1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Rapture = Second Coming?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Ed Edwards, Dec 2, 2004.

  1. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    14,519
    Likes Received:
    591
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I am not anti-pretrib. I am post trib. There is already a name for people who hold the post trib doctrine. This is a theological debate, not a political debate.

    The problem with the pre-trib doctrine is that worldwide it probably is a minority doctrine. Those who grew up in churches that taught that doctrine are used to it. As one who comes from a different denomination of Protestantism, I find the doctrine strange and illogical. I thought that it was a privilege to suffer for Jesus. I thought that to die was gain and to live was Christ. I thought that I was supposed to pick up my cross and follow Jesus. I thought that I was to be of good cheer because Jesus had overcome the world, and therefore I am not worried about Anti-Christ. Afterall, there are already plenty of Anti-Christs all around.
     
  2. DeafPosttrib

    DeafPosttrib New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,662
    Likes Received:
    0
    church mouse guy,

    Amen! [​IMG] We are willing to suffering for Christ's sake. Aren't you(anyone) willing to suffer for Jesus Christ?

    In Christ
    Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
     
  3. trailblazer

    trailblazer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
    churchmouseguy,

    I agree with you that it is a minority view worldwide. To me, that confirms the fact that since it is such a "new" doctrine that it should have been squelched much earlier than it has and confimed as abberant teachings that were brought to the USA around the mid 1800's. It should have been more obvious than it was and the churches warned about the strange new doctrine than it was. Because it wasn't, the eloquent Darby was able to convice enough people that Bible Colleges were formed, Seminaries like Dallas Theological Seminary and Bible Commentaries were written all to promote his new "enlightenment." I find it even more curious that it has not been squelched entirely because if you do look at it's historical origins, it originated around the same time period that Charles Taze Russell brought into existence the JW's, Ellen White started the Seventh Day Adventist, and Joe Smith formed the Mormons and then we have Mary Baker Eddy that created the Christian Scientist - they were all within 40 years of each other if I recall correctly.
     
  4. rjprince

    rjprince Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    WOW.

    Justification by faith alone through Christ alone was a minority view for about 1200 years. The majority must certainly be correct. Guess we should all convert to Islam.

    Russell, White, Smith, and Eddy -- all within 40 years of each other. Gotta be a conspiracy in there somewhere. This must be the final nail in the pre-trib coffin, seems like to me, NOT.

    Imminence is the norm in ALL the NT after the cross. Did not notice much response from you post-tribbers on that one. Other than to suggest that all the precross Olivet D. teaching really encompasses the church. If that were so, why such universal expectation of a "rapture" event?

    C'mon, a new teaching?! Numerous ante-nicene clearly evidence an expectation of an imminent return! Further, Chiliasm was clealy the DOMINANT ante-nicene position as well! Not until the allegoristic influence of Origen do we see that begin to shift.

    Pre-Trib is not NEW! It is a return to the foundations! The only way you can get away from it is to allergorize clear promises to Israel in the OT! LOOK AT THE NUMEROUS REFERENCES TO "SPIRITUAL" "DEEPER" INTERPRETIVE PRESUPPOSTIONS IN THE ABOVE POSTS!!!

    A CONSISTENT CONTEXTUAL LITERAL GRAMMATICAL HISTORICAL hermeneutic ALWAYS leads to PREMILLENNIALISM AND PRETRIB RAPTURE. (IMHO)

    OTHER POSITIONS, FOR THE MOST PART, REST ON BLENDING JEWISH COVENANTS WITH THE CHURCH. It is a FLAWED foundation.
     
  5. DeafPosttrib

    DeafPosttrib New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,662
    Likes Received:
    0
    Right.

    See? The cults have been on the rise so rapidly since 19th Century to today. We already seeing false prophets spreading over in the world according to 1 John 4:1.

    Maraget MacDonald was the example of 'false prophet'. She claimed, that she received vision from God about Christ's coming. Same as Joseph Smith claimed, he received vision from two Gods in New York State to discover gold book hidden in the ground. Joseph Smith claimed, that was in year 1830. Same time, as Maraget MacDonald claimed of her vision.

    Edwards Irving was a pastor of Apostlic Catholic Church. He allowed people to doing miracles, healings, speaking with tongues, visions, dreams, etc. That church was strongly charismatic. Obivously, that church was not come from God's, it was from satans to deceived people.

    Strange, Edwards Irving died 2 years later after Maraget MacDonald claimed of her vision. He was only, I think age 32. Probably, that was caused plaque fell upon him come from God(Rev. 22:18), because of invented new doctrines were added unto God's Word.

    Same with Joseph Smith, claimed, he received vision from God. He invented strange teaching. He died very young by assassination, while in the jail. I believe God caused him faced plaque because of added new teachings unto God's Word.

    I refuse add or take away any doctrines from God's Word. I fear of the Lord, I respect God's Word. We must preach everything from Genesis to Revelation from the Bible with the truths.

    Pretribulation teaching was unknown to Christians during in the middle of 19th Century, because it was not yet exist to them. Many churches started to adopted Darby's new teaching. Then later few pastors, evangelists had a private meeting and prayer in 1875, they were prepare for start new confernece on prophecy. Within three years later they launched new conference in Nigara Falls. Several years later after that confernce. Pretribulation doctrine rapidly become popular.

    Mostly influence upon churches on pretribulation doctrine comes from C.I. Scofield during in the dawn of the 20th Century.

    Bible warns us, we shall see many false prophets or false teachers are on the rise in the last days, many shall be deceived. Even, today, many are already deceived, because many of them did not study or reading Bible at their home. Most of them always listening to the teachers, pastors. They think pastors always teaching with truths. But they didn't realize, that many pastors teaching error doctrines conflict with God's Word. Easy for them misleading by pastors by believing the lies.

    I urge all of you stick with God's Word 100% all the times, no matter what men saying to you, they could be wrong. God's Word never have any error on any doctrines. God's Word shows us filled with truths. We should listen what God's Word saying than what men saying - Colossians 2:8.

    In Christ
    Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
     
  6. rjprince

    rjprince Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry,

    As I re-read my last post, I notice a good bit of sarcasm. Do not mean to be offensive, but it is obvious we all feel strongly about our position.

    I AM STILL NOTICING A LACK OF SUBSTANTIAL RESPONSE TO SPECIFICS OF MY POSTS. About all see are broad generalizations. Yeah, I know I have probably made a few of those myself, the whole pot and kettle thing. Of course I myself am the kettle! LOL.
     
  7. trailblazer

    trailblazer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
    rjprince,

    Hi brother! I have something of more substance for you on the "elect" (saved Jews and Gentiles) in Mark 13:22 & 27.

    Background: Mark reports that Jesus goes beyond the Jewish territory into the vicinity of Tyre and interacts with a Gentile woman - an indication that the time was rapidly approaching that the Gentiles were to be included as part of His Kingdom. (Mark 7:24) "Mark also reports that the woman was a Greek, that is born Gentile, a person with a pagan background, and a Syrophonenician by racE or nationality. These little touches must have been appreciated by the Gentile readers FOR WHOM WROTE HIS GOSPEL." (1)

    Mark 13:10 "And to all the nations the gospel must first be preached." ALL THE NATIONS, THE WHOLE WORLD. In spite of Matt. 10:5; 15:24- which passages merely indicate that God intended to have the good tidings proclaimed first to the Jews, then to the Gentiles -, it must be maintained that from the very beginning the Gentiles were included in the divine plan of redemption." (1)

    Mark 13:22 & 27 "False Christs and false prophets will arise and show signs and wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the ELECT."

    "Jesus is here referring to what will happen during the bitter days that are going to precede his return...these deceivers will try to mislead, if possible, the ELECT; yes even them!" (1)

    Mark 13:27 "And then he will send forth his angels and gather his ELECT from the four winds, from farthest reachs of earth to farthest reach of heaven."

    "Together, all the elect, now forming one countless multitude, thus gathered "from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven," accompanied by the angels who were divinely instructed to gather them, now go forth as the Bride, to meet the Bridegroom, and to be with him forevermore." (1)

    "Verses 24-27 record what will happen after the tribulation: the sun will be darkened, the moon will not give her light, the stars will be falling from the sky, etc. Then suddenly, "They - ALL men - (WE) will SEE the Son of man coming IN THE CLOUDS with great power and glory." The brilliant character of his appearance, in complete harmony with Dan. 7:13,14, will prove that this is indeed the Messiah of prophecy, and that the wedding of the Lamb with his bride, the church,is about to take place (Eph. 5:32; Rev. 19:7). For this to happen the all-glorious Son of man will send his holy angels to gather his ELECT "from the four winds, from the farthest reach of earth to the farthest reach of heaven." (1)

    (1) 'The Expositor's Bible Commentary,"Frank E. Gaebelein, Zondervan

    "The gathering of the elect to him;...a faithful Israelite shall be carried safely,...to the land of promise." (2)

    And who is an Isaraelite? "For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel," (Ro 9:6) "So those who share Abraham's faith in God's promise, Jew or Gentile, are Abraham's real spiritual descendants." RSV commentary

    "Peace and mercy be upon...the ISRAEL of God" Gal 6:16 -> THE ELECT!!!!! [​IMG] done [​IMG]
     
  8. rjprince

    rjprince Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Blazer,

    WOW.

    Thanks, brother. In the middle of working on a post under the land promise thread. But will respond more later.

    For now, just this:

    79 times in the NT that the word israhl or israhliths appears. In NONE of those passages is the CHURCH CALLED ISRAEL! But I will acknowledge that careless exegesis can almost find it in your final quote. If careless exegesis won’t work, selective quotation sure will!

    Your ending quote and supposition -- ""Peace and mercy be upon...the ISRAEL of God" Gal 6:16 -> THE ELECT!!!!!"

    Notice what you omitted in the ellipses “And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.”

    Would not quite go so far as to suggest that you have intentionally misrepresented the Text to make your point, but will declare that the manner of your quotation not only obscures the clear wording of the text, but it changes the meaning of the text! Your quotation appears to be from the NAS which also has the words, “be upon them, and upon” the Israel of God.

    With the previous verse it reads, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.”

    Two points here:
    1) Believers (the church) are addressed in verse 15 as those “in Christ Jesus” for whom circumcision is irrelevant.
    2) Those who understand that we are new creatures in Christ without regard for the covenant seal of Judaism are verbally given “peace and mercy”. In addition to the peace and mercy Paul prays upon the church, he also prays for the same upon the Israel of God, separate and distinct from the church.

    NOTE: There is no “Granville/Sharp” rule here. There is distinction between “them” and “the Israel of God”.

    Yes, believers are the spiritual seed of Abraham. BUT, nowhere are we promised the material blessings that are part of God’s covenant with the physical seed of Abraham.

    More later. See other thread re Land Promise to Abraham. Will also deal with Rom 9-11, that one will be LONG!
     
  9. rjprince

    rjprince Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, question, is everything after "Background..." from Expositors?
     
  10. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Church mouse guy: "I thought that it was a privilege to suffer for Jesus."

    It is, even for a pretrib. As one smarter than me said:
    "This is a theological debate, not a political debate."

    Church mouse guy: " I thought that to die was gain and to live was Christ.

    It is, even for a pretrib. As one smarter than me said:
    "This is a theological debate, not a political debate."

    Church mouse guy: " I thought that I was supposed to pick up my
    cross and follow Jesus.

    It is, even for a pretrib. As one smarter than me said:
    "This is a theological debate, not a political debate."

    Church mouse guy: " I thought that I was to be of good cheer
    because Jesus had overcome the world, and therefore
    I am not worried about Anti-Christ.

    It is, even for a pretrib. As one smarter than me said:
    "This is a theological debate, not a political debate."

    Church mouse guy: "Afterall, there are already plenty
    of Anti-Christs all around."

    Yep. except the proper term for them is "antichrist"
     
  11. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen, Brother Rjprince -- preach it! [​IMG]
     
  12. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    14,519
    Likes Received:
    591
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Hey, Ed, the comment about this being a theological debate not a political one dealt only with the issue of the proper name for Post Trib, which is Post Trib and not Anti-Pre-Trib, which is what was being posted at the time. That was the only term being defined. So drop the cleverness.
     
  13. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Colossians 2:5-8 (HCSB:)

    Therefore as you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, walk in Him,
    7 rooted and built up in Him and established in the faith,
    just as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness.
    8 Be careful that no one takes you captive through
    philosophy and empty deceit based on human tradition,
    based on the elemental forces of the world, and
    not based on Christ

    Remember, you were taught pretribulation rapture/resurrection.
    Who stole your hope away from you?

    The rapture and Second coming are two
    different events each at one end
    of Daniel's 70th Week (AKA: Tribulation
    period).
     
  14. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I can no more "drop the cleverness"
    than God can fail to have multiple
    resurrections (some including raptures) --
    one is not my nature, the other is not
    God's nature.
     
  15. trailblazer

    trailblazer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
    rjprince
    Hi rjprince, My computer was down and so I didn't have a chance to respond to your last critique of the manner of my summation in regard to:

    "Peace and mercy be upon...the ISRAEL of God" Gal 6:16 -&gt; THE ELECT!!!!"

    :( You insinuated that I "intentionally misrepresented the text to make [my] point" and then "declared that the manner of [my] quotation not only obscured the clear wording of the text, but that I changed the meaning of the text!"

    I may not have checked every version but to charge that it was SELECTIVE exegesis is erroneous. In the RSV that I used Paul says, Peace and mercy be upon all who walk by this rule, upon the ISRAEL OF GOD."

    In the comments that were used at the beginning prior to verse 16, I was showing that scripture DOES support the valid conclusion that ALL believing Jews and ALL believing Christians are the "true Israelites"...the Church...THE ISRAEL OF GOD...THE ELECT." By using [...] I was indicating that there were words that were omitted. Secondly, what was left as a concluding thought did not do disservice to God's word as what was left was legitimate premise that "Peace and mercy be upon...the ISRAEL of God -&gt; did apply to THE ELECT." That did not change the meaning of the verse nor was the verse twisted in order to provide a stamp-of-approval for unsound and prefabricated doctrine.

    To do so would be contrary to what I have presented in previous posts - that it was primarily because of Darby's erroneous interpretation of scripture ending up in Scofields Bible Commentaries that we have such divisiveness in the Church today.

    The premise presented was that, when it comes to salvation, it is always by "faith," both Jews and Gentiles and can be supported throughout the OT and the NT.

    May Romans 10:10-13 cut down some of those blue trees in the forest planted by Darby and Scofield so you can see the Word of God more clearly!
    Now if they are saved, are they not the ELECT? If they- the Jews are saved and the elect, are they not also apart of the Church?

    Therefore, I think you owe me an apology.

    There will be more coming on this matter but in the meantime, if you are interested, there is an excellent tape worth listening to on this very verse by someone more learned than I:

    http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsbible&sermonID=4180420539

    [ December 18, 2004, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: trailblazer ]
     
  16. trailblazer

    trailblazer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
    RJprince,

    (#1) In the above post, I was clarifying a previous post concerning Gal 6:16 that was actually a salutation of Paul's based on the previous verse(s) given as a rule for all to go by - yesterday and today.
    In 'Word Studies In the New Testament' by Vincent, pg 180, Paul bases the next verse, 16, one the new creation

    "And upon the Israel of God.The kai and may be simply connective, in which case the Israel of God may be different from as many as walk, etc., and may mean truly converted Jews. Or the kaimay be explicative, in which case the Israel of God will define and emphasise as many as, and will mean the whole body of Christians, Jewish and Gentile. In other words, they who walk according to this rule [of being a new creation] form the true Israel of God. The explicative kai is at best doubtful here, and is rather forced, ...It seems better to regard it as simply connective. Then (...) will refer to the individual Christians, Jewish and Gentile, and Israel of God to the same Christians, regarded collectively, and forming the true messianic community.

    More to follow - look for #2
     
  17. trailblazer

    trailblazer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
    rjprince, et al,

    Again concerning Gal6:15-16 of "the new creation" referring to both Jews and Gentiles.

    Wuest, 'Word Studies In The Greek New Testament', pg 179, sect.of Galatians

    v15) "It is because, while circumcision is of no avail to the Jew, nor the lack of circumcision of any avail to the Gentile, yet the Cross has power to make of believing Jew and Gentile a new creation which results in a radical transformation of character.

    Translation. For neither circumcision is anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.

    (v16)...Those therefore, who order their lives by the Holy Spirit's control, constitute the true Israel of God, not the Jews who have the name of Israel but are only children of Abraham after the flesh. The Greek word for "and" also has the meaning of "even" in some contexts. We translate here, "even the Israel of God" as identifying those who "walk according to this rule."

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  18. trailblazer

    trailblazer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
    (3) To those still hanging in here! [​IMG] [​IMG]

    'Galatians' by R. Alan Cole, Tyndale, pgs 182-184

    "The only thing that matters now is that Jew and Gentile alike are 'newly-created men' in Christ...Just as Genesis showed a creation marred and spoiled by sin, so surely in prophet and apocalyptist arose the picture of a new universe, a new ktisis of God (e.g. Is. lxv.17 taken up by Rev. xxi) in which God's active work as Creator is stressed...."

    "The second half of verse 16 poses a question of interpretation which hangs on the exact meaning of the introductory kai. Does the word mean 'and,' 'in additon to,' or 'even,' 'that is to say'? A strong case can be made for both views. If the word is to be translated 'and,'then Paul's final prayer is directed towards those Gentiles who realize the unimportance of their physical state, and to Jews who likewise realize the unimportance of circumcision. By so doing, they prove themselves to be the true Israel, God's Israel, the 'righteous remnant.'...It would be a full recognition of the fact that Jew and Gentile alike are fellow-heirs of the grace of life;..."

    "The other translation is bolder, but Paul is quite capable of it. This is to take kai as 'even.' 'that is to say,' 'the equivalent of.'...This would identify the new group, the 'third race of men'of whom the Church fathers delighted to talk - neither Jew nor Gentile, but Christian- with God's Israel. This is often put bluntly as 'the Church is the new Israel.' Put thus, we may well want to qualify the statement;...In the first place, if kai does not mean 'even,' then Paul is allowing two groups side by side in the kingdom of God; first, those who 'live according to the principle' enunciated in verse 15, and, secondly, God's Israel. But those of Israel who do not have this 'principle' are thereby automatically excluded from the true Israel, God's Israel. This is the inevitable deduction from Paul's reasoning above. In other words, while there is place for the believing Christian Jew in the kingdom, there is not for the Judaizer. Paul would go further. He would say that the 'believing Jew' belongs to Israel, but that the Judaizer does not. Thus there cannot be two groups; there can only be one."

    "But it is important to remember that, while Paul says that Christians are 'true' Jews.' he never says that Gentiles are Jews, nor Jews Gentiles; that is an illegitimate deduction. What he does say is that believing Jew and believing Gentile alike form the 'Israel of God.' the instrument of His purpose. It is interesting to remember in the context of verse 16 that 'Peace upon Israel' is the great Old Testament blessing (Ps cxxv.5)."
    *************************************************
    Whew! Very interesting that Paul uses an Old Testament blessing on New Testament Jews wouldn't you say, RJPRINCE? Why would Paul do that if he did not consider them to be New Covenant Israel of God Jews? Is it perhaps that Paul does definately consider them to be the elect as well? Appears that way to me.
     
  19. trailblazer

    trailblazer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'M ALMOST DONE - Uh, with the New Testament, that is! [​IMG] Straighten up now...this one is short.

    'MATTHEW HENRY COMMENTARY' pg, 1846 (Don't you just love Matt) [​IMG]

    [Paul] knew that in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availed anything nor uncircumcision, as to men's acceptance with God, but a new creature....It does not consist in our being in this or the other denomination of Christians; but it consists in our being new creatures;...No outward professions, nor particular names, will ever be sufficient to recommend us to him...And as many as walk according to this rule [of being a new creation] peace be upon them, and mercy upon the Israel of God...[Peace and mercy, Paul] declares, shall be the portion of all the Israel of God, all sincere Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, all who are Israelites indeed."
     
  20. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not exactly.
    I know what Matthew Henry said.
    What does Trailblazer say?
     
Loading...