• 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.

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RLBosley

Active 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).

Deut. 4:29-30 is not the so-called Great Tribulation time but a prophecy of the Babylonian exile. It's irrelevant.

Jer. 30:4-11 is talking immediately about the exile as well though it does point forward to the time when Christ would be established as King over his people. But you're assuming that the kingdom must be literal physical Israel. The use of Amos 9 in Acts 15 shows that the apostles saw the gathering of the church, Jews and Gentiles in Christ, was the ultimate fulfillment of the regathering of Israel.

Dan. 8:24-27 is not about the end times specifically. Though it may prefigure it.

Dan 12:1-2 is about the resurrection to eternal life and eternal death. Both come at the end of this time of trouble. There is nothing definitive regarding the tribulation here at all.

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)

Matt. 13:30, 39-42 actually argues against your position. The harvest occurs at the very end of the age and the weeds (unbelievers) are seen as being gathered first and burned then the wheat (believers - the church) brought into the barn. Of course both happens on the same day, the day of harvest. The wheat isn't gathered some years before the weeds are destroyed. Has nothing at all to do with the tribulation and clearly paints a picture of the believing and unbelieving residing together until the very end of the age - not the believing being removed a couple years before hand. It's interesting that you cut off verse 43 since that verse shows that the righteous will shine in the Father's kingdom at the same time as the wicked are burned.

Matt 13:48-50 same as above only the imagery is fish instead of wheat. The good and bad are together until the very end. No pre trib rapture even hinted at.

Matt 24:15-31 if you want to interpret this as the actual end of the age and the physical second coming, then you need to pay attention to what Jesus actually said, "immediately after the tribulation of those days" he would gather the elect. He's talking to the disciples and in verse 14 he refers to the preaching of the gospel. Clearly the idea is that the church will be present and endure through this tribulation not be rescued out of it beforehand.

1 Thess. 1:9-10 I'm not sure what this has to do with the tribulation. Unless you assume wrath in verse 10 is the "Tribulation." The wrath we are saved from is hell not tribulation. Also, Paul is telling the Thessalonian church that they are looking for the return of Jesus in the flesh, not an invisible "coming" where they go to him instead.

1 Thess. 5:4-9 Same as above. Wrath means hell and condemnation not tribulation. We are appointed to salvation (eternal life) not wrath (condemnation). Also Paul again argues for the believing to be watchful for Christ's return as we are children of the day in contrast to the wicked who are "asleep" as children of darkness. The imagery is a single return where some, the church, expected it. The rest, the wicked, are caught completely by surprise and suffer wrath.

2 Thess. 2:1-11 completed undoes the pre-trib rapture. It does not support it. Chapter 1 of 2 Thess shows that Christ will return, physically, to take vengeance on the unbelieving and at the same time be glorified in those who believe - that is the church. Can't be pre-trib, it's impossible. Chapter 2 continues that theme and says the ay of the Lord is the day of our "gathering to him", clearly the rapture. The day of the Lord has already been seen as when he comes to judge the unbelieving. Chapter 2 continues to show that Jesus will return after the apostasy and the appearing of the "son of destruction."

Rev. 4-18 I'm so sick of this argument I'm not even going to bother responding to it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

annsni

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apparently they are stronger than what you said at first.

Umm - remember that it does take a few minutes to look up the Scriptures you posted and write a response to them. Not only that, he responded at 7:30 am on Saturday morning and unless he's on his second cup of coffee, he will be a little slower to type than normal. ;)
 

RLBosley

Active Member
Umm - remember that it does take a few minutes to look up the Scriptures you posted and write a response to them. Not only that, he responded at 7:30 am on Saturday morning and unless he's on his second cup of coffee, he will be a little slower to type than normal. ;)

LOL. Sadly I am on my second cup of coffee... I've been up since 4:00. :eek:
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Umm - remember that it does take a few minutes to look up the Scriptures you posted and write a response to them. Not only that, he responded at 7:30 am on Saturday morning and unless he's on his second cup of coffee, he will be a little slower to type than normal. ;)

Granted I spoke too soon.
 

JamesL

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Granted I spoke too soon.

My son does, too.

He'll ask me to guess what he's thinking, and I'll scrunch my eyebrows. About 3 seconds later he asks again. So I squint. About two seconds later he says "DAD, GUESS !!"

And I'll say "for cryin' out loud. Can I have a few seconds to think?"


btw, before you can fully argue this supposed Israel/Church distinction, you should ponder...what are we to think of those believers who fit neither?

Like Seth, Noah, Enoch, and even Abraham, who all lived and died before Israel. In the minds of Dispensationalists, there are only the two entities.

And before you take a knee-jerk approach, remember that the supposed distinction is not only Eschatological.

When the Ninevites repented, were they part of the church? Couldn't be, if the church began in Acts. But they sure weren't part of Israel.

So...define church, as it is supposedly distinct from Israel in Dispensational thought.

Broaden your horizons a little, and don't be afraid to think for yourself
 
Last edited by a moderator:

blessedwife318

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Deut. 4:29-30 is not the so-called Great Tribulation time but a prophecy of the Babylonian exile. It's irrelevant.

Jer. 30:4-11 is talking immediately about the exile as well though it does point forward to the time when Christ would be established as King over his people. But you're assuming that the kingdom must be literal physical Israel. The use of Amos 9 in Acts 15 shows that the apostles saw the gathering of the church, Jews and Gentiles in Christ, was the ultimate fulfillment of the regathering of Israel.

Dan. 8:24-27 is not about the end times specifically. Though it may prefigure it.

Dan 12:1-2 is about the resurrection to eternal life and eternal death. Both come at the end of this time of trouble. There is nothing definitive regarding the tribulation here at all.



Matt. 13:30, 39-42 actually argues against your position. The harvest occurs at the very end of the age and the weeds (unbelievers) are seen as being gathered first and burned then the wheat (believers - the church) brought into the barn. Of course both happens on the same day, the day of harvest. The wheat isn't gathered some years before the weeds are destroyed. Has nothing at all to do with the tribulation and clearly paints a picture of the believing and unbelieving residing together until the very end of the age - not the believing being removed a couple years before hand. It's interesting that you cut off verse 43 since that verse shows that the righteous will shine in the Father's kingdom at the same time as the wicked are burned.

Matt 13:48-50 same as above only the imagery is fish instead of wheat. The good and bad are together until the very end. No pre trib rapture even hinted at.

Matt 24:15-31 if you want to interpret this as the actual end of the age and the physical second coming, then you need to pay attention to what Jesus actually said, "immediately after the tribulation of those days" he would gather the elect. He's talking to the disciples and in verse 14 he refers to the preaching of the gospel. Clearly the idea is that the church will be present and endure through this tribulation not be rescued out of it beforehand.

1 Thess. 1:9-10 I'm not sure what this has to do with the tribulation. Unless you assume wrath in verse 10 is the "Tribulation." The wrath we are saved from is hell not tribulation. Also, Paul is telling the Thessalonian church that they are looking for the return of Jesus in the flesh, not an invisible "coming" where they go to him instead.

1 Thess. 5:4-9 Same as above. Wrath means hell and condemnation not tribulation. We are appointed to salvation (eternal life) not wrath (condemnation). Also Paul again argues for the believing to be watchful for Christ's return as we are children of the day in contrast to the wicked who are "asleep" as children of darkness. The imagery is a single return where some, the church, expected it. The rest, the wicked, are caught completely by surprise and suffer wrath.

2 Thess. 2:1-11 completed undoes the pre-trib rapture. It does not support it. Chapter 1 of 2 Thess shows that Christ will return, physically, to take vengeance on the unbelieving and at the same time be glorified in those who believe - that is the church. Can't be pre-trib, it's impossible. Chapter 2 continues that theme and says the ay of the Lord is the day of our "gathering to him", clearly the rapture. The day of the Lord has already been seen as when he comes to judge the unbelieving. Chapter 2 continues to show that Jesus will return after the apostasy and the appearing of the "son of destruction."

Rev. 4-18 I'm so sick of this argument I'm not even going to bother responding to it.
Also Evan was making an argument from silence which is really weak. There are much better arguments although even the best ones have not convinced me.
 

RLBosley

Active Member
Also Evan was making an argument from silence which is really weak. There are much better arguments although even the best ones have not convinced me.

They are arguments from silence. Those are the weakest kinds of arguments.

That too. :thumbsup:

I felt like pointing it out, and leaving it at that, but I expected the accusation of "not being able to respond to the texts," so I went with that.
 

Greektim

Well-Known Member
Here is an example of why your argument of silence is weak... cause I can do the same thing.

Evidence for no 7 year tribulation at all: b/c the Bible doesn't say anything about it!

I think it is true, but it is not very strong.
 

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).

Poor old Scofield just didn't understand what he was saying in his introduction to the Song of Solomon!

Book Introduction - Song of Solomon
Read first chapter of Song of Solomon

Nowhere in Scripture does the unspiritual mind tread upon ground so mysterious and incomprehensible as in this book, while the saintliest men and women of the ages have found it a source of pure and exquisite delight. That the love of the divine Bridegroom should follow all the analogies of the marriage relation seems evil only to minds so ascetic that martial desire itself seems to them unholy.

The interpretation is twofold: Primarily, the book is the expression of pure marital love as ordained of God in creation, and the vindication of that love as against both asceticism and lust--the two profanations of the holiness of marriage. The secondary and larger interpretation is of Christ, the Son and His heavenly bride, the Church ( 2 Corinthians 11:1-4 refs).
http://www.biblestudytools.com/comm...-of-solomon/song-of-solomon-introduction.html
***********************************************************

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)

I have posted the following before but it is worth repeating:

That is a common argument given for the pretribulation rapture of the Church that is totally without merit. The argument is made that because the words church or churches do not appear after the completion of the third chapter of the Revelation, the Church cannot be present during the events described in the succeeding chapters. The word churches is used eleven times in Chapters 1-3, the word church is used seven times in these same chapters. The word church or churches does not appear again until Chapter 22, Verse 16. However, the term saints is used in Revelation 5:8; 8:3, 4; 11:18; 13:7, 10; 14:12; 15:3; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:8; and 20:9. The term redeemed is used in Revelation 5:9 and 14:3, 4. Both of these terms are characteristic of the Church, the Body and Bride of Jesus Christ when found elsewhere in the New Testament [Gregg, page 87]. The appearance of the churches again in Chapter 22, Verse 16 and the succeeding verse is interesting and informative.

Revelation 22:16,17, KJV
16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, [and] the bright and morning star.
17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.


Notice two things,

1. Jesus sent His angel to testify of these things in the churches, and
2. The Spirit and the Bride, the Church, give the invitation to come and take of the water of life freely.

These are strange statements to make if the Church is inconsequential during much of the period covered in Revelation; is gone during the tribulation period, and Jesus Christ rules with a ‘rod of iron’ during the millennium.


Now we examine the appearance of the words Israel or Jew in the Book of Revelation. The word Israel appears three times in the Book of Revelation, Chapters 2, 7, and 21; the word Jews appears only twice, Chapters 2 and 3, and there the reference is to false Jews. The word Jew does not appear at all after Chapter 3! So we see that a reference to Israel appears only once during that part of the Book that is presumed to represent ‘the seven year tribulation’ and ‘Jacob’s time of trouble’. The first time the word Israel is used [2:14] the reference is to the false prophet Balaam and his role in the seduction of Israel enroute to the promise land. In Chapter 7 the name Israel is used in the discussion of the servants of God who are sealed. The next occasion [21:12] the name is used in the description of the New Jerusalem, the Church, the Bride of Jesus Christ. Again, Israel is referred to only one time, and no reference is made to the Jews, during that period in which it is claimed that the Church is absent. Strange indeed is the absence of the words Jew or Israel in the 16 chapters of Revelation written specifically, according to pre-trib-rapture-dispensational theology, for the Jews while in the remainder of the New Testament the words Jew or Jews occur 188 times and the words Israel or Israelite occur 73 times.

It is interesting to note that there are other books in the New Testament where the words church or churches are not used. The words do not appear in the Gospels of Mark, Luke, and John. If one believes that the Church was not established until Pentecost, that is not necessarily unusual. It is interesting, however, that the book that many pre-trib-dispensationalists claim is the Gospel of the Kingdom [written by a Jewish believer who collected taxes for Rome] is the Gospel in which the Church is first proclaimed. The words church or churches are not mentioned in 1st & 2nd Peter, 1st & 2nd John, and Jude. Can we then argue the absence of the Church? The words are also absent from the first 15 chapters of Romans and occur only twice in Hebrews.

To show that the absence or presence of a word is not decisive consider the Book of Esther in the Old Testament. The editor of the Thompson Chain Reference Bible notes:
The name of God does not appear in the book, while a heathen king is referred to over 150 times. There is no allusion to prayer or spiritual service of any kind with the possible exception of fasting.
Does this absence of reference to God mean that He was absent or that the book of Esther should not be in the Canon? Obviously not. The book of Esther was written to show God’s watch care over His Covenant people through whom He would bring the Saviour into the world.

In conclusion, there are books in the New Testament in which the words church or churches are not mentioned. Therefore, the absence of the word church in Chapters 4-19 of the book of Revelation is scant justification to claim that the Church is absent during the period covered by these chapters. However, I believe the best argument against a pretribulation “Rapture” is contained in the proper interpretation of John 5:28,29.

Alan Johnson writing in the Expositors Bible Commentary, Volume 12, page 461 explains the absence of the word ‘church’ as follows:
“the word church or churches always stands in Revelation for the historic seven churches in Asia and not for the universal body of Christ. Since 4:2-22:15 concerns the believing community as a whole, it would be inappropriate at least for John’s usage to find the narrower term ‘church’ in this section.

Walvoord, page 279 of Major Bible Prophecies, writes:
In the entirety of Revelation 4-18, no mention of the church on earth is found. Instead believers are referred to as believing Gentiles or believing Jews but never as the church. The total absence of any reference to the church is difficult to explain unless the pretribulationists are correct that the church is in heaven and not on earth during this period.
However, as noted previously the word Jew is not mentioned in Chapters 4-19. The word Israel is mentioned only one time [Revelation 7:4]. The word Gentile is mentioned only one time [Revelation 11:2]. The word “redeemed” occurs only three times, one [Revelation 5:9] referring to the redeemed in Heaven, the remaining two in reference to the 144,000 on Mt Zion [Revelation 14:3, 4]. The word Saints occurs 13 times. Therefore, Walvoord’s statement that believers are referred to as believing Gentiles or believing Jews is not correct. In fact the words believer, believing, believe, or belief do not occur in the Book of Revelation.
*********************************************************

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.

Given your justification of the pre-trib-rapture it is doubtful that you know much about eschatology! There is not a single passage of Scripture that teaches a pre-trib-rapture unless you consider the writing of dispensational scholars? as Scripture! I have been on this BB for 10+ years and no one has yet produced such a passage of Scripture because it does not exist.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top