Eschatology: The "Left Behind" narrative is unbiblical

Jeffrey Bowden said:

Clare, there is no verse about the 2A that says Jesus is returning and we are gathered to Him. Matt 24:31 is a gathering during the 2A, but it is NOT to Him. How do I know that? That verse does not say we are gathered to Him. It's that simple.

Click to expand...

Your hermeneutic limps somewhat. . .every mention of a doctrine in the NT does not necessarily include the whole doctrine.
Unless Mt 24:31 explicitly excludes gathering to Jesus, there is no basis, in light of 1 Th 4:16-17, to assert that the gathering is not to Jesus.

Jeffrey Bowden said:

In fact, you can't tell me where that gathering ends up.

Click to expand...

In terms of his second coming (parousia, 1 Co 16:22, where parousia is citizens going out of the city to welcome an incoming dignitary and accompanying him back into the city, as in Jesus' entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday), the gathering to meet Jesus in the air (1 Th 4:16-17) ends up with the saints accompanying Jesus (back) to earth to assist in the final judgment (1 Co 6:2).

Jeffrey Bowden said:

We therefore can't say it is to Him. All verses that are a gathering to Him, say so.

Click to expand...

But who made that rule? The word "gathering" does not have to be used to mean the same thing.

At the resurrection, the saints are caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air--same thing, with different words.
Your limping hermeneutic takes things that are the same thing (e.g., Mt 24:31, 1Th 4:16-17) and divides them to make them two different things, for the sake of personal interpretation of prophetic riddles.

Jeffrey Bowden said:

That means all the verses that say we are gathered to Him are ONLY about the rapture. That is a fact that I challenge you to disprove.

Click to expand...

Your point?

And other apostolic teaching, as in the following, unequivocally locates the rapture with the end of time:

Jesus locates the resurrection in the last day (John 6:39).
Paul locates the resurrection with the rapture (1 Thessalonians 4:16).
Jesus locates the rapture with the second coming (Matthew 24:39-41).
Jesus locates the second coming with the judgment of the sheep and goats at the end of time (Matthew 25:31-33)?

Therefore: in terms of the time of their occurrence, the rapture occurs at the end of time:

the last day (end of time) = resurrection = second coming = rapture = final judgment of sheep and goats (all mankind)

The Liturgist said:

there was an attempted Protestant takeover of the Coptic Orthodox church around the time of the repose of Pope Shenouda, memory eternal,

Click to expand...

It is hard to believe that a Protestant takeover of the Coptic Orthodox Church was attempted. What happened was an attempt to continue ecumenical (not Protestant) services at the Muqattam Cathedral. This was attempted for the love and salvation of Egypt and was rejected by the Coptic Church leadership.

BTW, the major Protestant denomination in Egypt is Presbyterian and not Dispensational.

Andrewn said:

It is hard to believe that a Protestant takeover of the Coptic Orthodox Church was attempted. What happened was an attempt to continue ecumenical (not Protestant) services at the Muqattam Cathedral. This was attempted for the love and salvation of Egypt and was rejected by the Coptic Church leadership.

BTW, the major Protestant denomination in Egypt is Presbyterian and not Dispensational.

Click to expand...

I do realize it sounds far-fetched, but @dzheremi and several others can back my claims.

The ecumenical services at Muqattam were a separate but related issue, in which the Protestants were using them to poach attendees from the Orthodox church in the Copts own cathedral. Also it was not the Presbyterians who were primarily trying to take over the Coptic church (from within, with the cooperation of Coptic clergy) but rather ethnically Coptic evangelicals in both the US and Egypt. Indeed, there was even a blog run by those struggling against the takeover, which had resulted in the introduction of praise and worship music in several Coptic churches, and which was also highly entrenched in some parishes otherwise well regarded for instance for recording traditional Coptic music, such as St. Mark’s in Washington, D.C.

The takeover attempt was definitely real, it was clearly against the wishes of the majority, except perhaps in places like Muqattam where it had had the most influence, and it was wrong. The Coptic Orthodox church acted correctly to expel people who were abusing its own facilities, like the Muqattam Cathedral, to steal its congregants and to promote a false ideology.

Now I realize the suggestion of such a conspiracy might be met with incredulity, but Protestantism in Northern Europe came about in a similiar way albeit under more justified conditions, in response to Roman Catholic areas, and in the case of Moravians, in response to the imposition of Roman Catholicism by force in a traditionally Orthodox area. It is also argued, although I am not convinced, that the Saxons were effectively Orthodox and that the Norman conquest of England was a forced imposition of Roman Catholicism. However, it was the case that the Portuguese conquest of Kerala led to the forced imposition of Catholic hierarchs on the Mar Thoma Christians, some of whom resisted. And ironically it was among the Orthodox Mar Thoma Christians that a conspiracy similar to that which occurred among the Copts took place, in which the British East India Company effectively expropriated the funds of the Orthodox hierarchy the creation of what is now the Mar Thoma Syrian Church, a province of the Anglican communion. Of course, to my knowledge, the conspirators in the case of the Coptic Orthodox Church did not engage in any criminal activity.

The most egregious criminal conspiracies in the history of the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox (well, the Ethiopian and Armenian parts of it) were those connected with various communist governments, especially that of the former Soviet Union, which over its 70 year history massively infilitrated the hierarchy of at least seven Eastern Orthodox and one Oriental Orthodox jurisdiction, in the latter case (that of tne Armenians) causing a schism which led to a horrible act of sacrilegious hierocidal assassination*, in which a priest suspected of pro-Soviet sympathies was shot dead by an Armenian nationalist in 1929.

*It is generally regarded at least by Orthodox and Catholic churches that killing or even striking clergy, or executing them without a release from the church to do so, is sacrilege. Indeed it was such an act that led to the martyrdom of St. Thomas Becket

Andrewn said:

It is hard to believe that a Protestant takeover of the Coptic Orthodox Church was attempted.

Click to expand...

Why is it hard to believe? Read up on the history of non-Orthodox relations with the Egyptian Church (e.g., The Copts and the West 1432-1822: The European Discovery of the Egyptian Church by Alastair Hamilton) and you'll see that, over time, the Coptic people went from a sort of curiosity relative to the West's more general interest in what would eventually be called Egyptology to a target of conversion once it was realized that Muslims were too difficult to convert. And that particular reference largely stops before the arrival of most Protestants, which really picked up in the latter half of the 1800s with the arrival of the Presbyterians and others in 1850s and 1860s, who were also working in nearby Middle Eastern nations such as Iran to convert the native Christians over there.

Really, by the time things like the recent events at Muqattam began to happen, they were continuing a long-established pattern that had very little to do with "ecumenism" in any positive sense, if there can be one in the first place. Witness, for instance, that HH Pope Demetrius II issued a papal bull excommunicating those who would send their pupils to Protestant mission schools. HH departed in 1871.

dzheremi said:

Why is it hard to believe? Read up on the history of non-Orthodox relations with the Egyptian Church (e.g., The Copts and the West 1432-1822: The European Discovery of the Egyptian Church by Alastair Hamilton) and you'll see that, over time, the Coptic people went from a sort of curiosity relative to the West's more general interest in what would eventually be called Egyptology to a target of conversion once it was realized that Muslims were too difficult to convert. And that particular reference largely stops before the arrival of most Protestants, which really picked up in the latter half of the 1800s with the arrival of the Presbyterians and others in 1850s and 1860s, who were also working in nearby Middle Eastern nations such as Iran to convert the native Christians over there.

Really, by the time things like the recent events at Muqattam began to happen, they were continuing a long-established pattern that had very little to do with "ecumenism" in any positive sense, if there can be one in the first place. Witness, for instance, that HH Pope Demetrius II issued a papal bull excommunicating those who would send their pupils to Protestant mission schools. HH departed in 1871.

Click to expand...

Indeed so, various Protestants always gone after the Orthodox, especially the Oriental Orthodox, and also the Assyrians, because the latter two churches, based on the entirely false accusation of Monophysitism directed at the former (in fact, St. Diocorus and St. Severus of Antioch are among the most Christologically Orthodox church fathers) and the not entirely correct accusation of Nestorianism directed at the latter (the real Nestorians being Fundamentalist Calvinist neo-Nestorians who reject the Council of Ephesus over a hypothetical objection to the term Theotokos that derives from their iconoclasm), are wrongly perceived to be somehow backwards and insufficient and not authentically Christian.

For my part, I regard the Coptic and Syriac Orthodox churches as being the most exemplary, along with ROCOR, the OCA and other fragments of the formerly united Russian Orthodox Church that remains divided by various ethnic and political schisms), and the Antiochian and Georgian Orthodox, and also the autonomous Church of Sinai (I don’t as much care for the entire Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem because it lacks sufficient Arabic speaking clergy and is dominated by Greek nationals who are primarily Hellenophonic, despite most of its laity being Arabic speakers, but the autonomous Church of Sinai, which is the smallest autonomous canonical Eastern Orthodox church, and the only autonomous Orthodox church that consists almost entirely of just one isolated monastery which survives by providing medical care to the Bedouins and which has the actual Burning Bush in its courtyard is just absolutely precious to me).

On a very minor and pedantic technicality, I believe, correct me if I’m wrong, since we don’t want to give the impression that the Coptic Pope has the same kind of unilateral authority the Roman Popes have, that what he issued was rather an encyclical that was approved by the Holy Synod.

The Liturgist said:

Also it was not the Presbyterians who were primarily trying to take over the Coptic church (from within, with the cooperation of Coptic clergy) but rather ethnically Coptic evangelicals in both the US and Egypt. Indeed, there was even a blog run by those struggling against the takeover, which had resulted in the introduction of praise and worship music in several Coptic churches, and which was also highly entrenched in some parishes otherwise well regarded for instance for recording traditional Coptic music, such as St. Mark’s in Washington, D.C.

Click to expand...

I guess it is conceivable that some Coptic members wanted to introduce praise and worship music for the glory of God. This would be very different from claiming a Protestant takeover.

The Liturgist said:

On a very minor and pedantic technicality, I believe, correct me if I’m wrong, since we don’t want to give the impression that the Coptic Pope has the same kind of unilateral authority the Roman Popes have, that what he issued was rather an encyclical that was approved by the Holy Synod.

Click to expand...

I haven't a clue as to the correct terminology involved here, to be perfectly honest. The phrase that I've read concerning it from Coptic sources was "Papal bull", but this could be an example of Coptic people whose first language is not English borrowing a term from others because that's the first or most common English term that they've seen, without realizing that it carries some meaning or implication that they are not aware of. Wouldn't be the first time.

Edit: But, yes, regardless of what it is called, it should always be kept in mind that the Coptic Orthodox Pope does not have the powers claimed by Roman Catholics concerning their Pope, and hence cannot issue these kinds of declarations unilaterally.

Andrewn said:

I guess it is conceivable that some Coptic members wanted to introduce praise and worship music for the glory of God. This would be very different from claiming a Protestant takeover.

Click to expand...

No, "Protestant takeover" still works just fine, as they're still Protestants. Their ethnicity does not matter, except perhaps with regard to the ease of communicating with the people in their common language.

Andrewn said:

I guess it is conceivable that some Coptic members wanted to introduce praise and worship music for the glory of God. This would be very different from claiming a Protestant takeover.

Click to expand...

The individuals in question had renounced membership in the Coptic Orthodox Church and/or had been renounced as members by incurring anathema, for example, through actual Nestorianism or Iconoclasm in several instances. For example, the cathedral in Muqattam was entirely devoid of iconography when Bishop Abanoub preached his first sermon there. Actually it looked almost exactly like a cinema, in the manner of many modern churches.

Now, just because this was done does not need to count as some kind of condemnation of Protestantism as a whole. Ecclesiastical conspiracies happen, because church politics tend to be, as you know, rather ugly. I recall discussing with you controversies within the Coptic Orthodox hierarchy that do not pertain to Protestant doctrine, for example. And there are many churches where the internal politics are even more shall we say toxic.

Also I would stress once more the Protestant movement in question is not traditional Protestantism like Anglicanism. Rather it consisted of attempting to replace the traditional hymns of the Coptic Orthodox Church, suppressing the use of icons, the veneration of the blessed Virgin Mary, and auracular Confession, among other things, and was associated with the sale of books like “The Purpose Driven Life.” It would be like if Holy Trinity Brompton tried to impose their extreme low church worship style on the entire Anglican Communion, including the most Anglo Catholic parishes such as St. Magnus the Martyr, All Saints Margaret Street and St. Bartholomew the Great in the UK, and St. Thomas Huron Street in Canada (and formerly St. Mary Magdalene, where Healey Willan was organist), and St. Thomas Fifth Ave. In the US, all of which do things that these particularly low church Protestants were trying to suppress.

Protestant might be the wrong word for them - you have a point there. One could make a case these were actually Restorationists. They were certainly unlike Cranmer, Calvin, Luther or Wesley.

There is a priest in GoArch who I like, who advised me the best way to avoid the horror of church politics is to avoid church politics. Insofar as I am aware of various conspiracies that have occurred over the years, I feel contaminated by them. For example, learning of the various scandals in various churches of Western Europe concerning ecclesiastical benefices and simony, and also equivalent problems in the Eastern churches, was not edifying or beneficial to my faith. However it is important that a record of this things be made, but that we not dwell on them morbidly.

Also I think in the case of this scenario in the Coptic Orthodox Church we can say it had a happy ending, in that simply by installing diocesan bishops, whose absence was a grave oversight, the problem was literally solved, and also the potential for other kinds of ecclesiastical abuse.

tdidymas said:

I guess I missed something, I thought I read in that document a mention of a resurrection prior to tribulation. Can you help me understand how that document contradicts pre-trib?

Click to expand...

It's this:

"And when the three and a half years have been completed, the time of the Antichrist, through which he will have seduced the world, after the resurrection of the two prophets, in the hour which the world does not know, and on the day which the enemy of son of perdition does not know, will come the sign of the Son of Man, and coming forward the Lord shall appear with great power and much majesty, with the sign of the wood of salvation going before him, and also even with all the powers of the heavens with the whole chorus of the saints, with those who bear the sign of the holy cross upon their shoulders, as the angelic trumpet precedes him, which shall sound and declare: Arise, O sleeping ones, arise, meet Christ, because his hour of judgment has come! Then Christ shall come and the enemy shall be thrown into confusion, and the Lord shall destroy him by the spirit of his mouth. And he shall be bound and shall be plunged into the abyss of everlasting fire alive with his father Satan; and all people, who do his wishes, shall perish with him forever; but the righteous ones shall inherit everlasting life with the Lord forever and ever."

This describes Christ's coming in judgment, at which time the dead rise to meet the Lord.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

Perhaps I'm missing some context, but what is a "sea change"?

And the translators of the KJV didn't replace anything with anything, they were translating the word apostasia in a way consistent with how the word is used.

What you seem to be ignoring is how "departing" can relate to the sense of leaving or abandonment. If I depart from the faith, if I depart from Christ, that's a departure, that's a departing--an apostasy. Which is consistent with how the word is used.

Instead you latch onto a single possible translation, "departing", and then bring all your assumptions and presuppositions with you, and then violently force them into the word, and then claim anyone and anything that doesn't agree with you is part of some great cover-up to hide the truth.

That, frankly, is ridiculous and no one should take what you are saying seriously.

Here is how St. Jerome's Vulgate translates 1 Thessalonians 2:3

"Ne quis vos seducat ullo modo: quoniam nisi venerit discessio primum, et revelatus fuerit homo peccati filius perditionis,"

Jerome translates apostasia as discessio, a withdrawal, conceptually identical with "departing" in the sense of leaving someone or something, of turning away, etc.

The Peshitta translates apostasia as maruwt, "rebellion", from the adjective maruwd "rebellious" "unruly".

ܠܡܳܐ ܐ݈ܢܳܫ ܢܰܛܥܶܝܟ݂ܽܘܢ ܒ݁ܚܰܕ݂ ܡܶܢ ܐܶܣܟ݁ܺܡܺܝܢ ܡܶܛܽܠ ܕ݁ܶܐܢ ܠܳܐ ܬ݁ܺܐܬ݂ܶܐ ܠܽܘܩܕ݂ܰܡ ܡܳܪܽܘܕ݂ܽܘܬ݂ܳܐ ܘܢܶܬ݂ܓ݁ܠܶܐ ܒ݁ܰܪܢܳܫܳܐ ܕ݁ܰܚܛܺܝܬ݂ܳܐ ܒ݁ܪܶܗ ܕ݁ܰܐܒ݂ܕ݁ܳܢܳܐ ܀

In the 18th century Russian translation of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 we see

Да никтоже вас прельстит ни по единому же образу: яко аще не приидет отступление прежде, и открыется человек беззакония, сын погибели,

The word is otstuplénije, and it means "retreat" or "digression", that is, to abandon one's position, to turn away from one's obligations, etc.

Seriously, just look at how apostasia is used/translated in various languages.

You are cherry-picking your favorite way to translate it, and ignoring the nuance and how the word is actually used, and how readers of the Bible have always understood its meaning--and how it has been translated, and the intent behind the word and the translation choices in Bible translations across time, languages, and cultures.

If there is some great conspiracy to hide "the truth", then it's been going on since Jesus' earthly ministry, and you're going to have to blame Jesus, the Apostles, and the entire Christian Church of every time and place.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Sea change: Sea change or sea-change is an English idiomatic expression that denotes a substantial change in perspective, especially one that affects a group or society at large, on a particular issue. It is similar in usage and meaning to a paradigm shift, and may be viewed as a change to a society or community's zeitgeist, with regard to a specific issue. Wikipedia

Zeitgeist: The spirit of the age; the taste, outlook, and spirit characteristic of a period. Wiktionary

This is the truth: Paul originally taught the rapture to his Thessalonian flock: 1 Th 4:16-17. They were experts on the subject with supporting verses like 1 Th 1:10 and 1 Th 5:1-3 (the very violent beginning to the Trib).

His flock had received a fraudulent letter, made to appear to be from Paul, stating that they had missed the rapture and were in the Trib. The whole purpose of 2 Th 2:1-3 was to correct his Thessalonian flock, after they had been deceived by a fraudulent letter. In that light, please read 2 Th 2:1-3 BEFORE KJV came along with a total misunderstanding of the purpose to 2 Th 2:1-3.

Please also note that the Liddell & Scott Greek-English Lexicon carries the two main definitions to apostasia: (1) defection; revolt, and (2) departure; disappearance. It is easy to see that definition #1 relates to a falling away. However, definition #2 clearly relates to the rapture, as departure, in Greek, most closely relates to disappearance, as in physical departure.

Here are 2 Th 2:1-3 from Bibles BEFORE KJV came along with their very misguided sea change in verse 3 by replacing departure or departing with falling away. Here is what 2 Th 2:1-3 really said before the KJV in 1611. Paul was correcting his flock about a fraudulent letter they received, telling them they had missed the rapture and were in the Trib (Day of the Lord). Therefore, in verse 1 below, Paul is strictly raising the topic of the rapture, to then point out the deception suffered by his flock (verse 2), then he corrects them (verse 3):

2 Th 2:1 (Geneva Bible): Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our assembling unto him,

2 Th 2:2 (NLT): Don’t be so easily shaken or alarmed by those who say that the day of the Lord has already begun. Don’t believe them, even if they claim to have had a spiritual vision, a revelation, or a letter supposedly from us.

2 Th 2:3 (Geneva Bible): Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sin be disclosed, even the son of perdition.

ViaCrucis said:

It's this:

"And when the three and a half years have been completed, the time of the Antichrist, through which he will have seduced the world, after the resurrection of the two prophets, in the hour which the world does not know, and on the day which the enemy of son of perdition does not know, will come the sign of the Son of Man, and coming forward the Lord shall appear with great power and much majesty, with the sign of the wood of salvation going before him, and also even with all the powers of the heavens with the whole chorus of the saints, with those who bear the sign of the holy cross upon their shoulders, as the angelic trumpet precedes him, which shall sound and declare: Arise, O sleeping ones, arise, meet Christ, because his hour of judgment has come! Then Christ shall come and the enemy shall be thrown into confusion, and the Lord shall destroy him by the spirit of his mouth. And he shall be bound and shall be plunged into the abyss of everlasting fire alive with his father Satan; and all people, who do his wishes, shall perish with him forever; but the righteous ones shall inherit everlasting life with the Lord forever and ever."

This describes Christ's coming in judgment, at which time the dead rise to meet the Lord.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

This is only when the unbelieving dead are judged. It's called the Great White Throne of Judgment:

Rev 20 (NIV):11-15: Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

tdidymas said:

I don't know where you got this quote, as it doesn't appear to be in the page of the link you provided. And besides that, what happens in this quote is after the tribulation has started. In the link you provided, I see this quote (as it seems like the whole thing is about):

"So we have a passage, appearing in two Latin authors, which says that before the Tribulation, the elect are gathered together and taken away by the Lord."

This looks to me like a pre-trib rapture idea, written around the 4th Century.

Click to expand...

See the final section (Section 10).

-CryptoLutheran

Jeffrey Bowden said:

Sea change: Sea change or sea-change is an English idiomatic expression that denotes a substantial change in perspective, especially one that affects a group or society at large, on a particular issue. It is similar in usage and meaning to a paradigm shift, and may be viewed as a change to a society or community's zeitgeist, with regard to a specific issue. Wikipedia

Zeitgeist: The spirit of the age; the taste, outlook, and spirit characteristic of a period. Wiktionary

This is the truth: Paul originally taught the rapture to his Thessalonian flock: 1 Th 4:16-17. They were experts on the subject with supporting verses like 1 Th 1:10 and 1 Th 5:1-3 (the very violent beginning to the Trib).

His flock had received a fraudulent letter, made to appear to be from Paul, stating that they had missed the rapture and were in the Trib. The whole purpose of 2 Th 2:1-3 was to correct his Thessalonian flock, after they had been deceived by a fraudulent letter. In that light, please read 2 Th 2:1-3 BEFORE KJV came along with a total misunderstanding of the purpose to 2 Th 2:1-3.

Please also note that the Liddell & Scott Greek-English Lexicon carries the two main definitions to apostasia: (1) defection; revolt, and (2) departure; disappearance. It is easy to see that definition #1 relates to a falling away. However, definition #2 clearly relates to the rapture, as departure, in Greek, most closely relates to disappearance, as in physical departure.

Here are 2 Th 2:1-3 from Bibles BEFORE KJV came along with their very misguided sea change in verse 3 by replacing departure or departing with falling away. Here is what 2 Th 2:1-3 really said before the KJV in 1611. Paul was correcting his flock about a fraudulent letter they received, telling them they had missed the rapture and were in the Trib (Day of the Lord). Therefore, in verse 1 below, Paul is strictly raising the topic of the rapture, to then point out the deception suffered by his flock (verse 2), then he corrects them (verse 3):

2 Th 2:1 (Geneva Bible): Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our assembling unto him,

2 Th 2:2 (NLT): Don’t be so easily shaken or alarmed by those who say that the day of the Lord has already begun. Don’t believe them, even if they claim to have had a spiritual vision, a revelation, or a letter supposedly from us.

2 Th 2:3 (Geneva Bible): Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sin be disclosed, even the son of perdition.

Click to expand...

Making things up, denying evidence, and promoting conspiracy theories doesn't make your argument better.

-CryptoLUtheran

Jeffrey Bowden said:

This is only when the unbelieving dead are judged. It's called the Great White Throne of Judgment:

Click to expand...

The text, as quoted, states that when Christ comes, He comes to judge, and at that time the dead shall rise to meet Him--with the sound of angelic shout and heavenly trumpet.

"And when the three and a half years have been completed, the time of the Antichrist, through which he will have seduced the world, after the resurrection of the two prophets, in the hour which the world does not know, and on the day which the enemy of son of perdition does not know, will come the sign of the Son of Man, and coming forward the Lord shall appear with great power and much majesty, with the sign of the wood of salvation going before him, and also even with all the powers of the heavens with the whole chorus of the saints, with those who bear the sign of the holy cross upon their shoulders, as the angelic trumpet precedes him, which shall sound and declare: Arise, O sleeping ones, arise, meet Christ, because his hour of judgment has come! Then Christ shall come and the enemy shall be thrown into confusion, and the Lord shall destroy him by the spirit of his mouth. And he shall be bound and shall be plunged into the abyss of everlasting fire alive with his father Satan; and all people, who do his wishes, shall perish with him forever; but the righteous ones shall inherit everlasting life with the Lord forever and ever."

The Lord appears, with all the saints and powers of heaven, with the angelic trumpet and declaring that the dead should rise and meet Jesus. The righteous, rising up, meeting Christ, will go on to live forever with the Lord Jesus, while the wicked powers of the Antichrist and all the unrighteous shall perish in fire with the devil.

That's what the text here says.

Taking a sledgehammer and trying to force this square peg into a round hole just ain't gonna work.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

https://o.b5z.net/i/u/2167316/f/Ephraem-OntheLastTimestheAnt.pdf

See the final section (Section 10).

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

This is proof of the pre-Trib rapture. Now, prove that it isn't proof of the pre-Trib rapture.

1 Th 1:10 (NIV): and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

Ezekiel 14:21 (NLT): “Now this is what the Sovereign Lord says: How terrible it will be when all four of these dreadful punishments fall upon Jerusalem—war, famine, wild animals, and disease—destroying all her people and animals.

Do you see the word "war" above that's a certified form of God's wrath?

Rev 6:4 (NLT): Then another horse appeared, a red one. Its rider was given a mighty sword and the authority to take peace from the earth. And there was war and slaughter everywhere.

There you have proof, that the "war" in the 2nd seal is the starting point for God's wrath in the Trib. That seal is opened on day 1 of the Trib. Now, read again 1 Th 1:10 (NIV): and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

That is proof the pre-Trib rapture will occur. The "wrath to come" begins in the 2nd seal. You can bet that seal is opened on day 1 of the Trib.

Jeffrey Bowden said:

This is proof of the pre-Trib rapture. Now, prove that it isn't proof of the pre-Trib rapture.

1 Th 1:10 (NIV): and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

Ezekiel 14:21 (NLT): “Now this is what the Sovereign Lord says: How terrible it will be when all four of these dreadful punishments fall upon Jerusalem—war, famine, wild animals, and disease—destroying all her people and animals.

Do you see the word "war" above that's a certified form of God's wrath?

Rev 6:4 (NLT): Then another horse appeared, a red one. Its rider was given a mighty sword and the authority to take peace from the earth. And there was war and slaughter everywhere.

There you have proof, that the "war" in the 2nd seal is the starting point for God's wrath in the Trib. That seal is opened on day 1 of the Trib. Now, read again 1 Th 1:10 (NIV): and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

That is proof the pre-Trib rapture will occur. The "wrath to come" begins in the 2nd seal. You can bet that seal is opened on day 1 of the Trib.

Click to expand...

Pseudo-Ephraem is wrong in section 10, the only section I cared to look at.

ViaCrucis said:

Making things up, denying evidence, and promoting conspiracy theories doesn't make your argument better.

-CryptoLUtheran

Click to expand...

What's made up?