 |
Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 |
Quiet Wyatt |
For what it’s worth, I have never equated the Church with Israel, nor does that issue make one iota of difference regarding what the New Testament reveals about the ONE return/appearing/manifestation of Christ.
Last edited by Quiet Wyatt on 10/1/23 3:34 am; edited 1 time in total |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12792
10/1/23 3:26 am
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
Acts 1:9 NIV After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. 10 They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. 11 “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”
Note, the angels of God said plainly that He will come in the same way He left. He left visibly, bodily ascending to Heaven, and thus will come back visibly, bodily descending from Heaven back to Earth.
Not, as the pretrib fantasy has it, descending only to the clouds first, remaining unseen by those on the Earth, then proceeding back to Heaven with the Church to wait seven years before descending bodily and visibly to the Earth for those tribulation saints who are looking for Him. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12792
10/1/23 3:33 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Da Sheik |
Rev 3:10 “Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.” (NASB)
Christ promises to keep the church “from” the hour. He doesn’t say He will keep them “through” the hour. God keeps His promises ! We are not appointed to wrath guys! Why do you want it so bad ?  |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1860
10/1/23 7:36 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
It is a common but quite erroneous misconception by pretribbers, to claim that posttribbers believe the Church will experience the wrath of God. The posttrib view to the contrary affirms that God’s wrath will only ever be poured out on the ungodly. That being said, the persecutorial wrath of man and of Satan are things that Christians must always be prepared to face, though the faithful overcoming Christian (who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ—Rev 12:17b). nevertheless shall overcome in the end.
Revelation 12:11 NKJV And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12792
10/1/23 9:13 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Da Sheik |
The Tribulation period is the "Day of the LORD" in the Hebrew scriptures. It is the time of "Jacob's Trouble". It has absolutely nothing to do with the Church.
Jer 30:7 'Alas! for that day is great, There is none like it; And it is the time of Jacob's distress, But he will be saved from it. (NASB)
It is also called "Daniel's 70th Week". It is a period of 7 years that is ushered in by the signing of a covenant between Israel and the antichrist.
Dan 9:24 "Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place.
You guys are trying to put the Church in a time period she is not appointed to. It has absolutely nothing to do with the Body of Christ. It's like trying to force an end piece into the middle of a jigsaw puzzle. At first, it might seem like it would work, but the only way to halfway make it work is to cram, jam, and ram it into place. You are confusing scriptures that pertain to Israel with the Church. As long as you do this, you will be forever confused.
Using Matthew to prove posttrib rapture is already a faulty premise. The Olivet discourse is addressed to Israel (not the Church). The Church wasn't even founded when Jesus gave this discourse. The disciples would have had no concept of the Rapture at this point. Jesus didn't make mention of the Rapture until the Upper Room right before He left this earth. John 14 is where you find the Rapture- not the Olivet Discourse!
John 14:2 "In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.
Joh 14:3 "If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also. (NASB)
Jesus told them He was going to the Father's house (Heaven) to prepare a place for them (and us). Then He said He would come again and receive us to be where He is (Heaven). I would encourage you to study the Jewish wedding model. This is very important to understand the whole concept of the Rapture. Jesus is coming for the Church as a Groom. He is coming to the earth as a Judge at the 2nd coming.
You guys have got the wedding going on at the same time blood is up to the horse's bridle. The metaphors won't fit. Christ is coming for His bride before He unleashes His wrath on the earth. And yes, the Tribulation is the wrath of God. It begins when Christ opens the first seal in Revelation chapter 6. He is the one initating all of it. And by the time you get to the midpoint of the Tribulation, half of earth's population will be extinct. |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1860
10/2/23 10:09 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| Da Sheik wrote: | Rev 3:10 “Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.” (NASB)
Christ promises to keep the church “from” the hour. He doesn’t say He will keep them “through” the hour. God keeps His promises ! We are not appointed to wrath guys! Why do you want it so bad ? |
What makes you think all pretribbers are the church in Philadelphia? Do you even live in Philadelphia in Greece? Some of the dispensationalists have church ages in their system, and Philadelphia isn't in the last church age?
As a dispensationalist, why don't you apply this to yourself: "If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee"(Rev. 3:3) like it says to Sardis?
Revelation 16:15, way past when pretribbers thing the rapture happens, warns that His coming is like that of a thief. Revelation 3:3 is good evidence against pretrib.
What about one of those rebukes about tolerating Nicolaitans or that woman Jezebel's children being stricken with death? Why does Philadelphia apply to you and not the last church mentioned?
You might try hanging out in Alasehir/Philadelphia if you are alive during the tribulation. But I don't see how you could reverse the clock on a dispensational church age if that's the interpretation.
Pretrib makes heavy use of random eisegesis, pulling verses out of context. This is akin to taking the clearly post tribulational verses about 'one shall be taken and another left' or 'of that day and hour knoweth no man' and trying to make them pre-trib. It's just pulling a verse at random and using it as a prooftext, without considering the context. |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
10/2/23 4:10 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| Da Sheik wrote: | The Tribulation period is the "Day of the LORD" in the Hebrew scriptures. It is the time of "Jacob's Trouble". It has absolutely nothing to do with the Church.
Jer 30:7 'Alas! for that day is great, There is none like it; And it is the time of Jacob's distress, But he will be saved from it. (NASB)
It is also called "Daniel's 70th Week". It is a period of 7 years that is ushered in by the signing of a covenant between Israel and the antichrist.
Dan 9:24 "Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place.
You guys are trying to put the Church in a time period she is not appointed to. It has absolutely nothing to do with the Body of Christ. It's like trying to force an end piece into the middle of a jigsaw puzzle. At first, it might seem like it would work, but the only way to halfway make it work is to cram, jam, and ram it into place. You are confusing scriptures that pertain to Israel with the Church. As long as you do this, you will be forever confused. |
Why should we believe that? Because you say so? Because some pre-trib dispensationalists came along, beginning in the 1820s, teaching this brand new doctrinal system with an additional second coming that they have no Biblical evidence for?
Revelation speaks of people from every tribe and tongue who come out of the tribulation, so it is not only a time for Israel.
| Quote: |
Using Matthew to prove posttrib rapture is already a faulty premise. The Olivet discourse is addressed to Israel (not the Church). |
I think pretrib rests on people repeat stuff like this from other pretribbers without bothering to crack open their Bibles.
Matthew 24
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?
4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
| Quote: |
The Church wasn't even founded when Jesus gave this discourse. The disciples would have had no concept of the Rapture at this point. Jesus didn't make mention of the Rapture until the Upper Room right before He left this earth. John 14 is where you find the Rapture- not the Olivet Discourse!
John 14:2 "In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.
Joh 14:3 "If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also. (NASB)
Jesus told them He was going to the Father's house (Heaven) to prepare a place for them (and us). Then He said He would come again and receive us to be where He is (Heaven). I would encourage you to study the Jewish wedding model. This is very important to understand the whole concept of the Rapture. Jesus is coming for the Church as a Groom. He is coming to the earth as a Judge at the 2nd coming.
|
We can also look at the book of Revelation, which shows the New Jerusalem coming down out of heaven.
| Quote: |
You guys have got the wedding going on at the same time blood is up to the horse's bridle. The metaphors won't fit. Christ is coming for His bride before He unleashes His wrath on the earth. And yes, the Tribulation is the wrath of God. |
Please look up wrath in the dictionary, and orge in a Greek dictionary. 'Settled anger.'
Do you really think God's wrath will be against the tribulational saints, whose robes will be washed in the blood of the Lamb, and that they will not obtain salvation through our Lord Jsus Christ? |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
10/2/23 4:15 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Da Sheik |
Let's revisit your initial question, which really wasn't a true inquiry 
| Link wrote: | | I noticed that 'church' is not used in Revelation after chapter 3 to refer to the saints in heaven. |
This is actually a great observation that you have dismissed in such a cavalier way. I would encourage you to study the structure of both the book of Daniel and Revelation. You can't understand Revelation without a proper understanding of Daniel. Both books have a unique structure.
Daniel is written in two different languages; Hebrew and Aramaic. The Aramaic section (Dan 2:4-7:28) deals specifically with the Gentiles. The rest of Daniel is written in Hebrew and pertains specifically to the Jewish nation. Revelation has a similar (yet not identical) architecture. The first 3 chapters contain the word "church" (ekklesia in Greek) 19 times! From that point forward, the only time "church" is mentioned is in the benediction of the book (Rev 22:16).
You see this as nothing more than coincidence, but this is deliberate. The church does not appear in Revelation after chapter 3. She is conspicuously absent in the futuristic section of Revelation. After that period, the term "saints' is used, but that is used of Old Testament believers as well as those who get saved in the Tribulation; after the church age!
You will notice the symbolism changes dramatically after the first few chapters as well. In the first and last few chapters, Jesus is referred to by the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet (Alpha and Omega). From chapter 5 onward, Jesus is referred to as the Lamb (Passover overtones). You will notice other Jewish overtones (temple, tabernacle of testimony, 144,000 from 12 tribes of Israel, two witnesses that look a lot like Moses and Elijah, plagues reminicent of the Exodus, etc.). The reason there is no mention of the "church" in these chapters is because the pieces don't fit.
The Church was born in a miracle (Pentecost) and will leave in a miracle (The Rapture). |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1860
10/4/23 9:22 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Not all saints are "church" saints |
Da Sheik |
I don't have much more to say about all of this, but I will leave one last thing for your consideration. In order to make the postrib theory seem legit, you are forced to say that any time you see "saints" that is equivalent with "church". This is not what the Scriptures teach. Let me give you one powerful example: John the Baptist.
Luke 7:28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.
Jesus makes it clear that John is not a part of the Church. He died before Pentecost and that makes him an Old Testament saint. John was not confused about this either. Let's listen to his own testimony:
John 3:29 "He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. So this joy of mine has been made full. (NASB)
By John's own admission- he is not part of the bride, nor is he the groom. He is a "friend of the bridegroom". The bride of Christ is the Church. Paul makes this clear in Ephesians and Corinthians.
2Co 11:2 For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, so that to Christ I might present you as a pure virgin.
Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Eph 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
The Bride of Christ is the Church. The Church did not begin until Pentecost. Almost all reputable scholars acknowledge this. In Revelation 19 we see the bride already in Heaven prior to the 2nd coming of Christ. How do we know this?
Rev 19:7 "Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready."
Rev 19:8 It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints. (NASB)
This group is seen returning WITH Christ in just a few verses later:
Rev 19:14 And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses.
So you see, when the Lord returns to the earth, He's coming with His Bride, not for her.
There are church saints, there are Old Testament saints, and there will be Tribulation saints who get saved after the Rapture. But not all saints are church saints. |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1860
10/4/23 9:37 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| Da Sheik wrote: | The first 3 chapters contain the word "church" (ekklesia in Greek) 19 times! From that point forward, the only time "church" is mentioned is in the benediction of the book (Rev 22:16).
You see this as nothing more than coincidence, but this is deliberate. The church does not appear in Revelation after chapter 3. She is conspicuously absent in the futuristic section of Revelation. After that period, the term "saints' is used, but that is used of Old Testament believers as well as those who get saved in the Tribulation; after the church age! |
I do not say it is a coincidence. You can look up how John uses 'church' (ekklesia) in his writings. He uses them consistently to refer to local assemblies that actually met. Ditrophes did not have power to refuse to receive ministers John sent from the church universal, or from the church militant either--- terms that would be used later. He was able to exert his influence to not receive them in the church and to expel those from the church who did.
Robert Banks in his book 'Paul's Idea of Community' examines Paul's use of the term ekklesia. In early writings, it applies to the assembly in the local area. In later writings, he uses it to refer to what Banks calls 'The church throughout time and space' since it includes not only the church universal, but the deceased as well.
John uses the term to refer to local assemblies. In Revelation it is used for the church in one city, which is also how we see the term used throughout Acts.
A word study on plural versus singular uses of 'church' is interesting. We read about churches of Galatia, a region, but the church in Corinth, a city.
It is fitting that when John was talking about believers throughout the world that he would use the word 'saints.' One does not have to posit an addition second coming of Christ not taught anywhere in scripture to explain the change in verbage.
| Quote: |
The Church was born in a miracle (Pentecost) and will leave in a miracle (The Rapture). |
The church leaves to meet the Lord in the air at His coming, not seven years before His coming.
Let's consider II Thessalonians 2.
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
Wouldn't we both agree that this is referring to the coming of the Lord referred to in I Thessalonians 4, and that the gathering here is the rapture of the church?
Now look at the word 'coming' in the same chapter, the same Greek word.
8 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 coming:
Nowhere does Paul say there are two more comings of the Lord. He's talking about the coming of the Lord as if it is just one concept.
Revelation 19 shows the Rider on the white horse passage, which we both take as a reference to the second coming. Then it tells us that the beast and the false prophet are thrown into the lake of fire.
From II Thessalonians 2, we can see that the church is gathered at the coming of the Lord, and the man of sin is destroyed at the coming of the Lord.
That doesn't leave room for the idea of Jesus coming part-way and getting the church, leaving, coming back again, destroying the beast. There is no scripture to back that scenario up.
And if you back up a chapter and look at I Thessalonians 1, when Jesus comes back he gives the church rest from those causing it tribulation when He comes executing vengeance on them that believe not, that know not God. |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
10/7/23 8:45 am
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
