• 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!

Two good arguments for a Pretrib Rapture

Status
Not open for further replies.

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Pre-trib-dispensationalism started with Darby and so did the concept of the Church as a "parenthesis", an intercalation, an interruption in God's program for Israel! See the quote from the link below!

From: http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/short-history-of-dispensationalism

Notice that Watts was not a pre-tribber!
Here is your problem. There are many good scholars who put the rapture at the beginning or middle or end of the Tribulation. They still believe in the Tribulation, and they still believe in Millennial Kingdom. They don't dismiss dispensationalism. In fact, as your link proves dispensationalism started right back at Ireaneus, much farther back in history than Calvinism or your beloved Covenantal theology, especially the kind that teaches that the so-called "church" either is an extension of, or replaces Israel. It does neither.
However, even your link proves that dispensationalism, per se, was believed by scholars all throughout the ages.
Scofield was a pre-trib-dispensationalist. Darby's problem was that He considered the Church, for which Jesus Christ died, a FAILURE!
Darby is your problem not mine. I don't use him as an authority; you do. I don't quote from Darby; you do. Why do you quote from one who is a failure in your opinion?
Me? The Word of God is my authority. I have told you that many times.
I don't care whether you believe in a "parenthesis" Church or not. But according to Darby above and Walvoord in an earlier post, no "parenthesis" Church, no pre-trib-rapture.
If you are going to debate me, it will have to be on the basis of God's Word, not on the basis of whom you call "preeminent authorities in their fields." I don't really care about men's opinions. The question is: "What saith the Lord?" Do you care?
The only authority I have provided are preeminent dispensational scholars, Thomas Ice and John Walvoord. I did on one post a quote from Scofield's remarks [Original Scofield Bible} that the Song of Solomon was about the love of Jesus Christ and His Church, even though the Church is not in the Old Testament, according to dispensationalism. :laugh::laugh:That remark was removed in more recent versions to make the Scofield Bible comport with dispensational truth!:laugh::laugh:
Laugh all you will. The fact is that you are not quoting from the Word. You are quoting the words of men. In that you fail.
You do not understand the foreknowledge of God. And the only thing I accuse God of causing is the Salvation of the Elect!
Perhaps I understand it more than you think.
You really cannot Know that! You may think you do! {But given some of the stuff you write perhaps He doesn't even know!}
I can know and understand what the Bible teaches. Just because you can't grasp some of these truths doesn't mean my understanding is as limited.

Man is made in God's image. Part of that image is a free will to choose between good and evil. God does not force me to do anything, including typing the words that is in this box. What I type I do of my own free will. I can choose to yield to my flesh or yield to the Spirit. Paul said that:

Romans 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
--This is a choice that every believer must make every day, and it is made freely with the mind. With the mind one chooses to serve the law of God. It is a choice that you freely make. No one forces you to do it. The choice is yours.

Can you support that assumption about time with Scripture?
1 Timothy 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
God alone is immortal. He is the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end.
So, yes:
"God is timeless. He sees outside the boundaries of time. He eternal. He created time for man's sake."

God created all things, including time, and therefore is not bound by time, but lives outside of its realm.
His knowledge does not cause things to come into being.
His creative word does.
This is what makes Calvinism in error.
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
your failure to understand calvinism does not mean it is in error. It means youare without understanding DHK
The same can be sincerely said about you Icon.
Really, you do not understand the terrible error that you are drowning in.
Seek the Lord and pray. Perhaps He will give you light. You need to come out of the darkness. Plead with him now.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
Here is your problem. There are many good scholars who put the rapture at the beginning or middle or end of the Tribulation. They still believe in the Tribulation, and they still believe in Millennial Kingdom. They don't dismiss dispensationalism. In fact, as your link proves dispensationalism started right back at Ireaneus, much farther back in history than Calvinism or your beloved Covenantal theology, especially the kind that teaches that the so-called "church" either is an extension of, or replaces Israel. It does neither.
However, even your link proves that dispensationalism, per se, was believed by scholars all throughout the ages.

Darby is your problem not mine. I don't use him as an authority; you do. I don't quote from Darby; you do. Why do you quote from one who is a failure in your opinion?
Me? The Word of God is my authority. I have told you that many times.

If you are going to debate me, it will have to be on the basis of God's Word, not on the basis of whom you call "preeminent authorities in their fields." I don't really care about men's opinions. The question is: "What saith the Lord?" Do you care?

Laugh all you will. The fact is that you are not quoting from the Word. You are quoting the words of men. In that you fail.

Perhaps I understand it more than you think.

I can know and understand what the Bible teaches. Just because you can't grasp some of these truths doesn't mean my understanding is as limited.

Man is made in God's image. Part of that image is a free will to choose between good and evil. God does not force me to do anything, including typing the words that is in this box. What I type I do of my own free will. I can choose to yield to my flesh or yield to the Spirit. Paul said that:

Romans 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
--This is a choice that every believer must make every day, and it is made freely with the mind. With the mind one chooses to serve the law of God. It is a choice that you freely make. No one forces you to do it. The choice is yours.


1 Timothy 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
God alone is immortal. He is the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end.
So, yes:
"God is timeless. He sees outside the boundaries of time. He eternal. He created time for man's sake."

God created all things, including time, and therefore is not bound by time, but lives outside of its realm.
His knowledge does not cause things to come into being.
His creative word does.
This is what makes Calvinism in error.

I have challenged any pre-trib-dispensationalist on this BB for 10 years to present one, just one, passage of Scripture that teaches a pre-trib-rapture of the Church. Others have asked the same question. You claim to debate using the Bible then do so. Present that passage of Scripture!
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I have to be on ignore. Evan has not responded to my charges of his arguments being weak b/c they are arguments of silence. NOt sure what I did to get on ignore either. Anyone want to ask him?

You are not on ignore. I have been busy as of late.
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
I have challenged any pre-trib-dispensationalist on this BB for 10 years to present one, just one, passage of Scripture that teaches a pre-trib-rapture of the Church. Others have asked the same question. You claim to debate using the Bible then do so. Present that passage of Scripture!
You didn't answer my post. You ignored it. Here is a part of it.
Here is your problem. There are many good scholars who put the rapture at the beginning or middle or end of the Tribulation. They still believe in the Tribulation, and they still believe in Millennial Kingdom. They don't dismiss dispensationalism. In fact, as your link proves dispensationalism started right back at Ireaneus, much farther back in history than Calvinism or your beloved Covenantal theology, especially the kind that teaches that the so-called "church" either is an extension of, or replaces Israel. It does neither.
However, even your link proves that dispensationalism, per se, was believed by scholars all throughout the ages.
Your hatred of dispensationalism prevents you from seeing "the forest for the trees." The larger issue is dispensationalism. Deal with that first.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
You didn't answer my post. You ignored it. Here is a part of it.

Your hatred of dispensationalism prevents you from seeing "the forest for the trees." The larger issue is dispensationalism. Deal with that first.

My link proved that dispensationalism, with its pre-trib-rapture of the Church and the "parenthesis" doctrine of the Church, started with John Nelson Darby. It sure doesn't come from Scripture otherwise you and other likeminded pre-trib-dispensationalists would not have ignored the following question!

I have challenged any pre-trib-dispensationalist on this BB for 10 years to present one, just one, passage of Scripture that teaches a pre-trib-rapture of the Church. Others have asked the same question. You claim to debate using the Bible then do so. Present that passage of Scripture!

You are very immature, even childish, in many respects DHK. You soundly attempt to slime Calvinism and the Doctrines of Sovereign Election and Grace in any post you present which deals with them. Whether you agree with those doctrines or not you cannot honestly deny that there is a sound Biblical basis for those doctrines. But you are totally unable to present any Biblical basis for the pre-trib-rapture of the Church and the doctrine of the "parenthesis" Church on which that doctrine hangs. As Dr Thomas Ice writes: http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/short-history-of-dispensationalism

Darby's distinction between God's plan for Israel and the Church formed the basis for his most controversial contribution to Evangelical Christianity-the pretribulation rapture of the Church. Even strong opponents to this doctrine admit that it is logical if God is going to literally fulfill His ancient promises to Israel. The Church must be removed before God resumes His work with Israel, enabling the two programs to fully participate in the millennial kingdom.

//snip//

Darby's view of the church was crucial to his development of dispensationalism, especially his view (shared by many in his day) of the present ruin of the church.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
1. None of the Old Testament passages on the Tribulation mention the church (Deut. 4:29-30; Jer. 30:4-11; Dan. 8:24-27; 12:1-2).

2. None of the New Testament passages on the Tribulation mention the church (Matt. 13:30, 39-42, 48-50; 24:15-31; 1 Thess. 1:9-10, 5:4-9; 2 Thess. 2:1-11; Rev. 4-18)

So others what do you say? Did I tell you to buy a book? NO I did not because I know eschatology better than I know other theological arguments. Books are quite helpful, but the scripture is the authority.

So Evan! Where are the "Two good arguments for a Pretrib Rapture"? Where is just one passage of Scripture showing a pre-trib-rapture. Now a lot of us are likely going to die before the Lord Jesus Christ returns but that cannot be called a pre-trib-rapture!
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
My link proved that dispensationalism, with its pre-trib-rapture of the Church and the "parenthesis" doctrine of the Church, started with John Nelson Darby. It sure doesn't come from Scripture otherwise you and other likeminded pre-trib-dispensationalists would not have ignored the following question!
Your link proves that Dispensationalism started with the Church Fathers, particularly Ireneus--a hard fact for you to admit. Dispensationalism as a whole does come from Scripture and that fact cannot be avoided.
You are very immature, even childish, in many respects DHK. You soundly attempt to slime Calvinism and the Doctrines of Sovereign Election and Grace in any post you present which deals with them. Whether you agree with those doctrines or not you cannot honestly deny that there is a sound Biblical basis for those doctrines. But you are totally unable to present any Biblical basis for the pre-trib-rapture of the Church and the doctrine of the "parenthesis" Church on which that doctrine hangs. As Dr Thomas Ice writes: http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/short-history-of-dispensationalism
I have told you before, I don't care what Dr. Ice says.
Calvinism in and of itself is an erroneous theology that has led many astray.
Here is a good source for you:
http://bible-truth.org/IsCalvinismBiblical.html

Study the content therein and hopefully your eyes will be opened.
I can't convince you. You won't listen to what I have to say.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
Your link proves that Dispensationalism started with the Church Fathers, particularly Ireneus--a hard fact for you to admit. Dispensationalism as a whole does come from Scripture and that fact cannot be avoided.

My link proved that pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensationalism started with John Nelson Darby and you know that is the truth.

I have told you before, I don't care what Dr. Ice says.
Calvinism in and of itself is an erroneous theology that has led many astray.
Here is a good source for you:
http://bible-truth.org/IsCalvinismBiblical.html

You prove my assertion above that you are immature, even childish. I present the truth about the father of pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensationalism as recorded by a pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensational scholar and you reject it as false. Yet you want me to believe the trash talk of a Calvin hater! Get real DHK. Simply admit that there is no Scriptural basis for pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensationalism {PTRRD for short}.

Study the content therein and hopefully your eyes will be opened.
I can't convince you. You won't listen to what I have to say.

When you present one verse of Scripture to support PTRRD you may have something to say worth reading. The challenge still holds:

I have challenged any pre-trib-dispensationalist on this BB for 10 years to present one, just one, passage of Scripture that teaches a pre-trib-rapture of the Church. Others have asked the same question. You claim to debate using the Bible then do so. Present that passage of Scripture!
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
My link proved that pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensationalism started with John Nelson Darby and you know that is the truth.
Perhaps you haven't read your own link. Dispensationalism started with Ireneus. First come to that fact. Your link proves that much. Until you accept that fact we can proceed no further. There are many dispensatonalists that are pre-trib, mid-trib, and post-trib. I accept that. One must accept dispensationalism first.
]You prove my assertion above that you are immature, even childish. I present the truth about the father of pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensationalism as recorded by a pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensational scholar and you reject it as false. Yet you want me to believe the trash talk of a Calvin hater! Get real DHK. Simply admit that there is no Scriptural basis for pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensationalism {PTRRD for short}.
Calling me names doesn't do you any good. It doesn't prove your case.
I have presented my case in the Cal/Arm forum.
When you present one verse of Scripture to support PTRRD you may have something to say worth reading. The challenge still holds:
I'll post again what MacArthur said, although you can read it in the Cal/Arm forum/
https://donjobson.wordpress.com/201...-u-h-will-get-you-rapture-ready-for-saturday/

John MacArthur’s Answer: You see, that is just a label that they throw. What do you mean a dispensational point of view? The word dispensation is a NT word, Paul said “It was committed unto him the dispensation of the grace of God, dispensation of the mysteries.” It simply means a stewardship, it’s simply a term, that’s all. This is the accusation over and over again that Dispensationalism popped up with J. N. Darby, and C. I. Scofield, and all of that? But we are not working our way through a system, but rather attempting to interpret scripture on its own merit.

Ok, you have some basic things to deal with. Dispensationalism, by the way, is simply a title for theology that recognizes a literal nation Israel to be restored in the future. And recognizes a literal kingdom, and a literal tribulation, and a literal return, and a literal rapture, and that is dispensational. The other perspective is what’s called non-dispensational or covenant theology, which has no place for Israel, no kingdom in the future, and spiritualizes everything rather than making it literal.

Now, what you have to do is to go back to some very basic things. Dispensation simply means that God manages things in a certain way at a certain time. Everybody is a dispensationalist, everybody. I don’t care who they are in theology, they’re dispensational.
Look in the other forum. I have posted other material as well.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/short-history-of-dispensationalism

Darby's distinction between God's plan for Israel and the Church formed the basis for his most controversial contribution to Evangelical Christianity-the pretribulation rapture of the Church. Even strong opponents to this doctrine admit that it is logical if God is going to literally fulfill His ancient promises to Israel. The Church must be removed before God resumes His work with Israel, enabling the two programs to fully participate in the millennial kingdom.

//snip//


Darby's view of the church was crucial to his development of dispensationalism, especially his view (shared by many in his day) of the present ruin of the church.

//snip//


DARBY'S CONTRIBUTION

Darby is the father of dispensationalism.
"Although he was not a systematic theologian, he was an expositor of 'dispensational truth.' He synthesized exegetical truths to show the full story-line of the Bible, God's activity in human history"


Then from:http://www.pre-trib.org/data/pdf/Ice-JohnNelsonDarbyandth.pdf

"An accident happened which laid me aside for a time; my horse was frightened and had thrown me against a door-post."

This period of Darby’s life is known among Darby scholars as “The Convalescence” during which he experienced “The Deliverance. After the accident, Darby was taken to the home of Susannah Pennefather (1785–1862), his older sister, in Dublin in order to recover. Darby’s convalescence was a time when “the questions in his mind began to resolve themselves.

//snip//

Isaiah was a very influential part of his studies and change of views during this time. He notes:

"In my retreat, the 32nd chapter of Isaiah taught me clearly, on God's behalf, that there was still an economy to come, of His ordering; a state of things in no way established as yet. The consciousness of my union with Christ had given me the present heavenly portion of the glory, whereas this chapter clearly sets forth the corresponding earthly part. I was not able to put these things in their respective places or arrange them in order, as I can now; but the truths themselves were then revealed of God, through the action of His Spirit, by reading His word."

Darby summarized his views that he discovered during his convalescence retreat in Dublin in an issue of The Bible Treasury writing:

"Isaiah xxxii. it was that taught me about the new dispensation. I saw there would be a David reign, and did not know whether the church might not be removed before forty years’ time. At that time I was ill with my knee. It gave me peace to see what the church was. I saw that I, poor, wretched, and sinful J. N. D., knowing too much yet not enough about myself, was left behind, and let go, but I was united to Christ in heaven. Then what was I waiting for? J. G. B. came up and said they were teaching some new thing in England. “I have it!” I said"

//snip//

From the time of his convalescence, Darby developed a theology that taught and supported a dispensational, premillennial, pretribulationism. Essentially Darby came to understand that his place or position was the same as Christ, which is in heaven. Thus, the church is a heavenly people, not an earthly people like the established church, in which he was a clergyman. Juxtaposed to the heavenly and spiritual church was Israel, who are composed of a spiritual, ethnic, and national people on earth who have a future in God’s plan after the church age.

Darby came to understand that the church could be taken to heaven at any moment without signs preceding that event, in what would later be known as the pretribulational rapture of the church. Darby’s realization of a change in dispensations laid the groundwork for the development of dispensationalism, since he saw a distinction between God’s plan for the church and His plan for Israel. By this time, Darby also developed a pessimistic view of the visible church, Christendom, and came to believe that it was in utter ruins.

//snip//

From the time of his convalescence, Darby developed a theology that taught and supported a dispensational, premillennial, pretribulationism. Essentially Darby came to understand that his place or position was the same as Christ, which is in heaven. Thus, the church is a heavenly people, not an earthly people like the established church, in which he was a clergyman. Juxtaposed to the heavenly and spiritual church was Israel, who are composed of a spiritual, ethnic, and national people on earth who have a future in God’s plan after the church age.

Darby came to understand that the church could be taken to heaven at any moment without signs preceding that event, in what would later be known as the pretribulational rapture of the church. Darby’s realization of a change in dispensations laid the groundwork for the development of dispensationalism, since he saw a distinction between God’s plan for the church and His plan for Israel. By this time, Darby also developed a pessimistic view of the visible church, Christendom, and came to believe that it was in utter ruins.

//snip//


Ernest Sandeen tells us:

"Darby’s view of the premillennial advent contrasted with that held by the historicist millenarian school in two ways. First, Darby taught that the second advent would be secret, an event sensible only to those who participated in it. . . . There were, in effect, two “second coming” in Darby’s eschatology. The church is first taken from the earth secretly and then, at a later time, Christ returns in a public second advent as described in Matthew 24. . . .

Second, Darby taught that the secret rapture could occur at any moment. In fact, the secret rapture is also often referred to as the doctrine of the any- moment coming. Unlike the historicist millenarians, Darby taught that the prophetic timetable had been interrupted at the founding of the church and that the unfulfilled biblical prophecies must all wait upon the rapture of the church. . . . Darby avoided the pitfalls both of attempting to predict a time for Christ’s second advent and of trying to make sense out of the contemporary alarms of European politics with the Revelation as the guidebook."

//snip//


Darby found an exegetical basis in Scripture for his doctrine of a pretribulation Rapture. As a careful student of the Bible, Darby had no need to appeal to an oracle for his doctrines. The unfounded and scurrilous accusations of MacPherson and his sympathizers contravene the whole ethos of John Nelson Darby, a man of integrity to whom the Word of God was paramount.” Tim LaHaye believes that whether Darby was influenced by the Bible or not, nevertheless, pretribulationism is found within the pages of Scripture.

"John Darby gained his views primarily from his study of the Word of God, the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and the influence of emerging premillennial biblical literalists, who were moving from the Historical school of interpreting prophecy to the Futurist position. But even if he didn’t, that doesn’t change anything. The pre-Trib position is supported by Scripture. Surely that is enough!"

If LeHaye says it it must be true but I wonder; does anyone smell special and additional revelation in the above?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
You are being childish and avoiding questions that are directly put to you.
What is the purpose of having a debate when you can't answer the questions or even admit to those things posted?

I have posted repeatedly links to dispensational scholar Dr. Thomas Ice showing that John Nelson Darby is the father of pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensational doctrine {PTRRDD}. You ignore them and then expect me to believe the haters of the Doctrines of Sovereign Election and Grace. Ridiculous! When you post a single passage of Scripture that proves John Nelson Darby was not delusional when he developed his pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensational doctrine {PTRRDD} then you will have something worthwhile to say. Otherwise, one more time!

I have challenged any pre-trib-dispensationalist on this BB for 10 years to present one, just one, passage of Scripture that teaches a pre-trib-rapture of the Church. Others have asked the same question. You claim to debate using the Bible then do so. Present that passage of Scripture!
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
I have posted repeatedly links to dispensational scholar Dr. Thomas Ice showing that John Nelson Darby is the father of pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensational doctrine {PTRRDD}. You ignore them and then expect me to believe the haters of the Doctrines of Sovereign Election and Grace. Ridiculous! When you post a single passage of Scripture that proves John Nelson Darby was not delusional when he developed his pre-trib-rapture-ready-dispensational doctrine {PTRRDD} then you will have something worthwhile to say. Otherwise, one more time!

I have challenged any pre-trib-dispensationalist on this BB for 10 years to present one, just one, passage of Scripture that teaches a pre-trib-rapture of the Church. Others have asked the same question. You claim to debate using the Bible then do so. Present that passage of Scripture!
And I have already answered that. But you have answered very little of my posts.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2187608&postcount=33
 

Inspector Javert

Active Member
I have challenged any pre-trib-dispensationalist on this BB for 10 years to present one, just one, passage of Scripture that teaches a pre-trib-rapture of the Church. Others have asked the same question. You claim to debate using the Bible then do so. Present that passage of Scripture!

They cannot and never will to your satisfaction, and here's why:

It's simply because if God himself walked up to you in a 3-piece suit and shook your hand and explained that Pre-Tribulational Rapturism and Dispensationalism were the Biblical truth...

You would still deny it.

Your loathing of Dispensationalism is tatamount to neurosis.

Only poor martyr DHK even bothers to discuss it with you.
The Scripture COULD read something like:

"Before 7 years of judgment upon the sins of the nations and 7 years of trials of Jacob....the ransomed ecclesia of Christ shall be snatched away so that they may not suffer the wrath of God prior to the bowls of wrath poured out upon the nations"....

And you wouldn't consider that even possible evidence of a Pre-Tribulational Rapture.
You'd deny it no matter WHAT verse was offered.
You haven't seen it because you don't WANT TO...(that's a facet of your free-will...but that's another discussion)

Your only delusion is to pretend that there could be ANY passage or verse sufficient to convince you of it. In that suggestion you are deluding yourself.

The difference between DHK and you is this:
If DHK were shown reasonably sufficient texts of Scripture to deny his view...
he actually WOULD abandon it and yield to the testimony of Holy Writ....

God could not personally convince YOU no matter WHAT he said in the Scripture. Your hatred of Dispensationalism has passed the point of neurotic...it's truly psychopathic........it's frightening, deranged....disturbing.....

I can only guess poor DHK bothers to debate you at all for the sake of the seeking and searching who might want to hear BOTH sides of the debate...before your psychopathic rage takes complete control of you......
There is no way he is so stupid as to think that you are even CLOSE to rational on this one.

Pre-trib Rapturism may be wrong...I dunno....
But God himself couldn't convince you of it if he tried.

You've made your choice....
That's why no one can show you the text you demand.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
That would be hilariously comical if it were not so pathetically sad!
You wanted Scripture. Over a dozen scriptures were posted in just one post.
You gave one answer and quoted one passage of Scripture.
Here was your answer.
I would not even call that interpretation eisegesis, it is simply deliberate falsehood in an attempt to justify a false doctrine. The pre-trib-rapture was invented by John Nelson Darby out of "Whole Cloth". I have presented information showing how he came by that falsehood. He read Isaiah 32 and apparently had some special message from the Holy Spirit. That is the similar to the claim of Joseph Smith that he the book of Mormon in King James English on gold pages. It simply is not as blatant!
Pitiful!
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
They cannot and never will to your satisfaction, and here's why:

It's simply because if God himself walked up to you in a 3-piece suit and shook your hand and explained that Pre-Tribulational Rapturism and Dispensationalism were the Biblical truth...

You would still deny it.

Your loathing of Dispensationalism is tatamount to neurosis.

Only poor martyr DHK even bothers to discuss it with you.
The Scripture COULD read something like:

"Before 7 years of judgment upon the sins of the nations and 7 years of trials of Jacob....the ransomed ecclesia of Christ shall be snatched away so that they may not suffer the wrath of God prior to the bowls of wrath poured out upon the nations"....

And you wouldn't consider that even possible evidence of a Pre-Tribulational Rapture.
You'd deny it no matter WHAT verse was offered.
You haven't seen it because you don't WANT TO...(that's a facet of your free-will...but that's another discussion)

Your only delusion is to pretend that there could be ANY passage or verse sufficient to convince you of it. In that suggestion you are deluding yourself.

The difference between DHK and you is this:
If DHK were shown reasonably sufficient texts of Scripture to deny his view...
he actually WOULD abandon it and yield to the testimony of Holy Writ....

God could not personally convince YOU no matter WHAT he said in the Scripture. Your hatred of Dispensationalism has passed the point of neurotic...it's truly psychopathic........it's frightening, deranged....disturbing.....

I can only guess poor DHK bothers to debate you at all for the sake of the seeking and searching who might want to hear BOTH sides of the debate...before your psychopathic rage takes complete control of you......
There is no way he is so stupid as to think that you are even CLOSE to rational on this one.

Pre-trib Rapturism may be wrong...I dunno....
But God himself couldn't convince you of it if he tried.

You have a very small mind!


You've made your choice....
That's why no one can show you the text you demand.

Because it does not exist!
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
You wanted Scripture. Over a dozen scriptures were posted in just one post.
You gave one answer and quoted one passage of Scripture.
Here was your answer.

Pitiful!

There has not been one passage of Scripture posted that clearly shows a pre-trib-rapture of the Church. Everything presented has been subject to the eisegesis of pre-tribbers!

I present Scripture showing clearly a general resurrection and judgment and you pre-tribbers simply ignore it. Rather than take the words of Jesus Christ you take the pipe dreams of Darby!

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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top