THE RAPTURE

[DeafPosttrib]

Titus 2:13 does not saying that the 'hope' is escape from the coming tribulaiton. 'Hope' speaks of have confident and faith looking forward for our eternal life when Christ shall come again to make our body chnaged into immortality, and shall never die forever and ever. That what we hope for.

'Hope' - Titus 1:2; 2:13; & 3:7 speak of eternal life, not escape from the coming tribulaiton.

Our salvation does not depend base upon our own good works, our salvation upon base on our faith only.

Pretrib heavily depend on 'once saved always saved', because they do not have to be worry about the coming tribulation, because they already saved, will be rapture escape from the coming tribulation.

Most of Christians who believe in pretrib are not prepare for the coming tribulation or persecution. Once persecution hits them, it will shake their faith according Matt. 13:21; & Luke 8:13.

Matt. 24:13 tells us, that we must be endure TILL the end then shall be saved. Or if we do not endure in the halfway, or till our death, we shall not be saved.

Also. Rev. 13:9-18 & 14:9-11 both are very clear warning to us, IF any person received mark of the beast or worshipping the beast, WILL GO TO EVERLASTING LIFE! Obivously, Rev. 13:9-18 & 14:9-11 both are speak of conditional salvation.

That why, many pretrib pastors saying Rev. 13:9-18 & 14:9-11 both are NOT apply to the Church, because we will be rapture first anyway. That is their logical, and fallacy. No way that they can prove in the Bible saying that we shall be rapture first before the coming tribulation.

Many pretrib pastors KNEW Rev. 14:9-11 is a clearly speak of conditional salvation, that why, they avoid this, not teaching to the congregation on this passage.

Dr. Peter Ruckman teaches, when rapture comes, the Holy Spirit gones. Then, there is no grace upon people during great tribulation period. They have to doing good works and follow Golden rules, etc.

Dr. Peter Ruckman KNEWS that in the Bible is very clearly speak of conditional salvation, instead, he saying, these are not apply to the Church, just as what many dispensationalists saying.

Also, so many baptist pastors in America are aware that the Bible teaching LOT of conditional salvation.

For example, many baptists who are dispensationalist, teaching that the saints in the Old Testament period, they were saved by faith PLUS obey or keeping the laws, these were conditonal salvation. Because they saying, the Holy Spirit was not dwell in them during Old Testament period. Also, many dispensationalists teaching, right now we are in the New Testament period, it is so called, 'Church Age', or 'Grace Age', because they saying Church now have Holy Spirit dwells in them. Dispensationalists teaching, when rapture occurs, The Holy Spirit leaves, then, there shall be no grace. People who are not yet saved right now, shall miss rapture. They do not have the grace from God during great tribulaiton. So, they have to faith in Christ, obey the laws, and refuse receive the mark of the beast, many will be martyred, shall be saved by follow their death or still alive till Christ comes.

Most dispensationalists saying conditional salvation is for only in the Old testament period, and great tribulaiton period. They saying, unconditional salvation is for 'Church' during "Church Age" or "Grace Age".

There is so much confusion within Dispensationalism doctrine.

God's plan of salvation never change since from the beginning to the end of the world. Bible emphasis that our salvation by through our faith only.

Later this week, I will start new topic about "Faith", what itself means. Will use lot of verses on faith too.

Bible is very clearly teaching us, that conditonal salvation is still always right there from the beginning to the end, nothing chnage of God's plan of salvation.

Later, I will start new topic on 'Faith' with verses, what itself means.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[Ed Edwards]

DeafPosttrib: "Pretrib heavily depend on 'once saved always saved', ... "

While i've not done a complete study of the
ecology of eschatology/salvation options -
pretribs are divided OSAS/non-OSAS just like a-mills, etc.

 

[mcgyver]

Hello everyone,

I have been reading and re-reading the various posts that have been added since I was last here on Friday, some well reasoned, some knee-jerk, and I can say that there are certain horses that are well and truly dead........

I would like to shift focus if I may.........

It is my impression that those who hold the view that there will be no rapture, base their interpretation in large part from the standpoint of viewing New Testament writings through the "lens" of the Old Testament....(if I am mistaken please correct me). I would say here that I commend people who seek understanding of God's word by looking at the "preponderance" of scripture both OT and NT........
I say this due to the repeated comparisons and parallels I've seen drawn......

Might I suggest that a good case for the rapture may be built by the same method?

Do we see any foreshadowing of events to come?

What parallels can we then draw?

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by ituttut:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by OldRegular:

Originally posted by OldRegular:
I have repeatedly asked for one verse of Scripture that shows a pre trib rapture. So far no one has been kind enough to respond.

I stand by the above statement.

This entire question could be settled if those of the pretrib persuasion would simply read the following prophecy by the Apostle Peter and then heed his advice at the end of the prophecy.

Hi Old Regular. I feel you are reading the wrong Apostle for the Christian. His name is Paul, and He says He has a dispensational gospel. He is my Apostle, at least that is what Christ told Him from Heaven. Peter and the other Apostle’s will have their own kingdom and will judge Israel of the earth. Christian’s will not have to go through the tribulation to reach the kingdom of God. We are all ready in the Body of Christ, in His kingdom, which is in the kingdom of God.

Peter preached to those of His day (and will be used in the tribulation) water baptism was necessary (Acts 2:37-38). This was before that gospel was phased out. James, Peter and the rest shook hands with Paul, and the others, and said they (the kingdom church) would go to the circumcised. God never gave any of the other Apostles the authority to preach at or to a Gentile, with the one exception when God sent Peter to Cornelius, in which is plainly shown, God would not allow Peter to add “repent and be baptized for the remission of sins”.

No uncircumcised has ever been associated with the Holy Spirit in this manner. We see in Acts where God stopped Peter in mid sentence. When Peter said in Acts 10:43, ”that through his name every one that believeth on him shall receive remission of sins”, they received the Holy Ghost. No Gentile ever made a covenant with God for God never asked us to. Oh how we Gentiles should love the Jew. If not for them we would never have been in the Temple.

To see premillennialism I think we have to slip in on that first row and listen real good to Paul. Christ gave our one heavenly Apostle a dispensational gospel. At least that is what Paul says in his gospel in Ephesians 3. I actually believe this guy. He tells us we will be caught up. This makes more sense as we go on. We see he gets a little exasperated with the Thessalonians, as they are not paying attention, and are easily swayed. I believe it was Mr. Barnum that said “there’s a sucker born every minute”. There were quite a few in that church.

We will be caught up, and what a comfort that will be. I don’t know but should the rapture come today, is it possible for those that don’t believe in the rapture to go through the tribulation, and inherit the earth with Israel? If so the Word says the uncircumcised with be licking the dust of their masters (Jews) sandals, for as the Jew will be servants of God, the Gentiles will be the servants of the Jew.

Of course, we Baptist of the Christian faith, of which I’m sure you are, will be in heaven away from all the commotion down here when it begins.

Oh, by the way in your II Peter reference to Paul. In Galatians 1:6-9 Paul says it is a good idea for Christians to believe what he says, and Peter says the Jew had better believe what Paul says. I believe Paul wrote Hebrews, for I believe Peter makes reference to that. Peter, James, and Hebrews are three books for the tribulation folk. Christian faith, ituttut. </font>

Your post sounds like hyper-dispensationalism to me. Instead of rightly dividing the word of truth you are splintering it!

The claim that the Gospel preached by Jesus and the Apostles is different than the Gospel preached by the Apostle Paul is a grevious error. Paul tells us in Galatians 1:8, 9

8. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.


In the Gospel according to Mark we read in chapter 1:

1.The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;

14. Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God.


In the Gospel according to John we read in John 3:3:

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.


In the Gospel of Luke Jesus Christ tells the two disciples on the road to Emmaus [Luke 24:25-27]:

25. Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26. Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27. And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.


In Acts the Apostle Paul tells us:

Acts 26:22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:
Acts 28:23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.


We also read from the Book of Acts, chapter 28:

30. And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him,
31. Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.

Finally Paul tells us in Romans, chapter 1

16. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
17. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
18. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness.

I repeat on the basis of Scripture: The claim that the Gospel preached by Jesus and the Apostles is different than the Gospel preached by the Apostle Paul is a grevious error.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by mcgyver:
Hello everyone,

I have been reading and re-reading the various posts that have been added since I was last here on Friday, some well reasoned, some knee-jerk, and I can say that there are certain horses that are well and truly dead........

I would like to shift focus if I may.........

It is my impression that those who hold the view that there will be no rapture, base their interpretation in large part from the standpoint of viewing New Testament writings through the "lens" of the Old Testament....(if I am mistaken please correct me). I would say here that I commend people who seek understanding of God's word by looking at the "preponderance" of scripture both OT and NT........
I say this due to the repeated comparisons and parallels I've seen drawn......

Might I suggest that a good case for the rapture may be built by the same method?

Do we see any foreshadowing of events to come?

What parallels can we then draw?

All that is required for the dispensationalists to prove their point is to show one, that is one, passage of Scripture that shows a pretribulation rapture. They have not and cannot because thete is not one.

 

[mcgyver]

Hello OldRegular,

This is the problem that we are all running into; the definition of a "single passage of scripture" as proof.....

By the same standard, there is not a "single passage of scripture" that says "the trinity is real", although the triune nature of God is clearly painted throughout the Word of God.

Before one says "how about 1 John 5:7"; The word "trinity" is not used, and due to textual differences in the various manuscripts, if this was the only verse alluding to the trinity; we wouldn't have a leg to stand on........

So to place this in perspective......

How do we show ANYTHING with a SINGLE passage of scripture?

 

[Charles Meadows]

Mcgyver,

How do we show ANYTHING with a SINGLE passage of scripture?

Very good point. We don't. "Prooftexts" do NOT exist!

I certainly appreciate the case made here so far for the pretrib rapture. But in my opinion scripture as a whole does not support this. I see a rapture as being a product of what Dr Bob calls an "interpretation grid". In order to interpret literally alot of biblical passages we have to set a up a little timeline, which includes a "rapture" of the church. While I see it as being a product of fidelity to the scriptures I also see it as being a MISINTERPRETATION of the scriptures.

 

[mcgyver]

Hi Charles.....

Well, even though I personally look forward to the rapture.......The means of transportation is not as important as the final destination!

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by mcgyver:
Hello OldRegular,

How do we show ANYTHING with a SINGLE passage of scripture?

The Deity of Jesus Christ:

John 10:30 I and my Father are one.

Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The humanity of Jesus Christ:

1 John 1:2, 3
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

1Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Jesus Christ the only Way to God:

John14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

1Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;


The Visible Return of Jesus Christ

Acts 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

The General Resurrection and Judgment:

John 5:28, 29
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.


May I say that I am not in favor of "proof texting" since it can be used to prove anything, even false doctrine. Similarily a collage of Scripture can also be used to prove almost anything if one is sufficiently clever, even false doctrine. Certainly any doctrine must be based on the whole of Scripture. Also certainly no doctrine can violate any Scripture that clearly teaches the opposite.

The doctrine of the pretrib rapture, which cannot be established by either a single passage of Scripture or a collage of Scripture is a violation of Scripture which clearly teaches a General Resurrection and Judgment.

John F. MacArthur in his book Charismatic Chaos [page 94] expands further on the interpretation of Scripture as follows:

“The Reformers used the expression scriptura scripturam interpretatur, or ‘Scripture interprets Scripture.’ By this they meant that obscure passages in Scripture must be understood in light of clearer ones. If the Bible is God's Word, it must be consistent with itself. No part of the Bible can contradict any other part. One divine Author, the Holy Spirit, inspired the whole Bible, so it has one marvelous, supernatural unity. The synthesis principle puts Scripture together with Scripture to arrive at a clear, consistent meaning. If we hold to an interpretation of one passage that does not square with something in another passage, one of the passages is being interpreted incorrectly, or possibly both of them. The Holy Spirit does not disagree with himself. And the passages with obvious meanings should interpret the more arcane [obscure] ones. One should never build a doctrine on a single obscure or unclear text."

Unfortunately MacArthur, a dispensationalist, does not heed his own advice.

 

[Michaelt]

Originally posted by Charles Meadows:
Mcgyver,

How do we show ANYTHING with a SINGLE passage of scripture?

Very good point. We don't. "Prooftexts" do NOT exist!

I certainly appreciate the case made here so far for the pretrib rapture. But in my opinion scripture as a whole does not support this. I see a rapture as being a product of what Dr Bob calls an "interpretation grid". In order to interpret literally alot of biblical passages we have to set a up a little timeline, which includes a "rapture" of the church. While I see it as being a product of fidelity to the scriptures I also see it as being a MISINTERPRETATION of the scriptures.

Quick question. In making your timeline, where is the Church in Revelation chapters 4 - 20, during the tribulation?

 

[mcgyver]

Hi OldRegular,

You posted:

Unfortunately MacArthur, a dispensationalist, does not heed his own advice.

There might be another explaination.....After his study was complete he might have changed his mind...
(A moot point)

Also, though I as a Christian accept all the verses and illustrations you posted above (diety of Christ, etc.), the single verse or ("prooftext" as brother Charles refered to them), would mean very little to the skeptic.......

Try any one of those verses on the next Jehovah's Witness that knocks on your door, and you will be amazed at the way they can and will refute those verses.
I am sure the interpretations that they have to explain the verses that are listed will leave you in open mouthed amazement (and I don't say that in a negative manner). I know, I have spent much time and effort in reaching those poor, deceived people.

The point I am making: Is any single verse without corroborating scripture can be refuted. Therefore we need to stop looking for single "prooftexts" and look at the scripture as a whole.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by mcgyver:
Hi OldRegular,

The point I am making: Is any single verse without corroborating scripture can be refuted. Therefore we need to stop looking for single "prooftexts" and look at the scripture as a whole.

The question was asked: "How do we show ANYTHING with a SINGLE passage of scripture?"

I demonstrated that certain truths could be established by a single passage of Scripture. In some cases I presented more than one passage.

I also made the point that I do not like so-called proof texts as some often use a single passage of Scripture to demonstrate an untruth. The one that comes to mind is 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 17.

it is also true that even a collection of Scripture can be and frequently is used to establish false doctrine.

By the way I follow the advice of the Apostle John in 2 John 9-11 when approached by Jehovah's Witnesses.

 

[Ed Edwards]

OldRegular: //The claim that the Gospel preached by Jesus and the Apostles is different than the Gospel preached by the Apostle Paul is a grevious error.//

Nobody here made that claim. You have created a strawman. But i
note you demolished it successfully

Sorry, Brother but you seem to be avoiding the mountain of evidenct
from the Scripture of the Rapture of the Chruch Age born-again Christian
elect saints just before the Tribulation 7-year-day. Instead you are
in the plain burning strawmen.

Here is what was said:

Ituttut: //God never gave any of the other Apostles the authority to preach at or to a Gentile, with the one exception when God sent Peter to Cornelius, in which is plainly shown, God would not allow Peter to add “repent and be baptized for the remission of sins”.//

It is a great leap of faith from:
"God never gave any of the other Apostles the
authority to preach at or to a Gentile, ... "

to: " ... the Gospel preached by Jesus and the Apostles
is different than the Gospel preached by the Apostle Paul ... "

The Gospel to the Gentiles is as a capsule of medicine whereas
the Gospel to the Jews is as a jeltab of medicine -- same Gospel,
different audence.

OldRegular: "All that is required for the dispensationalists to prove their point is to show one, that is one, passage of Scripture that shows a pretribulation rapture. They have not and cannot because thete is not one."

I don't think that Hitler had the right to kill Jews.
We are NOT necessarily dispensationsalists here.
We are NOT trying to "prove a point".
We are not all trying to convince folks of pretriublation rapture
(but i admit I AM )

Sorry 'enemy idenification score of 'F' today.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Mcgyver: //Therefore we need to stop looking for single
"prooftexts" and look at the scripture as a whole.//

Amen, Brother Mcgyver -- Preach it!

Hebrews 4:1-10 speaks of our Salvation with the picture of
us entering God's rest. The Salvation that God provides to
us is so important to Him that He uses many images to
protray Salvation. There is NOT one and only one Salvation
verse - there are many verses showing many facets of
the Salvations God has provided for us in Jesus, the Christ.

 

[OldRegular]

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by OldRegular:

Amen, Brother!

Isa 41:1 (KJV1611 Edition):
Keepe silence before me, O ylands, and
let the people renew their strength: let them
come neere, then let them speake:
let vs come neere together to iudgement.

 

[OldRegular]

original post by Ed Edwards OldRegular: //The claim that the Gospel preached by Jesus and the Apostles is different than the Gospel preached by the Apostle Paul is a grevious error.//

Nobody here made that claim.

Ed Edwards: I suggest that you reread the post by ituttut [excerpt below].

“I feel you are reading the wrong Apostle for the Christian. His name is Paul, and He says He has a dispensational gospel. He is my Apostle, at least that is what Christ told Him from Heaven. Peter and the other Apostle’s will have their own kingdom and will judge Israel of the earth. Christian’s will not have to go through the tribulation to reach the kingdom of God. We are all ready in the Body of Christ, in His kingdom, which is in the kingdom of God.

Peter preached to those of His day (and will be used in the tribulation) water baptism was necessary (Acts 2:37-38). This was before that gospel was phased out. James, Peter and the rest shook hands with Paul, and the others, and said they (the kingdom church) would go to the circumcised. God never gave any of the other Apostles the authority to preach at or to a Gentile, with the one exception when God sent Peter to Cornelius, in which is plainly shown, God would not allow Peter to add “repent and be baptized for the remission of sins”.

Ed Edwards: What gospel was Peter preaching, the Gospel of Jesus Christ or the Gospel of Paul? When was it phased out? Some of the Apostles [Bartholomew and Thomas] reportedly traveled as far as India [See the web site below.]. What Gospel did they preach?

http://www.ccel.org/bible/phillips/CN092MAPS2.htm

[ March 08, 2005, 09:51 PM: Message edited by: OldRegular ]

 

[Charles Meadows]

Ed,

"OldRegular: //The claim that the Gospel preached by Jesus and the Apostles is different than the Gospel preached by the Apostle Paul is a grevious error.//

Nobody here made that claim. You have created a strawman. But i
note you demolished it successfully"

No - one individual here does believe that (Carl I believe). And I agree that it IS a grievous error.

 

[DeafPosttrib]

Obivous, Carl teaches this. He called it, "Pauline Gospel". His teaching is grievous error.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[carlaimpinge]

Originally posted by Charles Meadows:
Ed,

"OldRegular: //The claim that the Gospel preached by Jesus and the Apostles is different than the Gospel preached by the Apostle Paul is a grevious error.//

Nobody here made that claim. You have created a strawman. But i
note you demolished it successfully"

No - one individual here does believe that (Carl I believe). And I agree that it IS a grievous error.

None of you "brethren" can handle the texts which OPENLY DECLARE the gospels as different. I've NEVER met one who did or could. In fact, the majority don't even try.

The 12 didn't KNOW OR PREACH Paul's gospel DURING the eartly ministry of the Lord. It contains the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord for you sins WHICH THEY DIDN'T KNOW OR BELIEVE.(Luke 18, 1 Cor.1, Luke 24) They DID PREACH the gospel of the kingdom though! (Matt.10) One is NOT THE OTHER by "plain English". Wresting scripture due to being UNLEARNED and UNSTABLE (bible words and terms, see 2 Peter 3) will get one NO UNDERSTANDING.

They LEARNED, then BELIEVED the resurrection after it's OCCURRENCE. At that time, they were TAUGHT the gospel of God (Luke 24, Mark 1, Romans 1, Mark 16), which concerns the Father's testimonoy of the RESURRECTION of Jesus Christ, as the Son of God. That gospel INCLUDED water baptism for the RECEPTION of the Holy Spirit. (Mark 16, Acts 2)

Paul's gospel DOES NOT include that. (1 Cor.1, Rom.1, Eph. 1) He WAS NOT sent under the same commission as them, for he was CALLED by the HEAVENLY, GLORIFIED, Lord Jesus Christ, who APPEARED to him.

The statements of the Holy Spirit made by the apostle Paul ARE NOT "grievious error". The diatribe of those who teach that John the Baptist, the Lord Jesus Christ, the 12, and the 70 preached the GOSPEL OF THE GRACE OF GOD during the Lord's earthly ministry is falsehood, foolishness, and farcity. They preached the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM, which was at hand.

Paul stated a DISPENSATION of the gospel was given him. (1 Cor.9)

Paul stated that he received his GOSPEL by revelation not man. (Gal.1)

Paul stated that his GOSPEL concerned a MYSTERY which was given him by revelation which was UNKNOWN to others. (Eph.3, 6)

Paul stated that he communicated his GOSPEL unto the leaders of Jerusalem and THEY PERCEIVED the grace (Eph.3) which was given unto him. (Gal.2)

Now play with those verses.