The strong case against a pre-tribulation rapture

[BobRyan]

The fact that they do not agree with you on something - means nothing to me. I look for their insight anyway - and at times Matthew Henry and others provide a great deal of insight. And as I pointed out above - Robertson's statements on 2Thess 2:1-3 are not out of line with what Matthew Henry appears to be saying.

And in this case you are the one who brought up an outside source with Robertson. By your rules I should be throwing Robertson's views under a bus because he is not in agreement with me on all points.

When i agree with you that the Sabbath commandment cannot be bent to point to week-day-1 I do so while still differing with you on almost every other statement you make on that subject.

The point remains.

 

[DHK]

The fact that they do not agree with you on something - means nothing to me. I look for their insight anyway - and at times Matthew Henry and others provide a great deal of insight. And as I pointed out above - Robertson's statements on 2Thess 2:1-3 are not out of line with what Matthew Henry appears to be saying.

When i agree with you that the Sabbath commandment cannot be bent to point to week-day-1 I do so while still differing with you on almost every other statement you make on that subject.

The point remains.

The point doesn't remain. There is such a thing as "progressive revelation." We learn as we continue in time. Just as the NT believers knew much more than the OT believers, we again have the resources to have more knowledge than 2nd century believers. We learn as we go. Today we benefit from standing on the shoulders of great men that have gone before us--men that have thoroughly refuted the SDA movement for example. We have scholars that have written tomes of systematic theology, volumes of commentaries and other resources. Even a book like Strong's Concordance was not available to early believers.

There is hardly a conservative evangelical scholar that will agree with you today. You are pulling commentaries out of the 19th century--mostly Presbyterian, reformed or Calvinistic, and post-mill. They were that way for a reason. Almost all of them were post-mill. They basically copied one another or accepted each other's eschatology. Read what the different Reformers say, including Barnes and MH say about Rev.17:1-6. They will almost all agree that the woman refers to the papacy. But that is not true today. Evangelicals are not so dogmatic. We are not stuck back in the Middle Ages as you are.

Again, I challenge you:
Try refuting the evidence I provided here:
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost...&postcount=197

 

[Rippon]

"Most likely hyper-Calvinistic" is your bare conjecture having no correlation to the article whatsoever."

Yes,the above is what I said. When you are trying to prove something from an article --the "something" has to be mentioned at the very least.

--It is relative to my experience with the Dutch Reformed here who are so hyper Calvinist

"Relative to your experience" huh? Since when is your anecdotal evidence supportive of the specifics of your original claim? You have met certain folks from who knows where -- not the Netherlands I suspect. The Dutch Reformed Church doesn't even exist there any longer. In that country,like America,there have been lots of splits and mergers of denominations. But you want to elevate your personal experience with people you claim are from the Dutch Reformed Church of the Netherlands? You want us to think it bears some kind of relevance with Corrie's religious upbringing more than a century ago. But you are generalizing --lumping disparate items together to form what you what you think are connections. That is pretty spotty patchwork DHK.

The Dutch Reformed may have not gone down the trail that far by the end of the 19th century but it was on its way.

The DRC of the Netherlands was not in the least hyper-Calvinistic as I have demonstrated time and time again. It was about as hyper-Calvinistic as Presbyterian churches today --nada --not at all.

The Calvinist trail ends in death.

And here you go off the tracks altogether. You have switched from your theme of hyper-Calvinism to Calvinism. The Calvinist trail certainly does not end in death. Every regenerate person has eternal life. We know that Christ has given eternal life to all those whom the Father has given Him.And we know Him,the only true God,and Jesus Christ,who was sent to the eath by the Father. See John 17:3,4.

So the "Calvinist trail" as you termed it is in possession of eternal life. To say otherwise is just extreme sinful spite.

And by the way, all these references you have devoted to hyper-Calvinists over the years is a lot of wasted effort on your part DHK. True hyper-Calvinism is just as equidistant from Calvinism as Arminianism. Both H-C and Arminianism are cousins. There are many saved Arminians and there are many saved hyper-Calvinists. Both groups are in deep error but not in danger of hell-fire because of their theological departures. Many Christians from roughly 500 A.D. to 1520 A.D. subscribed to theological errors. Some significant ones. But if they were indeed actual Christians --they were united with Christ.

 

[BobRyan]

. Read what the different Reformers say, including Barnes and MH say about Rev.17:1-6. They will almost all agree that the woman refers to the papacy.

And they would be correct on that point. the Protestant Reformers were better Bible students than you appear to imagine.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

John MacArthur is a strong Calvinist, but also a dispensationalist. He also is pre-trib,
http://www.gty.org/connect/doctrine#Eschatology

So then -- he is wrong on all three counts.

nothing like being consistent.

Still he has other areas where it turns out - he is right.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Again, I challenge you:
Try refuting the evidence I provided here:
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost...&postcount=197

You link to a list of "claims" but no example of showing that the claims are true. We do see some texts "used" for the claims but nothing at all where an attempt is made to "show the texts" say that

1. Christ's millennial reign is on earth, (no text says that)
2. or that say "immediately BEFORE the tribulation of those days.. He will gather His elect" (no text says that)
3. Or that say "there will be a 7 year tribulation" (NO text says that)
4. Or that "bible timelines can be sliced up and gaps inserted" (no text says that).

All the salient points of his position - are missing so he merely "assumes" what he cannot show IN the text and ignores that what is missing from the text -- is the CORE of his argument.

The Rapture of the Church

We teach the personal, bodily return of our Lord Jesus Christ before the seven year tribulation (1 Thessalonians 4:16; Titus 2:13) to translate His church from this earth (John 14:1 3; 1 Corinthians 15:51 53; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-5:11) and, between this event and His glorious return with His saints, to reward believers according to their works (1 Corinthians 3:11 15; 2 Corinthians 5:10).
The Tribulation Period

We teach that immediately following the removal of the church from the earth (John 14:1 3; 1 Thessalonians 4:13 18) the righteous judgments of God will be poured out upon an unbelieving world (Jeremiah 30:7; Daniel 9:27; 12:1; 2 Thessalonians 2:7 12; Revelation 16), and that these judgments will be climaxed by the return of Christ in glory to the earth (Matthew 24:27 31; 25:31 46; 2 Thessalonians 2:7 12). At that time the Old Testament and tribulation saints will be raised and the living will be judged (Daniel 12:2 3; Revelation 20:4 6). This period includes the seventieth week of Daniel's prophecy (Daniel 9:24 27; Matthew 24:15 31; 25:31 46).
The Second Coming and the Millennial Reign

 

[BobRyan]

Today we benefit from standing on the shoulders of great men that have gone before us--men that have thoroughly refuted the SDA movement for example. We have scholars that have written tomes of systematic theology, http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2076911&postcount=197

i think it would be great if one of them would visit BB and help out some.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

i think it would be great if one of them would visit BB and help out some.

in Christ,

Bob

MacArthur is an example of a current conservative scholar. Go to his website and find out for yourself. He has written commentaries on all the books of the Bible, and many other books as well.
Like the books you quote from he is a Calvinist and believes in eternal security. He would have that in common with Matthew Henry and Barnes.
But his eschatology is more up to date. He, unlike you, is not stuck back in the Middle Ages.
As I have previously said, almost no conservative evangelical scholar of today would agree with your position.

 

[DHK]

You link to a list of "claims" but no example of showing that the claims are true. We do see some texts "used" for the claims but nothing at all where an attempt is made to "show the texts" say that

1. Christ's millennial reign is on earth, (no text says that)
2. or that say "immediately BEFORE the tribulation of those days.. He will gather His elect" (no text says that)
3. Or that say "there will be a 7 year tribulation" (NO text says that)
4. Or that "bible timelines can be sliced up and gaps inserted" (no text says that).

All the salient points of his position - are missing so he merely "assumes" what he cannot show IN the text and ignores that what is missing from the text -- is the CORE of his argument.

Are you too lazy to look up the scripture he gives.
He gives a summary of his beliefs in an on-line post. To keep it brief he gives only the references not the entire verses. If you want more in depth information you will have to look it up in one of his books.

 

[BobRyan]

--- as for Robertson. ---

These were the points I noticed "in the text"

Originally Posted by BobRyan


1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,

--In this verse the coming of the Lord "and our gathering together with him" is the rapture. ---

2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come.


3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

============================

It is the "English" that is tripping you up as well as the Greek.

The subject is the rapture.

1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,


The problem to be avoided - is the wild claim that "oops! you missed it" coming to them by false teachers or a fake letter.

2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come.

Obviously Paul is equating "the day of Christ" with his "subject" which He call "The coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him"


Solution: Take note of the events that must come FIRST - the solution stops all from being deceived in any way --

3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed


Conclusion No one would then believe a lying report that "the rapture has come last week and you missed it".


pre-trib rapture does not survive "the details in the text".

Pre-trib rapture has no "solution" for the problem that they are trying to avoid which is the "oops! you missed the rapture it was last week" deception.

Pre-trib rapture promoters are left uselessly talking about events AFTER the rapture -as if THIS would stop someone from being fooled in a "OOPS! the rapture was last week and you missed it" scenario.

Obviously.
[/I]
And here is where I find consistent observations with the above in Robertson's comments.

==============================================

Quote:
Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament

Verse 1
Touching the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (υπερ της παρουσιας του Κυριου ̔ημων̓ Ιησου Χριστου — huper tēs parousias tou Kuriou ‛hēmōn' Iēsou Christou). For ερωτωμεν — erōtōmen to beseech, see note on 1 Thessalonians 4:1; 1 Thessalonians 5:12. υπερ — Huper originally meant over, in behalf of, instead of, but here it is used like περι — peri around, concerning as in 2 Thessalonians 1:4; 1 Thessalonians 3:2; 1 Thessalonians 5:10, common in the papyri (Robertson, Grammar, p. 632). For the distinction between Παρουσια Επιπανεια — ParousiaΑποκαλυπσις — Epiphaneia (Epiphany), and Παρουσια — Apokalupsis (Revelation) as applied to the Second Coming of Christ see Milligan on Thessalonian Epistles, pp. 145-151, in the light of the papyri. επιπανεια — Parousia lays emphasis on the presence of the Lord with his people, αποκαλυπσις — epiphaneia on his manifestation of the power and love of God, και ημων επισυναγωγης επ αυτον — apokalupsis on the revelation of God‘s purpose and plan in the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus.


And our gathering together unto him (kai hēmōn episunagōgēs ep' auton). A late word found only in 2 Maccabees. 2:7; 2 Thessalonians 2:1; Hebrews 10:25 till Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, p. 103) found it on a stele in the island of Syme, off Caria, meaning “collection.” Paul is referring to the rapture, mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, and the being forever with the Lord thereafter. Cf. also Matthew 24:31; Mark 13:27.

Verse 3
Let no man beguile you in any wise (μη τις υμας εχαπατησηι κατα μηδενα τροπον — mē tis humas exapatēsēi kata mēdena tropon). First aorist active subjunctive of εχαπαταω — exapataō (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb απαταω — apataō) with double negative (μη τισ μηδενα — mē tis, mēdena) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in 1 Corinthians 16:11 rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in Mark 13:15 (μη καταβατω — mē katabatō). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes “tricks” of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion.

For it will not be (οτι — hoti). There is an ellipse here of ουκ εσται — ouk estai (or γενησεται — genēsetai) to be supplied after οτι — hoti Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of 2 Thessalonians 2:4. The meaning is clear. οτι — Hoti is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not “imminent,” but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of 2 Thessalonians 2:2.

===================================

So "again" that is


Vs 1

as applied to the Second Coming of Christ...
Paul is referring to the rapture


Vs 3
The second coming not only is not “imminent,” but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of 2 Thessalonians 2:2.


Robertson's comments are not so out of line with the post above.

 

[BobRyan]

Are you too lazy to look up the scripture he gives.
He gives a summary of his beliefs in an on-line post. To keep it brief he gives only the references not the entire verses. If you want more in depth information you will have to look it up in one of his books.

I already stated - that if you want to make MacArthur's case using his texts then you have a problem because the salient points of the pretrib rapture are not there.

Not one of them says:

1. Christ's millennial reign is on earth, (in fact no text says that)
2. or that say "immediately BEFORE the tribulation of those days.. He will gather His elect" (in fact no text says that)
3. Or that say "there will be a 7 year tribulation" (in fact NO text says that)
4. Or that "bible timelines can be sliced up and gaps inserted" (in fact no text says that).

All the salient points of his position - are missing so he merely "assumes" what he cannot show IN the text and ignores that what is missing from the text -- is the CORE of his argument.

In general I agree with you that MacArthur is a good Bible scholar - and yet even he cannot find a text stating the salient points of the pre-trib rapture notion.

 

[DHK]

I already stated - that if you want to make MacArthur's case using his texts then you have a problem because the salient points of the pretrib rapture are not there.

Not one of them says:

1. Christ's millennial reign is on earth, (in fact no text says that)

Isaiah 11:4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
--Are there poor in heaven? This is the Millennial Kingdom--on earth when Christ comes "to smite the earth...to slay the wicked" to bring righteousness to the earth.
What else does Isaiah say?

Isaiah 11:5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.

Isaiah 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
--There are no such animals in heaven. There are no little children in heaven. This harmony between animals and small children will only be found when Christ rules [/b]on the earth[/b] during the Millennial Kingdom.

Isaiah 11:7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
--not Heavenly scene; but an earthly one--yet to come in the MK.

Isaiah 11:8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
--Would you allow your child to do this today.
In a more modern translation, the WEB:
Isaiah 11:8 The nursing child will play near a cobra's hole, And the weaned child will put his hand on the viper's den.
--Obviously not a heavenly scene.
Shall I go on? There are dozens, if not scores of such passages which describe the Millennial Kingdom here on earth. To say that the MK is in heaven is completely fictional. You have no evidence, but that of EGW's imagination. That is not sola scriptura.

2. or that say "immediately BEFORE the tribulation of those days.. He will gather His elect" (in fact no text says that)

The elect in that context refers to the Jews.
The believers of 1Thes.4:14-17 have already been raptured. They are not there.

3. Or that say "there will be a 7 year tribulation" (in fact NO text says that)

The obvious fact that you don't take the Scripture literally demonstrates your unbelief. Of course it says it is.
Revelation 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
--How long is 42 months? It is 31/2 years or half the seven year period of the Tribulation.

Revelation 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
42 months or 31/2 years or half of the seven year period.

Revelation 12:6 The woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, that there they may nourish her one thousand two hundred sixty days.
--1260 days = 42 months = 3 1/2 years = half of the seven year period.
But you don't take the Bible literally do you?

Revelation 11:3 I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred sixty days, clothed in sackcloth."
--Same as above; same as 42 months already quoted.
Do I need to go on, or just remind you that you don't believe these verses.

4. Or that "bible timelines can be sliced up and gaps inserted" (in fact no text says that).

Was there are reason that both Jesus and Peter quoted only partial texts?
I believe so.

All the salient points of his position - are missing

so he merely "assumes" what he cannot show IN the text and ignores that what is missing from the text -- is the CORE of his argument.

You mean they are missing according to the interpretation that EGW wants you to believe.

In general I agree with you that MacArthur is a good Bible scholar - and yet even he cannot find a text stating the salient points of the pre-trib rapture notion.

You mean you will find any excuse to deny the truth.

 

[BobRyan]

I already stated - that if you want to make MacArthur's case using his texts then you have a problem because the salient points of the pretrib rapture are not there.

Not one of them says:

1. Christ's millennial reign is on earth, (in fact no text says that)
2. or that say "immediately BEFORE the tribulation of those days.. He will gather His elect" (in fact no text says that)
3. Or that say "there will be a 7 year tribulation" (in fact NO text says that)
4. Or that "bible timelines can be sliced up and gaps inserted" (in fact no text says that).

All the salient points of his position - are missing so he merely "assumes" what he cannot show IN the text and ignores that what is missing from the text -- is the CORE of his argument.

In general I agree with you that MacArthur is a good Bible scholar - and yet even he cannot find a text stating the salient points of the pre-trib rapture notion.

Isaiah 11:4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
--Are there poor in heaven? This is the Millennial Kingdom--on earth when Christ comes "to smite the earth...to slay the wicked" to bring righteousness to the earth.
What else does Isaiah say?

Isaiah 11:5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.

Isaiah 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
--There are no such animals in heaven.

There will be on the new earth.

There is no mention of the millennium in Isaiah 11.

And there will be little children taken to heaven at the 2nd coming. Rev 2 and Rev 22 point to God's throne being where Paradise is - where the Tree of life mentioned in Gen 2 -- is.

There are no little children in heaven. This harmony between animals and small children will only be found when Christ rules [/b]on the earth[/b] during the Millennial Kingdom.

Christ rules on His throne in heaven during the Millennium - not on earth. The saints are taken to heaven at the 2nd coming "I will come again and receive you unto Myself that where I am there you may be also" John 14:1-4.

The obvious fact that you don't take the Scripture literally demonstrates your unbelief. Of course it says it is.
Revelation 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
--How long is 42 months?

1260 years - just as everyone admits that 70 weeks in Dan 9 is 490 years.

The 1260 years of the dark ages is mentioned in Dan 7, Rev 11, Rev 12 and Rev 13.

Terms like 1260 days, 42 Months, and Times (2 years) Time (1 year) and half a time (6 months) -- all point to 42 months -- all point to 1260 days and like Daniel 9 all these apocalyptic timelines use day for year.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

There is no mention of the millennium in Isaiah 11.

There is no mention of the trinity in the Bible either, but it is described in plenty of passages, just as Isaiah 11 is a vivid description of the Millennial Kingdom.

And there will be little children taken to heaven at the 2nd coming. Rev 2 and Rev 22 point to God's throne being where Paradise is - where the Tree of life mentioned in Gen 2 -- is.

You are speculating. In the resurrection we receive our glorified bodies. They will be perfect. Does the 7-month old unborn still in womb retain that underdeveloped body in the resurrection. Does a one-year old, still unable to talk, retain a year old resurrection body? Does a person on the other end of the spectrum, 90 plus years retain a body that looks like that of a 90 year old? You are speculating!
Perhaps we can assume that our bodies will be about the same age that Adam's was when he was created--an ideal age--not the age of death. Thus it is unlikely there will be any children in heaven.

Since the Millennial Kingdom is on earth, there will be children on the earth. Thus your confusion. Earth and heaven are not the same.

Christ rules on His throne in heaven during the Millennium - not on earth. The saints are taken to heaven at the 2nd coming "I will come again and receive you unto Myself that where I am there you may be also" John 14:1-4.

More nonsense. Why is it so difficult for you to distinguish between heaven and earth. Christ will rule from a real physical throne (David's throne) on earth. There are scores of passages that deal with this--too many to just throw away.

1260 years - just as everyone admits that 70 weeks in Dan 9 is 490 years.

You mean everyone who is SDA??

The 1260 years of the dark ages is mentioned in Dan 7, Rev 11, Rev 12 and Rev 13.

There is no dark ages mentioned in the Bible. That is EGW's imagination that you are bound to follow. No sola scriptura here.

Terms like 1260 days, 42 Months, and Times (2 years) Time (1 year) and half a time (6 months) -- all point to 42 months -- all point to 1260 days and like Daniel 9 all these apocalyptic timelines use day for year.

No they don't.
Read what Scofield says:

[FONT=&quot] Seventy weeks[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]These are "weeks" or more accurately, sevens of years; seventy weeks of seven years each. Within these "weeks" the national chastisement must be ended and the nation re-established in everlasting righteousness (Da 9:24).
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The seventy weeks are divided into seven=49 years; sixty-two=434 years; one=7 years (vs. 25-27). In the seven weeks=49 years, Jerusalem was to be rebuilt in "troublous times." This was fulfilled, as Ezra and Nehemiah record.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Sixty-two weeks=434 years, thereafter Messiah was to come (Da 9:25). This was fulfilled in the birth and manifestation of Christ. Da 9:26 26 is obviously an indeterminate period. The date of the crucifixion is not fixed. It is only said to be "after" the threescore and two weeks. It is the first event in Da 9:26. The second event is the destruction of the city, fulfilled A.D. 70. Then, "unto the end," a period not fixed, but which has already lasted nearly 2000 years. To Daniel was revealed only that wars and desolations should continue (cf. Mt 24:6-14.)
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The N.T. reveals, that which was hidden from the O.T. prophets Mt 13:11-17; Eph 3:1-10 that during this period should be accomplished the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven Mt 13:1-50 and the out-calling of the Church Mt 16:18; Ro 11:25. When the Church- age will end, and the seventieth week begin, is nowhere revealed. Its duration can be but seven years. To make it more violates the principle of interpretation already confirmed by fulfilment. Da 9:27 deals with the last week.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The "he" of Da 9:27 is the "prince that shall come" of Da 9:26, whose people (Rome) destroyed the temple, A.D. 70. He is the same with the "little horn" of chapter 7. He will covenant with the Jews to restore their temple sacrifices for one week (seven years), but in the middle of that time he will break the covenant and fulfil Da 12:11; 2Th 2:3-4. Between the sixty-ninth week, after which Messiah was cut off, and the seventieth week, within which the "little horn" of Da 7. will run his awful course, intervenes this entire Church-age. Da 9:27 deals with the last three and a half years of the seven, which are identical with the "great tribulation." Mt 24:15-28 "time of trouble" Da 12:1 hour of temptation" Re 3:10. (see "Tribulation," Ps 2:5; Re 7:14). Cmt. on Ps 2:5. Cmt. on Ex 7:14.

[/FONT]

 

[BobRyan]

1260 years - just as everyone admits that 70 weeks in Dan 9 is 490 years.

The 1260 years of the dark ages is mentioned in Dan 7, Rev 11, Rev 12 and Rev 13.

Terms like 1260 days, 42 Months, and Times (2 years) Time (1 year) and half a time (6 months) -- all point to 42 months -- all point to 1260 days and like Daniel 9 all these apocalyptic timelines use day for year.

No they don't.
Read what Scofield says:
[/FONT]

Even Scofield had to admit that the 70 weeks of Daniel are in fact 490 years - not 490 literal days.

The point remains.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

There is no mention of the trinity in the Bible ...

There is no dark ages mentioned in the Bible. That is EGW's imagination

Not even close.

[FONT=&quot]John Wesley[/FONT][FONT=&quot] applies [/FONT][FONT=&quot]11th horn of Dan 7 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]to Papacy – [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]John Wesley’s explanatory notes.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Verse 8[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
Another little horn - Probably either the Turk or the Romish antichrist. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Verse 24[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
And another - This seems to mean the Romish antichrist. [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Dan 7 – 11th horn[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Matthew Henry[/FONT][FONT=&quot] – concise.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]erses 15-28 It is desirable to obtain the right and full sense of what we see and hear from God; and those that would know, must ask by faithful and fervent prayer. The angel told Daniel plainly. He especially desired to know respecting the little horn, which made war with the saints, and prevailed against them. Here is foretold the rage of papal Rome against true Christians. St. John, in his visions and prophecies, which point in the first place at Rome, has plain reference to these visions. Daniel had a joyful prospect of the prevalence of God's kingdom among men. This refers to the second coming of our blessed Lord, when the saints shall triumph in the complete fall of Satan's kingdom.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Matthew Henry - [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Who is this enemy[/FONT][FONT=&quot], whose rise, reign, and ruin, are foretold? Interpreters are not agreed. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Some will have the fourth kingdom to be that of the Seleucidae, and the little horn to be Antiochus, and show the accomplishment of all this in the history of the Maccabees; so Junius, Piscator, Polanus, Broughton, and many others: [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]but others will have the fourth kingdom to be that of the Romans, and the little horn to be Julius Caesar, and the succeeding emperors (says Calvin), the antichrist, the papal kingdom (says Mr. Joseph Mede), that wicked one, which, as this little horn, is to be consumed by the brightness of Christ’s second coming. The pope assumes a power to change times and laws, potestas autokratorike —an absolute and despotic power, as he calls it. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Others make the little horn to be the Turkish empire; so Luther, Vatablus, and others. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Now I cannot prove either side to be wrong[/FONT][FONT=&quot]; and therefore, since prophecies sometimes have many fulfillings, and we ought to give scripture its full latitude (in this as in many other controversies), I am willing to allow that they are both in the right, ...But yet it has a further reference, and foretels the like persecuting power and rage in Rome heathen, and no less in Rome papal, against the Christian religion,[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]============================================== begin John Gill section[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]John Gill [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Daniel 7:8[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I considered the horns[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
The ten horns of the fourth beast; these the prophet particularly looked at, took special notice of them, carefully observed them, their number, form, and situation, and pondered in his mind what should be the meaning of them: and, behold;
while he was attentive to these, and thinking within himself what they should be, something still more wonderful presented: there came up among them another little horn;
not Titus Vespasian, as Jarchi; nor the Turkish empire, as Saadiah; nor Antiochus Epiphanes, as many Christian interpreters; for not a single person or king is meant by a horn, but a kingdom or state, and a succession of governors; as by the other ten horns are meant ten kings or kingdoms; besides, this little horn is a part of the fourth, and not the third beast, to which Antiochus belonged; and was to rise up, not in the third or Grecian monarchy, as he did, but in the fourth and Roman monarchy; and was to continue until the spiritual coming of Christ; or, until his kingdom in a spiritual sense takers place; which is not true of him: and since no other has appeared in the Roman empire, to whom the characters of this horn agree, but antichrist or the pope of Rome, he may be well thought to be intended.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]and Jeromon the place says, that this is the sense of[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]``all ecclesiastical writers, that when the Roman empire is destroyed, there shall be ten kings who shall divide it among them; and an eleventh shall arise, a little king, who shall conquer three of the ten kings; and having slain them, the other seven shall submit their necks to the conqueror:''[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]who he further observes is not a devil or demon, but a man, the man of sin, and son of perdition; so as that he dare to sit in the temple of God, making himself as if he was God: now to the Roman antichrist everything here said answers: he is a "horn", possessed of power, strength, authority, and dominion, of which the horn is an emblem; a "little" one, which rose from small beginnings, and came to his ecclesiastic power, from a common pastor or bishop, to be a metropolitan of Italy, and then universal bishop; and to his secular power, which at first was very small, ..., he was contriving one for himself; they rose at the same time and reigned together; see ( Revelation 17:12 Revelation 17:13 ) : before whom, there were three of the first horns plucked up by the
roots;
before whom three kings or kingdoms fell, and were subdued as in ( Daniel 7:20 Daniel 7:24 ) which, according to Mr. Mede F13, were the kingdoms of the Greeks, of the Longobards, and of the Franks; but, according to Sir Isaac Newton F14, they were the exarchate of Ravenna, the kingdom of the Lombards, and the senate and dukedom of Rome; or, according to the present bishop of Clogher F15, the Campagnia of Rome, the exarchate of Ravenna, and the region of Pentapolis, which were plucked up by Pipin and Charlemagne, kings of France, and given to the pope; and were confirmed to him by their successor Lewis the pious, and is what is called the patrimony of St. Peter; in memory of which a piece of Mosaic work was made and put up in the pope's palace, representing St. Peter with three keys in his lap; signifying the three keys of the three parts of his patrimony; and to show his sovereignty over them, the pope to this day wears a triple crown: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man;
in some monstrous births there have been eyes in the knees, and in the belly above the navel F16; but never was there known such a monster as this, to have a horn, and eyes in the horn; horns some monsters have but not eyes in them: these may design the pretended sanctity and religion of the pope of Rome or antichrist, who, though a beast, would be thought to be a man, a religious creature; or his pretended modesty, humanity,...; and may denote his penetration and sagacity, his craft and cunning, and sharp looking out to get power and dominion, temporal and spiritual; and his watchfulness to keep it, that it is not encroached upon, and took away from him; and also all means and instruments by which he inspects his own and others' affairs; particularly the order of the Jesuits, which are his eyes everywhere, spies in all kingdoms and courts, and get intelligence of what is done in the councils and cabinets of princes: how many eyes this horn had is not said; nor is it easy to say how many the pope of Rome has; he has as many as Argus, and more too, and these sharp and piercing: and a mouth speaking great things
as that he is Christ's vicar on earth, Peter's successor, head of the church, and universal bishop; that he is infallible, and cannot err; that he has all power in heaven, earth, and hell; that he can forgive sin, grant indulgences, make new laws, and bind the consciences of men; dispense with the laws of God and men; dispose of kingdoms, and remove and set up kings at pleasure, with many others of the like kind; see ( Revelation 13:5 Revelation 13:6 ) .[/FONT]

 

[DHK]

Even Scofield had to admit that the 70 weeks of Daniel are in fact 490 years - not 490 literal days.

The point remains.

in Christ,

Bob

I never said otherwise. The Hebrew word for "week" simply means "seven." This is not your game of numerology. It is the definition of the word. There are seventy "sevens." That is the literal translation. Context shows that the "sevens refer to years this time, not days, or months, or weeks, as it could be translated--all possibilities, depending on the context. The word "week" simply means "a group of seven" in the Hebrew. It has no inherent eschatological meaning.

There are 69 weeks accounted for in the passage. One week is not accounted for. It is yet to come. It is future. One week is a group of seven or seven years. Thus the Great Tribulation is seven years. It is still to come. This is quite obvious from this passage.

 

[BobRyan]

Since you brought up Robertson in the first place -- i noted

Originally Posted by BobRyan


1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,

--In this verse the coming of the Lord "and our gathering together with him" is the rapture. ---

2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come.


3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

============================

It is the "English" that is tripping you up as well as the Greek.

The subject is the rapture.

1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,


The problem to be avoided - is the wild claim that "oops! you missed it" coming to them by false teachers or a fake letter.

2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come.

Obviously Paul is equating "the day of Christ" with his "subject" which He call "The coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him"


Solution: Take note of the events that must come FIRST - the solution stops all from being deceived in any way --

3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed


Conclusion No one would then believe a lying report that "the rapture has come last week and you missed it".


pre-trib rapture does not survive "the details in the text".

Pre-trib rapture has no "solution" for the problem that they are trying to avoid which is the "oops! you missed the rapture it was last week" deception.

Pre-trib rapture promoters are left uselessly talking about events AFTER the rapture -as if THIS would stop someone from being fooled in a "OOPS! the rapture was last week and you missed it" scenario.

--- as for Robertson. ---


Quote:
Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament

Verse 1
Touching the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (υπερ της παρουσιας του Κυριου ̔ημων̓ Ιησου Χριστου — huper tēs parousias tou Kuriou ‛hēmōn' Iēsou Christou). For ερωτωμεν — erōtōmen to beseech, see note on 1 Thessalonians 4:1; 1 Thessalonians 5:12. υπερ — Huper originally meant over, in behalf of, instead of, but here it is used like περι — peri around, concerning as in 2 Thessalonians 1:4; 1 Thessalonians 3:2; 1 Thessalonians 5:10, common in the papyri (Robertson, Grammar, p. 632). For the distinction between Παρουσια Επιπανεια — ParousiaΑποκαλυπσις — Epiphaneia (Epiphany), and Παρουσια — Apokalupsis (Revelation) as applied to the Second Coming of Christ see Milligan on Thessalonian Epistles, pp. 145-151, in the light of the papyri. επιπανεια — Parousia lays emphasis on the presence of the Lord with his people, αποκαλυπσις — epiphaneia on his manifestation of the power and love of God, και ημων επισυναγωγης επ αυτον — apokalupsis on the revelation of God‘s purpose and plan in the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus.


And our gathering together unto him (kai hēmōn episunagōgēs ep' auton). A late word found only in 2 Maccabees. 2:7; 2 Thessalonians 2:1; Hebrews 10:25 till Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, p. 103) found it on a stele in the island of Syme, off Caria, meaning “collection.” Paul is referring to the rapture, mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, and the being forever with the Lord thereafter. Cf. also Matthew 24:31; Mark 13:27.

Verse 3
Let no man beguile you in any wise (μη τις υμας εχαπατησηι κατα μηδενα τροπον — mē tis humas exapatēsēi kata mēdena tropon). First aorist active subjunctive of εχαπαταω — exapataō (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb απαταω — apataō) with double negative (μη τισ μηδενα — mē tis, mēdena) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in 1 Corinthians 16:11 rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in Mark 13:15 (μη καταβατω — mē katabatō). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes “tricks” of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion.

For it will not be (οτι — hoti). There is an ellipse here of ουκ εσται — ouk estai (or γενησεται — genēsetai) to be supplied after οτι — hoti Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of 2 Thessalonians 2:4. The meaning is clear. οτι — Hoti is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not “imminent,” but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of 2 Thessalonians 2:2.

===================================

So "again" that is


Vs 1

as applied to the Second Coming of Christ...
Paul is referring to the rapture


Vs 3
The second coming not only is not “imminent,” but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of 2 Thessalonians 2:2.


Robertson's comments are not so out of line with the post above.

 

[DHK]

Since you brought up Robertson in the first place -- i noted

Perhaps A.T. Robertson wasn't such a good commentary to use in the first place, but not for the reasons you state. Let me explain.

[FONT=&quot]

The meaning is clear. Hoti is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2Th 2:2. Except the falling away come first (ean mê elthêi hê apostasia prôton). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. Apostasia is the late form of apostasis and is our word apostasy.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It is obvious that the second coming is after the Tribulation, and therefore the rapture before. "The falling away" must come first, that is an apostasy from the faith, or something akin to it as I have already explained to you. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be first (prôton) before Christ comes again.

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Hence it is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles, for in verse 2Th 2:6 he speaks of to katechon (that which restraineth) while in verse 2Th 2:7 it is ho katechôn (the one that restraineth). Frame argues for a combination of Belial and Antichrist as the explanation of Paul's language. But the whole subject is left by Paul in such a vague form that we can hardly hope to clear it up. It is possible that his own preaching while with them gave his readers a clue that we do not possess.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]It is clear that Robertson was not settled in his own thoughts on this passage. I previously thought that he was more dogmatic in his position, but he isn't. He admits that the subject is very vague (at least to him.)
[/FONT]

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

As any of the Reformers might have explained …..
Isaiah 11:4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.

“Blessed are the poor” in the Kingdom of Christ.

Christ’s is the Millennial Kingdom—on earth.

“Blessed and holy is he that hath part in The First Resurrection ….. this The Thousand Years.”
“But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people that ye should show forth the praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous Light” …. “who hath delivered us from the power of darkness and hath translated us into the KINGDOM OF HIS DEAR SON” ….. “And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father—to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever” ….. “and we shall reign on earth” ….. “They shall be priests of God and of Christ and shall REIGN WITH HIM.”

“When the Thousand Years are expired (and) satan shall be loosed out of his prison”, Christ shall come "to smite the earth...to slay the wicked" to bring righteousness to the earth …..
What else does Isaiah say?
THEN “righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins. And the wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.”
---There are no such animals on earth now. Who says there will be no little children on the New Earth? This harmony between animals and small children will only be found when Christ rules on the earth AFTER <the Millennial Kingdom> at present.

“And I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away.”

“And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.”
---Not a Heavenly scene or a present one, but an earthly scene yet to come at the end and after This The Thousand Years The First Resurrection—after the present Kingdom of Christ on earth.