John Darby

[Naomi25]

Except for the Bible itself! Paul clearly declared that the church was to be delivered from the wrath to come! That is not general wrath, but what we call the tribulation!

"What WE call the tribulation". Yes...this is part of the problem. You are relying on what "we" say, not scripture. Because...there is a difference in escaping 'wrath' and escaping 'tribulation'. The bible tells us about tribulation:

I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world.”-John 16:33

Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life.-Revelation 2:10

strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying that through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God. -Acts 14:22

We are told to EXPECT tribulation. Matt 24:29 tells us Jesus' coming to gather the elect will happen "Immediately AFTER the tribulation"...which assumes we endure it.

How is this different from escaping 'wrath'? We see when we look at the passages that promise it:

For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, -1 Thessalonians 5:9

Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. -Romans 5:9

These verses aren't talking about skipping out on tribulation and trial. They are speaking directly to the nature of judgment...ultimate salvational issues. Are we, as Christians, destined for eternal life, or eternal wrath? Life...because of Jesus Christ, in whom we HAVE escaped the wrath to come. And that is because wrath is the natural consequence of every single human being who does not call on the name of the Lord.

Yes in the Body of Christ there is no Jew nor Gentile (that is a talk for another thread what is meant). But the Chruch is raptured prior to the tribulation, so that we may go through the bema judgment of corinthians, receive our rewards and then get our fine linen!



The bride of Jesus is in heaven! There is also a throng shouting in heaven who are not part of the bride! There are saints on earth who have not been made ready at this point! How can they be part of teh bride since the bride is ready and they are not????

Again, you're making assumptions the text doesn't actually say. The bible doesn't actually say the Church is Raptured before the Tribulation...I've spent a good deal of time presenting verses that say otherwise...and you repeating that it does is not worthy evidence that refutes me.
And let me remind you...you have not yet proven that there IS separate throne events. Making the assumption that there are is premature and builds your doctrine on an unproven foundation.
And yes! SOME of the bride most assuredly IS in heaven in Rev 19. SOME of the bride is in heaven as we speak. The problem that remains with you is this: Rev 19 is somewhat ambiguous as to whether the Marriage supper is announced in heaven and then carried out on earth AFTER Christ returns, or if its a single event all in heaven. And IF it's all a single event in heaven, you would also need to deal with the fact that a good portion of the bride still dwells on the earth. To prove the "tribulation saints" as you call them, are NOT the bride, you would need to prove that they are somehow 'different Christians' to the other 'bride Christians' in some salvational way. Not possible.
Therefore, you paragraph above is full of assumptions that you haven't even ATTEMPTED to back up with biblical proof. Probably because there is none.

Well Scripture says it is so it matters not if you think it doesn't make sense!

Revelation 20

I'm sorry, but
I get that you WANT there to be an earthly Millennium, but at this point you're just making stuff up to put in the text.

Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment. -John 5:28–29

"Do not marvel at this, for an '1000 years is coming after Jesus comes again' when all who are in the tombs will...."
You see how that just doesn't say what you want it to?
And here's the deal. You might say that there was no real word for "hour" back then, so they just whacked in a word that meant 'fixed time' or what have you (which still doesn't support your case, by the way), but DID they have the word for 1000? You know they did. So...if they meant after 1000 years, why didn't they use it?
The fact is, you have to squeeze things, rearrange things...make things say things they don't, to have it all fit the way you want it. Me? I read it as it is. I got no problem or beef with the text. It can stay as it is and it doesn't jiggle my world or doctrine.

Here is resurrection of the just. Prior to that "symbolic" thousand years as you call it! This is just for the just.

So the resurrection of the just occurs 1,000 years before the resurrection of the unjust!

The problem with your claim here is twofold. The first is: you have yet to prove that the "first resurrection" is a physical resurrection and not the resurrection of new life that every single believer experiences when we pass from death to life in Christ. As before, I've already gone over this subject in depth, presenting plenty of bible verses to support this idea...its not an outrageous one. The bible speaks of Christians 'coming to life' IN Christ often.
The second problem you have with your 1000 year gap between believers and unbelievers resurrection is this:
"Books were opened". BookS. 'And another book, the Lambs book of Life'.
Now, I ask you...if the believing dead had already been raised and resurrected, why would the book of Life need to be open and present at that judgment? Answer: it wouldn't.
So, once again you find yourself in trouble because you are so desperate to stick a gap in there.
The fact is, the 'first resurrection' is most likely spiritual life all Christians get. And the GWT judgment is, indeed, at the end of the Millennium, which also ends when Christ returns, and it is then that he will raise and judge the dead and make all things new.

 

[Naomi25]

I have read writings that make out how the Seals, Trumpets and Bowls are all the same thing. This is done to support the agenda of AMillennisim. The theory that we are at present in the Millennium.
It is a false theory, from many angles, the main one being; Jesus has not Returned yet; every eye will see Him.

I'm sorry...can I just confirm...are you saying that Amil folks say that Jesus HAS already returned?

 

[Naomi25]

This is correct, and the only way to address Bible doctrines.

Darby became the whipping boy for the Reformed camp, but they really have nothing substantial to support their false eschatology. Thus Darby, Scofield, Ryrie, Walvoord, etc. were maligned to no end, so that people would think evil of Christian brethren, and forget about the underlying issues.

You have claimed that Dispensationalism is fraught will difficulties. But all those difficulties disappear when once people agree that the only sound way to interpret the Bible is to take it in its plain literal sense (other than where there are figures of speech).

May I ask you a question?
How you do view the 7 Churches in Revelation? Are they simply written to those, particular, physical, literal Churches?
Or, as most Dispensational folk do...do you see those 7 Churches as a representation of all the 'dispensations' of Churches down through the last 2000 years.
Because, you must know, that IF you do see them this way, like all those other Dispensationalists do...that is NOT the literal way of reading this text...the format of which is an epistle. There is not a single thing in the passage asking us to view it any other way. There is nothing there to suppose we ought to believe it is not addressing 7 literal, actual churches. And, taking it further is very...unliteral. Hypocritical even.

 

[farouk]

I...was being sarcastic. You see...when you insist that there must be distinction between Jew and Gentile...and then also insist that God is going to "force them into the NC"...where Jews and Gentiles become one body in Christ....you DO realise that you are arguing against yourself...right?



Ok. There are two problems just here. The first goes back to the fact that the bible only speaks of 2 ages: this age and the age to come. So....if Jews and Gentiles are 1 NOW and they are 1 in ETERNITY....why on earth do you think there will be an inserted 'age' that is NOT talked about where we'll suddenly be separated again? Nonsensical. For no reason as well.
Second...have you heard of 'shadows and types'? Surely even Dispensationalists have heard of these and must agree that they are replete through scripture. The first Adam and Jesus the second Adam? The 'first' exodus and then the events surrounding Jesus the second? How HE was the passover Lamb, who took away the sins, and how he then led his people away from slavery? The OT is packed with them, and they ALL point to Jesus. We know this because the NT tells us. We're not just making it up.
The thing with OT 'prophecies' about what Dispensationalists hold onto as an 'earthly millennial, theocratic kingdom' is not, in actual fact, that. What they are those verses speaking about then, because it's clear that the bible DOES speak of Israel being promised a kingdom, so...what, then? Let's just a look at the promise of the new covenant for a second:

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” -Jeremiah 31:31–34

Here God is speaking of the days of 'the coming Kingdom' (chapters 30-33)...but, in this kingdom, is his rule associated with the Mosaic Law? Clearly not...he is linking it to a a direct spiritual reign of God over the hearts of his people: in other words: the Kingdom or rule of God here, envisioned by Jeremiah, prophesied to his people, is NOT mediated by and earthly theocratic kingdom.
Again, we see Jesus associating this kingdom not with the Old Covenant, but with the NC, that he himself is bringing into the world:

And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.-Luke 22:20

and said, “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. -Matthew 18:3

Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” -John 3:3

Paul spends some time carefully explaining the nuances between the old and new covenant...between law and gospel. He concludes by saying that the new fulfills the old; supercedes it, renders it obsolete...that the 'mystery of God', hidden from sight in all times past, but now, through Jesus, bought out from the 'shadows' and into substance...the old being the types and shadows of the 'real', and have now passed away:

In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. -Hebrews 8:13

These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. -Colossians 2:17

They serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things. For when Moses was about to erect the tent, he was instructed by God, saying, “See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain.” But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. -Hebrews 8:5–6

For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. -Hebrews 10:1

So...when we're looking at verses in the OT about promises theocratic kingdoms, we must understand two things: the OT is in a time of shadow and mystery, where the revelation of both Christ and the kingdom/covenant he will bring has not yet been revealed, and that that therefore means that the authors of the scripture portray the promises of God in ways that the people will understanding and can long for.
Another 2 important notes need to be made from these conclusions: the first is: like it or not, these are not fanciful 'imaginings' of the Covenantal scholar. As we can see from the verses above, the OT and the OC were indeed types and shadows, things that were made 'obsolete' when the 'better form of reality' came...Jesus and the NC he bought. Second, there is also no denying WHAT is was Jesus bought through the NC. It wasn't a theocratic earthly kingdom. It was a spiritual one. A one that recused people from sin and promised that the 'better land' we all (Gentiles now included) longed for was actually going to be the restored earth (Romans 8).
The fact of the matter is this: the NT supports this summation of the OT kingdom prophecies far better than it does yours. With Dispensational teaching on OT kingdom prophecies, a separate 'age' has to be jammed in, in between the clear '2 ages' that are taught.


Yes, but you cannot provide scripture that sections any of these up, can you? You claim the 'church' must be raptured because God promises he won't beat his bride....but can't prove that any other person who comes to Christ should NOT have those exact same promises or status of bride...tribulation or not. All you have to go on is the fact that the term 'Saint' appears in Revelation. Which is the weakest argument in the world. 'Saint' also appears all throughout the other books of the NT. The notion that the Church can't be in Revelation because the word isn't found after chapter 4 is also ridiculous, as there are at least 3 other entire books in the NT were the word 'church' is not found either. Are they Raptured during the period those books were written too? You cannot build you're doctrine based on these words appearing or not appearing. You must do better, you must have textual evidence that states there is a difference between 'saints', 'Jews' and 'Church'. But you cannot. And the VERY FACT that they ALL must be saved through Christ is a check against you. Because scripture repeatedly tells us that anyone coming TO Christ are made one IN him. One body, neither Jew nor Gentile. Christ breaks down the wall of division.
So, not only can you NOT find positive proof for your theory, there is actually proof against it.

@Naomi25 I guess I keep coming back to 1 Corinthians 10.32 which speaks of those three different categories of people: Jews, Gentiles, and the church of God...

 

[farouk]

May I ask you a question?
How you do view the 7 Churches in Revelation? Are they simply written to those, particular, physical, literal Churches?
Or, as most Dispensational folk do...do you see those 7 Churches as a representation of all the 'dispensations' of Churches down through the last 2000 years.
Because, you must know, that IF you do see them this way, like all those other Dispensationalists do...that is NOT the literal way of reading this text...the format of which is an epistle. There is not a single thing in the passage asking us to view it any other way. There is nothing there to suppose we ought to believe it is not addressing 7 literal, actual churches. And, taking it further is very...unliteral. Hypocritical even.

@Naomi25 Oh I think they are literal. But that they also have application to various tendencies which have occurred in church history and can occur.

For example, the letter to the church at Ephesus seems to fit the general context of the 'real live' Ephesian church in Acts and in the Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

So; where are those scriptures?
But thanks for including me in your fantasy 'rapture', but no thanks, as I know I have work to do here. I look forward to the great Promises of God to His people, as they live in all of the holy Land, in peace and prosperity. Isaiah 35, Ezekiel 34:11-16, Zechariah 8:1-8

It will be interesting to see well over 1 billion people squeeze into Israel! But you think the church stays dead until after the millenial kingdom. So they are not ,according to you, 6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

So you think the church is not blessed and holy. Also the second death has authority over them for that is what the word power is!

But the 2 verses that show the church will be delivered from the wrath of the tribulation are:

Rev. 3: 10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.

This cannot be the lake of fire! because it happens on earth! And to try is peraizo and its construct shows it means to inflict evil! So you would have the beloved of Jesus have the Father inflict evil on them.

10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

The lake of fire is never called Wrath. But the tribulation is called wrath numerous times in the SCripture! So the church is to be delivered from the wrath not kept safe in the wrath!

Then of course the bride has made herself ready of REv. 19! If the church is still on earth when this is announced (and it is according to you and the dead church has not been resurrected) Then this is a LIE LIE LIE! For the bride will not be ready according to your chronology!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I challenge you to go through scripture and cough up proof that all the different 'names' found in scripture for those belonging to Jesus: the elect, Saints, the Church, saved, believers; weren't used in a synonymous way. Because they clearly are.
Then, go through and find me proof that shows the Judgment Thrones aren't one and the same event. Including Jews standing before it. Because I didn't mean there would be 'two thrones'...you notice the ""? The event is listed as "The Final Judgement", or "The Throne Judgment". So my point was not that there was another 'special throne' that Jesus would sit upon, but that there would be a separate 'judging'...as you implied. So...as you implied...where in scripture STATES this separate 'judging' event? If, as you say it must be, it has to be, then it must be taught somewhere, right?
Time to start providing scripture to back your opinions. I don't need or want more Dispensational thought. I know their doctrines well. I want to know if you can, where others have not, been able to reasonably ground it in scripture. Thus far you have not.

Well it is your bias against dispensationalism that makes you think I implied a separate judgment for Jews.

And there are only two judgment seats anyone goes before!

The Bema seat judgment declared in Corinth.

1 Cor. 3:
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

2 Corinthians 5:10
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

this judgment seat is the "Bema" seat. In Pauls day in the Empire, the Bema was most commonlknown at sport events and military "parades". All were qualified and it was a place for rewarding rewards for notable action!

If you noticed this bema everyone is saved! where the great white throne is for the lost only!

YOu say I have not, but yet I post more SCripture than you !

I just gave you the scripture for two separate judgment seats!

Also what do you think the judging of the peoples (sheep v. goats) is if not a judgment seat.

But the final judgment is the thronos judgment! And this has a totally different meaning! See it is not enough just to spout an English bible!

As for the synonymous names of saints? For the most part I agree! But from Adam through the twelve tribes they were never called the elect, nor the church once.

From the 12 tribes to Pentecost- they were never called the church or the body of Christ or the bride of Christ not once!

From Pentecost to teh Rapture? Every one saved is called a member of the Body of Christ.

And in case you think the chruch goes back to the OT,

Matthew 16:18
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

See will build! NOt have been building or will continue to build or keep building! Jesus saw the church as future.

Tribulation saints are never once called the church or the body of Christ! That is an assumption by covenantal opinion!

Are we all called the elect? Yes for we are! Are we all called saints? Yes we are! For we are all sanctified ones. But the church began at Pentecost and ends at teh Ra[pture which I showed you biblically has to occur before the tribulation begins.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I...was being sarcastic. You see...when you insist that there must be distinction between Jew and Gentile...and then also insist that God is going to "force them into the NC"...where Jews and Gentiles become one body in Christ....you DO realise that you are arguing against yourself...right?

No I am not arguing against myself.

Because I see in SCripture the church (the one body) ending in time and tribulation saints taking over! In the body there is one body and Jewish remnant entering in that body!

But the being forced, applies to the entire nation that survives as the Scriptures' I posted show you!

Ok. There are two problems just here. The first goes back to the fact that the bible only speaks of 2 ages: this age and the age to come. So....if Jews and Gentiles are 1 NOW and they are 1 in ETERNITY....why on earth do you think there will be an inserted 'age' that is NOT talked about where we'll suddenly be separated again? Nonsensical. For no reason as well.
Second...have you heard of 'shadows and types'? Surely even Dispensationalists have heard of these and must agree that they are replete through scripture. The first Adam and Jesus the second Adam? The 'first' exodus and then the events surrounding Jesus the second? How HE was the passover Lamb, who took away the sins, and how he then led his people away from slavery? The OT is packed with them, and they ALL point to Jesus. We know this because the NT tells us. We're not just making it up.
The thing with OT 'prophecies' about what Dispensationalists hold onto as an 'earthly millennial, theocratic kingdom' is not, in actual fact, that. What they are those verses speaking about then, because it's clear that the bible DOES speak of Israel being promised a kingdom, so...what, then? Let's just a look at the promise of the new covenant for a second:

Well your problem in this is because you force that everything in this age has to be the same from Pentecost until Jesus returns! The Bible doesn't say that and neither should we!

Shadows and types? Absolutely! The old while literal also were shadows and types for things in the New! But NO , not all types point to Jesus! Some point to the rapture, some to gentiles in the millenial kingdom and some other events. I agree the super majority point to to the Lord, but not unamimously.

Here God is speaking of the days of 'the coming Kingdom' (chapters 30-33)...but, in this kingdom, is his rule associated with the Mosaic Law? Clearly not...he is linking it to a a direct spiritual reign of God over the hearts of his people: in other words: the Kingdom or rule of God here, envisioned by Jeremiah, prophesied to his people, is NOT mediated by and earthly theocratic kingdom.
Again, we see Jesus associating this kingdom not with the Old Covenant, but with the NC, that he himself is bringing into the world:

Well if you wish to go further into the aspects of teh coming Kngdom for Israel I am certainly prepared to give you dozens of verses of whatr life will be like in that coming kingdom.

Teh OT covenant had spiritual aspects, so why shouldn't teh New Covenant also have many spiritual aspects. But as the many many scriptures I showed you prove: The kingdom will be here on earth and many many things will be on earth.
Farming, Building, procreation, even sinning to name just a few! And yes I agree that the kingdom and Covenant that God will force upon the survivors of Israel is the New covenant ! But as Paul declared the promise belongs to them and we gentiles are partakers of the blessings not taker overs! We are living in the time where God is calling out of the gentiles a people for Christ! This is the church! But this time period will end with the rapture!

And of course it is an earthly theocratic kingdom! Jesus is going to rule and reign over it for 1,000 years! Do I need to repost all the verses that show Jesus returning to earth to establish a kingdom? Just remember that when Jesus finally conquers death in actuality- He yields HIs throne and submits back to the Father!

Yes, but you cannot provide scripture that sections any of these up, can you? You claim the 'church' must be raptured because God promises he won't beat his bride....but can't prove that any other person who comes to Christ should NOT have those exact same promises or status of bride...tribulation or not. All you have to go on is the fact that the term 'Saint' appears in Revelation. Which is the weakest argument in the world. 'Saint' also appears all throughout the other books of the NT. The notion that the Church can't be in Revelation because the word isn't found after chapter 4 is also ridiculous, as there are at least 3 other entire books in the NT were the word 'church' is not found either. Are they Raptured during the period those books were written too? You cannot build you're doctrine based on these words appearing or not appearing. You must do better, you must have textual evidence that states there is a difference between 'saints', 'Jews' and 'Church'. But you cannot. And the VERY FACT that they ALL must be saved through Christ is a check against you. Because scripture repeatedly tells us that anyone coming TO Christ are made one IN him. One body, neither Jew nor Gentile. Christ breaks down the wall of division.
So, not only can you NOT find positive proof for your theory, there is actually proof against it.

I already did if you bothered to read the Scriptures I posted!

Well John, 3rd JOhn , JUde, Hebrews et al.

YOu just refuse to see in the Scriptures that tribulation saints have a different role than the church or the saved Israel of the tribulation! For if you looked at them as written and not reinterpreted by covenantl theologians you would see the church is different from Israel, as is different from the tribulation saints.

I already showed you an earthly kingdom where Israel is the focal point as Scripture says it will be.

I already showed you that the church is to be kept from the time of Jacobs trouble, the 70th week of Daniel, or the tribulation! I already gave you the verses that shows the reason for the tribulation itself!

OT saints have a different role in the millennial kingdoms- which you don't believe i neither even though that time frame is mentioned 5 times!

YOU are so used to be inculcated into thinking symbolic, you forget that literal also is true. The Lion lying with the Lamb. Is that symbolic or a restoration of the earth before the fall? I know this is literal!

But let me ask you this.

Who are Jesus brethren in Matthew 25? Jesus makes a differentiation between them and the sheep? so show me from SCripture whom you think the sheep are and who the brethren of Jesus are?

 

[Enoch111]

May I ask you a question? How you do view the 7 Churches in Revelation? Are they simply written to those, particular, physical, literal Churches?

The letters to the seven churches in Asia (Minor) should be taken in their plain literal sense. Which would also mean that Jesus sent an angel to each of those churches, with the specific message recorded.

At the same time, those messages are as applicable to churches today as they were at that time. There are lessons there for all Christians in all ages.

Or, as most Dispensational folk do...do you see those 7 Churches as a representation of all the 'dispensations' of Churches down through the last 2000 years.

This interpretation is quite common among Dispensationalitists and Historicists. But it is a stretch.

"The non-separatist Puritan, Thomas Brightman, was the first to propose a historicist interpretation of the Seven Churches of Revelation 2–3.[58] He outlined how the seven Churches represent the seven ages of the Church of Christ.[59] A typical historicist view of the Church of Christ spans several periods of church history, each similar to the original church, as follows:

1. The age of Ephesus is the apostolic age.
2. The age of Smyrna is the persecution of the Church through AD 313.
3. The age of Pergamus is the compromised Church lasting until AD 500.
4. The age of Thyatira is the rise of the papacy to the Reformation.
5. The age of Sardis is the age of the Reformation.
6. The age of Philadelphia is the age of evangelism.
7. The age of Laodicea represents liberal churches in a "present day" context."

Historicist interpretations of the Book of Revelation - Wikipedia

 

[Keraz]

It will be interesting to see well over 1 billion people squeeze into Israel!

As there is nearly 1 billion people now in all of the holy Land, that will not be any problem. But there are not a billion true born again Christians and also the holy Land will become like the garden of Eden. Isaiah 35:1-10

As for the rest of your beliefs, it will only be as things happen, that you will finally understand. As Isaiah 35:5 says.

 

[Keraz]

I'm sorry...can I just confirm...are you saying that Amil folks say that Jesus HAS already returned?

No, but AMills believe Jesus comes at the end of the Millennium. Which they say we are in now.
What refutes that idea is the very different events before Jesus Returns now and what happens after the Millennium.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

As there is nearly 1 billion people now in all of the holy Land, that will not be any problem. But there are not a billion true born again Christians and also the holy Land will become like the garden of Eden. Isaiah 35:1-10

As for the rest of your beliefs, it will only be as things happen, that you will finally understand. As Isaiah 35:5 says.

Israel does not hold 1 billion people. Nor all the land set out by God to Abraham! You are just plain wrong!

So the OT saints will not be included? Do you think over 1 billion people in approx. 6,000 years are saved?

According to teh group unreached peoples- the MUslim and Chinese lands right now host over 150 million believers! that is just 2020 alone!

You are just desperately grabbing at straws to save a sinking doctrine.

You cannot accept a rapture to heaven for the purpose of having our works judged and wedding Jesus before we return to earth with Jesus but the bible teaches it, if one is willing to accept the bible as written and not play some kind of scriptural game of TWISTER with the Word of God!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

"What WE call the tribulation". Yes...this is part of the problem. You are relying on what "we" say, not scripture. Because...there is a difference in escaping 'wrath' and escaping 'tribulation'. The bible tells us about tribulation:

I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world.”-John 16:33

Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life.-Revelation 2:10

Very lame! and very very old. There is a difference between tribulation and THE TRIBULATION. I personally prefer calling it teh 70th week of Daniel.

But to show that the wrath and Daniels 70th week and the tribulation are the same?

Matt. 24:
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

Rev. 6:

12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;

13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.

14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.

15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;

16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:

17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?


19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Is this the best you have?? Attacking a term men use to call a very specific ffuture time in human history and highlighting that?

But the bible calls tha t70th week of Daniel by many names.

Time of Jacobs trouble Jer. 30:7
Seventieth week of Daniel Dan. 9:27
Jehovah' s strange Work Is. 28:21
Jehovah's strange act Is. 28:21
Day of Israel's calamity Deut. 32:25, Obadiah 12:14
Tribulation Deut. 4:30
The Indignation Is. 26:20, Dan. 11:36
Overflowing Scourge Is. 28:15, 18
Day of vengeance Is. 34:8, Is. 35:4, Is. 61:2
Year of recompense Is. 34:8
Time of Trouble Dan. 12:1 Zeph. 1:15
Dasy of wrath Zeph 1:15
Day of Distress Zeph 1:15
Day of wasteness Zepn. 1:15
Day of desolation Zeph 1:15
day of darkness Zeph 1:15, Amos 5:18, Joel 2:2
Day of gloominess Zeph. 1:15
Day of clouds Zeph. 1:15, Joel 2:2
Day of thick darkness Zeph 1:15, JOel 2:2
Day of the Trumpet Zeph. 1:16
Day of Alarm Zeph 1:16

New Testament names:

Day of teh Lord 1 Thess. 5:2
Wrath of God Rev. 15:1,7, 14:10, 16:1
Hour of trial to come upon the whole earth Rev. 3:10
Great Day of the wrath of the Lamb REv. 6:16-17
Wrath to come 1 Thess. 1:10
Wrath 1 thess. 5:9, REv. 11:18
Great Tribulation Matt. 24:21, Rev. 2:22, 7:14
Tribulation Matt. 24:29
Hour of Judgment. REv. 14:7

Different names all for the same 7 years. So please do not confuse general normal tribulation with THE TRIBULATION.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

We are told to EXPECT tribulation. Matt 24:29 tells us Jesus' coming to gather the elect will happen "Immediately AFTER the tribulation"...which assumes we endure it.

NO it doesn't assume you and I endure it! It may not happen for another 150 years!!! What it means is that the survivors of all the woes that fell upon the earth between the seal judgments, trumpet judgments, bowl judgments and the genocide the antichrist declares against Jews and christians. Or the people in the midst of the tribulation period! This passage does not identify the who are those.

But we know there are three classes of people that survive

The goats, the sheep, and Jesus' brethren who the sheep aid.

These verses aren't talking about skipping out on tribulation and trial. They are speaking directly to the nature of judgment...ultimate salvational issues. Are we, as Christians, destined for eternal life, or eternal wrath? Life...because of Jesus Christ, in whom we HAVE escaped the wrath to come. And that is because wrath is the natural consequence of every single human being who does not call on the name of the Lord.

Nice try to swap the name of the lake of fire with the term wrath! But that pig don't fly!!!!

NO where can you find eternal torment in the lake of fire called wrath except if it is forced upon this and the other passage! And also that makes you a silly reader!

Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.

For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, -1 Thessalonians 5:9

Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. -Romans 5:9

Not every time we see the word "salvation" in English is it used of being saved eternally! Context determines meaning and here since the word is "soteria" which in Scripture is more commonly used of being delivered from something. SOZO is almost exclusively used in the eternal salvation sense.

Unless of Course you believed women get saved by having children.

1 Timothy 2:15
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

also as given the fact Scripture refers multiple times to teh tribulation as the wrath of God and never the lake of fire, it becomes moot.

As for Romans 5:9. You make this verse nonsensical! We have been saved by His blood, so we are going to be saved more???????

Again, you're making assumptions the text doesn't actually say. The bible doesn't actually say the Church is Raptured before the Tribulation...I've spent a good deal of time presenting verses that say otherwise...and you repeating that it does is not worthy evidence that refutes me.
And let me remind you...you have not yet proven that there IS separate throne events. Making the assumption that there are is premature and builds your doctrine on an unproven foundation.
And yes! SOME of the bride most assuredly IS in heaven in Rev 19. SOME of the bride is in heaven as we speak. The problem that remains with you is this: Rev 19 is somewhat ambiguous as to whether the Marriage supper is announced in heaven and then carried out on earth AFTER Christ returns, or if its a single event all in heaven. And IF it's all a single event in heaven, you would also need to deal with the fact that a good portion of the bride still dwells on the earth. To prove the "tribulation saints" as you call them, are NOT the bride, you would need to prove that they are somehow 'different Christians' to the other 'bride Christians' in some salvational way. Not possible.
Therefore, you paragraph above is full of assumptions that you haven't even ATTEMPTED to back up with biblical proof. Probably because there is none.

Well as we have a throng of people in heaven already, and Paul taught the Church in Corinthians that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord- Unless you are saying Jesus isn't in heaven, this is the only place the wife can be.

also give a biblical defense as to why this passage doesn't flow chronologically.

As for the Bride? Look at Scripture a little more closely again:

Rev. 19:7
7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.

At this point which happens before Jesus returns to earth- Gods Word says Jesus bride has made herself ready! If some of the Body of Christ are still on earth then His bride is not ready! Unless you wish to assume that they have had their works judged on earth (the Bema Scriptures shows just for the Bride).

NO you need to prove that there is not a pre trib rapture for the church and that when it says the Bride is ready to wed, it means not all but most because some are still stuck on earth. Also how did all them christians get in heaven?????????

I do not call them Christians at all! They are Tribulation saints. Just like I do not call saved OT Jews Christians. They are Jewish saints. Same as I do not call teh saved from Adam to the founding of Israel Christians. They are OT saints. YOu need to show they are called Christians and why when God promised tro deliver them from the wrath to come- they are there enduring the wrath that has come (Rev. 6)

What you call my "assumptions" are based on a literal, historical , grammatical understanding of Scripture. It takes each word at its normal, usual meaning unless the passage requires its secondary or tertiary meaning in English!

YOur problem is you force teh saints in the Trib to be Christians and yet they are never called the church, the bride, the body or another term used to describe us saved from Pentecost to present.

and no you have not presented verses that prove there is no pre trib rapture. YOu assume they mean that because you force the saved to be called Christians when they are not called that once in SCripture!

Matter of fact- the beheaded in the trib are not called the bride - but are called kings and priests of Jesus! The throng in heaven- they are not the bride for they are announcing her!

and you use a strawe man by attacking the fact that it is assumed that teh wedding scene in REv. 19 is in heaven. where is your biblical evidence it is not? I use the natural normal flow of teh passage. What do you use to assume it isn't?

The problem with your claim here is twofold. The first is: you have yet to prove that the "first resurrection" is a physical resurrection and not the resurrection of new life that every single believer experiences when we pass from death to life in Christ. As before, I've already gone over this subject in depth, presenting plenty of bible verses to support this idea...its not an outrageous one. The bible speaks of Christians 'coming to life' IN Christ often.
The second problem you have with your 1000 year gap between believers and unbelievers resurrection is this:
"Books were opened". BookS. 'And another book, the Lambs book of Life'.

Well accepting the Bible as written, there can be no other answer!

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

So if we accept the Bible as written and not reinterpreted, some of the dead were resurrected at this point in time! Then 1000 years later teh rest of the dead were risen.

this all happens after Jesus returns to earth! So where di the Bride in heaven come from and where did the throngs of people in heaven come from??????? Assumptions on your part.

The Bible says there is a gap of 1,000 years between the two resurrections in REv. 20, So I teach it! YOu cannot , other than by assumption, say this is not to be understood literally.

As for the books and the Lambs book?

Everyone is written in teh Book of Life (or living), and then the deeds of the lost are also recorded. The Lambs book of Life is only for the church. NO saved people at this final resurrection. Remember God HImself said that those resurrected here, the second death has authority over them. YOu and other covenatlists add that this doesn't mean every person resurrectd teh second death has authoirty over them. And that simply cannot be true biblically unless one re-interprets Gods Word!

 

[rockytopva]

If I had to pick an end time date I would go with the scientist, Isaac Newton...

"And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half. " - Daniel 12:7

From a folio cataloged as Yahuda MS 7.3g, f. 13v:

"So then the time times & half a time are 42 months or 1260 days or three years & an half, reckoning twelve months to a year & 30 days to a month as was done in the Calendar of the primitive year. And the days of short lived Beasts being put for the years of lived kingdoms, the period of 1260 days, if dated from the complete conquest of the three kings A.C. 800, will end A.C. 2060." - Isaac Newton

As Charlemagne was crowned king on December 25, 800 by Pope Leo the III so the day of Christ's coming will be on Christmas Day, 2060. If the rapture of the saints (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17) occurs seven years before the time of Christ’s coming the date of the rapture 12.25 2053. Which would all fall around 5820 on the Jewish calendar. However… Isaac Newton notes, and I must add along with any of my calculations....

"It may end later, but I see no reason for its ending sooner. This I mention not to assert when the time of the end shall be, but to put a stop to the rash conjectures of fancifull men who are frequently predicting the time of the end, & by doing so bring the sacred prophesies into discredit as often as their predictions fail. Christ comes as a thief in the night, & it is not for us to know the times & seasons which God hath put into his own breast." - Isaac Newton

So... I am on board with John Darby and Isaac Newton. Christ comes as a thief, and in times such as these. And I would say within the coming decades.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

If I had to pick an end time date I would go with the scientist, Isaac Newton...

"And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half. " - Daniel 12:7

From a folio cataloged as Yahuda MS 7.3g, f. 13v:

"So then the time times & half a time are 42 months or 1260 days or three years & an half, reckoning twelve months to a year & 30 days to a month as was done in the Calendar of the primitive year. And the days of short lived Beasts being put for the years of lived kingdoms, the period of 1260 days, if dated from the complete conquest of the three kings A.C. 800, will end A.C. 2060." - Isaac Newton

As Charlemagne was crowned king on December 25, 800 by Pope Leo the III so the day of Christ's coming will be on Christmas Day, 2060. If the rapture of the saints (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17) occurs seven years before the time of Christ’s coming the date of the rapture 12.25 2053. Which would all fall around 5820 on the Jewish calendar. However… Isaac Newton notes, and I must add along with any of my calculations....

"It may end later, but I see no reason for its ending sooner. This I mention not to assert when the time of the end shall be, but to put a stop to the rash conjectures of fancifull men who are frequently predicting the time of the end, & by doing so bring the sacred prophesies into discredit as often as their predictions fail. Christ comes as a thief in the night, & it is not for us to know the times & seasons which God hath put into his own breast." - Isaac Newton

So... I am on board with John Darby and Isaac Newton. Christ comes as a thief, and in times such as these. And I would say within the coming decades.

Well you and Isaac could have saved a lot of calculating if you had just read the SCriptures. The three conquered kings reign concurrent with 7 other kings that give their allegiance ot he beast in those 3 1/2 years!

YOu wish to put a stop to rash conjectures by fanciful men who are predicting the time of the end by predicting the time of the end on your own????

Why should you not be considered among teh hundreds of fanciful men who made other predictions? What makes Charlemagne a key figure????

 

[rockytopva]

Well you and Isaac could have saved a lot of calculating if you had just read the SCriptures. The three conquered kings reign concurrent with 7 other kings that give their allegiance ot he beast in those 3 1/2 years!

YOu wish to put a stop to rash conjectures by fanciful men who are predicting the time of the end by predicting the time of the end on your own????

Why should you not be considered among teh hundreds of fanciful men who made other predictions? What makes Charlemagne a key figure????

I would make the call that I believe the rapture of the church within the next 30 years, noting, my calculations could be off. I believe a rapture must occur otherwise how are we going to return to reign with Christ 1,000 years if we are still here?

 

[Keraz]

It will be interesting to see well over 1 billion people squeeze into Israel! But you think the church stays dead until after the millenial kingdom. So they are not ,according to you, 6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

I have repeatedly said that the Christians will occupy all of the holy land, the area from the Nile to the Euphrates. And the true Church is only those born again Christians. Not billions of people at all.
Revelation 20:4 is quite clear; ONLY the trib martyrs will be in the first resurrection. Those who remain alive when Jesus Returns, will be with Him in the Millennium. 1 Thess 4:17 and Matthew 24:31

I would make the call that I believe the rapture of the church within the next 30 years, noting, my calculations could be off. I believe a rapture must occur otherwise how are we going to return to reign with Christ 1,000 years if we are still here?

NO scripture says that the Lord will take His people to heaven. Why do people believe such fanciful and unscriptural ideas?
When Jesus Returns, He will be accompanied by the angel army of heaven. Matthew 16:27, Revelation 19:14

The doctrine of the 'rapture' is a Satanic deception. Believing it sets up people for a huge disappointment and that will cause many to fall from their faith.

 

[rockytopva]

I have repeatedly said that the Christians will occupy all of the holy land, the area from the Nile to the Euphrates. And the true Church is only those born again Christians. Not billions of people at all.
Revelation 20:4 is quite clear; ONLY the trib martyrs will be in the first resurrection. Those who remain alive when Jesus Returns, will be with Him in the Millennium. 1 Thess 4:17 and Matthew 24:31

NO scripture says that the Lord will take His people to heaven. Why do people believe such fanciful and unscriptural ideas?
When Jesus Returns, He will be accompanied by the angel army of heaven. Matthew 16:27, Revelation 19:14

The doctrine of the 'rapture' is a Satanic deception. Believing it sets up people for a huge disappointment and that will cause many to fall from their faith.

Satanic deception? Please! You can't put people in hell for disagreeing with your eschatology! Especially as Christ declares himself over and over as coming as a thief! If this was post trib it would be rather well announced!

 

[rockytopva]

I have repeatedly said that the Christians will occupy all of the holy land, the area from the Nile to the Euphrates. And the true Church is only those born again Christians. Not billions of people at all.
Revelation 20:4 is quite clear; ONLY the trib martyrs will be in the first resurrection. Those who remain alive when Jesus Returns, will be with Him in the Millennium. 1 Thess 4:17 and Matthew 24:31

NO scripture says that the Lord will take His people to heaven. Why do people believe such fanciful and unscriptural ideas?
When Jesus Returns, He will be accompanied by the angel army of heaven. Matthew 16:27, Revelation 19:14

The doctrine of the 'rapture' is a Satanic deception. Believing it sets up people for a huge disappointment and that will cause many to fall from their faith.

"I consider it a serious matter to kill men because they are in error on some question of scriptural interpretation, when we know that even the elect ones may be led astray into error." - Michael Servetus, shortly before being executed by John Calvin

I also consider it a serious matter to accuse someone of being Satanically decieved for not going along with their eschatology! Especially as scripture says...

But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is. -Mark 13:31-33