If you have not read the first part of this discussion click The Posttribulation Rapture

The following questions have been asked about my Posttribulation Rapture view.

1. What preparations should I make if post-trib is correct.

1A. At present I have just advised people to "be on the alert" and keep watching the signs of the times. Keep studying the Bible and seeking to know its meaning. Also do some spiritual preparation in case you Bible is taken from you ie memorize scripture. I have memorized a verse from each chapter in the NT and a chapter title so that if my Bible was confiscated I could at least think my way through the NT. The mental and spiritual preparation is most important anyway. If we are alert we will see the last days approaching and should have time to collect food or other supplies if we have a little money available (before the mark of the beast comes into force in the middle of the 70th week).

Name : CG

2. I can't believe in the post-trib view due to one simple verse in the Bible - Matt 24:36 "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only."or try Mark 13:32, Matt 25:13, etc

If I take a post-trib view, then I would know exactly the day of the Lord's coming, and he says that no man can know that day!!

Also, there is Luke 21:28, Luke 21:36 what is it that I am going to escape, if not the tribulation? What about 1Thess 5:9 "For God has not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation"?

The 24th chapter of Matthew clarifies many things for me, especially verses 36 through 41 - who is taken in verses 40 & 41?? What does that then mean?

"But as the days of Noah were, so shall the coming of the Son of man be" - God did not put his wrath on Noah, he gave him and his family a means of escape, just before his judgments fell. Did He destroy Lot and his family? No, He loves and cares for the faithful and did not destroy them or appoint them to His wrath!

I am looking for the Lord, not the anti-christ, if I take the post trib view, then I must watch for the anti-christ, and not my Lord, because the anit-christ must come first - when he comes, then I will know exactly the day of the Lord's return. This just doesn't work for me - as He tell's me to watch for Him always -

Who then, are the four and twenty elders? Why are they clothed in white raiment, with crowns on their heads?

Also, the post-trib view, in my opinion, does not promote the love of Christ Jesus. If Jesus died for my sins (which He did), why would I be appointed to the wrath of God when Jesus has already paid my debt?

Your friend in Christ

CG

Dear CG

2a. Thank you for illustrating my point so well. I said most pretribs argue against the posttrib rapture because of "straw men" or misconceptions about the posttrib view. You were perfect in illustrating this in your response.

You said you couldn't believe in Posttrib because of Matt. 24:36 because you think that you would then know the exact day of the Lord's coming. But as a posttrib we do NOT know the day and hour of the Lord's return. He does not return to earth on day 1260 of the second half of the trib. The two witnesses are killed and lie in the streets for 3 1/2 days after the end of the 70th week of Daniel and into the 1335 days of Daniel 12.

Matt. 24:36 is clearly in the context of the Coming of the Lord AFTER the trib (see Matt 24:29-36) so even pretribs must deal with the question of not knowing the day and hour of the second coming (unless they take verse 36 completely out of context and impose a pretrib context to it). The same applies to your comment about Noah in verse 40-41. It is the second coming of the Lord that is being referred to in this context.

Regarding Luke 21:28, 36 again, please my friend, LOOK AT THE CONTEXT and you will see that it is the coming of the Lord AFTER the tribulation. Luke 21:21-27 is clearly parallel to Matt 24 leading up to 24:29 which could not be more clearly stated as occurring "immediately after the tribulation of those days..."

About 1 Thes 5:9 I agree 100% with you that God has not appointed the church to wrath. Posttribs do not think believers of any age suffer the wrath of God. They are preserved as Noah and Lot were (on earth) through the time of God pouring out His wrath. Even if the rapture were pretrib, would you say that those who are saved after the rapture suffer the wrath of God. If so, then explain John 3:36? (The wrath of God is removed from all who believe in the Son-before, or after, the rapture.) You implied in your comments that it would be unloving for God to destroy the faithful and appoint them to His wrath. What about the innumerable multitude of believers out of every trib and tongue and nation, that come out of the Great tribulation Rev 7:9-17. (according to pretribs they are apparently saved after the rapture and then killed by the antichrist or other unbelievers.) Do you mean to imply that God did not love them, because they didn't get saved until after the rapture so they have to suffer the consequences and endure the wrath of God? And in this connection your last comment that posttrib does not promote the love of Christ because "if Jesus died for my sins (which He did), why would I be appointed to the wrath of God when Jesus has already paid my debt?" Didn't Jesus already pay the debt of those saved after the pretrib rapture also? So you see that the argument of deliverance from wrath is a greater problem for pretribs to explain how God's wrath is poured out on believers saved after the rapture than it is for posttribs who believe God "know how to rescue the godly from temptation and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment" (II Peter 2:9) and that He never pours out His wrath on believers. Again you misrepresent the posttrib view and reject your "straw man" but you have not dealt with the real posttrib view.

Who are the 24 elders in white raiment, with crowns of their heads? I believe they are representatives of the church and Israel. Rev. 21:9-14 describes the twelve apostles and twelve tribes of Israel as enduring forever in the new Jerusalem, so I think this is the most logical explanation for who the 24 elders are. In chapter 4-5 they have not been rewarded yet because Rev. 11:15-18 tells us that the time to reward "Thy bond-servants and prophets and to the saints and to those who fear Thy name" (which would certaintly include the church) is at the seventh trumpet.

Regarding imminence: The Lord may take me home at any time, so the argument of keeping a pure life because of the thought of His imminent return is not needed. I know I may meet Him at any moment, irregardless of the posttrib rapture, so I must keep my life pure anyway. So I am looking for the Christ, not the antichrist, but I am also obeying Matt 24:42 and being on the alert regarding the seasons, 24:32-33.

I hope you and other pretrib friends will get a better understanding of the posttrib position (see http://www.oocities.org/Athens/6476, for my explaination of the posttrib position) before criticising it. You and other pretrib friends quite likely will find, as I did, that it makes more sense than the pretrib view if understood correctly. I trust this stimulates you to more careful Bible study.

Post Millenialism

Dan,

3. It seems to me that the millennium is equated with the first resurrection in Revelation 20. In my study, I have concluded that by defining first resurrection we can determine the meaning of the 1000 years. The first resurrection could be a 1000 year period injected into history before the end. The problem is that there is no mention of this 1000 year reign anywhere else in Scripture. Some propose various texts as supporting documentation, but those texts say nothing about 1000 years or the first resurrection.

Try this thought on as an alternative. Suppose the first resurrection is regeneration, the work of the Spirit in bringing those who are spiritually dead to new life in Christ. Those who participate in this resurrection have nothing to fear of the second death. The 1000 years would be the period from the death of Christ until the release of Satan at the end of history. Passages that support Christ reigning now include Romans 5:17, I Cor 15:24ff, and Rev 5:9f. The I Cor passage says Christ must reign UNTIL his enemies are under his feet and include the enemy of death. Believers do not live the entire 1000 years but come to life during the 1000 years and during their lives, they reign with Christ. The rest of the dead do not come to life because they are dead in their trespasses and sins.

The spiritual resurrection of believers is described in John 11:25f, and John 5:21,24. The crossing over from death to life is the first resurrection. After all, why should the Revelation text encourage with the words that the second death has no power over those who have part in the first resurrection? If they already were beheaded for Christ and came back to life, who would ever think that the second death would be a threat to them? Those encouraging words are for believers who face persecution and need such encouragement. Believers are priests of God (I Pet 2:5,9) and reign with him in this fallen world.

I know this is a different approach than you are used to and I may be out of line being neither pretrib or posttrib. However, if you look at the text you may find that this view has much to commend it. Satan once was, now is not and will come up out of the abyss at the end of history. It is hard to make a complete case for this view is so few words. Let me know what you think.

Alan,

3a. Thank you for your question. I have a friend who is postmillenial. I have discussed this view with him. My biggest problem with this view is the spiritualizing of the passage in Rev. that reads so naturally if taken literally. Just because it is the only passage in the Bible that mentions the 1000 year reign does not mean it must be spiritualized. The principle of progressive revelation tells us that later revelation will be more detailed than earlier revelation so it is not entirely surprising that the detail of the length of time of the earthly reign of Christ, previously revealed (Rev 3:21, 5:10) should now, so late in the book of Revelation, be revealed. The context is clear that at (or shortly after) the return of Christ to the earth, Rev 19:11-21, Satan is bound for 1000 years 20:1-3. These verses need no spiritualizing and are not written in figurative language. They make plain sense as written. Then, verse 4 mentions the souls of those beheaded...who had not worshiped the beast.... This is something which, according to the description of the beast (Rev 13), has not occurred yet. These beheaded saints are resurrected and reign with Christ (upon the earth Rev 5:10). The rest of the dead (the unbelievers Rev 20:7-15) wait until after the 1000 years and then are resurrected. Again the plain sense makes good sense so seek no other sense.

To do as you suggested, "Suppose the first resurrection is regeneration, the work of the Spirit in bringing those who are spiritually dead to new life in Christ. Those who participate in this resurrection have nothing to fear of the second death. The 1000 years would be the period from the death of Christ until the release of Satan at the end of history. " If I suppose the first resurrection is anything other than a literal bodily resurrection, then the possibilities of what the 1000 years is, is only limited by my imagination. The passages in John 11:25f, involves some figurative descriptions but need not be transported to the Rev 20 context to redefine what is being taught their. The 1000 years could mean ANYTHING other than what it plainly says it means. I do not believe God leaves His word so open to speculation. Those who have nothing to fear of the second death do have nothing to fear but their counter parts who remain unresurrected do have something to fear. So it IS logical to say that they have nothing to fear since they have been resurrected. If they hadn't been resurrected they would have something to fear, so the statement that they have nothing to fear is a reassurance that they are exempted from a most dreadful fate awating those pour unbelieving souls.

I also wanted to comment on your statement, "Satan once was, now is not and will come up out of the abyss at the end of history." I believe to quote a prominent pretrib, "Satan is alive and well on planet earth." Scriptural evidence for this is plentiful, but briefly look at the armor we are to take on to fight Satan (Eph 6:10-17) These instructions would be meaningly if Satan was now during the church age bound. And external evidence in the world around us that Satan is not bound is abundant. Why would there be such a rise in Satan worship and the occult if he was bound?

Thank you for your comments

Dan

Question about the length of the trib.

Name : Rapone

Date : Thu Jul 3 1997

4. Greetings brethren in Jesus' Name.

I hope someone can answer the following using the Bible as the sole authority:

1) Is the tribulation seven years or three-and-a-half years in length (Scripture)?

2) Is there any difference between the tribulation and the great tribulation, in regards to starting point and duration (Scripture)?

In Christ's love.

My answer:

4a. I'm sorry no Scripture was given despite your many attempts to get some verses on this subject. No scripture tells us that the tribulation is 7 years!

This is generally accepted by premillenialists (of which I am one). In Matt 24:9 general tribulation for the church age is described. We know it gets worse toward the end of the church age (2 Tim 3:1-13). Matt. 24:21 mentions a period called the Great Tribulation that starts (all seem to agree) in the middle of the 70th week of Daniel and most (except prewrathers) say it continues for 3 1/2 years to the end of Daniels 70th week (see Matt. 24:15-29). In Matt 24:29 it seems to be referring to the great tribulation when it says, "Immediately after the tribulation of those days..." The great tribulation is mentioned again in Rev 7:14 describing martyrs.

That the great tribulation continues for 3 1/2 years gains support from the fact that the antichrist is given authority to act (killing believers) for 42 months, Rev 13:5-7. Also, Rev 6:9-11 tells us that judgment will not come until the last maryter is killed, which will be after the authority of the antichrist is removed. So tribulation will continue for the full 3 1/2 years (despite prewrathers idea that the great tribulaiton will be cut short.)

At a boy, Rapone, for keeping after them to support what they say with Scripture. Keep being like the Bereans in Acts 17:11.

Greetings in Jesus' Name.

You write: "No Scripture tells us that the tribulation is 7 years," that it is simply "generally accepted."

No Scripture yet generally accepted? What kind of exegesis is that??:)

My response:

That is no kind of exegesis, but the fact remains that NO Scripture tells us that the trib is 7 years. That it is generally accepted by premillenialists does not mean that I accept it, though I am premillenial. You will note that the first event in my time line is the start of Daniel's 70th week (not the start of the tribulation, as most premillenialist have it.)

As you study prophecy you will find that many things are generally accepted but not clearly substantiated with Scripture. That is why I exhorted you to be like the Bereans. Check out things that you have heard and assumed. For a few other examples try these: a. find support that the 144,000 are WITNESSES. Yes they are bond-servants of God but it does not say that they are witnesses. Rev 7:3 b. try to find the Scripture that says the antichrist will make a peace treaty with Israel for 7 years. Yes he will make a covenant with THE MANY for 7 years, Dan 9:27, but not NECESSARILY Israel. c. and how about support that the restrainer is the Holy Spirit indwelling the church which is removed before the 70th week of Daniel. Don't get me wrong, I do lean to the belief that the Holy Spirit is the restrainer (although prewrathers make a good case for Michael), but firm Scriptural support is lacking. Just recognize when you are making assumptions.

So keep asking those questions and demanding Scripture to support the answers.

Til He comes,

Dan