True or false statement?

[evangelist6589]

Was reading a certain book and the author makes this statement.

“For nine-teen hundred years of church history, no one—including historical luminaries such as Ephraim, Augustine, Calvin, Luther, Knox, Zwingli, and Wesley—had any concept of the pretribulational rapture that LaHaye claims is so “clearly taught” in Scripture.”

Excerpt From: Hank Hanegraaff. “The Apocalypse Code.” iBooks. https://itun.es/us/gZBnK.l

Is this a true or false statement? I like to study opposing positions and so eschatology is perhaps the most complex in all of theology.

 

[TCassidy]

It is a true statement if you ignore the way some of the writings of the Patristics are interpreted. Many dispensational authors have used evidence of an early understanding of Pre-Millennialism as supporting Pre-Tribulationalism, which is an unfounded assertion.

 

[Smyth]

Was reading a certain book and the author makes this statement.

“For nine-teen hundred years of church history, no one—including historical luminaries such as Ephraim, Augustine, Calvin, Luther, Knox, Zwingli, and Wesley—had any concept of the pretribulational rapture that LaHaye claims is so “clearly taught” in Scripture.”

Excerpt From: Hank Hanegraaff. “The Apocalypse Code.” iBooks. https://itun.es/us/gZBnK.l

Is this a true or false statement? I like to study opposing positions and so eschatology is perhaps the most complex in all of theology.

It's true, those men knew nothing of the modern doctrine of the pretribulational rapture. And, eschatology is simple enough, as long you don't start trying to make the Bible fit nonsense, such as the pretribulational rapture. It's like LaHaey's followers have never read the Bible, and otherwise are totally devoid of common sense.

Read Mark 13:14-27 slowly, and keep asking yourself where the elect are during the Tribulation (Mark 14:19).

 

[The Biblicist]

The statement is true. I have studied in detail even the few historical statements that modern Pre-trib writers claim teach an imminent return and in every single case the context demonstrates the writer is speaking from a post-tribulational view. That is, the writer assumes the church is already in the tribulation facing the anti-christ and thus expecting the coming of the Lord.

 

[Darrell C]

Was reading a certain book and the author makes this statement.

“For nine-teen hundred years of church history, no one—including historical luminaries such as Ephraim, Augustine, Calvin, Luther, Knox, Zwingli, and Wesley—had any concept of the pretribulational rapture that LaHaye claims is so “clearly taught” in Scripture.”

Excerpt From: Hank Hanegraaff. “The Apocalypse Code.” iBooks. https://itun.es/us/gZBnK.l

Is this a true or false statement? I like to study opposing positions and so eschatology is perhaps the most complex in all of theology.

It's a false statement, because we see the Pre-Tribulation Rapture taught directly from Scripture.

I have spoken with Hank on a couple of occasions, and he is unwilling to debate this issue. If you try to raise it, he cuts you off.

I affirm, with LaHaye, that the Pre-Tribulational Rapture is clearly taught, and the only way one can deny this is by denying that there will be a thousand year Kingdom, as described in Revelation 20. Of course, there is much else that those who take an A-millennial view deny, spiritualizing text after text, concept after concept.

The Pre-Tribulational Rapture is the only reasonable view, because if the Church is Raptured after the Tribulation, then this leaves no physical believers to repopulate the Kingdom, from which come those who rebel against God at the end of the Millennial Kingdom. I have yet seen the first reasonable commentary from anyone that can justify the removal of the promises of God to Israel and the Church.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

It's true, those men knew nothing of the modern doctrine of the pretribulational rapture. And, eschatology is simple enough, as long you don't start trying to make the Bible fit nonsense, such as the pretribulational rapture. It's like LaHaey's followers have never read the Bible, and otherwise are totally devoid of common sense.

Read Mark 13:14-27 slowly, and keep asking yourself where the elect are during the Tribulation (Mark 14:19).

Be glad to discuss that nonsense with you.


God bless.

 

[Smyth]

Be glad to discuss that nonsense with you.

Start a topic. Make your case. Be concision.

 

[Darrell C]

Start a topic. Make your case. Be concision.

Okay, did start a thread here.

Out of time so just gave a basic statement to kick it off.

Enjoy!


God bless.

 

[evangelist6589]

It is a true statement if you ignore the way some of the writings of the Patristics are interpreted. Many dispensational authors have used evidence of an early understanding of Pre-Millennialism as supporting Pre-Tribulationalism, which is an unfounded assertion.

Interesting...... So the Premillennialist view is not taught in scripture and all proponents of it are following John Nelson Darby?

 

[evangelist6589]

It's a false statement, because we see the Pre-Tribulation Rapture taught directly from Scripture.

I have spoken with Hank on a couple of occasions, and he is unwilling to debate this issue. If you try to raise it, he cuts you off.

I affirm, with LaHaye, that the Pre-Tribulational Rapture is clearly taught, and the only way one can deny this is by denying that there will be a thousand year Kingdom, as described in Revelation 20. Of course, there is much else that those who take an A-millennial view deny, spiritualizing text after text, concept after concept.

The Pre-Tribulational Rapture is the only reasonable view, because if the Church is Raptured after the Tribulation, then this leaves no physical believers to repopulate the Kingdom, from which come those who rebel against God at the end of the Millennial Kingdom. I have yet seen the first reasonable commentary from anyone that can justify the removal of the promises of God to Israel and the Church.


God bless.

Which makes me wonder why Hank thinks that bible experts like Mac are following Darby over scripture. Mac is not one to follow a man as he loves to dig into the text and exegete it.

 

[TCassidy]

Interesting...... So the Premillennialist view is not taught in scripture and all proponents of it are following John Nelson Darby?

And there you go. A perfect example of what I was talking about. The inability in some people to discern the difference between Pre-Millennialism and Pre-Tribulationalism. Two very different things, but what I actually said was:

Many dispensational authors have used evidence of an early understanding of Pre-Millennialism as supporting Pre-Tribulationalism

See the difference?

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

False. J Dwight Pentecost lists and includes quotes of some who believed in a pre trib rapture in his book "Things to Come".

And no it is not them misinterpreting the writers premillennialism for pre tribulationism. The quotes are clear.

 

[TCassidy]

The quotes are clear.

Post them.

 

[Darrell C]

Which makes me wonder why Hank thinks that bible experts like Mac are following Darby over scripture. Mac is not one to follow a man as he loves to dig into the text and exegete it.

Well, when you have people that say "John MacArthur is not really a Theologian," what do you expect?

And to be clear, I am not saying Hank said that.


God bless.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Sorry.. I was a little bit mistaken, I have quoted that show some of the early church fathers believed in the imminent return of Christ

 

[Smyth]

Which makes me wonder why Hank thinks that bible experts like Mac are following Darby over scripture. Mac is not one to follow a man as he loves to dig into the text and exegete it.

I love expositional preachers. But, even someone who "loves to dig into the text and exegete it" can be guilty of devoting a lot of effort into proving nonsense. There are intellects behind all kinds of false doctrine.

 

[evangelist6589]

Well, when you have people that say "John MacArthur is not really a Theologian," what do you expect?

And to be clear, I am not saying Hank said that.


God bless.

He is not. But RC Sproul is.

 

[TCassidy]

Sorry.. I was a little bit mistaken, I have quoted that show some of the early church fathers believed in the imminent return of Christ

And, of course, we all believe in the imminent return of Christ. But that is a good illustration of what I was saying, above.

When dispensationalists are challenged to support dispensationalism from historic writings of the Patristics they end up supporting Pre-Millennialism, or the imminent return of Christ.

What they don't support is the Pre-tribulational rapture.

 

[TCassidy]

Which makes me wonder why Hank thinks that bible experts like Mac are following Darby over scripture.

John MacArthur is slowly, but surely, moving away from Classic Dispensationalism toward a New Covenant Theology. He is, at least, moving in the right direction in that he now acknowledges there are insurmountable problems with Classic Dispensationalism.

 

[evangelist6589]

John MacArthur is slowly, but surely, moving away from Classic Dispensationalism toward a New Covenant Theology. He is, at least, moving in the right direction in that he now acknowledges there are insurmountable problems with Classic Dispensationalism.

Proof of this?