Arguments for a Post Trib. Rap.

Personally, I think Jesus went to the Father to pour His blood on the mercy seat of heaven as was done in the tabernacle on earth, which was a picture or foreshadow of the true tabernacle (made without hands) in heaven.

 

I believe that Hebrews 9:11-18 supports your opinion. Whether the passage means literal blood or is speaking metaphorically I can't say. Nevertheless the sacrifice of Jesus Christ obtained our eternal salvation and ushered in the New Covenant.

11. But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12. Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
13. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15. And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
18. Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.

 

Amy

John Gill says of Verse 12:

Ver. 12. Neither by the blood of goats and calves, &c.] With which the high priest entered into the holy place, within the vail, on the day of atonement, Le 16:14,15 for Christ was not an high priest of the order of Aaron, nor could the blood of these creatures take away sin, nor would God accept of such sacrifices any longer:

but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place; which shows the truth of his human nature, and the virtue of its blood, as in union with his divine Person; by which he opened the way into the holiest of all, as the surety of his people, and gives them boldness and liberty to follow him there; he carried his blood not in a basin, as the high priest carried the blood of goats and calves, but in his veins; and by it, having been shed by him, he entered not into the holy place made with hands, but into heaven itself; and that not every year, as the high priest, but "once" for all, having done his work; or as follows,

having obtained eternal redemption; for us, from sin, Satan, the law, and death, to which his people were in bondage, and which he obtained by paying a ransom price for them; which was not corruptible things, as silver and gold but his precious, blood: in the original text it is, "having found eternal redemption"; there seems to be an allusion to Job 33:24. This was what was sought for long ago by the, Old Testament saints, who were wishing, waiting, and longing for this salvation; it is a thing very precious and difficult to find; it is to be had nowhere but in Christ, and when found in him, is matter of great joy to sensible sinners; God found it in him, and found him to be a proper person to effect it; and Christ has found it by being the author of it: this is called an eternal redemption, because it extends to the saints in all ages; backwards and forwards; it includes eternal life and happiness; and such as are sharers in it shall never perish, but shall be saved with an everlasting salvation; it is so called in opposition to the carnal expiations of the high priests, and in distinction from temporal redemptions, deliverances, and salvations.

 

OR, I can't believe the number of times that you have posted John Gill quotes that say the same thing as me. I promise I have never read a word of John Gill! :laugh:

 

That speaks well of you Amy. Of course you realize that he was an ardent advocate of the Doctrines of Grace [Calvinism to some.].

A bit of information. John Gill was one of the most learned men of his day. He wrote a commentary on every verse of Scripture containing some ten million words and that with a quill pen.

 

I remember in my early 20s, I read a lot of Hal Lindsey books, and thought it was the only answer to the end times. Once I read the Scripture, there is no definitive proof, only opinions. One thing that made me doubt the pre trib theory is a verse in Matthew where Jesus tells us that no man knows the day or hour of His return. Now, if we are raptured on Janurary 1, 2010, and that ushers in the Tribulation/Great Tribulation for a precise seven year period, as the story goes, then, if I was unsaved and left here, then I think I would have sense enough to know exactly when Jesus was returning. For those that say the verse refers to the day and hour of the rapture, then that is not really a return, is it.

Another ridiculous analogy I have heard is Noah took the eight out of the flood, symbolizes the rapture. No, if it symbolizes anything, it shows us how God gets us through the Tribulation.

OR, I appreciate your views on this and dispinationalism, as it makes for an unchanging God and harmony through the whole Bible.

 

Thanks SN. I really appreciate your comments.

 

Got a question. Or ten.

The common description of the 144,000 is that they were

1. Sealed
2. Virgins
3. The Father's name written on their foreheads
4. They sang before the throne
4. They were redeemed from the earth
5. They follow the Lamb wherever he goes.

Are they in heaven or on earth?
Where does it say they are flaming Jewish evangelists?
Where does it say that they prophesy?
Is this a symbolic number?
Why is Dan left off the list, and Manasseh included?
Why Manasseh and not Ephraim, his brother.

 

You are contradicting yourself. You say: The fact is, that nowhere in Scripture, will you find the words, “seven year tribulation period”. Then you immediately say: "But we know for sure, that the tribulation will last seven years". That is absolute nonsense.

 

As a matter of interest whose interpretation, or should I say mythology, of Daniel 9 did you use to arrive at that fantastic definite "seven year tribulation" when you say: The fact is, that nowhere in Scripture, will you find the words, “seven year tribulation period”.

 

This is not a forum on elementary arithmetic. Where did you get the nonsense about Daniel?

 

Exactly!! Excellent post!! 100% correct. :thumbs:

Darren

 

How is that a contradiction? The bible leaves clues for people to nut out in their brain, as stilllearning has shown very clearly. You call it nonsense, what a joke.

Darren

 

I agree, with one exceptions.

If I tell you I'm coming to you house to "STAY FOR ONE WEEK",

how long would I be at your house,

One week or a "half week???

shall confirm for one week,

The AC does make a treaty, but for how long shall it be "Confirmed",

one week or half week??

And who was invited, and does attend the lamb's marraige supper, and who rejected the invitation and doesn't attend??

Isa 28:15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:

Isa 28:18 And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.


“And he (Jesus) shall confirm the covenant with many (rapture church) for one week”. (trib period)

 

Interesting, good point. I haven't thought of that.

You are saying the "HE" (Jesus) confirmed the week covenant (with the church) and HE (Jesus) caused the sacrifice, obligations of the AC to cease (mid week or 3 1/2 years into the reign of the AC) - "..and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

Darren

 

Just where in Scripture do you find that nonsense. It is not there so it had to come from some dispensational writer or preacher. That is what I initially asked.

 

So both you and stillearning are jokes? Your so-called doctrine is.