Why the usual tired old "Darby" rebuttal can RIP....

Amen, there is one and only
one resurrection as noted in
Daniel 12:1-3. God's hand is shortened so he
cannot show mercy on whom He will.

I DON'T THINK SO!

 

Link: "I read your message, but I still do not see any scripture that places the rapture before the tribulation."

"do not see" is the definition of "blind".

Link: "The fact that Paul warned the Thesalonians not to think the time had come before the man of sin was revealed indicates that he expected Christians to be around when the man of sin was revealed. If it were not posible in Paul's view of things for the Thessalonians he was writing to to be around when the man of sin was revealed, why would he have written it."

Your logic is based on an incorrect assumption and is in
error. " ... indicates that he expected Christians
to be around when the man of sin was revealed" is the error part.
This incorrect assumption makes your question foolish and of
no meaning.

I think you are confusing pretribulation rapture/resurrection doctrine
with some other theory of eschatology.

OldRegular: //Also would you please exegete Daniel 9:25-27
for us. I looked at it and can't find any mention
of the "Great Tribulation".//

I was very careful to delineate what i meant where. Are you
also trying to say "pretribu is wrong because is isn't
what ever unknown eschatology you have?

Did you notice that Daniel 9:25-27 denotes two halfs of
a seven year period? (it did, BTW).

In Revelation are five denotations of 3½-years.
They are called:

"time, times, and half a time" (years 1+2+½ = 3½-years)
42 months - 42/12 = 3½-years
1260 days - 1260/30 = 3½-years

Some say each of the five overlap in the second half
of the 70th week of Daniel.
I say they denote the two halves of the 70th week
of Daniel. Jesus mentions both the AOD = abominations
of the desolation and the great tribulation (period)
in the 24th chapter of Matthew. the AOD is from Daniel 9:27.
The great tribulation after the AOD is where i get
the tribulatin period for the whole 7-year "day" of
the Lord AKA Daniel's 70th week, AKA the Tribulation Period.

But hey, critics of God and His Holy Bible want all this
in ONE VERSE which cannot be possibly misunderstood (like there
is a passage in the Bible doesn't get misunderstood
by somebody).

 

YOU wrote,

Ed: //7R. No Signs precede the Rapture
(1 Thess. 5:1-3, Matthew 24:31-44)
7SC. Signs precede the Second Coming
(Luke 21-11-28, Matthew 24:21-30)//

Link: //How do you get 'No Signs precede the Rapture.'
The Scriptures you quote argue for the opposite of
what you are saying. Why do you put those signs as
signs of the Scond coming and not before the rapture?
I do not see anything in the passages you
quote that justify the separation.//

I keep putting down the same stuff. I don't expect everybody
to agree with me, but there is no excuse not to understand
what i'm saying.

What is the first word in your version of Matthew 24:31?
My first word is "and". The HCSB has an error puting "He"
first. Actually the error is deeper. The text now
has the verse 31; the Greek word is "kai" which is the
Greed equivalent in the 1st century (1AD-100AD) of
the 21st Century, Microsoft Word BULLET.

I keep puting this all over this board, it seems to get
ignored. Nobody argues with it, they just ignore it.
Please disagree, agree, but don't ignore:

----------------------------------
In Matthew 24:3 the disciples of Jesus
ask three questions:

(in the order asked):
1. When will the Temple be destroyed?
2. What is the sign of His coming?
3. What is the sign of the end of age?

Jesus answers these questions in
Matthew 24:4-44, then follows them with
some parables.

Here are the answers of Jesus in the
order the questions were asked:

1. When will the Temple be destroyed?
Matthew 24:4-14

2. What is the sign of His coming?
Matthew 24:15-30

3. What is the sign of the end of age?
Matthew 24:31-44

Here is a summary of the answers
in the order in which events will occur:

1. When will the Temple be destroyed?
Soon, it was in 70AD

3. What is the sign of the end of age?
No signs preceeding the end of the age

2. What is the sign of His coming?
The Sign of His coming will be the
Tribulation period.

Recall the Greek language in which this
Mount Olivet Discourse (MOD) was written
did not have Microsoft Word to do it with.
So many ands, buts, and other connectors
give the outline. I believe the major
outline to be:

1. When will the Temple be destroyed?
Matthew 24:4-14

2. What is the sign of His coming?
Matthew 24:15-30 NOTICE THE END at verse 30

3. What is the sign of the end of age?
Matthew 24:31-44 NOTICE the beginning at verse 31

The Gathering in Matthew 24:31 is the
Rapture/resurrection which ends the
current church age (gentile age, age of grace,
last days, etc.)

Thus Matthew 24:4-14 describes all of the
church age even up to this time.
Matthew 24:4-14 describes the church age.
The signs of Matthew 24:4-14 are signs
that the church age continues.

 

Back on topic: i note that John Darby was
not aware of Micrsoft Word. My pretribulation
arguments are NOT John Darby's
pretrib arguments

 

Sadly those who follow after Darby take one of the most difficult passages of Scripture [Daniel 9:26, 27] and base their entire eschatology on it, contrary to what the rest of Scripture teaches.

 

I wrote //How do you get 'No Signs precede the Rapture.'
The Scriptures you quote argue for the opposite of
what you are saying. Why do you put those signs as
signs of the Scond coming and not before the rapture?
I do not see anything in the passages you
quote that justify the separation.//

Ed Edwards wrote,
****************
I keep putting down the same stuff. I don't expect everybody
to agree with me, but there is no excuse not to understand
what i'm saying.
****************

After reading your message, I think the error may be one of wording. Every sign that Christ gives in the passage is a sign that will take place before the Second Coming. Even if you believe the rapture comes first, anything before the rapture takes place before the Second Coming.

I do not see any scriptural reason to separate the rapture from the Second Coming. You will have to show me a reason to see a gap in time. Do you have a scripture that shows the gap in time?

*************
What is the first word in your version of Matthew 24:31?
My first word is "and". The HCSB has an error puting "He"
first. Actually the error is deeper. The text now
has the verse 31; the Greek word is "kai" which is the
Greed equivalent in the 1st century (1AD-100AD) of
the 21st Century, Microsoft Word BULLET.
*************

Can you demonstrate where ‘kai’ represents the equivalent of an MSWord Bullet? In verse 22 it does not. Verse 22 starts with ‘kai’ and refers back to verse 21. I cannot think of any reason to see ‘kai’ in verse 31 as Christ breaking from the sequence of events. What reason is there for me to think that verse 31 happens before verse 30, if that is what you are arguing for? It is ‘highly counterintuitive’ to say the least. It also goes against the gist of the Thessalonians passage. Verses like Matthew 24:30-31 are further evidence for believing that the resurrection occurs at Christ’s coming.

Matthew 24 (KJV)
30. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.


Interpreting ‘And’ here as a MSWord bullet sounds to me like grasping at straws, trying to find a way to make the pre-trib position still possible after reading this passage. I just can’t find any evidence in scripture suggesting the pre-trib rapture in the first place. Shouldn’t you at least have some evidence for it before trying to come up with off-the-wall ways of interpreting other passages to make them fit with the theory? Where is the passage that sets the timing of the rapture seven years before the Second Coming. If you think you have quoted a passage that shows this, please quote the portion of the passage you believe proves this point, or quote the whole passage and underline the parts you believe prove your case.

*********************
I keep puting this all over this board, it seems to get
ignored. Nobody argues with it, they just ignore it.
Please disagree, agree, but don't ignore:
*********************

You cite long lists of verse references, but rarely quote anything or explain how you believe it fits into your timetable. The long post you posted twice seems to be a list of where you think verses fit in your timetable, without any verses to back up the timetable.

Ed Edwards wrote,
*********
1. When will the Temple be destroyed?
2. What is the sign of His coming?
3. What is the sign of the end of age?

Jesus answers these questions in
Matthew 24:4-44, then follows them with
some parables.

Here are the answers of Jesus in the
order the questions were asked:

1. When will the Temple be destroyed?
Matthew 24:4-14

2. What is the sign of His coming?
Matthew 24:15-30

3. What is the sign of the end of age?
Matthew 24:31-44
****************

I see nothing in the passage that demands that we break it up this way. I do not see a reason to think that Christ answered the ‘sign of thy coming, and of the end of the age’ as two separate categories. Your divisions seem arbitrary here. What is your basis for making the divisions as you do? I still do not see how your divisions offer any proof of a pre-trib rapture, and I do not see any evidence in scripture to support the way you divide up the chapter.

So far, your arguments seem to be along these lines, “I believe these verses refer to this time period.” But where is the scripture to give me reason to believe that x verse refers to y time period? If I look at scripture as a whole, it seems to be saying that the resurrection and rapture occur as Christ returns. That is what I see in the Pauline epistles. What scripture gives us reason to think otherwise? Why should we try to figure out a way to make Matthew 24 fit into a pre-trib mold if there is not scriptural evidence to back up the pre-trib mold in the first place?

The main argument I keep hearing whenever I ask this question is that God has not appointed unto wrath. As I’ve pointed out before, there are three problems with this interpretation:

1. The wrath isn’t poured out until later in the Tribulation, so arguing ‘not appointed unto wrath’ is not even an argument for pre-trib, but for pre-wrath (mid trib I suppose.)
2. God poured out His wrath on Egypt without pouring out His wrath on the children of Israel who were in Egypt. The wrath in Revelation is reminiscent of what happened in Egypt.
3. This argument implies that Tribulational saints are appointed unto God’s wrath, and that seems unlikely in light of the positive comments Revelation makes about them.

 

Ed,

You make your own outline of five resurrections is fill of your logical. I do not agree with your logical.

Apostle Paul tells us of 1 Cor. 15:23 says, there is only two orders of resurrection: First, Jesus Christ rosen from the tomb, he is the firstfruit, THEN they that ARE CHRIST'S AT HIS COMING. THere shall be the only one future resurrection of the saints.

Daniel 12:2-3 support John 5:27-29; 6:39,40,44, & 54 tell us, there shall be a general resurrection of both just and unjust on the LAST DAY at Christ's coming.

Bible does not teaching us there are series or phases of the future resurrection like as split comings. Bibke teaches, once when Christ comes, THEN all people who died shall be risen at the same time. Very simple and plain.

You have to accept what the Bible saying.

In the past, I have been ask you the same two questions:

Please show us where a verse in the Bible saying Christ shall come before tribulation?

Please show us where a verse in the Bible saying Rapture shall be occur 3 1/2 or 7 years earlier before Christ's coming?

None of you include Ed answer my questions. I am waiting for anyone to answer my question from the Bible to prove it.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

Link, Amen! Preach it!!

 

DPT

They don't answer your question because they can't, at least from Scripture. The entire concept of a pretribulation "rapture" is based on eisegesis, not exegesis, of Daniel 9:26,27. Darbyism dug itself a hole and can't get out. Fortunately a group called progressive dispensationalists is finally moving away from Darbyism and toward covenant premillennialism.

 

One last day, one coming, one judgment. The just to glory, the unjust to eternal damnation. One event. No secret rapture. The trumpet shall sound, the earth shall shake, and every eye shall see the Son of God coming in all His glory, even the eyes of those that pierced Him.

With you there, DPT.

 

Re 20:5
But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Re 20:6
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years


Hey guys!
You can't have a first if that is all there is to it. A first needs a second, possibly more. But at least a second. Otherwise you totally destroy the meaning of words. First, second third...Didn't they teach you how to count in first grade? Or kindergarten?

In HIS service;
Jim

 

Who was the first resurrection?