Where do you stand on the Pretribulation Rapture?

[Stranger]

You are the one not wanting to deal with what has been said from Scripture, and that because you cannot understand it. It's you that is in denial of the written Word of God, and no one can help you until you decide you will listen to The Father and His Son in His Word instead of men's traditions.

Because you listen to men, and not God in His Word, He has put blindness upon you away from His Word. He has allowed you to deceive yourself because of not listening to Him.

You are in the category of the deceived that Apostle Paul spoke of in 1 Thess.5 that are "drunken in the night" and "sleep in the night", ideas he used to point to those spiritually drunken on the doctrines of men:

1 Thess 5:6-7
6 Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.

7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.
KJV

I have no problem dealing with the Scripture.  And what I said to you involves the Scripture.   But you just keep coming back and telling me I'm not supposed to believe that as a dispensationalist. 

I am a dispensationalist.  I hold to the dispensations of the Scripture.  I am pre-trib.  That means I believe in the rapture before the Tribulation.  I believe just like you, that the term 'thief in the night' pertains to the 'Day of the Lord'. 

It would be better if you quit these early accusations and just address what I said.  And why don't you give  your theological persuasion?  Are you ashamed of it?

Stranger

[notreligus]

You are the one not wanting to deal with what has been said from Scripture, and that because you cannot understand it. It's you that is in denial of the written Word of God, and no one can help you until you decide you will listen to The Father and His Son in His Word instead of men's traditions.

Because you listen to men, and not God in His Word, He has put blindness upon you away from His Word. He has allowed you to deceive yourself because of not listening to Him.

You are in the category of the deceived that Apostle Paul spoke of in 1 Thess.5 that are "drunken in the night" and "sleep in the night", ideas he used to point to those spiritually drunken on the doctrines of men:

1 Thess 5:6-7
6 Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.

7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.
KJV

I have no problem dealing with the Scripture.  And what I said to you involves the Scripture.   But you just keep coming back and telling me I'm not supposed to believe that as a dispensationalist. 

I am a dispensationalist.  I hold to the dispensations of the Scripture.  I am pre-trib.  That means I believe in the rapture before the Tribulation.  I believe just like you, that the term 'thief in the night' pertains to the 'Day of the Lord'. 

It would be better if you quit these early accusations and just address what I said.  And why don't you give  your theological persuasion?  Are you ashamed of it?

Stranger

What do you believe to be the ultimate goal of God's progressive dealings with mankind?

[dpr]

You are the one not wanting to deal with what has been said from Scripture, and that because you cannot understand it. It's you that is in denial of the written Word of God, and no one can help you until you decide you will listen to The Father and His Son in His Word instead of men's traditions.

Because you listen to men, and not God in His Word, He has put blindness upon you away from His Word. He has allowed you to deceive yourself because of not listening to Him.

You are in the category of the deceived that Apostle Paul spoke of in 1 Thess.5 that are "drunken in the night" and "sleep in the night", ideas he used to point to those spiritually drunken on the doctrines of men:

1 Thess 5:6-7
6 Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.

7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.
KJV

I have no problem dealing with the Scripture.  And what I said to you involves the Scripture.   But you just keep coming back and telling me I'm not supposed to believe that as a dispensationalist. 

I am a dispensationalist.  I hold to the dispensations of the Scripture.  I am pre-trib.  That means I believe in the rapture before the Tribulation.  I believe just like you, that the term 'thief in the night' pertains to the 'Day of the Lord'. 

It would be better if you quit these early accusations and just address what I said.  And why don't you give  your theological persuasion?  Are you ashamed of it?

Stranger

Don't have a clue what you're talking about, and obviously you don't either.

If you don't care to address the many Scripture evidences I posted showing Jesus doesn't gather us until the 'day of the Lord', then fine, you are not required to believe the Scripture if you don't want.

Your continued rejection to address my posted Scriptures suggests to me you are not really interested in what God's Word declares as written.

[dpr]

What do you believe to be the ultimate goal of God's progressive dealings with mankind?

God is going to divide His sheep from the goats when He returns. Those that erred in doctrine will be taught, even the wicked will be forced to come to His Truth and confess Him (Ezek.44; Rev.3:9).

[Stranger]

What do you believe to be the ultimate goal of God's progressive dealings with mankind?

The ultimate goal of anything God does is for His glory.  The ultimate goal of His progressive dealings with man is I believe found in 1Cor. 15:24-26

" Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father;when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.  For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.  The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death."

Now, you said you used to be a dispensationalist.  What are you now?

Stranger

[Tertullian]

dpr

My point is that if you say the Tribulation comes before the rapture,, then why watch for Christ?   Just watch for the Tribulation. 

Stranger

The followers of Jesus were to watch for signs of the Tribulation so that they could flee Jerusalem and avoid the worst of the destruction of Jerusalem. Historically, this was fulfilled when Christians fled Jerusalem (primarily to Pella) and then the Romans destroyed the city.   "Coming" is biblical language for judgement; if you can't muster a Bible study on the word, then take my word for it.  The Christians weren't to watch for the Rapture, but to watch for Christ's coming judgement.

Mark 13:1 And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” 2 And Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

Is that not simple?  The inability of pretribbers to understand even simple English amazes me.  I don't even have to tell you that Jesus isn't speaking of a third temple, do I? 

Mark 14 “But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

It might be obscure to you, but he abomination of desolation is what causes the Temple to be destroyed.    You don't need to know what it is, nor even understand it, but accept it else you'll be in error.  Anyway, the followers of Jesus were to exit by fleeing, not by rapture.   That should be simple enough for you to understand.   If English is in your top three languages, you might also notice the local is Judea, not the whole planet.

One of these days, read the Bible for what it says, rather than read it only for the purpose of twisting it to be compatible with a horrible false doctrine. 

[Tertullian]

The sample size of this survey is a bit small, but it shows what I already believed: People don’t become pretribbers from reading the Bible.  On the contrary, the Bible liberates people from the false pretrib rapture doctrine.  As of two full months of the survey being posted, not a single person has indicated that they became a pretribber after being something to the contrary.

The Pretrib Rapture doctrine is like the Prosperity Gospel; it’s taught by crooked preachers who teach what carnal Christians want to hear.  No one wants to die (unless their lives have become totally miserable), and the pretrib rapture doctrine feeds off that fear of death.

[notreligus]

The sample size of this survey is a bit small, but it shows what I already believed: People don’t become pretribbers from reading the Bible.  On the contrary, the Bible liberates people from the false pretrib rapture doctrine.  As of two full months of the survey being posted, not a single person has indicated that they became a pretribber after being something to the contrary.

The Pretrib Rapture doctrine is like the Prosperity Gospel; it’s taught by crooked preachers who teach what carnal Christians want to hear.  No one wants to die (unless their lives have become totally miserable), and the pretrib rapture doctrine feeds off that fear of death.

Your theory does not fit everyone who believed or continues to believe there will be a pre-trib rapture.   As a former Dispensational I was taught that believers would be raptured from the Earth after the fullness of the Gentiles, or when God was going to again turn to Israel and again deal with that nation primarily, if not exclusively.   Israel would have to endure tribulation because of her rejection of Christ and at the end of the seven years Christ would return (not the with consummate judgment) to set up the Messianic kingdom.   The escapism you refer to is a byproduct of this belief. Dispensationals have been taught to watch the events of the Middle East and as they worsen and Israel is on the verge of accepting a false Messiah who will bring about a false peace then we can know the rapture is near.    Many Christians believe this and they don't know it as being "Dispensational."   Most do not even understand these things as Dispenationalism and that's why they don't participate in these discussions.(They're not afraid to debate you or anyone else.)  But they do hold firmly to Genesis 12:3 and believe that people that reject that Israel, the nation, is going to again be God's main focus, and those who deny this are wrong.    Another point that is always made is that the Church is not mentioned in Revelation after Chapter Three, and that is the proof that the Book of Revelation deals with Israel and the tribulation she must endure, and it has nothing to do with the Church.   They don't see the preachers of such things as crooked.   They flock to the meetings of folk like Perry Stone and John Hagee whose preaching and teaching emphasis is Israel.   Hagee, in his first edition of In Defense Of Israel, proclaimed that Jesus did not come as the Messiah but will come as the Messiah when He returns.  Those who believe these teachings have been made to feel guilty about accepting any other teaching that does not put the nation of Israel at the forefront of end-times.  This is why they get so defensive about this subject. 

What Christians need to understand is why Christ came to this Earth.   Right now many believe He came to save Gentiles and that God will resort to a former program to save Israel, still His chosen people.   Until they recognize that ALL of mankind needed reconciliation to God because ALL are guilty, they'll continue to believe these other things.   

[Tertullian]

The escapism you refer to is a byproduct of this belief.

Your understanding of basic Dispensationalism is spot-on and clearer than most dispies understand their own belief.  That escapism, the Rapture, may be a byproduct, but it's also very dear to their thoughts and it's a focus of their teachers.

But they do hold firmly to Genesis 12:3 and believe that people that reject that Israel, the nation, is going to again be God's main focus, and those who deny this are wrong.    Another point that is always made is that the Church is not mentioned in Revelation after Chapter Three

Dispy doctrine is absolutely indefensible, which is an obvious reason why they don't debate much.   They have token "proofs" such as you've pointed to, but those proofs don't stand up to any scrutiny.  I've noticed several Pretrib oasis forums for dispies to gather and discuss their take on middle-eastern events and other insane nonsense without criticism allowed. 

Hagee, in his first edition of In Defense Of Israel, proclaimed that Jesus did not come as the Messiah but will come as the Messiah when He returns.

How does Hagee hide his horns and tail in pictures and videos?  Are those features like vampire flesh, they just don't show up in mirrors and photos?

[Gods Princess]

Whether pre or mid it is going to happen. I am mid-trib but regardless of that, the rapture is going to happen. The most important thing is that we are ready.

[Tertullian]

Whether pre or mid it is going to happen. I am mid-trib but regardless of that, the rapture is going to happen. The most important thing is that we are ready.

It is death you should be ready for, not the rapture. 

[Gods Princess]

Who says i am going to die? Jesus made it clear thst not eveyone will die but some will be caught up in the rapture :) 

[Tertullian]

Even some Full Preterists believe the Rapture, but just that it already occurred.   But, God's word says we're all appointed to die.

Paul says the Lord will descend with the shout of an archangel (which many people understand to mean Jesus will come invisibly and silently to take our mortal bodies to heaven) to take "we" who are still alive.  I believe it's a mistake to conclude that those who are still alive won't die.  Paul was referring to his living contemporaries, himself and the Thessalonians.  The real rapture applies to all saints, after we die.

[3 Resurrections]

Gods Princess  -  I am one that sees an already fulfilled, literal physical rapture of resurrected saints to heaven back in AD 70 - but NO translation taking place of anyone alive at that time.  The language of the I Thess. 4 text has been mistakenly interpreted to indicate a mass translation of living believers for our future, like that of Enoch, but it's just not there in the text.  It is only describing the group transport of the incorruptible bodies of resurrected believers to heaven back in AD 70.   The "alive and remaining" saints were those who had already been resurrected before (like those raised during Christ's ministry), who were still alive in their incorruptible bodies, and who had remained on earth in that first century. 

The phrase in I Cor. 15:51 "...we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed..." is translated in the Aramaic "...NONE of us shall sleep but all of us shall be transformed..."  When negatives are translated from the original languages into English, the process is a bit tricky.  This Aramaic version sounds as if it is saying that not a single one of those believers addressed in I Corinthians would pass through the physical death process.  We know that couldn't be the proper interpretation of this, since "it is appointed unto man once to die, and after this the judgment." 

"...we shall not all sleep..." is equal to "...all of us shall not sleep..." which is also equal to "...none of us shall sleep..."  which is also equal to Christ's statement directed to a grieving Martha in John 11:26, "...and everyone who lives and believes in me SHALL NEVER DIE..."  The literal, Interlinear translation of "SHALL NEVER DIE" is "in NO WISE SHALL DIE FOREVER".  In other words, Christ was promising to those who believed in Him, that even though their bodies were destined to die, their physical bodies would not stay dead forever in the grave, but would be changed into an incorruptible form in the resurrection.  They would "not perish (or go out of existence), but would have everlasting life."  To prove His power to do this, He gave them the visual demonstration of raising Lazarus from the dead, NEVER TO DIE AGAIN.  Lazarus and others like him participated in the AD 70 "rapture" to heaven that I Thess. 4 is talking about.

God is perfectly capable of translating every living believer instantaneously if He so desired, (as He did in the singular case of Enoch), but it is a mistake to presume that the I Thess. 4 and I Cor. 15 texts are the promise of a translation-type change for us while we are still alive.  I Cor. 15 is merely describing how the physically dead, rotting corpses of believers are changed to incorruptible, living ones in the resurrection.

[Gods Princess]

There were people back in the day, who also believed that the rapture had already occurred and they were encouraged not to be deceived.

You guys can believe whatever you like, I choose to believe what Jesus said.

[Tertullian]

You guys can believe whatever you like, I choose to believe what Jesus said.

What Jesus said:

And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!  And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down ... Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

70 AD, Period.

[Joe]

Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

1Co 15:51 ¶ Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Mt 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
 22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
 23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
 24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
 25 Behold, I have told you before.
 26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
 27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
 28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
 29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
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.

2Th 1:6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;
 7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 
 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
 10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

The Cloud, The Shout, The Trumpet, and usually In Flaming Fire.

I think the confusion comes from the lack of knowing the scriptures and blindly following blind leaders.  Blinded by their traditions.  The LORD said that the leaders in His day made the Word of God of no effect through their traditions.
________________________________________

May God Bless...

Joe

[Tertullian]

Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Coming with the clouds is an OT expression for judgement.  Those who pierced Jesus saw the judgement in 70 AD.  They're all long dead now, so they won't be seeing Jesus come in any fashion in the future.  Likewise, your other verse quotes support 70 AD, not 2016+.

I think the confusion comes from the lack of knowing the scriptures and blindly following blind leaders.  Blinded by their traditions.  The LORD said that the leaders in His day made the Word of God of no effect through their traditions.

That is true, like people not seeing OT symbolism in Revelation, or those who crassly expect signs, such as the vision in Revelation, to be literal.   Popular end-times doctrines are modern traditions that hardly existed before the 1800s.

[Star of David]

Up until December 13, 1990, I was an ardent believer in the popularly-taught End Times scenario of Antichrist, Armageddon, Seven Years of Tribulation, a possible and plausible reason to have a Rapture, Mark of the Beast, '666' (Rev. 13:18), etc., etc., etc.

But on December 13, 1990, this dire scenario began to show some serious cracks in my mental picture of how the Last Days will unfold.

And by the end of 1991, I seriously doubted that this cataclysmic scenario would take place.

And, certainly, by the end of 1992 and since then to this very day, this End Times scenario of Antichrist, Armageddon, Seven Years of Tribulation, Rapture, Mark of the Beast, '666' scenario has been a laughable one to me.

[3 Resurrections]

God's Princess  -  If you and I had lived back in the first century, we also might have easily fallen prey to believing Hymenaeus' and Philetus' heresy that a resurrection had already occurred.  If we had seen or heard about that impressive, massive group of saints who were raised along with Christ and seen in Jerusalem in AD 33, we too might have been tricked into thinking that particular First Resurrection event was the only one which would ever happen.  These risen Matthew 27:52-53 saints did not die again.  They stayed to serve in the early church.  Paul refers to them several times in his writings.  These risen saints were the very ones that Hymenaeus and Philetus were using as "exhibit A" to prove their discouraging teaching that a resurrection was already past, since this remarkable story was widely known.   

What you have in the "rapture" text of I Thess. 4 is Paul's efforts to counter this heresy that had been circulating.  This heresy taught that the believers could not expect a second resurrection in their future (after that first one in AD 33) that would raise the bodies of the saints who had died after Christ's ascension.  Paul contradicts this, saying that those saints who were already above ground, (the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints and those like them), would not be the only ones Christ intended to take back to heaven with Him at His return.  Their fallen brethren also, the dead saints still in the ground, would be raised out of their graves first.  These saints would then rise to meet Christ in the air, with the already-resurrected, "alive and remaining" Matthew 27:52-53 saints following closely behind them to also join the Lord in the air.  There is no description of a translation-type change taking place in Paul's comforting words - only an assurance that God would not leave a single departed saint's body behind when He appeared.  All the dead would have been changed from their dead bodies into incorruptible, living forms fit to be taken into heaven.

Paul writes in II Tim. 4:1 (Interlinear), prior to his martyrdom in AD 67 (which II Tim. 4:6 speaks about), that this anticipated second resurrection was about to occur soon.  "Earnestly testify therefore I before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who IS ABOUT TO JUDGE LIVING AND DEAD according to His appearing and kingdom His; proclaim the word; be  urgent in season, out of season...."  The living were about to pass through the judgment of the Great Tribulation which primarily took place in Judea and Jerusalem in the years approaching  AD 70.  It was vengeance for the blood of Christ that they had called down upon their own heads and that of their children at Jesus' crucifixion. 

All believers who have died since AD 70 or who will die in our future can likewise expect a similar change into an incorruptible, living form.  But it will necessarily have to be at a third coming of Christ in our future, since He already made good on His many promises to come soon a second time for that first-century generation.

[notreligus]

God's Princess  -  If you and I had lived back in the first century, we also might have easily fallen prey to believing Hymenaeus' and Philetus' heresy that a resurrection had already occurred.  If we had seen or heard about that impressive, massive group of saints who were raised along with Christ and seen in Jerusalem in AD 33, we too might have been tricked into thinking that particular First Resurrection event was the only one which would ever happen.  These risen Matthew 27:52-53 saints did not die again.  They stayed to serve in the early church.  Paul refers to them several times in his writings.  These risen saints were the very ones that Hymenaeus and Philetus were using as "exhibit A" to prove their discouraging teaching that a resurrection was already past, since this remarkable story was widely known.   

What you have in the "rapture" text of I Thess. 4 is Paul's efforts to counter this heresy that had been circulating.  This heresy taught that the believers could not expect a second resurrection in their future (after that first one in AD 33) that would raise the bodies of the saints who had died after Christ's ascension.  Paul contradicts this, saying that those saints who were already above ground, (the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints and those like them), would not be the only ones Christ intended to take back to heaven with Him at His return.  Their fallen brethren also, the dead saints still in the ground, would be raised out of their graves first.  These saints would then rise to meet Christ in the air, with the already-resurrected, "alive and remaining" Matthew 27:52-53 saints following closely behind them to also join the Lord in the air.  There is no description of a translation-type change taking place in Paul's comforting words - only an assurance that God would not leave a single departed saint's body behind when He appeared.  All the dead would have been changed from their dead bodies into incorruptible, living forms fit to be taken into heaven.

Paul writes in II Tim. 4:1 (Interlinear), prior to his martyrdom in AD 67 (which II Tim. 4:6 speaks about), that this anticipated second resurrection was about to occur soon.  "Earnestly testify therefore I before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who IS ABOUT TO JUDGE LIVING AND DEAD according to His appearing and kingdom His; proclaim the word; be  urgent in season, out of season...."  The living were about to pass through the judgment of the Great Tribulation which primarily took place in Judea and Jerusalem in the years approaching  AD 70.  It was vengeance for the blood of Christ that they had called down upon their own heads and that of their children at Jesus' crucifixion. 

All believers who have died since AD 70 or who will die in our future can likewise expect a similar change into an incorruptible, living form.  But it will necessarily have to be at a third coming of Christ in our future, since He already made good on His many promises to come soon a second time for that first-century generation.

Paul did not believe or teach that the second resurrection was to soon occur.  You have wrongly categorized Paul.   A reading and study of the two books to the church at Thessalonica confirm what I've stated to be true.    Paul had to write the second letter to correct a teaching by Judaizers who had come there after him to proclaim what you said that Paul believed; so, Paul's belief was the opposite.  Members of the church had been convinced that Christ's second coming was to be at anytime.   Paul told them to get back to work because many had given up and were no longer "occupying until He comes" and were waiting for His return.   We've had people in our own generation go sit on mountaintops and wait for Jesus to return on a certain day at a certain time.  They found that they too had to go home and get back to work.   

[3 Resurrections]

notreligus  -  The II Thess. epistle was written in approximately AD 52.  Yes, Paul told them at the time he was writing that the Day of Christ was not "at hand" (present) at the time he was writing.  But he gave them a list of time markers that the believers could observe which would indicate that the Day of Christ was near at hand in their future.  Some of these time markers Paul had already discussed with them in person earlier, and he was refreshing their memory.  The generation he wrote to would live to see these time markers transpire, but until then, they were to exercise "patient waiting for Christ" (II Thess. 3:5). 

This waiting period from the II Thess. epistle around AD 52 was not long until October of AD 66 arrived when Roman armies would first encircle Jerusalem, just as Christ had predicted in Luke 21:20.  The rebellion (apostasia) that provoked this Roman military response started around mid AD 66.  This rebellion of the Jews against the Romans was the "falling away" (apostasia) time marker that Paul had alerted the Thessalonians to look for in II Thess. 2.  The word "soon" for someone living around AD 52 is not misplaced in this context.

Speaking of the lackadaisical attitude toward a proper work ethic that Paul rebukes in II Thess. 3:11 -12, this may or may not have been related to a belief in a soon-coming arrival of Christ.  We are not told the reason for this malady among some of the Thessalonians.  It could have been a problem similar to that of the Cretans (the "slow-bellies"), without being related to an excuse to sit on a rooftop and wait for Christ's appearing.

[dpr]

The followers of Jesus were to watch for signs of the Tribulation so that they could flee Jerusalem and avoid the worst of the destruction of Jerusalem. Historically, this was fulfilled when Christians fled Jerusalem (primarily to Pella) and then the Romans destroyed the city.   "Coming" is biblical language for judgement; if you can't muster a Bible study on the word, then take my word for it.  The Christians weren't to watch for the Rapture, but to watch for Christ's coming judgement.

....

That view that the signs Jesus gave in His Olivet discourse was past history is a doctrine of men called Preterism. It is not from The Bible, it is from men.

In Jesus' Olivet discourse (i.e., Matt.24 & Mark 13), He gave seven main signs of the very end of this world, with His 2nd coming being the final sign given. Those signs directly parallel the signs of the Seals in Revelation 6. So that strikes out any of men's theories that He meant those signs just for His disciples that were with Him on the Mount of Olives for their day.

Furthermore, those in Christ Jesus should be very watchful of doctrines devised that try to eliminate those signs being for the very end which Jesus gave His servants to be watching. Those are part of His warning to His Church to be watching all the way up to His return. So once again, through men's doctrine, the devil seeks to change Holy Writ.

[dpr]

Mark 13:1 And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” 2 And Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

Is that not simple?  The inability of pretribbers to understand even simple English amazes me.  I don't even have to tell you that Jesus isn't speaking of a third temple, do I? 

Mark 14 “But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

It might be obscure to you, but he abomination of desolation is what causes the Temple to be destroyed.    You don't need to know what it is, nor even understand it, but accept it else you'll be in error.  Anyway, the followers of Jesus were to exit by fleeing, not by rapture.   That should be simple enough for you to understand.   If English is in your top three languages, you might also notice the local is Judea, not the whole planet.

One of these days, read the Bible for what it says, rather than read it only for the purpose of twisting it to be compatible with a horrible false doctrine.

Let's see how your false accusation has turned upon yourself... because you have left out an important part of the discussion which Jesus had with His disciples in Mark 13. I will use the Matthew 24 version...

Matt 24:1-3
24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and His disciples came to Him for to shew Him the buildings of the temple.

2 And Jesus said unto them, "See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

3 And as He sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?"
KJV

By His disciple's response to what He said about the not one stone standing upon another event, they understood Him to be speaking "of the end of the world" like the Scripture says as written. And to make sure that's the timing that's to be understood there, they included the event of Jesus' 2nd coming which will only occur on the last day of this world, and is still future to us.

But men's doctrine of Preterism tries to lie and twist what is written there. They treat that phrase "the end of the world" by changing it to end of the 'age', and then add the lie that was meant for the disciples' days, and then falsely link it to the destruction of the 2nd temple and Jerusalem in 70 A.D. by the Romans.

But anyone who uses their brain just a little will want to them to stop at that point of changing the end of the world idea with converting it to that 'end of the age' idea, because if that doctrine were true, it would have to also mean Jesus' 2nd coming already happened back in His Apostle's days! One should note what is actually written there, that the event of Jesus' 2nd coming is ALSO given with that "end of the world" written phrase.

This is why the hard-core versions of false Preterist doctrine actually does... believe Jesus' 2nd coming already happened back in His Apostle's days! So they do not... believe in a bodily return of our Lord Jesus Christ back to this earth at all!

And you throw out a false accusation that I don't read my Bible?

[dpr]

You guys can believe whatever you like, I choose to believe what Jesus said.

What Jesus said:

And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!  And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down ... Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

70 AD, Period.

Wait a minute, you're leaving relevant Scripture out again.

Matt 24:32-35
32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:

33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away.
KJV


That idea of His saying, "This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" is directly connected to ALL those signs Jesus gave there in that Chapter. The very final sign He gave was that of His 2nd coming to gather His Church after the tribulation.

Therefore, He was NOT... applying that generation idea to the days of His Apostles. He was applying it to the FINAL GENERATION that will see ALL those signs He gave there, including the sign of His coming in the clouds!

Once again, because you have been taught to believe Preterist doctrine from men, it has twisted your understanding away from what is actually written there.

[dpr]

Mark 14 “But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

It might be obscure to you, but he abomination of desolation is what causes the Temple to be destroyed.    You don't need to know what it is, nor even understand it, but accept it else you'll be in error.  Anyway, the followers of Jesus were to exit by fleeing, not by rapture.   That should be simple enough for you to understand.   If English is in your top three languages, you might also notice the local is Judea, not the whole planet.

By that, you have also shown you don't really know what the "abomination of desolation" our Lord Jesus warned is about.

In the Book of Daniel (which is where Jesus quoted from about the AOD), we are shown a false one coming to Jerusalem for the end of this world, and ending sacrifices, and instead placing an abomination that makes desolate, pointing to an idol being used in place of sacrifices at the temple. Thus the abomination of desolation is NOT... about a destruction of a temple in Jerusalem; it is about SPIRITUAL DESOLATION of a temple in Jerusalem for the end.

In 170 B.C. we have an example of the false one in Daniel 11 that did most of that. His name was Antiochus Epiphanes, or Antiochus IV. He conquered Jerusalem, went into the STANDING temple and sacrificed swine upon the altar, desecrating it, and spread its broth around inside the temple, and then placed an idol to Zeus demanding all to bow in worship to it. In Rev.13 we are shown a similar event of idol worship for the end of this world with the 'image of the beast'.

Thing is about Antiochus, he did that back around 170 years before Jesus was born. And Antiochus had already died by the time of Jesus' 1st coming and declaration of the "abomination of desolation" for the end from the Book of Daniel.

It means... look for a final manifesting of the "abomination of desolation" for the end of this world, IN JERUSALEM, IN A REBUILT TEMPLE.

Revelation 11:1-2 reveals another temple in Jerusalem for the end. Apostle Paul revealed it in 2 Thess.2:4 also. And the orthodox Jews in today's Jerusalem already have the materials ready to build it.

Thus denial of another temple in Jerusalem for the end just doesn't get it since we have all that evidence, both from Scripture and from the Jew's own working today in Jerusalem. The only thing preventing its building is the coming of the pseudo-Christ to work his great signs and bring world peace.

Furthermore, per Zechariah, The LORD is to build the temple in Jerusalem when He comes. So the orthodox Jews in Jerusalem are definitely looking... for their Messiah to come and the building of their temple in Jerusalem. Thing is, the one coming first will not be the True Messiah Jesus Christ, for Jesus of Nazareth Who is The Messiah, they have rejected.

[dpr]

Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Coming with the clouds is an OT expression for judgement.  Those who pierced Jesus saw the judgement in 70 AD.  They're all long dead now, so they won't be seeing Jesus come in any fashion in the future.  Likewise, your other verse quotes support 70 AD, not 2016+.
....

That is true, like people not seeing OT symbolism in Revelation, or those who crassly expect signs, such as the vision in Revelation, to be literal.   Popular end-times doctrines are modern traditions that hardly existed before the 1800s.

Jesus' future coming in the clouds will... involve a judgment upon this earth. That's what the consuming fire Apostle Peter warned of in 2 Pet.3:10 is about, as Paul warned also in 1 Thess.5 about the "sudden destruction". Both were pulling from the Old Testament Books of the prophets about that future event for the very end of this present world.

Does Preterism really teach you that falseness that everything written in the OT Books of the prophets is all fulfilled history?? Their truly crazy if that's true, and it would seem so by what you've written. Even Isaiah covered future events of God's new heavens and a new earth which is still way... future to us still.

[dpr]

God's Princess  -  If you and I had lived back in the first century, we also might have easily fallen prey to believing Hymenaeus' and Philetus' heresy that a resurrection had already occurred.  If we had seen or heard about that impressive, massive group of saints who were raised along with Christ and seen in Jerusalem in AD 33, we too might have been tricked into thinking that particular First Resurrection event was the only one which would ever happen.  These risen Matthew 27:52-53 saints did not die again.  They stayed to serve in the early church.  Paul refers to them several times in his writings.  These risen saints were the very ones that Hymenaeus and Philetus were using as "exhibit A" to prove their discouraging teaching that a resurrection was already past, since this remarkable story was widely known.   

What you have in the "rapture" text of I Thess. 4 is Paul's efforts to counter this heresy that had been circulating.  This heresy taught that the believers could not expect a second resurrection in their future (after that first one in AD 33) that would raise the bodies of the saints who had died after Christ's ascension.  Paul contradicts this, saying that those saints who were already above ground, (the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints and those like them), would not be the only ones Christ intended to take back to heaven with Him at His return.  Their fallen brethren also, the dead saints still in the ground, would be raised out of their graves first.  These saints would then rise to meet Christ in the air, with the already-resurrected, "alive and remaining" Matthew 27:52-53 saints following closely behind them to also join the Lord in the air.  There is no description of a translation-type change taking place in Paul's comforting words - only an assurance that God would not leave a single departed saint's body behind when He appeared.  All the dead would have been changed from their dead bodies into incorruptible, living forms fit to be taken into heaven.

Paul writes in II Tim. 4:1 (Interlinear), prior to his martyrdom in AD 67 (which II Tim. 4:6 speaks about), that this anticipated second resurrection was about to occur soon.  "Earnestly testify therefore I before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who IS ABOUT TO JUDGE LIVING AND DEAD according to His appearing and kingdom His; proclaim the word; be  urgent in season, out of season...."  The living were about to pass through the judgment of the Great Tribulation which primarily took place in Judea and Jerusalem in the years approaching  AD 70.  It was vengeance for the blood of Christ that they had called down upon their own heads and that of their children at Jesus' crucifixion. 

All believers who have died since AD 70 or who will die in our future can likewise expect a similar change into an incorruptible, living form.  But it will necessarily have to be at a third coming of Christ in our future, since He already made good on His many promises to come soon a second time for that first-century generation.

Am I on a Preterist Forum???

That's what that doctrine above is. It is a doctrine of men, and is not found in God's Word.

Jesus' 2nd coming did NOT... happen back in His Apostle's days. It is still future to us, and understanding that does not make one a Futurist either, seeing how some Preterists also believe Jesus' 2nd coming is still future.

[dpr]

notreligus  -  The II Thess. epistle was written in approximately AD 52.  Yes, Paul told them at the time he was writing that the Day of Christ was not "at hand" (present) at the time he was writing.  But he gave them a list of time markers that the believers could observe which would indicate that the Day of Christ was near at hand in their future.  Some of these time markers Paul had already discussed with them in person earlier, and he was refreshing their memory.  The generation he wrote to would live to see these time markers transpire, but until then, they were to exercise "patient waiting for Christ" (II Thess. 3:5). 

This waiting period from the II Thess. epistle around AD 52 was not long until October of AD 66 arrived when Roman armies would first encircle Jerusalem, just as Christ had predicted in Luke 21:20.  The rebellion (apostasia) that provoked this Roman military response started around mid AD 66.  This rebellion of the Jews against the Romans was the "falling away" (apostasia) time marker that Paul had alerted the Thessalonians to look for in II Thess. 2.  The word "soon" for someone living around AD 52 is not misplaced in this context.

Speaking of the lackadaisical attitude toward a proper work ethic that Paul rebukes in II Thess. 3:11 -12, this may or may not have been related to a belief in a soon-coming arrival of Christ.  We are not told the reason for this malady among some of the Thessalonians.  It could have been a problem similar to that of the Cretans (the "slow-bellies"), without being related to an excuse to sit on a rooftop and wait for Christ's appearing.

You started out alright about what Apostle Paul was teaching, but then you fell quickly to men's doctrines of Preterism or Historicism, wrongly teaching 2 Thess.2 events being already past history.

What Paul taught in 2 Thess.2 about a false one coming to sit in the temple (in Jerusalem), is for the final generation on this earth when Jesus' 2nd coming happens on the 'day of the Lord'. On that day will come a destruction from The Almighty, and will end man's works off this earth. That of course did NOT... happen in 70 A.D.

It foolishness to teach that Jesus' 2nd coming happened back in 70 A.D., and that's basically the idea you are preaching, because the events of 2 Thess.2 are timed for the very end of this world, and not back in 70 A.D. Proof? Easy, in 2 Thess.2 Paul taught that false one coming to sit in the temple will be destroyed by the brightness of Jesus' coming. And that false one coming to sit in the temple is... about a literal temple in Jerusalem, a standing temple for the end which the orthodox Jews today have the materials ready to build.

[DaveRC]

Mark 13:1 And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” 2 And Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

Is that not simple?  The inability of pretribbers to understand even simple English amazes me.  I don't even have to tell you that Jesus isn't speaking of a third temple, do I? 

Mark 14 “But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

It might be obscure to you, but he abomination of desolation is what causes the Temple to be destroyed.    You don't need to know what it is, nor even understand it, but accept it else you'll be in error.  Anyway, the followers of Jesus were to exit by fleeing, not by rapture.   That should be simple enough for you to understand.   If English is in your top three languages, you might also notice the local is Judea, not the whole planet.

One of these days, read the Bible for what it says, rather than read it only for the purpose of twisting it to be compatible with a horrible false doctrine.

Let's see how your false accusation has turned upon yourself... because you have left out an important part of the discussion which Jesus had with His disciples in Mark 13. I will use the Matthew 24 version...

Matt 24:1-3
24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and His disciples came to Him for to shew Him the buildings of the temple.

2 And Jesus said unto them, "See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

3 And as He sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?"
KJV

By His disciple's response to what He said about the not one stone standing upon another event, they understood Him to be speaking "of the end of the world" like the Scripture says as written. And to make sure that's the timing that's to be understood there, they included the event of Jesus' 2nd coming which will only occur on the last day of this world, and is still future to us.

But men's doctrine of Preterism tries to lie and twist what is written there. They treat that phrase "the end of the world" by changing it to end of the 'age', and then add the lie that was meant for the disciples' days, and then falsely link it to the destruction of the 2nd temple and Jerusalem in 70 A.D. by the Romans.

But anyone who uses their brain just a little will want to them to stop at that point of changing the end of the world idea with converting it to that 'end of the age' idea, because if that doctrine were true, it would have to also mean Jesus' 2nd coming already happened back in His Apostle's days! One should note what is actually written there, that the event of Jesus' 2nd coming is ALSO given with that "end of the world" written phrase.

This is why the hard-core versions of false Preterist doctrine actually does... believe Jesus' 2nd coming already happened back in His Apostle's days! So they do not... believe in a bodily return of our Lord Jesus Christ back to this earth at all!

And you throw out a false accusation that I don't read my Bible?

The Greek translation is aionos #165. That is "age" in the English.

And the KJV didn't  mistranslate this just the common word usage of "world" has changed since then.

What did Jesus mean by "this generation" in Luke 17:25?

What did Jesus mean in Matthew 16:27-28 & Revelation 22:12?

[RB]

Just tagging this so I can come back in the morning and post.

It foolishness to teach that Jesus' 2nd coming happened back in 70 A.D

Agreed

What Paul taught in 2 Thess.2 about a false one coming to sit in the temple (in Jerusalem), is for the final generation on this earth when Jesus' 2nd coming happens on the 'day of the Lord'. On that day will come a destruction from The Almighty, and will end man's works off this earth. That of course did NOT... happen in 70 A.D.

It foolishness to teach that Jesus' 2nd coming happened back in 70 A.D., and that's basically the idea you are preaching, because the events of 2 Thess.2 are timed for the very end of this world, and not back in 70 A.D. Proof? Easy, in 2 Thess.2 Paul taught that false one coming to sit in the temple will be destroyed by the brightness of Jesus' coming. And that false one coming to sit in the temple is... about a literal temple in Jerusalem, a standing temple for the end which the orthodox Jews today have the materials ready to build.

Disagree

You are just as wrong as the Preterists. Tomorrow.....

[Gods Princess]

I beleive more in mid trib....but whether its pre or mid trib...it's going to happen and we all need to be ready. 

[3 Resurrections]

dpr  -  The Man of Sin was NOT to be destroyed by the brightness of CHRIST'S coming.  He was to be destroyed at the same time that the brightness of HIS OWN coming was destroyed.  If you read the whole sentence, you will catch this. 

II Thess 2:8-10  "And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his (the Wicked one's) coming: even him (The Wicked One) whose coming (The Wicked One's coming) is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved."

If this truly is CHRIST'S second coming spoken of here that destroys the Man of Sin, then the sentence structure would demand that Christ's coming would be like Satan's, accompanied by lying wonders.  Since that interpretation is impossible, then it has to mean that the very brightness of the Man of Sin's coming into power is snuffed out simultaneously along with his own life. As soon as he comes on the scene and exalts himself, he is destroyed.

I have discussed on this forum before in a couple of places just who this singular character was.  His name was Menahem, son or grandson of Judas the Galilean of Acts 5:37, another Messiah wannabe.  Several in this family were involved with instigating revolts and rebellion against Rome, and Menahem was no exception.  He fulfilled all the criteria listed in II Thess. 2 for the Man of Sin's actions.

The second coming and the bodily return of Christ did not occur simultaneously with the Man of Sin's destruction.  That Day of the Lord was to follow some time afterward.  The destruction of this man was just a mile marker that would alert the believers to be ready for Christ's coming some time after the Man of Sin had been destroyed.  On the calendar, it was only 4 years later, since Menahem was killed in the Zealot temple siege in AD 66. 

[dpr]

The Greek translation is aionos #165. That is "age" in the English.

And the KJV didn't  mistranslate this just the common word usage of "world" has changed since then.

What did Jesus mean by "this generation" in Luke 17:25?

What did Jesus mean in Matthew 16:27-28 & Revelation 22:12?

What's the Greek translation for "the sign of Thy coming"?

Matt 24:3
3  And as He sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the world?"
KJV

Because that phrase, "the sign of Thy coming" was included in the disciple's question places the meaning to be at the end of this world when Jesus' 2nd coming actually happens, as according to the OT prophets and NT Apostles.

The word 'age' can mean that also. It does not have to be limited to a generation. That's why the KJV translators also translated it to 'eternal, (for) ever (-more), ever, and world.'

Simply by the events written in the OT prophets and Revelation about the end of this present world are enough to know that Jesus' 2nd coming is still future to us today.

[dpr]

I beleive more in mid trib....but whether its pre or mid trib...it's going to happen and we all need to be ready. 

Our Lord Jesus didn't leave us on our own to know how to be 'ready'. What does 'ready' really mean? He certainly did not just say 'be ready' and nothing else. He commanded us to 'watch'...

Matt 24:42-47
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.

44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.

45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?

46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.

47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.
KJV

Jesus referred to the hours of standing watch, like a military division of hours of the night. There was 3 separate times of watches of the night, roughly 4 hours each (sunset to 10 o'clock; 10 to 2 in the morning; and 2 to sunrise).

If you knew in which "watch" the thief would come, then you would not allow your house to be broken into ("broken up"). That idea of the thief is about the metaphor of the day of the Lord coming "as a thief in the night" per Paul in 1 Thess.5, and Peter in 2 Pet.3:10, and Rev.16:15 where our Lord Jesus said He comes "as a thief".

This means our Lord Jesus expects us to be watching, and know in what "watch" His coming is, which means a general ballpark idea (not the specific day or hour, which no man knows). It's like Paul also said in 1 Thess.5, that that day of the Lord is not... to take us (the Church) by surprise, for we are given to know "the times and the seasons".

This is why our Lord Jesus gave us the seven main signs of the end of this world which are events we are to be watching leading up to His return in Revelation.

So that... is actually how... those in Christ Jesus are to be 'ready' in waiting for His coming.