Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, Post-Trib.....Where Are You, and Why?

In reference to the OP, as to when the rapture will occur, I believe it will be pre-trib.
I also believe post-trib is not a Biblical stance to take. It seems almost foolish to believe that God will "zap up" the believer, only to "zap-down" the believer immediately after he gets there. There is a time line of events that occur between the rapture and the Second Coming.

There is a difference between "tribulation" in general, which the Word of God promised that every believer who lives a Godly life will suffer.
The Great Tribulation will begin with the revelation of the Anti-Christ. It is sometimes referred to as Daniel's Seventieth Week (thus 7 years in length), and also Jacob's Trouble. It is divided into two periods of 31/2 years each. These periods of time you will find referred to as 1,260 days, 42 months, (a time, times and half a time). The entire scope of seven years is described by the seals, trumpets, and vials. During that time the Church or believers will not be there. They will have been raptured before that time, and for good reason.

Look first at the nature of the two comings (the rapture and His Second Coming).
In the rapture he only comes to the clouds.

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 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.
--We shall meet him in the air.
--He is coming only for the saints. We which are alive in Christ shall be caught up together with them in the clouds.

--He will come as he went:
Acts 1:10-11 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
--There were no angels accompanying him in his ascension. It was slow and gentle, compared to what His Second will be.

The believer is saved from wrath to come.
Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
--Note that Paul warns us many times of persecution.
But the wrath to come refers to the Great Tribulation, which we will not enter in.

What will his second coming be like in contrast to the rapture:
Mark 8:38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.
--It will be with the glory of His Father and with the holy angels. That is vastly different from the rapture.

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 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;
--With the mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on unbelievers, punishing them with eternal destruction...
Is this the same as coming for his saints?? No, it is a completely different coming! It is in contrast, and setting this in contrast he comforts the believers in Thessalonica.

And most importantly he is coming from heaven to vindicate and fight on behalf of Israel:

Revelation 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
Revelation 19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Revelation 19:19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
Revelation 19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

These are some of the verses that describe when Christ comes from Heaven at His Second Coming to defeat the Anti-Christ, and all the armies that have risen up against Israel. But note who comes with Christ:
"The armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen." Who are these? These are the saints, the believers, the Church, that have been with Christ for these last seven years. What have they been doing? The Church is the Bride of Christ. They have been celebrating at the marriage supper of the lamb.

Revelation 19:8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.
--This is the Bride, the Church, described in the same way as it says of those going to war in verse 14.

Revelation 19:9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
--This is what they were doing--celebrating the marriage supper of the lamb.

There were two events that happened during these 7 years up in heaven.
One was the marriage supper of the lamb.
The other, immediately after the resurrection was the Judgement Seat of Christ described in 1Cor.3:11-15. There must be time for these events to happen. Thus post trib does not make sense. God doesn't zap up and zap down to fight Israel. It is not Biblical. There must be time for other events in heaven to happen. There are two resurrections. One before the Millennial Kingdom (pre-trib.) and one after the Millennial Kingdom (at the Great White Throne Judgment). [No "zap up--zap down" post-trib].
There is no need for a mid-trib. That doesn't make sense.

The only option left is a pre-trib rapture when all of Scripture is taken into account. And I didn't even take all the Scripture into account. I could have made my case much stronger, but I only took those Scriptures which came to memory.
I hope this helps.

 

Another verse that teaches the same truth is:
1 Thessalonians 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

This is our destiny. God has not appointed us to wrath, the wrath of the anti-christ, or the wrath of God being poured out on this world during the seven years of Tribulation.
I believe therefore that all believers will be raptured before that time.
It is a point of controversy whether or not any Gentiles will be saved during the Tribulation. The Jews, near the end, will be saved as a nation. As for others, it seems like they will have had their chance. Scripture says:

2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Note:
1. They will all follow the anti-christ.
2. They all do not receive the love of the truth.
3. Therefore God will send them a strong delusion.
4. They all should believe a lie.
5. They all will be damned.
6. It is we who have believed the truth. They had their chance. Now God is pouring out his wrath against them, and is vindicating Israel.

It is possible that God will give a chance to those that have never heard the gospel before. I have heard that position often, but I don't know where the Scriptural support is for it.

 

Pre trib was invented by J.N. Darby in the middle 1800's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Nelson_Darby

His people sponsored Scofield and controlled Dallas Theo for 50 years.

 

It is a serious thing to ignore the teachings of Paul, John, Jesus, and the writers that were inspired of the Holy Spirit who taught pre-trib. They taught it. It was not an invention. It is Biblical doctrine. I don't get my doctrine from man but from the Bible. Where do you get your doctrine from? Can I guess? I would, but I don't think you would like my answer.

 

Which of course - debunks the pre-trib traditions.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Nothing you have posted debunks the pre-trib position at all.
Anyone can copy and paste Scripture without context. Why not give some explanation as to why you are posting Scripture.

Again, nothing you posted teaches this.

What evangelization? Show me. Give me an exact verse.
The chapter is speaking of JEWS that are protected by God.

No context Bob--no meaning.
The saints here have already been raptured. The elect referred to is Israel.

Read the entire chapter. Once the man of sin appears the saints won't be there. Why not read the chapter. You just give the reference and blindly expect the people to believe you? The height of arrogance I would say! What does it say in that passage? Or better yet what does it say starting with the verse immediately after, verse five?

2 Thessalonians 2:5-10 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
--Wickedness is in the world today. He who permits wickedness, allows it, will continue to allow it. But someday He, the Holy Spirit will be taken out of the way.

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:
--When the Holy Spirit is taken out of the way then that Wicked (one), that is the Antichrist, will be revealed. Eventually the Lord will destroy with the brightness of his coming.
--The Holy Spirit indwells believers. He will be taken out of this world by the believers being taken out of this world via the rapture. There will therefore be no more restraining influence against the wickedness of this world. (verse 7)
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

We are sealed unto the day of salvation. This has nothing to do with eschatology. The point is moot.

 

The concept of a rapture of the church and where that rapture happens if at all is a small sub-set of a larger discussion ie: Covanent vs. Dispensational theology.

In my opinion, if you are intreanched in one of those positions and unwilling to examine that "larger picture", then you will never change you views in the smaller sub-set regardless of how brilliant the opposing view challanges you.

If you are willing to accept the arguement that covanent theology is correct because it is the historical teaching of the reformed faith, if you can accept the "already-not yet" concept of the Kingdom Of God, if you can interpret the OT based on the NT and if you are satisfied that it is acceptable to use allegory to interpret prophecy, then you can discard pre-trib thinking.

If on the other hand you don't see where Jehovah made a "covanent" of grace but rather unconditional promises to the Jews regarding the land and regarding their status as the chosen people, if you can't accept that God changed his mind about his promises to the Jews but will not do the same to the gentile dominated church and if you accept that God is fully able to give his inspired writers of scripture the correct words to describe the amount of time things will last (ie: 1000 years = 10 centuries, no more, no less) then you can and probably will accept a pre-trib rapture.

There are really good arguements for both sides of this debate and good and better educated people than me are on both sides. I make no claim to spiritual superiority, but my belief is that Jehovah gave us the Bible to inform us, not trick us. He (Jehovah) being willing and able to communicate clearly and certainly has the communication skills necessary to accomplish this task means exactly what he said when he gave the inspired writers of the Bible their words. So, a 1000 years is exactly 1000 years, the Israelites are the decendents of Abraham/Isaac/Jacob (not the NT church) and there is no mention of the Church (in the Bible) going through nor is there any reason for it to go through the tribulation where God pours out his wrath on the unbelieving world in judgement.

So with this I cast 1 vote for Pre-trib Rapture.

 

Except for that Matt 24 reference... and... the 2Thess 2:1-4 reference... and the fact that Rev 19 comes right before Rev 20 where we find the "FIRST resurrection"

except .. "for that"

The Catholic church claims that scripture is too hard to read - and that you need someone to tell you what it says. (ECFs and all) Have you noticed that they make that argument?

The church is referenced as "Israel" in Romans 11, Romans 2, Romans 9.. John is carrying that thought forward.

In Rev 21 all of mankind enters through one of the 12 gates into the New Jerusalem - and each gate is associated with one tribe of Israel.

The part you conveniently skipped over - is "instructive".

2Thess 2 (NASB)
1 Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,
2 that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.
3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,
4 who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.

True - and as vs 1-4 state ALL of that must happen BEFORE we are gatthered together to him.

The text is explicit - the coming of Christ is not hidden behind "He is taken out of the way" rather the second coming of christ is described in the chapter this way -

1 Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,

"He is taken out of the way" is not another way to say "Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him"

But here is the way Paul states the coming of Christ "again" in the chapter - "by the appearance of His coming" Parousia.

8 Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming;

 

Jeremiah 31

I have come in late in this discussion, so excuse me if I am redundant.

To me, a great issue to consider is Jeremiah 31 (beginning at verse 31). In my opinion, if Israel in Jeremiah 31 is referring to the church then the Dispensational Pre-trib position collapses. I think Jeremiah 31 is clearly referring to the church in the New Testament; I find it difficult, if not impossible, to refute.

Answering the initial questions: What are you? Why are you?

I am Covenantal Ammil or Pre-Mil, depending on the year. All my formal academic studies took place in strongly dispensational circles, and I believed it most of my career. I first started to doubt Dispensationalism during a lecture by Charles Ryrie in which I thought he had done some tremendous exegetical gymnastics on a major verse. After further research, I believed him to be wrong on that verse. From there, I set out to study what the Bible had said about the subject. Before I began to study, I thought through some exegetical rules which were as follows:

1. Begin with the New Testament (The old concealed; the new revealed).
2. Begin with clear verses. Thus, I did not begin with Revelation but I found Jesus' teachings were more clear. Let the clear verses dictate the unclear.

I came to a very rough view of what is called historic Pre-Millennium. I then began to study the subject further. Up to that time, I had never read a book that was not written by dispensationalists on the topic of the New Covenant, end times, or law. I discovered much of what I had believed were supported by others, but not in the dispensational camp.

That is what I believe and why I believe it. Despite all my formal academic training, I have rejected dispensational pre-trib.

 

Thanks, Ruiz

I have had very serious doubts about pretrib dispensationalism also - and the web is loaded with thought-provoking articles that I wish had been written many years ago. I have in mind some Google articles including "Pretrib Rapture - Hidden Facts," "Pretrib Rapture Secrecy" and another one about its hidden background entitled "Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty" which does include sources for the shocks in it. It was amazing to find out that the same theological system, originated and developed only in the 1800s in Britain (and, yes, the earliest developers including Darby admitted it was then a totally new view!), was never ever a part of Christian theology or any organized churches before 1830! May the Lord bless all who approach this issue with an open mind; the times (especially under a threatening monarchy!) demand that we all get down to bedrock and read on all sides of the rapture debate. The best and most accurate work I have found (bought it at Armageddon Books) on the same theological history is "The Rapture Plot" by historian Dave MacPherson who has researched it since the early 1970s. Lord bless.

 

If nothing else, this and other threads debunk the principle of "sola scriptura." The idea that a new doctrine could be discovered 2000 years after the document was written . . . .

 

Those are good. And simple. I love simple. I have done much the same as you. Thanks for sharing that.

I love Charles Hodge's three simple rules of interpretation:

1. The Scriptures are to be taken in the sense attached to them in the age and by the people to whom they were addressed.
2. Scripture cannot contradict Scripture.
3. The Scriptures are to be interpreted under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, which guidance is to be humbly and earnestly sought.

 

Please explain unconditional promises cancelled. And while you are at it, give us some examples of how the church today is better at not sinning than "God's chosen people" before Acts ch. 2

 

I do not believe unconditional promises are canceled. The latter question I believe is rhetorical, thus I will not answer it.

Can you explain how Israel in Jeremiah 31 is not talking about the church (cf Hebrews 8).

 

Why?

Jeremiah 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Because:
1. This is a promise written to the Jews.
2. This is a future promise that is not yet taken place and won't take place until the Millennial Kingdom comes--after the Second Coming of Christ.
3. It is very evident that the events described here have not taken place.
"They shall ALL know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them."
There are millions that do not know Christ, and have never even heard of him. There is no possible way that this could even be near fulfillment.

 

DHK,

Hebrews 8 clearly quotes this passage and refers it to the Church. The context of Hebrews is going from the first covenant to the new covenant and, in context, cites Jeremiah as referring specifically to the New Covenant in Jesus Christ.

Is Hebrews 8 wrong? Clearly, this is written about the church and fulfilled in Christ.

Do you care to explain why Hebrews 8 uses this text as a part of the New Covenant in Christ?

 

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Is Hebrews 8:10 clearly wrong, as you say?
Has God put his laws into the Jews' minds and upon their hearts, and have they turned to Him, and is He their God?
Or is this speaking of yet a future time?

 

D,

He has Christians.... the point is that this is referring to, in context, Christians. Israel is the Church in this context.

 

I do not believe in Replacement Theology.
The Church did not replace Israel. Paul speaks of both Israel and the Church existing alongside each other. The Church did not replace Israel. This passage has nothing to do with the Church. Look at the context:

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

I take the Bible for what it says.

Jeremiah 31:31ff is speaking of Israel and promises made to Israel, not the Church.