Eh? What did you say? Please repeat. Dictionaries are useful things. You should consult one once in a while. ;-)
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The strong case against a pre-tribulation rapture
- Thread starter evangelist-7
- Start date
- Status
Eh? What did you say? Please repeat. Dictionaries are useful things. You should consult one once in a while. ;-)
Try living on the US/Canada border, dealing with the tribal languages, complete with the same varied accents as the English Speakers have. And then there is French.
The same transliterated word, in Anishinaabemowin, has 3 different spellings. One the French Jesuits came up with, One the Anglican Missionary priests came up with, and one The Methodists in the US wrote down.
A native speaker from Ontario will pronounce 'o' as 'ooh', and 'oo' as 'ou', or 'oh'.
Yes is spelled 'eh', by some, 'ah' by others, and sounds like 'ane' by most, regardless.
yet?Right, and I reference him for that reason only. He kinda makes the case, as well as anyone can, for how 2Thes. actually reads.
2Thes. Very clearly shows 1Thes. 4, and 2Thes. 2 are the same event.
No wonder no one trusts lawyers!
Even when they are right, they are wrong.
That Corrie Ten Boone, was a member of the Dutch Reformed Church can be found in any one of her man biographies on-line. I hope you are not questioning that.
As for the Dutch Reformed Church:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Reformed_Church
He is not wrong in Daniel 9. I suggest you study it out.
You are the one that is dreadfully wrong. Why don't you refute what he has to say.
According to you. She has as much credibility as my Catholic neighbor living next door. Zilch!
Her credentials: Watchmaker, Christian Reformed (Calvinist and post-mil), her theology--the gospel and doctrine borne out of experience.
She is hardly qualified to make such eschatological statements. Try using a better source. If that is all you can do I feel sorry for you. You need to up your game a bit. Children read Corrie's books. Her biography is a great read, but it is not theological. Do you base all your theology on people's experiences?
She was opposed to it, not because of Bible study, but because of her experiences. That is flawed doctrine.
I don't really care about her doctrine.
You know very well I was not questioning that. I want proof that the DRC was hyper-Calvinistic. I make my sentences plain as day and you do your best to squirm out of their import.
The teachings of the DRC "were based on the teachings of John Calvin and the many other Reformers of his time."
Nope. No mention of hyper-Calvinism whatsoever.
You are "hyper-sensitive" about the term "hyper-calvinist" and probably don't know how to accurately define the word yourself.
Do you know we have someone of the Dutch Reformed persuasion that posts here from time to time? His first name is Gerhard.
Other than your over sensitive feelings concerning Presbyterian Calvinism, the point being made was that Corrie ten Boone was a member of the Dutch Reformed Church.
It has been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that her church was Calvinistic. Furthermore, no doubt it was postmillennial in its eschatological outlook, certainly not pre-trib, and definitely not teaching the rapture.
By trade Corrie was a watchmaker.
When the war broke out they (out of good works--something that their church emphasizes) harbored Jews.
She argued against the rapture, not out of sound Bible study, but rather because of her experience during the war, the holocaust, etc. She believed that a belief in the rapture would not prepare Christians for future trials. That is her reason for the rejection of the rapture; not a doctrinal reason.
When doctrine is based on experience it is no better than the Charismatic experiences tales of visions and dreams and wild fancies that we hear of today. They too base their doctrine on their experiences.
DHK,your post #172 did not address anything relating to the above. You are being evasive.
So where do you believe you or EGW are wrong Bob? Since no one is perfect in doctrine I assume.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Here is my "actual" post.
Yes but he did us all the favor of admitting that 2 Thess does not fit the pre-trib tradition of man. So while he may choose to declare the Bible wrong and man's tradition right - at least he admits to the gap.
========================================
And no wonder Scofield struggled with 2Thess -- it flatly refutes the pre-trib rapture as does Matt 24.
1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,
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.
5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things?
6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time.
7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.
8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.
9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders,
10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie,
12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,
That is the rapture it is the subject of the chapter. It takes place as Paul says AFTER all the events he lists in the chapter.
And Paul does not want the church to be deceived so he says that they should not be expecting that rapture event before the events he then lists that precede it.
Which destroys the chapter in favor of man-made tradition because Paul is providing proof/reason/evidence/data that they can use to NOT believe wild stories of the form "The rapture has happened and you missed it".
Paul says that you will know this is a lie because there are a number of things that must happen BEFORE that rapture event.
The great apostasy of the dark ages would have to come BEFORE 2Thess 1 rapture that takes place at the visible coming of Christ.
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
The papacy would arise FIRST - BEFORE the rapture.
We all see that clearly in our history. We all know that in fact the dark ages DID come and we all know that the Papacy DID arise and that the rapture has not yet happened.
Paul was right!
Note: the vs 1 rapture does not happen UNTIL the list that follows takes place -- not the other way around. The other way around would be of no help at all in debunking the "rapture happened and you missed it" wild claims that Paul was trying to shoot down..
Paul prevents the deception that the "rapture has happened and oops! you missed it" by showing that a list of things must come first. This was the defense the cure for the false rapture errors.
1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,
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,
And so God gathers His elect just as Christ said .
In Matt 24 we have
29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."[/QUOTE]
Originally Posted by prophet
Scofield set himself up as God, in the notes at the beginning of 2Thes.
He claimed that the book of 2Thes. had an original theme of delineating between the "pre-trib cRapture", and the end of the trib pre-wrath resurrection.
He claimed that a mistake by the translators, left 2 Thes. teaching, instead, that they are in fact one singular event.
He knew that he couldn't make the case for his Darbyism, on scripture alone, so instead of repenting, he impuned the scripture (of course he set up a straw man called "translators", but he really sought to unseat the Holy Ghost, and make himself the sole guide into all truth).
Yes but he did us all the favor of admitting that 2 Thess does not fit the pre-trib tradition of man. So while he may choose to declare the Bible wrong and man's tradition right - at least he admits to the gap.
So then we all find flaws in Scofield - but just because he is wrong in Dan 9 and in 2Thess 2 and in 1Thess 4 and in Rev 20 does not mean he is wrong everywhere. I will admit that he can be right in some places as well as being wrong in other places.Quote:
Originally Posted by DHK
I don't agree with Scofield on everything. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion on any passage of scripture.
The only place I was recommending Scofield was in Daniel 9:24-27,?
========================================
And no wonder Scofield struggled with 2Thess -- it flatly refutes the pre-trib rapture as does Matt 24.
1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,
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.
5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things?
6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time.
7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.
8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.
9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders,
10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie,
12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,
That is the rapture it is the subject of the chapter. It takes place as Paul says AFTER all the events he lists in the chapter.
And Paul does not want the church to be deceived so he says that they should not be expecting that rapture event before the events he then lists that precede it.
Which destroys the chapter in favor of man-made tradition because Paul is providing proof/reason/evidence/data that they can use to NOT believe wild stories of the form "The rapture has happened and you missed it".
Paul says that you will know this is a lie because there are a number of things that must happen BEFORE that rapture event.
The great apostasy of the dark ages would have to come BEFORE 2Thess 1 rapture that takes place at the visible coming of Christ.
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
The papacy would arise FIRST - BEFORE the rapture.
We all see that clearly in our history. We all know that in fact the dark ages DID come and we all know that the Papacy DID arise and that the rapture has not yet happened.
Paul was right!
Note: the vs 1 rapture does not happen UNTIL the list that follows takes place -- not the other way around. The other way around would be of no help at all in debunking the "rapture happened and you missed it" wild claims that Paul was trying to shoot down..
Paul prevents the deception that the "rapture has happened and oops! you missed it" by showing that a list of things must come first. This was the defense the cure for the false rapture errors.
1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,
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,
And so God gathers His elect just as Christ said .
In Matt 24 we have
29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."[/QUOTE]
Last edited by a moderator:
evangelist-7
New Member
This has been a BIG-time problem with ALL of the mainline denominations for centuries!
Following "the doctrines of men" instead of following the Spirit.
And disastrous false doctrines have been the result, such as: cessationism, OSAS, pre-trib rapture.
ALMIGHTY GOD has always been in total control over everything.
SATAN earned the right to be allowed to wield (only so far) his tremendous influence over man.
MAN was created with the free will to choose to do whatever he pleases.
This does not mean that God cannot use every trick in the book to sway man's choices.
This He has done, and does still, with certain chosen ones (to varying degrees).
(But He doesn't mess around with everyone's free will choices.)
And as always, welcome to the real world of Christianity.
.
evangelist-7
New Member
evangelist-7
New Member
Dis is also true of ALL of the many Christian denominations ... and ALL of the many non-Christian cults/sects!
So, buyer beware!
Can't go wrong, however, with the SUPER COMBO of ... Scripture + the Holy Spirit.
.
Last edited by a moderator:
There is a gap. He did not declare the Bible to be wrong. He did not say man's tradition is right. I sense someone's tarnished opinion of Scofield, is being put ahead of what the truth of Scofield actually said, and the result is slander--not becoming of a Christian.
One cannot say anything they want to about another person without proper documentation. Document that he put tradition above the Bible or withdraw the statement.
That is true with every person.
If that is true, then there is no harm in you studying Daniel 9:24-27 from his notes, where he is not wrong and you are wrong.
He didn't struggle with those passages; you struggle with his interpretation of them. It is your unbelief that gets in the way.
Paul is addressing the Thessalonians about false teachers. They are still present on the earth looking forward to the rapture (our gathering together to Him [in the air]). What follows will happen after the rapture.
The rapture is the first thing mentioned here. The rest of the events follow.
Your reading comprehension is not very good here is it?
2 Thessalonians 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
--First they would be gathered together with Him.
Therefore don't be troubled for the day of Christ is still at hand. It is still to come (as it is to this day). The day of Christ (as the Day of the Lord of the OT) refers not just to the Second Coming but to the Tribulation preceding it. The rapture (vs.1) takes place first.
No he doesn't. The rapture takes place first. That is clear from verse one. He then goes on to delineate a timeline of what will then happen.
This is your fanciful interpretation which has no substance at all. It is a dream of EGW. The Dark Ages have come and gone but Christ has not come. That defeats your interpretation right there, and proves EGW a false prophetess.
This "apostasy" will take place right before the revealing of the antichrist, not sometime before in ancient history. Your interpretation is preposterous.
It is not speaking of the rapture here.
He is, first, speaking against the teaching of false teachers.
Second, there will seem to be a great falling away from the faith. One can see that today. Pick up an encyclopedia or do a search on the internet. How much of the population is considered "Christian"? Perhaps 20% of the world or even more. But those who are truly saved are only 1% maybe!! That is the falling away. Those who claim the name of Christ and are not.
After the rapture, (when believers have gone) then the man of sin (nothing to do with the papacy), will be revealed. This is the anti-christ.
That is not what it says. Paul comforts the Thessalonians speaking of the rapture to take place in verse one. Then he gives the timeline of what is to follow next.
Paul said nothing of the Dark Ages or of the Papacy. This is your overactive imagination (or that of EGW). It is cultish thinking. The Dark Ages (ca. 500-1000 A.D.) was over a millennia ago. Things have changed. You are stuck in ancient history.
The Bible is always right; but you are not.
You are in need of English comprehension.
Check the Greek scholar A.T. Robertson for verse one in the original language:
Is it clear enough now?
Paul has presented a timeline. The rapture happens first.
Therefore, they are not to be troubled or shaken in mind by the following events which will happen after the rapture for they won't be there.
"That Day", the Day of Christ" (the Tribulation plus His Second Coming) will only come when first there is a falling away, and that hasn't happened yet (Paul's time).
After that happens, then the man of sin (anti-christ) will be revealed.
The elect in verse 29 are the Jews. During the tribulation the believers are not there. They have been raptured. Christ will come for his elect, the Jews, and they will be saved (Rom.11:26). This will happen at the end of the Tribulation and at the beginning of the Millennial Kingdom. Then those signs will be seen. But those signs were not in the Dark Ages. Therefore your interpretation is wrong.
The elect here is the Jews.
The rapture has already taken place.
After having done some research, I would conclude that not only are the Reformed Churches that I referred to hyper-Calvinists, but so are you!!
So are many Baptists, and many others on this board.
I read a very good article on hyper-calvinism:
Read the entire article here:
http://www.bivosmallchurch.net/resources/Religions/Calvinism/Hyper-Calvinism.htm
What I glean from this article is this.
If you deny that a man is unable to respond to the gospel by his own faith you are a hyper calvinist.
- Status