I want to show you what I mean, and you want to steer the discussion a different way.
It's OK, I know where it's going to lead, I'm thinking you do also. No worries, like I said, we've discussed this a lot.
Much love!
It Must Be Absolutely Terrifying To Be A Post-Tribulation Believer
- Thread starter Paul2
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
It's OK, I know where it's going to lead, I'm thinking you do also. No worries, like I said, we've discussed this a lot.
Much love!
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Bring forth the evidence!
You believe Matt ch25 is incompatible with Matt ch24(Post-Trib).
Please explain you findings.
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Luke 22:41-44
And He was withdrawn from them about a stone’s throw, and He knelt down and prayed, saying, “Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done.” Then an angel appeared to Him from heaven, strengthening Him.
And being in agony, He prayed more earnestly. Then His sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground.
Hebrews 5:7
"who, in the days of His flesh, when He had offered up prayers and supplications, with vehement cries and tears to Him who was able to save Him from death, and was heard because of His godly fear, though He was a Son, yet He learned obedience by the things which He suffered.
It's all in the question I've asked, that you won't answer. There is my finding.
You include the church in a narrative prophecy in Matthew chapter 24, and I ask you, do you accept the prophecy of the sheep/goats judgment given by Jesus just a few minutes later in the very same manner as you do the prophecy of Jesus' return in the previous chapter? As a narrative of events that will happen in just that way?
If you don't, there's a glaring contradiction. If you do, well, let me know, and we can go on from there.
Much love!
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
i see no contradictions in Matthew ch24 and Matthew ch25
The Disciples/Bride is spoken to in Matthew ch24 and again in Matt ch25
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
i am patiently waiting for your explanation of incompatability between Matthew ch24 Post-Trib and Matthew ch25
Thank You my Brother
One of the real problems I see in being Post-Trib is that means you are not allowed to read certain passages in the clear and plain way in which they are written, because they cause irreparable harm to the view if you do. The create conflicts which are not solvable from Scripture, and people end up saying things like, "It says this, but it actually means that", or, "this is a parable", though it not be in the form of a parable, such as the Sheep/Goats judgment.
Jesus gave that prophecy in the same narrative form as He did of His coming in power and glory a few minutes earlier. But when you think that Jesus is gathering the Church as part of "the chosen", then you have to ask youself, So, who exactly are these sheep in the next little bit? And if you try to put the church there, you have to ask, why are they being separated according to works? I thought Jesus knows those who are His!
I've not yet met a post tribber - that I can remember
- who accepts that passage exactly as written. Or the sealing of the 144,000. Or even Matthew 24:31, for that matter, as they import a meaning to "the chosen" that was not used in that day. Defining a word by it's usage by other people in other contexts decades later simply isn't accurate.So to make "the chosen" and "the nations" anything other than Jews and Gentiles - in that day, among that people - is incorrect.
I've heard I don't know how many justifications for not just believing what we read, but that's the only way I find it all to harmonize.
In every case where I've watched the Spirit open my eyes to a passage, it's to see the full value of the words used, for the simplicity of what they say, and it's never, not once, to cause me to overturn the basic saying of a passage for something it metaphorically represents or some such, as these will always have Scripture instructing that very thing, "this is a type", like the parting of the Red Sea, or, this is allegory, Hagar is Jerusalem is the bondage of the Law, Sarah is the heavenly city, like that.
To have to somehow select without actual Biblical authority that this or that passage is actually type/parable/allegory, well, I certainly don't want to be in that position! I feel very much safer on the side of, well, that's what He said, so, I think it's what He meant.
Much love!
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
@marks says: "to make "the chosen" and "the nations" anything other than Jews and Gentiles - in that day, among that people - is incorrect."One of the real problems I see in being Post-Trib is that means you are not allowed to read certain passages in the clear and plain way in which they are written, because they cause irreparable harm to the view if you do. The create conflicts which are not solvable from Scripture, and people end up saying things like, "It says this, but it actually means that", or, "this is a parable", though it not be in the form of a parable, such as the Sheep/Goats judgment.
Jesus gave that prophecy in the same narrative form as He did of His coming in power and glory a few minutes earlier. But when you think that Jesus is gathering the Church as part of "the chosen", then you have to ask youself, So, who exactly are these sheep in the next little bit? And if you try to put the church there, you have to ask, why are they being separated according to works? I thought Jesus knows those who are His!
I've not yet met a post tribber - that I can remember
So to make "the chosen" and "the nations" anything other than Jews and Gentiles - in that day, among that people - is incorrect.
I've heard I don't know how many justifications for not just believing what we read, but that's the only way I find it all to harmonize.
In every case where I've watched the Spirit open my eyes to a passage, it's to see the full value of the words used, for the simplicity of what they say, and it's never, not once, to cause me to overturn the basic saying of a passage for something it metaphorically represents or some such, as these will always have Scripture instructing that very thing, "this is a type", like the parting of the Red Sea, or, this is allegory, Hagar is Jerusalem is the bondage of the Law, Sarah is the heavenly city, like that.
To have to somehow select without actual Biblical authority that this or that passage is actually type/parable/allegory, well, I certainly don't want to be in that position! I feel very much safer on the side of, well, that's what He said, so, I think it's what He meant.
Much love!
God is incorrect?
JESUS is incorrect?
the Holy Spirit is incorrect?
Job was a Gentile and he was God's 'chosen'.
Then the Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil?”
John 1:10
"He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved.
Do you read the prophecy of the sheep/goats judgment in the very same manner that you do the prophecy Jesus gave a few minutes earlier of His coming in power and glory? If I remember correct, you don't, but maybe I'm not remembering right. So I've been asking.
If you accept it as the same kind of narrative prophecy, then the contradiction is in the church being gathered in 24:31, and there being sheep in 25:33. If the Christians were already gathered, then who are these sheep? And if you try to fit the Christians being gathered as part of the nations - the church, there's your sheep - why is it that Jesus separates them according to their works? The church is specifically not saved nor righteous by our own works. We are saved by faith, and to then declare us righteous based on our works gives a very wrong idea, were that referring ot the church.
Jesus knows those who are His, this is something different. And interpretting this as the church being among the nations, isn't that defeating the purpose anyway? The church is included in Matthew 24:31 because of the words "the elect", so that would be their place in a post trib rapture.
If you read the Sheep/Goats judgment as something else, such as a retelling of the great white throne judgment, or as a parable of some kind, that's a contradiction, because they are given in exactly the same way. There is no textual reason to treat them as anything other than narrative prophecy, a foretelling of events that will happen in just that way, both passages.
When you put gentiles in Matthew 24:31, that goes directly against the usage of that terminology circa Jesus' time. Ask any Jew, who are "The Chosen" and who are "the Nations"? Jews and Gentiles. Paul would, decades later, in different context, to a primarily gentile audience, refer to all Christians as being chosen by God, as all blessings are in Christ, we are elect in Him. Isaiah shows Messiah to be God's "Elect Servant", and in Him, we share in what is His. So we are "elect in Him".
Just the same, out of 70 nations in the world, God chose 1 of them, and there wasn't any question about that. There wasn't some different usage in that context. That's what it meant. You have to disregard that.
What we have here in fact is a prophecy that Jesus will return, will send His angels to regather Israel to the promised land, and then the gentiles are gathered for judgment, exactly as prophesied many many times, in the Law and the Prophets. And you can obtain this view by simply accepting as true the very things Jesus said.
Much love!
Last edited:
Well, I'd be interested to see in Job where he is called the chosen. Just the same, I understand that there is no real consensus on exactly when Job lived, but his lifespan puts him not too many generations after the flood, at least during Abraham's time, perhaps earlier.
I'm not seeing anything in your post that gives some Scriptural indication that Job should be considered part of "the chosen" that referred to Israel, only that you say I'm incorrect. It seems that you are saying Job should be considered to be chosen being a righteous man? But that's not a Biblical argument.
Jews / Gentiles = Chosen / Nations, that's how the language was used when Jesus gave that prophecy.
Much love!
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
Yes, this is true, and even Adam himself would be saved through Jesus Christ alone. However, he was not a part of the chosen people, who came much after him. Those in the OT were not baptized into Christ as are we. Their sins were covered until Messiah would come.
Much love!
And, this does not show us a place in the Bible that Job is called among the Elect.
Much love!
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Repeat this to yourself = "No one comes to the Father except thru JESUS"
When you do, keep in mind that the WORD was God in the Beginning before HE came to earth as Jesus.
Please let me know the following:
a.) Do we choose God or does He choose us?
a.) Does this apply to all people at all times beginning in Genesis?
b.) If God chooses a person (Jew or Gentile) to reveal Himself to that person, did God choose that person?
You are presenting theological arguments to define words. I prefer to work with word definitions as shown in history, and in the text, and then work out the theology from there.
Much love!
@David in NJ
When you do that you are imposing your own theological conclusions on the very texts that would correct you if you allowed the words to have their normal use and meaning.
So where to go from there? There's nowhere.
Go ahead and laugh more as you wish, to me this is sad.
Much love!
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
@marks,
We go to where the JOY is = Nothing but love for us from Above my Brother
Don't be sad, be GLAD that we are Brethren in the Peace of God thru Christ Jesus our LORD
Let us use the definitions given to us in the Word = John 15:16-17
You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you.
These things I command you, that you love one another.
I love His Word too much to not be saddened by such things. It's just the way I am.
Words mean things, and that's the way that is.
Much love!
Similar threads
