After the Rapture

==I don't think I would reference MacPherson in any serious discussion about eschatology. Many people who believe in the pre-trib rapture don't know the first thing about Darby. Thus whatever he believed does not affect the vast majority of pre-trib believers today. The modern pre-trib teaching is based on certain Biblical arguments. Either you can deal with those arguments or you can't, either you agree with them or you don't, but the worn out "no organized church before 1830 ever taught a pretrib rapture" argument does not work. It does not matter what people taught before or after 1830. What matters is the teachings of Scripture. That is where the discussion must center. Scripture and Scripture alone. If Scripture teaches a pre-trib rapture then those who have believed it were/are correct and those who have not were/are wrong. If Scripture does not teach a pre-tribu rapture then those who have believed it were/are wrong and those who have not believed it were/are correct. Either way both sides must ground their arguments in Scripture and not in who believed what, when, and first.

 

Reply to Martin

Rapture history is only the history of what past Bible teachers thought the Bible was teaching concerning the rapture. And it tells us if they were following the Bible or something else. We now know that some of the earliest rapture teachers were influenced by the occult including pyramidology and astrology! If Martin was able to read so rapidly the articles I listed, he must be a champion speed reader! And how can he avoid points brought up and broadbrush MacPherson so easily? Apparently he's never Googled "Scholars Weigh My Research" which presents a galaxy of evangelical greats who have sided with his research into pretrib beginnings. Martin, all you have to do is name just a few well-known Southerners before 1830 who ever clearly taught a pretrib rapture. And be sure to quote them!

 

==I have been reading and studying on rapture theory for more than ten years now. I know all the arguments and, to be honest, it seems like everyone just repeats the same old arguments over and over again. That is one of the main reasons I normally don't debate this issue. Nine times out of ten you will accomplish more running in circles than you will debating the timing of the rapture. MacPherson, and his theories, are not taken seriously by any serious scholar/student of eschatology. Nor is anything proven by naming people who believed in a pre-trib rapture before/after 1830. Scripture is the only thing that matters. If you can't prove your position with Scripture it does not matter how many or how few have held your position.

 

Your 'imagination' is going beyond the Word of God.

 

One need not read McPherson to gain knowledge of when the Rapture will occur. It is written in the Bible. And the Apostle Paul preached it in the first century AD. John spoke of great tribulations on the earth after the Church had been taken, so the Word of God and the Apostles are the ultimate authority on the truth of the pre-trib rapture of the Church.

 

Many of you need to prove verse in the Bible to supports pretribulation rapture. Myself was before pretrib, now am posttrib. Because I can easily see in the Bible teaching us, there is the only one future coming at the end of the age.

For example- Matthew 24:29-31 telling us, Christ shall come immediately after the tribulation, appear in the clouds, blown with the trumpet, gathering his elect(Christians) from the four winds(all over the world-north, south, east, and west). It is clearly posttribulational.

There are many passages in the Bible telling us, Christ shall come after tribulation. There is not even a single verse find anywhere in the Bible saying that Christ shall come before tribulation.

If you believe in pretrib rapture, please show me a verse anywhere in the Bible to prove that Christ shall come before tribulation.

Early Church were taught only one future coming, none of them were taught two phases of second advent, or split coming. It was not teaching till in the late 19th Century. Many of us know that.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

==You claimed that the verse, Rev 7:14, does not say "the great tribulation". I pointed out several sources proving that you are wrong.

1. I gave the name of many translations that say you are wrong which, I believe, include ALL the major translations except the KJV.

2. I pointed out that you are also wrong when it comes to the greek text. Can you explain why the definite article in Rev 7:14 does not mean "the"?

You made a claim, a claim that does not line up with the clear textual evidence, and I am calling on you to either recant your claim or back it up with textual evidence. Nothing I said in my reply to you is "imagination", it all comes directly from the text. Revelation 7:14 proves that many people, from all nations and tribes, will be saved during "THE" great tribulation.

 

Lady Eagle,

That verse only strengthens my stance.

The Rapture of the Church takes place and the rest of the dead live not again for a thousand years... the time of the Millenial Kingdom.

Those who are spoken of as having been martyred were martyred prior to the Rapture of the Church!

 

While an interesting idea, this whole rapture business is a fairly recent concept. Historically, it was not a part of Christian theology until popularized in the 1800s, and again in the 1970s by guys like Hal Lindsay. I find it to be a hodgepodge patchwork of out of context verses strung together to support a particularly weak eschatology. While I understand why some do, I do not believe it to be a valid interpretation of scripture.

 

Some claim that only the first three chapters of Revelations apply to the Church and anything after Revelations 4:1 is the great tribulation after the rapture. However, the text does not say that.

Rev 1:10-11 (KJV)
10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

Jesus commands John to write all he sees in a book and then distribute it to the seven churches in Asia. Jesus Dictates messages to the seven churches. Then, John is called up to Heaven so he can see what he needs to write that book.

Rev 4:1 (KJV) After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will show thee things which must be hereafter.

They then say that the church is not mentioned after this, so that must be the rapture. However, Revelations 12 says differently. Chapter twelve starts out telling of how Israel gave birth to the Messiah and about how Satan tried to destroy him. Satan failed and went after the woman (Israel). The woman escaped, so the serpent went after the remnant of the seed of the woman.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The remnant of her seed (the Messiah Jesus) is the church. Who has the testimony of Jesus Christ? The Church does. So, we see that the church is mentioned after Rev 4:1

 

TC is correct.

Proving rapture find in Rev. 4:1 is a logically and fallacy. Rev. 4:1 say nothing about resurrection, Christ's descend, gathering of the saints. Rev. 4:1-2 telling us, John was called up alone by the angel, for the purpose to show him of visions to see the ffuture things, just like as Rev. 1:10-11 tells us, John was filled in spirit as he received vision from the revelation(supernatural communicate) of Jesus Christ.

Anyone of you cannot find the verse anywhere in Revelation saying that our gathering together shall be prior tribulation.

Our gathering shall be shown clearly find in Revelation chapter 7:9-17; 10:7; 11:12; 15-18; 14:14-20; 16:12-17.

Rev. 20:4-6 telling us very clear, that thousands, or millions of saints, who have been beheaded for Christ's sake throughout centuries, they are the church, that they have the part of the first resurrection(salvation) through Jesus Christ, are now reigning with Christ in heaven. Church have been reigning with Christ in heaven for 2,000 years. 'A thousand years' represents length time, it could be several thousands of years like, 3,000 or 4,000 years.

Rev. 20:4-6 is now happening. Rev. 20:3, 7-9 shall be fulfilled when after Satan is loosed out of the way(2 Thess. 2:6-8; Rev. 12:9-10; and 17:8) to persecute against saints, it is future event. Then, God shall destroy the earth with fire, take Satan away and cast him into the lake of fire.

Then, the judgment day come to judge the world - Rev. 20:11-15 fits with Matt. 25:31-46.

Then, God shall create new heavens and a new earth. Eternality shall be begin!! We shall reign with Christ on new earth forever and ever.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

The Scriptures you referenced have nothing to do with the Rapture of the Church, DPT... none, whatsoever.

All of these events happen after the Rapture of the Church. There are none saved but the 144,000 after the Rapture.

 

I think some of you don't realize there that there is the rapture which is before the great tribulation and then there is the second coming of Christ. The rapture of the church is not at the same time as the second coming of Christ.

 

The rapture of the Church is part of the second coming of Christ, in the same sense Christ's birth...and return after three days in the grave are considered the first coming. It could even be argued that each Christophany in the OT is also considered part of the first coming.

 

Out of curiosity, do you any typology in your studies?

 

For His Blood Spoke My Name

Originally Posted by His Blood Spoke My Name
Revelation 7 does not say 'the great tribulation.' It says 'great tribulation.'

In reply to your very unBiblical statement, I said:

"Sorry, it does say "the great tribulation". The NASB translates it "the great tribulation", as does the ESV, NLT, NIV, RSV, HCSB, and the NKJV. I looked it up in the greek text and the definite article is there. The passage does, without any textual doubt, say "the great tribulation". This verse, Rev 7:14, is clearly refering to the same thing Jesus was in Matt 24:21. A period of tribulation unlike anything the world has ever, or will ever, see."

You have yet to give a substantive reply to the points I raised.

1. I pointed out that ALL the major translations disagree with you. The only exception being the KJV.

2. I pointed out that the Greek also disagrees with you. The passage does contain the definite article in Rev 7:14 which is properly translated "the"?

In other words, despite your claim, Revelation 7:14 does correctly read:

"I said to him, My lord you know. And he said to me, these are the ones who come out of the great tribulation..." (Rev 7:14 NASB)

This textual FACT refutes your false teaching that nobody, beyond the 144,000 Jews, will be saved during the tribulation period. Therefore I call on you to recant your statement or explain why you continue to support your statement inspite of the clear textual evidence against your statement. I am not going to drop this issue until I recieve a meaningful reply.

 

Just because the majority translations include the word 'the' in them does not mean it is supposed to be there.

The KJV was around for years before most of the translations out there and it did not say 'the great tribulation'.

Nor do earlier Bibles such as Tyndale, Wycliffe, or the Geneva Bible.

 

==Maybe you failed to read the part where I said that the greek contains the definite article in Rev 7:14 which is properly translated "the"? The passage could literally read "the tribulation, the great one" ("tes thlipseos tes megales") which is correctly rendered, in the english, "the great tribulation" (as all modern translations correctly render it).

 

I do not see a definite article in the Greek.

"ek megas thlipsis" out of great tribulation. No 'the' in there at all, Martin.