... and read the whole surrouding context of the seven seals, the seven bowls, and the seven trumpets. They don't like the gospel and they will kill those who stand for it. That is not happening on a large scale basis today, nor do we see the judgments that are prophesied.

Not according to the text of Revelation. There will be famine, economic issues, and they will cry out for the rocks and hills to fall on them and hide them from the wrath of the Lamb. That is the wrath that we are saved from. It is a time that cannot be characterized as "peace and safety."

Which is what I said. The wrath that we are saved from is the wrath that comes after the peace and safety. It will not overtake us. We will be taken out of it. The people who will be surprised are the ones who are not looking for his return.

No, go back and read. The "tabernacle of David" is the nation of Israel, similar to the "house of Israel" or "house of Jacob" you see often.

That is demonstrably impossible. Look at the word "rebuild" or "build again." You say that the tabernacle of David is "Christ." But how is that a "rebuilding"? Christ was never built before? A rebuilding, by definition, has to be a rebuilding of something that previously existed. Your view does not deal with teh words of the text.

Several severe problems. First, there is no reason to connect this with Amos 9. Second, Amos 9 is the context of judgment on Israel as a nation, and future restoration of the same people. It is not about an individual. Third, if you want to play off the word "temple" you have to recognize that Amos 9 does not use that word. It uses a different one.

No he didn't. You just cited the text above. He was not talkign about that termple, but about his body.

What he "needs" is irrelevant. He needs nothing at all. He is God. But the OT prophesies a rebuilding of the temple and we either have to have that rebuilding or say that God lied ... he said somethign he really didn't mean. Or spiritualize the text so that it doesn't mean anything. Which is problemmatic since you are using your presupposition to interpret the text.

Which is irrelevant since that isn't under discussion.

No, it's not. You have taken the words of God and changed them to mean something else. You said "tabernacle of David" really means "Christ." If so, then why didn't God say that? Did he really appoint you to make that point? Why not just say what he meant? He certainly could have done that, and in fact did that in other places when he talked about the coming Christ. He most assuredly did not talk about that in Amos 9.

I do. I referenced it above, gave you a resource you could read for more info, and took the time to show how your understanding is inadequate.

So? They don't say anything about a crucified Savior either, or a God that is unchangeable. Do you really want to talk about something it does not say? I don't see how what it doesn't talk about it relevant.

 

Pastor Larry: //Times of "tribulations and persecutions" is not what we are talking about. We are talking about The Tribulation, the seven year period described in Revelation as God's judgment on the earth.//

Amen, Brother Pastor Larry -- Preach it!

 

Could you please state how Revelation 20:4-6 explicitly teaches two resurrections? </font>[/QUOTE]Did you read it? I can't see how you would question this if you read it.

Notice

1) They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
2) The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed.

So there is a resurredtion before the thousand years and one after the thousand years.

Then you see, This is the first resurrection. Why call it the "first resurrection" if it is the only? That makes no sense. There clear implication is that there is more than one, otherwise there would be no need to point out the "first." It would be "the resurrection."

So have I.

 

I see that you have the heart of a pastor but then I have come to expect nothing less from a follower of Darby/Scofield. </font>[/QUOTE]Is this the personal attack to which you were referring? If so please reread your remarks to which I responded. </font>[/QUOTE]I know exactly what I said. But you made a personal attack on me. Why? There was no call for it. I made no personal attack on you. Go back and read what I said. There is not even a hint of a personal attack in there.

 

No I am not wrong, you are. The passages under discussion were 1 Thessalonians 5:1-11 or 2 Thessalonians 2:1ff, not 1 Thessalonians 4. </font>[/QUOTE]Are you under the impression that chapters 4 and 5 are not in the same context? Paul wrote it all together, with no verse divisions. That, by definition, is context. You brought up an ancillary point to what I was making, but it was addressed in the context that I was talking about. That is a really minor point, and not a good way to try to dodge the question.

 

OldRegular: "Could you please state how Revelation 20:4-6 explicitly teaches two resurrections? "

Would you like to state how it does not?

The first meaning of 'first' is:
preceeding all others in a series.
The use of the word 'first' in the term
'first resurrection' implies at least
'a second resurrection'. This is as
explicit as you can get.

 

OldRegular: "I have always said that John 5:28, 29 should be interpreted literally."

John 5:28-29 (KJV1611):

Marueile not at this: for the houre is comming,
in the which all that are in the graues shall
heare his voice,
29 And shall come foorth, they that haue done
good, vnto the resurrection of life, and they that
haue done euill, vnto the resurrection of damnation.

Do you then contend that these resurrections cannot
happen in 61 minutes or more (technical definition of 'minute')?

The Revelation 20 passage show it taking 1,000 years
(literal, could be a figure of speach for a LONG TIME)
between the resurrection of the just and resurreciton
of the unjust. Nothing in John 5:28-29
conflicts with Revelation 20 EXCEPT IN YOUR UNDERSTANDING
OF JOHN 5:28-29. Sad that you have to scrap a beautiful
scripture like chapter 20 of Revelation because
you can't understand John 5:28-29

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revelation 20:4-5 4 ... and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice

1) They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
2) The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed.

So there is a resurredtion before the thousand years and one after the thousand years.

Then you see, This is the first resurrection. Why call it the "first resurrection" if it is the only? That makes no sense. There clear implication is that there is more than one, otherwise there would be no need to point out the "first." It would be "the resurrection."

Common simple explanation. Don't have to play
twister here