The Pre-Trib Rapture

[marks]

I see what you’re saying, but still confess to struggling over how you ‘allow the passages to just say’ seemingly opposite things.

Do you mind me asking how you harmonise the below passages if you see both at ‘face value’?

Ephesians 2:8-9
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Revelation 20:12
And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done.

What doesn't harmonize to you? That the living are saved by grace, and the dead are judged for what they had done? The living also will be judged for what we've done. Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead.

Much love!

 

[Ronald D Milam]

Overlapping then, is that right? With this small offset?

Yes, that's the point, the 1335 coming BEFORE the 1260 (Beast) was one of my check points. So, in order for the 1335 to come first and with it also being the Two-witnesses, the two-witnesses would have to DIE FIRST (BIG CHECK MARK).

So, the 1335 comes 75 dats before be 1260, so if one is very wise or blessed by God to understand this, then he has a perfect lock on THE END TIMES Eschatological Timelines. Not only does he know when the Two-witnesses shows up, but because they show up 75 days before the Beast shows up, and we know the Beasts reign is only 1260 days, we know they have to die exactly 75 dats before the Beast dies, so when the Two-witnesses die that has to happen with only 75 days left in the Beasts rule.

There is no reason for the Two-witnesses to die in reality, they have Glorious bodies (Moses and Elijah were at the transfiguration with Jesus) God only allows them to die in order to allow us to know the end time TIMELINES. When you juxtapose two sets of people(s) against each other, and are told they both have 1260 day ORDAINED OFFICES on this earth, its easy to g a bearing on your position. Its like using to stars against each other for navigating.

 

[marks]

Yes, that's the point, the 1335 coming BEFORE the 1260 (Beast) was one of my check points. So, in order for the 1335 to come first and with it also being the Two-witnesses, the two-witnesses would have to DIE FIRST (BIG CHECK MARK).

So, the 1335 comes 75 dats before be 1260, so if one is very wise or blessed by God to understand this, then he has a perfect lock on THE END TIMES Eschatological Timelines. Not only does he know when the Two-witnesses shows up, but because they show up 75 days before the Beast shows up, and we know the Beasts reign is only 1260 days, we know they have to die exactly 75 dats before the Beast dies, so when the Two-witnesses die that has to happen with only 75 days left in the Beasts rule.

There is no reason for the Two-witnesses to die in reality, they have Glorious bodies (Moses and Elijah were at the transfiguration with Jesus) God only allows them to die in order to allow us to know the end time TIMELINES. When you juxtapose two sets of people(s) against each other, and are told they both have 1260 day ORDAINED OFFICES on this earth, its easy to g a bearing on your position. Its like using to stars against each other for navigating.

OK, so that would be another conflict to me. The beast has power to overcome everyone, but he cannot harm them until the end of their ministry. That means I would have to overlook the meaning of one of those two passages. Either the beast is given that power or he's not, but it's not, yes, and no.

Much love!

 

[Timtofly]

And, I’ll remind you again, you have no scriptural evidence that Adam was made either as an elohim, or with ‘the image’ BEFORE the fall, and lost either of those status’ after it.

You refuse to call those created on day 6, divine beings. Of course they were. They were the perfect complete divine image of God. God did not do a halfway job. They are the only sons of God. Surely the sons of God in God's image were not created on any other day.

If Adam was not divine then he never sinned nor died period. You claim God created Adam a wicked sinner from the get go.

 

[Timtofly]

If we are to assume you are correct, and the text means that Son’s of Adam saw that the daughter of Eve were attractive….then why on earth does it not just say that?

That is about as far as you can get from what I posted.

The many generations of sons of God after creation, around the generation of Enoch, saw daughters from Adam's fallen descendants via Seth. Seth was born in Adam's image a fallen corruptible flesh and blood descendant of Adam and Eve. The daughters born to Adam's fallen offspring, were who the "divine" sons of God, many generational offspring later from those created on the 6th day, saw.

It is like those in the Civil War between the states were not the founding fathers of the Revolutionary War. But one could say Americans fought in the Civil War and know it was not the same Americans who fought in the Revolutionary War. One event happened many generations after the other. But all are still called Americans. It is understood a different generation of Americans.

So the anology would be like immigrants coming after the Civil War. Americans saw the new Immigrants. They were all humans, and even the immigrants would become Americans.

Except what happened is the sons of God did not change Adam's offspring. The sons of God became as wicked as the fallen offspring of Adam and Eve.

So the anology ended up with the Americans if the same as Genesis, they stopped calling them Americans and thousands of years later no one even remembers what an American is. They were only known by the invading immigrants no matter who those immigrants were known by. The immigrants totally changed the course of history and no one can remember the original Americans.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

The 7th Trumpet event starts in Revelation 10 not 11. In fact the 7 Thunders come between the 2nd and 3rd woe. The 7 Thunders come between the 6th and 7th Trumpets.

No brother, you conflate the ACTUAL EVENTS with the Parenthetical Citation Chapters. This is now so easy to me, but I understand, I did not see it for over 30 years myself. But its like Einstein's theory of relativity, he worked on it for years, once he finally got the last of the problem solved it was easy for him to see, but not so much for others.

The 7th Trump is first seen in actuality in Rev. 16, the 7 Vials are the 7th Trump which is the 3rd Woe as Revelation 8:13 specifically tells us, the three trumps yet to sound are three woes, woe, woe, woe. {Something like that...:)}. Yes, the Trumps are in Rev. 10, I agree, they are the 7 Thunders, and TIME WILL BE NO MORE [as we know it] after they sound, likewise we see it in Rev. 11, where it says the 3rd Woe comes quickly. We also see it in Rev. 19 when Jesus defeats the Beast....BUT the real timeline is Rev. 16 where we see the 7 Vials.

Let me briefly on the fly point out the actual timeline, then the Parenthetical Chapters brother.

Write the things which you have SEEN, the things WHICH ARE and the things which will be HEREAFTER.

Rev. 1 Jesus as seen in all of his glory (The things John saw, Jesus in all his Glory)
Rev. chapters 2 and 3, the Church Age (The things which ARE)

Revelation 4:1 is the Rapture (Everything after this is the HEREAFTER)

Rev. 4 and 5 are the Church in Heaven before the Seals have ever been opened.

Rev. 6 is Jesus opening the Seals in the presence of the Church Prophesying what the coming Trumpet Judgments will soon bring to pass as soon as the 7th Seal opens the Scroll up.

Rev. 7 is the Jews (3-5 million) fleeing Judea, not 144,000 male virgins. We also see the Church in Heaven in verses 9-17. The 144,000 is a CODE for all Israel who repent. God holds up the Trumpet Judgments until they repent and flee to Judea as Rev. 7:1-3 tells us.

Trumpet Judgments start now, they are Rev. 8, 9 and 15&16

Rev. 8 is the First Four Trumps, the Wrath of God starts here, not in Rev. 6.
Rev. 9 is the First Two Woes we see. The 2nd Woe is in Rev. 11 but that is Parenthetical in nature.

Rev. 15 IMHO, this and Rev. 16 should be ONE CHAPTER, this happens in Heaven, notice in Rev. 8 we see the Trumpets being readied to sound and the Judgments brought in the same chapter. Then in Rev. 15 we see the Angels preparing the Vials to be poured.
Rev. 16 is the 7th Trumpet or the 3rd Woe, which is all 7 Vials being poured out on mankind.

That ENDS the book of Revelations real timeline everything else is a Parenthetical Citation Chapter until we get to Rev. chapter 20.

The Parenthetical Citation Chapters

Rev. 10 like you say is really the 7 Trumps (Thunders). This us just a flash forward to the end.
Rev. 11 is the Two-witnesses chapter that tells if their 1260 day ordained Ministry to the Jews.
Rev. 12 starts with the First Trump (Rev 8) we see Israel (the Woman) fleeing Judea.
Rev. 13 starts with the Rev. 8 Trump also, we see the Beast comes to power at the 1260 event.

Rev. 14 is the Harvest Chapter, we see the Jews (Wheat) as Jesus returns being gathered into the barn, we see the Wicked Grapes being placed in the Wine-press of Gods Wrath in verses 17-20 (Rev. 16:19) and finally we see a FLASHBACK to the Pre Trib Rapture in verse 14 (Three Harvests)

Rev. 17 is the Harlot symbology telling us that ALL FALSE RELIGION is the Harlot, nothing more nothing less. This starts in Rev. 8, the kings in league with the Beast kill off all the other Religions.

Rev. 18 is Babylon getting judged, this starts in Rev. 8 also, this is God casting down Satan and Babylon (this whole world) is now know a habitation of devils. This lasts 42 months, Babylon (World) is being hit by God's plagues for 42 months, which makes the rich merchants all cry and wail. NOTICE in verse 8 it says her plagues will come in ONE DAY and in verse 10 it says her Judgment is come in ONE HOUR, well both mean 42 months. The Day of the Lord lasts 42 months and the Beast and his kings rule for 42 months, in Revelation 17:12 it says the kings who have received no power will receive power for ONE HOUR(42 months) with the Beast.

Rev. 19 we Marry the Lamb, return with him to defeat the Beast at Armageddon.

Rev. 20, 21 and 22 are all after the Kingdom Age starts.

So, Parenthetical means we are being told something as an aside to what is going on in real time. In chapters 12, 13, 17 and 18 they all start with the Rev. 8 Day of the Lord/Asteroid Strike, as does the first Trump which is that Asteroid strike. Rev. 11 starts 75 days before the DOTL, it is the Two-witnesses showing up 1335 days before the Second Coming. Rev. 10 like I stated, is just an overview of the 7 Trumps and a flash forward to the very end. Rev. 14 and 19 both covers 7 years, The Harvest Chapter (Rev. 14) stretches from the Pre Trib Rapture to Jesus' landing at the 2nd Coming and Rev. 19 has the Wedding of the Church and our 7 year stay in Heaven (the Fathers mansion) followed by our returning to earth with Jesus to defeat the Beast.

Just as we see the 2nd Woe in Rev. 11 but get the DETAILS in Rev. 9, likewise we see the 7th Trump which is the 3rd Woe, sounded in Rev. 11, but the DETAILS (7 vials) are seen in Rev. 16.

Finish in a bit Dog Walking time.

 

[Timtofly]

How can the ‘millennium’ not be considered as ‘intermediate’? If ‘this age’ ends at Christ’s second coming, all the things that come with it (resurrected bodies being given, the wicked judged) and then we move into a new time period

Define this age, please.

 

[Timtofly]

Ah…no. No you didn’t say “in principle”. Here is what you said:

“Look at it as the Lamb's book of life.
Every human ever conceived is written in the Lamb's book of life.”

This is what you quoted:

Obviously. The branch cut off would indicate that for thousands of years many of Israel would have to be removed from the Lamb's book of life on principle alone.

 

[No Pre-TB]

Where do you find your pretribbers who say such things? Seriously! I've been in pretrib circles, and in rapture debates, for a long time, I don't find this common in the least! Or was that sarcasm also?

Much love!

Christian affiliated forums, Pre-TB web sites and Pre-TB eschatology videos on YouTube. If you didn’t hear it, I’m surprised. I’ve seen that comment often!

 

[marks]

Christian affiliated forums, Pre-TB web sites and Pre-TB eschatology videos on YouTube. If you didn’t hear it, I’m surprised. I’ve seen that comment often!

I guess we run in different circles then. To me, it's a straw man anyway, because I don't argue that. But I realize you are responding to your understandings of "pre-trib", not mine.

I've heard it, only, very infrequently. I hear the Rev. 4:1 rapture frequently, for example.

It goes to a "plenary inspiration" thing. Whether Paul knew or not is moot, God knows.

Much love!

 

[Enoch111]

I think the angels were created either second or third day.

We are not told specifically when they were created, but when God said "Let there be light" it is possible that He created the angels on day one. This is not something to get into an argument over, since no one knows. According to Job this is the most likely scenario.

 

[Timtofly]

Do we truly suppose that, after reading this AND Rev 13, that God, in his grace, love and ‘will’, predestined us to be his, wrote our names in his book…only to scrub ‘em out when we resist his will…but he might consider writing them back in if we return to him?
No, the thought is sound; from the foundation of the world, the Lamb’s book of life contains the name of those who are ‘predestined to be adopted’.

Yes!

God reserved the right to put every name in the Lamb's book of life.

He also gave humans permission to remove themselves from the Lamb's book of life.

God predestined every single last soul.

What you claim is that since He knew who would reject, God by your standard, should not have redeemed them in the first place. Neither should He have written their names down. Thank God, He does not go by your standards.

 

[Timtofly]

I’m sorry, but…huh?
How on earth do you suppose we get ‘God created the sun, moon and stars’…as ‘God created the angels here’…? This is such a stretch not even Gumby would try.
And, when added to the passage in Job that outright TELLS us that the ‘morning stars’ and ‘the sons of God’ (regardless if you believe they are the same or different)…were there AT the laying of the foundation of the world. That also is not day 4. Or 6.

Morning stars are not stars?

 

[Naomi25]

I have to, because Jesus said it. And I don't see any issues with it, and it all harmonizes to me.

Jesus explained that He didn't mean He was a loaf of bread, but where does He explain the judgement isn't what He in great detail said it was?

Much love!

Faith that God would do as He said He would, in covering their sins, that was the message. Just as we believe God will do what He said He would do in removing our sins, giving new life in Christ. To the Jews, this was a promise yet to be seen. For us, it is the message of Salvation.

Just like Abraham, faith that God would do as He said He would do, giving Him multitudes of children.

You know, I'm reading through some of your recent posts, I must not be writing well, you've seemed to take quite a few of mine in ways I didn't mean.

For instance dispensationalism isn't a system I use, it just describes what I see. Things like that. I find this increasing complicated to try to respond to..

I think perhaps the natural course of this conversation draws to a close. Because, yes, I may be taking things as you didn’t mean, which I of course am not doing on purpose. But I’m also struggling with what I see as contradictions in what you write.
For example…from my perspective, you’ve been arguing that Abraham was saved because he believed ‘you are going to have more children then you can count’ (a quote from #808), and that it was ‘offering sacrifices’ (quote from #810) that somehow explained salvation through faith AND works.
I’ve tried to argue (in #842, #843) that it was more than faith in a single promise, but in the promise of a coming Messiah that would save elected people. Indeed…all OT people who are redeemed exhibited the same sort of faith.
So, like I said, I’m a little confused when I read above that the OT folks had “Faith that God would do as He said He would, in covering their sins, that was the message. Just as we believe God will do what He said He would do in removing our sins”.
I cannot recall you making that point at all before.

I am also unlikely to view your interpretation that salvation by faith will be done at some point future, in which case salvation will only come through works. I believe James thoroughly bridges our understanding on the faith/works issue, and to therefore assume the ‘difference’ must come because of a new dispensation falling on the church is rather a circular argument.

But…all in all, I’ve thoroughly enjoyed chatting with you about these issues, and don’t mind in the least that we have…just as we started…conflicting ideas!

 

[Naomi25]

Of course all since Abraham could put their faith in the Atonement of a future Cross. Probably before that as well. Job being the only example prior to Abraham.

"By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure."

No one since Isaac, has not seen an example of God Himself and the willingness to give up a son as an Atonement. The OT had an example and were without excuse.

The first century Jews were not looking for a Messiah. They were looking for a Prince. They were looking for a Prince to continue their way of life forever.

Abraham was already their example of putting faith and trust in a sacrificial offering. What the Jews missed is that Abraham met Jesus Christ whom they would kill, after He had suffered on the Cross. In fact people today do not see that Abraham saw the nail prints, and completely understood what a resurrection was. Even though this is Abraham's own confession:

"And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together."

I’m afraid I miss your exact point here. Is this just an ‘added thought’ to my conversation with marks, or is there some particular thought/point here that I’m missing..?

 

[Naomi25]

Psalms 104:1-7 KJV
1) Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty.
2) Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain:
3) Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind:
4) Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire:
5) Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.
6) Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains.
7) At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away.

Genesis 1:1-9 KJV
1) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2) And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3) And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4) And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5) And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
6) And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7) And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
{Angels created here}
8) And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9) And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

I think the angels were created either second or third day.

Much love!

I confess I’m confused by this. As someone who likes to take each text at ‘face value’, I would wonder how you see these texts at all referring to the angels.
Angels are not mentioned…indeed, we could even say that the words used here, for ‘firmament’ is not meant to be understood as ‘heaven’ (where God and his angels dwell)…but simply as ‘an expanse’.

And, as I’ve pointed out to timtofly, Job outright tells us that these beings were present when God laid the foundation of the world.

Job 38:4-7
[4] “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding.
[5] Who determined its measurements—surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
[6] On what were its bases sunk,
or who laid its cornerstone,
[7] when the morning stars sang together
and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

When we have clear text, why try and supersede it with texts that are not clear?

 

[Naomi25]

You refuse to call those created on day 6, divine beings. Of course they were. They were the perfect complete divine image of God. God did not do a halfway job. They are the only sons of God. Surely the sons of God in God's image were not created on any other day.

If Adam was not divine then he never sinned nor died period. You claim God created Adam a wicked sinner from the get go.

Shall I tell you your failures?
You fail to prove, via scripture, that there WERE others created on Day 6 apart from Adam.
You fail to prove, via scripture, that they indeed, were divine…
You fail to prove, via scripture, that ‘image of God’ even means, or calls for a being of divine nature.
You fail to prove, via scripture, that a person must first be divine for sin and death to have affect on their person.
You fail to prove, via reason AND scripture, that I claimed God created Adam wicked…or that God indeed had to have, IF Adam was not first divine.

 

[Naomi25]

That is about as far as you can get from what I posted.

The many generations of sons of God after creation, around the generation of Enoch, saw daughters from Adam's fallen descendants via Seth. Seth was born in Adam's image a fallen corruptible flesh and blood descendant of Adam and Eve. The daughters born to Adam's fallen offspring, were who the "divine" sons of God, many generational offspring later from those created on the 6th day, saw.

I…believe you are putting words in the bible that are just not there.
“The many generations of sons of God after creation, around the generation of Enoch, saw daughters from Adam's fallen descendants via Seth.”
‘Many generations’ of the ‘sons of God’? First, it doesn’t say that, second, you are once against assuming who the ‘sons of God’ even are. You have not proved definitively that the ‘sons of God’ are human…but somehow ALSO divine. This, as I’ve said before, shows a fundamental lack of understanding of what sort of being an ‘elohim’ is. They are spiritual. Without physical form.

Indeed…the whole notion that the ‘daughters’ are from ‘Seth’s fallen line’, but that there existed another group of humans that had evaded the fall, is nothing short of fantastical. In other words…it sounds like good fiction, but there’s nothing in the text that allows for such presumption of fact.

.
It is like those in the Civil War between the states were not the founding fathers of the Revolutionary War. But one could say Americans fought in the Civil War and know it was not the same Americans who fought in the Revolutionary War. One event happened many generations after the other. But all are still called Americans. It is understood a different generation of Americans.

So the anology would be like immigrants coming after the Civil War. Americans saw the new Immigrants. They were all humans, and even the immigrants would become Americans.

I…have no idea what point your trying to make here, or how it ties to the topic at hand. Perhaps referring to strictly American history is not a good way to draw an analogy to an Australian.

Except what happened is the sons of God did not change Adam's offspring. The sons of God became as wicked as the fallen offspring of Adam and Eve.

.

Again…not a single shred of this is found in scripture. Not a mention, not a whisper.

So the anology ended up with the Americans if the same as Genesis, they stopped calling them Americans and thousands of years later no one even remembers what an American is. They were only known by the invading immigrants no matter who those immigrants were known by. The immigrants totally changed the course of history and no one can remember the original Americans..

Yeah…no idea what you’re saying here.

 

[Naomi25]

Define this age, please.

Matthew 12:32
And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Mark 10:29-30
Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life.

Luke 20:34-36
And Jesus said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, for they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

1 Corinthians 1:20
Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

1 Corinthians 2:6
Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away.

Ephesians 1:21
far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come.

Hebrews 6:5
…and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come,

We can see a clear distinction between ‘this age’ and ‘the age to come’. ‘This age’ is always describing things of this earth; fallen, temporal things. Foolish wisdom, earthly possessions, marriage.
The only things that are seen as constant between the two ages, is ‘not being forgiven for speaking against the Holy Spirit’, and ‘Christ’s rule and authority over every power, dominion and name’.
If we consider the ‘age to come’, we see that ‘the age to come’ is talking about eternal things: eternal life, no marriage, because we are like the angels, heavenly wisdom, heavenly power.

 

[Naomi25]

This is what you quoted:

No. What I quoted you saying is found in #720. You said:

. Look at it as the Lamb's book of life.

Every human ever conceived is written in the Lamb's book of life.

As far as the other thing I am supposed to have quoted…
You may have written that, but it was NOT what I was referring to. In point of fact, here is how the conversation went.

You:
#720 - Every human ever conceived is written in the Lamb's book of life.

Me:
#774 - I’m sorry…didn’t you say - “Every human ever conceived is written in the Lamb's book of life.” in post #720

You:
#821 - I said in principle. I did not say they were.

Me:
#856 - Ah…no. No you didn’t say “in principle”. Here is what you said: “Look at it as the Lamb's book of life.
Every human ever conceived is written in the Lamb's book of life.”

You:
#888 -
This is what you quoted: “Obviously. The branch cut off would indicate that for thousands of years many of Israel would have to be removed from the Lamb's book of life on principle alone.”



You can see that during the whole conversation I was not…never was, “quoting” from a part (wherever it may lie) where you said “on principle alone”. I have only EVER been quoting and referring to what is a clear and obvious statement from you in which you did NOT clarify it was ‘in principle’.