Featured Reasons why the Bible teaches a Pretribulational rapture

The only writer I recommended was Thomas Ice and you don't like him because, though himself a dispensationalist, he has enough integrity to state that Darby is the grand puba of Classic Dispensationalism.

You really have nothing worth listening to!

I have a number of MacArthur's books and appreciate him very much. However, he is a dispensationalist and any comments he has on eschatology will be biased by that doctrine.

MacWrthur is flat wrong on his interpretation of the above Scripture. The biggest mistake you Dispensationalists make in interpretation of Revelation is that you take a dispensational approach. You refuse to let Scripture speak to you rather you filter it through your dispensational sifter!

I would not know since I am not a Calvinist!

There is nothing to agree with.

I gave up DHK. I quit holding my breath, speaking metaphorically of course, waiting for your rebuttal to the Following Scripture:


John 6:39. And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

John 6:40. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 6:44. No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 6:54. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

Last Day means Last Day and GOD can not lie![/QUOTE]

 

[/QUOTE]
Revelation is progressive. "The last day" simply means "the resurrection." We learn more and more about the doctrine of the resurrection as we move along in Scripture. We learn much more in 1Cor.15, and still some more in Revelation 20. If you are stuck back in the Gospel of John and this is all you know then no wonder you are confused. He was speaking to an OT audience. Christ had not yet died.

The resurrection is the last day.
But Jesus links the resurrection to those that believe, to those that the Father draws to him. He will raise them up on the last day. The day of their resurrection, we learn from other Scripture. It is before the Millennium and before the Tribulation.
The resurrection of the "damned" or the unjust is at the Great White Throne Judgment. There will be no unbeliever present there. The two resurrections do not happen at the same time. No verse says that it must happen at the same time; but plenty of Scripture buts them far apart, at least 1,000 years apart. And that is a fact.

 

God is speaking to an Old Testament audience in the Gospel of John? Are you really serious DHK. That sounds like something from Beameup! That is a pathetic, sickening remark!

DHK, you make endless efforts to insult me but honestly you are not sufficiently mature to do so!

The LAST DAY is the LAST DAY. You can spin like the "whirling Dervish" but that does not alter the truth of what Jesus Christ tells us in John's Gospel. The LAST DAY is the LAST DAY and that is the day of the resurrection. John 5:28, 29 also tells us that the unbeliever will be raised on that day as does Revelation 11:15-19.

Furthermore there is not

. There is one passage of Scripture that can be misinterpreted to indicate that. I would simply remind you that your doctrine introduces conflict in Scripture, mine does not!

If at first you don't succeed tryn try again!

 

The truth is painful isn't it? But that's the price you pay for buying into Replacement Theology - (1,500 year old Catholic "theology" ).

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;
but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

 

It is no insult to tell you the truth.
John the Baptist is also recorded in the gospels. He was the last of the Old Testament Prophets. Even in the book of Acts, when Paul came upon those Jewish believers in Acts 19 who had followed the teaching of John the Baptist, but had never heard of the Holy Spirit, you will find that most commentaries will relegate these believers to the category of: "OT saints."
The Pharisees and Saducees kept the OT law. They were not under grace. The gospel had not been taken to the Gentiles. This was still in a dispensation of law.

Every context defines the word or phrase in which it is used.

Neh_8:18 Also day by day, from the first day unto the last day, he read in the book of the law of God. And they kept the feast seven days; and on the eighth day was a solemn assembly, according unto the manner.
--"Last day is last day" you say. Is this also the "Last Day," the day of that so-called great and general resurrection that you dream of.
--Context OR, Context. You habitually ignore context.

To deny the Millennium is to deny Scripture.
In Rev.20:1-7 "thousand years" is mentioned no less than six times. You said there is not one passage of Scripture. That is false. The Bible speaks of the Millennium over and over again. It uses a specific number repeatedly, and you simply deny it.

 

A little historical context:

It is an insult and furthermore blasphemous to deny Scripture!

You are insisting that the following Scripture are only for an Old Testament Audience. That is unreal, DHK, but you are to be congratulated you have one cheerleader, Beameup!

John 3:3-17
3. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?
5. Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
9. Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?
10. Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?
11. Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
12. If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
13. And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
14. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15. That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

 

Once you "paint yourself into that corner", the "corner" of one and a half millennia old Catholic "replacement theology",
then you simply are unable to grasp the mystery that was revealed to the Apostle Paul, the mystery which was hidden in God.

If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
how that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery Eph 3:2-3a

 

Who was crucified Beameup and paid the penalty for our sins? Was it Jesus Christ or Paul? It seems you are confused!

 

It is an insult and furthermore blasphemous to deny Scripture!

You are insisting that the following Scripture are only for an Old Testament Audience. That is unreal, DHK,[/quote]
I have said nothing blasphemous; I have not denied Scripture. I have not said that following Scripture is only for an OT audience. You are putting words into my mouth which is shameful.
Consider again. Was John the Baptist the last of the OT prophets, according to the words of Christ, or was Christ lying about John?
If John was the last of the OT prophets, then he lived in an OT age, along with all of his OT contemporaries, those that lived before the cross. That is not difficult to grasp. Perhaps those that don't understand dispensations find it difficult.

Concerning progressive revelation.
Did Abraham have more revelation than Seth?
Did Moses have more revelation than Abraham?
Did David have more revelation than Moses?
Did Isaiah have more revelation than David?
Did Paul have more revelation than Isaiah?
Do believers today have more revelation than early century Christians who did not have the completed Word of God, whereas we do, and easy access to all the words in the Bible through a concordance, as well as sermons by previous preachers.
Revelation is progressive.
There is no possible way that the audience that Jesus was preaching to in the gospels had as much light as Paul did after the crucifixion and well after Pentecost. The death, burial and resurrection of Christ had not even taken place yet.

 

The question is do you believe the Gospel of John is only for Old Testament audiences. That is what you clearly said and you cannot deny it!

The bold is by me just to show any interested what you believe about the Gospel of John!

 

No, it is not what I said. I said that Jesus was speaking to an OT audience. Context becomes important in this case.

I said:

 

You need to correct the quotes.

In the meantime I will present what you said from your post #103.



Keep back peddling DHK, you have to be fast to get away from that one![/QUOTE]

The teaching of the resurrection was taught in the OT scriptures, but that was very vague, as it took the coming Messiah, and His Apostles thru their Epostles to "fill in the blanks" for us now!

And Jesus was born ubder the law, spoke mainly to Isreal as messiah, so how could he NOT be speaking mainly to the OT understandings?

{rogressive revelation from God, as we now know much more clearly what the resurrection is going to be like , and the evnts around that event then OT believers did!

 

The teaching of the resurrection was taught in the OT scriptures, but that was very vague, as it took the coming Messiah, and His Apostles thru their Epostles to "fill in the blanks" for us now!

And Jesus was born ubder the law, spoke mainly to Isreal as messiah, so how could he NOT be speaking mainly to the OT understandings?

{rogressive revelation from God, as we now know much more clearly what the resurrection is going to be like , and the evnts around that event then OT believers did![/QUOTE]

Looks like you need to join Beameup and DHK if you think Jesus Christ was speaking only to the Jews. One reason that the Jews refused Jesus as the Messiah is that He did not speak to them according to their understand of the OT Scripture which was faulty.

He came offering a Spiritual Kingdom, the Kingdom of God. The Jews were looking for someone to throw off the yoke of Rome and reestablish the Davidic kingdom. When Jesus Christ told Pilate: Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. {John 18:36} he meant what he said.

 

That is what I said. We agree.

This is also what I said, but you didn't understand. Jesus was born under the law. John the Baptist was the last of the OT prophets. Jesus teaching was directed to those that lived in an OT dispensation. Context is key.

That is what I said, correct?

Let's understand what happened by the time Christ had died, rose again, and was ready to ascend into heaven. He appeared to his eleven disciples and entrusted to these eleven men the salvation of the entire world. 11 Men and that is all. At the most there were 120 gathered together on the day of Pentecost. After 3 1/2 years of ministry it boiled down to 11 apostles and a total of 120 disciples and that is it. Amazing!

So who was Christ addressing?
They weren't believers were they? They were crowds of unbelievers!
Some of them wanted to kill him.
Some of them followed him because of the miracles (they wanted to be fed).
Some of them liked what he said, and went to hear him.
Some thought he was a prophet, but no more than that.

He was left with 120 on the day of Pentecost.
So who was he talking to OR? They were unbelievers in an OT dispensation before the cross.

He went to the Jews, not the Gentiles. He sent the disciples to the Jews. Even the Syrophonecian woman accepted her place when Christ referred to her as a "dog" or Gentile.

He came to his own, and his own received him not. They rejected him; they crucified him. Had the Jews accepted them as their Messiah then, we have no way of knowing what direction history would have taken.

 

Sorry! the quote feature was messed up in Y1 post. The above post attributed to me should read:

***********************************

Same problem, the above statement was posted by Y!!

************************************************

Same problem, the above statement was posted by Y!!

**************************************
Following is my response to Y1

 

Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight,
that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. John 18:36

"but now"

It is surprising to note that some simply don't understand that Jesus didn't know "everything" during his ministry.
He was subject to the Father and spoke the words the Father gave him to speak... and revelation to him was "progressive".

"He came unto his own" - the Jews - with the message that the Kingdom of Heaven was here to be established on earth, if they would receive Him.

 

I know you're a dispensationialsit, so do you believe in post-trib rapture? I ask this in sincerity.

 

So! Was Jesus Christ God or was He not? He told the unbelieving Jews just as He tells some doubtful on this Forum: John 10:30. I and my Father are one.

Before His crucifixion Jesus Christ told God the Father: John 17:4. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

So obviously HE did not come to establish a Messianic Kingdom or the above statement is not true. Need I remind you that God cannot lie!