Pre-trib Rapture only, anything else incriminates God

[KingJ]

where is "tribulation saints" hinted at?

Rev 13:7, Rev 14:12, Rev 8:3-4. These verses call them saints.

The only important thing to note about the difference between those raptured and them, is the criteria for salvation. Saving faith to believe Jesus is Lord and was raised from the dead per Rom 10:9 will matter naught in the tribulation if you have the mark of the beast per Rev 14:9-11.

But for those raptured, Rom 10:9 saving faith in Jesus is the very criteria for salvation.

Tribulation saints can be thought of as 'harder nuts to crack'. A harsher filtering process is required to get a yield from the batch of humans remaining on earth after the rapture. It is clear that some will only take serving Jesus seriously when 'a gun' is held to their head.

 

[joestue]

Jesus, in the verse you are referencing from Matt 24 is not speaking to Christians already raptured.

you got to quit making up stuff.

Jesus isn't speaking of a rapture because there isn't one at the close of this age.

 

[KingJ]

Jesus isn't speaking of a rapture because there isn't one at the close of this age.

The OP gives scripture that proves a rapture. Perhaps attempt to directly address the points made?

Your one-liner insults and critiques belong on X, not here.

 

[B-A-C]

1 Timothy 1:7 in the NASB:

"wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions."

That word "confident assertions" is the Greek diabebaioomai — to speak very confidently, to strongly affirm. Paul's point is sharp: their confidence is inversely proportional to their understanding. A great preaching text.

KingJ often makes assumptions without scripture to back it up. Then he accuses you of cherry-picking the only verses that actually have to do with the subject at hand.

The problem is.. when the first base foundation assumption is wrong, everything on top of it is wrong.
He is pretty good at context switching and avoiding direct questions.

 

[KingJ]

1 Timothy 1:7 in the NASB:

"wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions."

That word "confident assertions" is the Greek diabebaioomai — to speak very confidently, to strongly affirm. Paul's point is sharp: their confidence is inversely proportional to their understanding. A great preaching text.

KingJ often makes assumptions without scripture to back it up. Then he accuses you of cherry-picking the only verses that actually have to do with the subject at hand.

The problem is.. when the first base foundation assumption is wrong, everything on top of it is wrong.
He is pretty good at context switching and avoiding direct questions.

Avoid direct questions? You are accusing me of what I am accusing you and others of? Please give examples BAC. Go floor is yours.....

I am not going to hold my breathe as I am still waiting for you to grasp the OP and post 11 to you.

-----------------------------

BAC ''nobody knows the start date of the tribulation = evidence for Matt 24:36 not relating to the rapture''.

KingJ

1. Dan 9:27 clearly states a covenant will be signed = Start of seven years.
2. Matt 24:15 states a clear event taking place that is either the start of the seven years or the start of the second half of the tribulation.
3. The tribulation is EXACTLY seven years and according to Rev 20:3 is at the end of the sixth day as it ushers in the seventh day which is said to be EXACTLY a thousand years. These are dates that any person with a working brain can calculate.
4. A lot of scripture suggests that God's wrath comes at the mid point. So you could start counting from when ''hail and fire mingled with blood'' start falling to the earth.
5. Matt 24:36 says NOBODY except for God the Father knows the day and hour. That would mean you need to believe all angels in heaven and Jesus Himself cannot count to six thousand days and seven years.
6. The demons Jesus cast into pigs Matt 8:29 seemed to know it was not yet their time. IE They know their time...Their ''time'' is judgement day. Judgement day will be at the end of the seven days Rev 20:10.

Every point raised proves that the end of the tribulation is a knowable date. You need to debunk all six points raised.

BAC ''KingJ makes assumptions without scripture to back it up''. He is pretty good at context switching and avoiding direct questions.

--------------------------

Disagreement on this topic is a serious matter. In my OP I explain that you are incriminating God. With this accusation in mind, do you not think a Christian should try and do better than merely accusing someone of '''you say I am cherry picking, but you are. You are also guilty of 'confident assertions''.

---------------------------

If you want to get personal. I have a massive beef with you and a few others. A Christians ONE JOB per 2 Cor 5:20 is to properly represent God as good Psalm 136:1, righteous in all His ways Psalm 145:17 and just Job 34:12.

Yet you hold to and teach as scriptural fact many things that completely and utterly incriminate Him.

How your belief represents God determines the accuracy of it as....scripture is CRYSTAL clear that God is righteous in all His ways. If I accuse your belief of incriminating God you should come with a very strong rebuttal that proves I am wrong and that God remains righteous. But no, you and others do not. On multiple occasions you simply do not care. You merely state ''that is what scripture says'' so I will teach it. You are wrong and I am right. I am smart and you are dumb. Bla bla bla brain rot drivel.

Granted, you are not as bad as some others. But I remind you all of one verse.

Matt 18:6 If anyone causes one of these little ones, those who believe in me, to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.

When you misrepresent the nature and character of God you are stumbling many and need to meditate on Matt 18:6!!!

 

[KingJ]

The problem is.. when the first base foundation assumption is wrong, everything on top of it is wrong.
He is pretty good at context switching and avoiding direct questions.

You are just make assumptions about my beliefs that you cannot support. But I can support my statements of your belief. It is important to use all scripture to shine light on a topic. Never start with a pet belief.

On the rapture, I have correctly accused you of cherry picking. Note how not one popular scripture rapture believers use as support (provided in my post # 3) were in your post # 2.

That my friend is the very definition of cherry picking!

 

[B-A-C]

Dan 9:27 clearly states a covenant will be signed = Start of seven years.

What translation do you have? Where does it say this happens precisely at the start?

Let me lay this out plainly, chapter and verse, no assumptions added.

The Core Problem With Pre-Trib Logic

You cited Daniel 9:27 as your foundation. Good — let's stay there. That verse places the abomination of desolation at the middle of the week — not the beginning. So the Great Tribulation, which Jesus himself ties directly to that abomination in Matthew 24:15-21, doesn't even start until 3½ years in. That's your own verse saying that.

But here's the deeper problem. You say the rapture can't be post-trib because you can just add 7 years from the covenant signing date. Simple math, right?

Give me the calendar date. What day does the tribulation start?

If you don't know that date — and you can't, because no man knows — then your "just add 7 years" argument has no starting point. You can't calculate 7 years from an unknown date.

The Tuesday/Wednesday Problem

You agree with Jesus that no man knows the day or hour. OK. So here's the problem that creates for pre-trib:

Say the tribulation starts on Wednesday. You need to rapture the church on Tuesday. But Jesus doesn't know Wednesday is coming until Wednesday arrives. So He looks back and says "I should have raptured them yesterday." That's not a theological position — that's an impossibility you've built into your own framework.

Post-trib doesn't have this problem. Jesus watches the signs unfold — signs He himself described in Matthew 24. The man of lawlessness is revealed. He takes his seat in the temple. Those are visible, public, undeniable events. From that point the days are countable. Christ acts at the end of a known countdown, not before an unknown start.

Four Witnesses Saying the Same Thing

Scripture establishes truth by multiple witnesses. Here are four saying the same thing:

Matthew 24:29-31 — after the tribulation, the Son of Man appears and sends angels with a trumpet to gather the elect.

Mark 13:24-27 — after the tribulation, He gathers the elect.

2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 — the gathering to Christ will not happen unless the apostasy comes first AND the man of lawlessness is revealed AND takes his seat in the temple.

Revelation 20 — after the tribulation, after the millennial reign — "This is the first resurrection."

Four books. Same word. After.

The Resurrection Problem

Revelation 20 calls it the first resurrection. If the church was already raptured years earlier, what do we call that event? The pre-first resurrection? Scripture used the word "first" for something that happens after the tribulation. You don't get to invent an earlier unnamed event and still call Revelation 20 the first.

The Trumpet Problem

1 Corinthians 15:52 says the resurrection happens at the last trump. Matthew 24:31 places a trumpet at the gathering of the elect after the tribulation. Revelation has seven trumpets, the last of which in chapter 11 announces the kingdoms of this world becoming Christ's kingdom.

If there's a pre-trib rapture trumpet, name it. Where is it in Scripture? Because Paul already used the word "last" — and you can't have a "last trumpet" with more trumpets coming after it. That would make it the not-last trumpet.

The Simple Test

Read it at face value. Don't add events Scripture doesn't mention. Don't invent a secret rapture the text never calls secret. Don't create a "pre-first" resurrection the text never names. Don't place a trumpet before the last trumpet.

When you do that — when you just let the text say what it says — post-trib isn't a strained interpretation. It's the plain reading. After means after. Last means last. First means first.

The pre-trib position requires additions to Scripture to survive. The post-trib position just requires reading it.

 

[KingJ]

What translation do you have? Where does it say this happens precisely at the start?

Let me lay this out plainly, chapter and verse, no assumptions added.

The Core Problem With Pre-Trib Logic

You cited Daniel 9:27 as your foundation. Good — let's stay there. That verse places the abomination of desolation at the middle of the week — not the beginning. So the Great Tribulation, which Jesus himself ties directly to that abomination in Matthew 24:15-21, doesn't even start until 3½ years in. That's your own verse saying that.

But here's the deeper problem. You say the rapture can't be post-trib because you can just add 7 years from the covenant signing date. Simple math, right?

Give me the calendar date. What day does the tribulation start?

If you don't know that date — and you can't, because no man knows — then your "just add 7 years" argument has no starting point. You can't calculate 7 years from an unknown date.

The Tuesday/Wednesday Problem

You agree with Jesus that no man knows the day or hour. OK. So here's the problem that creates for pre-trib:

Say the tribulation starts on Wednesday. You need to rapture the church on Tuesday. But Jesus doesn't know Wednesday is coming until Wednesday arrives. So He looks back and says "I should have raptured them yesterday." That's not a theological position — that's an impossibility you've built into your own framework.

Post-trib doesn't have this problem. Jesus watches the signs unfold — signs He himself described in Matthew 24. The man of lawlessness is revealed. He takes his seat in the temple. Those are visible, public, undeniable events. From that point the days are countable. Christ acts at the end of a known countdown, not before an unknown start.

Four Witnesses Saying the Same Thing

Scripture establishes truth by multiple witnesses. Here are four saying the same thing:

Matthew 24:29-31 — after the tribulation, the Son of Man appears and sends angels with a trumpet to gather the elect.

Mark 13:24-27 — after the tribulation, He gathers the elect.

2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 — the gathering to Christ will not happen unless the apostasy comes first AND the man of lawlessness is revealed AND takes his seat in the temple.

Revelation 20 — after the tribulation, after the millennial reign — "This is the first resurrection."

Four books. Same word. After.

The Resurrection Problem

Revelation 20 calls it the first resurrection. If the church was already raptured years earlier, what do we call that event? The pre-first resurrection? Scripture used the word "first" for something that happens after the tribulation. You don't get to invent an earlier unnamed event and still call Revelation 20 the first.

The Trumpet Problem

1 Corinthians 15:52 says the resurrection happens at the last trump. Matthew 24:31 places a trumpet at the gathering of the elect after the tribulation. Revelation has seven trumpets, the last of which in chapter 11 announces the kingdoms of this world becoming Christ's kingdom.

If there's a pre-trib rapture trumpet, name it. Where is it in Scripture? Because Paul already used the word "last" — and you can't have a "last trumpet" with more trumpets coming after it. That would make it the not-last trumpet.

The Simple Test

Read it at face value. Don't add events Scripture doesn't mention. Don't invent a secret rapture the text never calls secret. Don't create a "pre-first" resurrection the text never names. Don't place a trumpet before the last trumpet.

When you do that — when you just let the text say what it says — post-trib isn't a strained interpretation. It's the plain reading. After means after. Last means last. First means first.

The pre-trib position requires additions to Scripture to survive. The post-trib position just requires reading it.

BAC, thanks for your efforted reply but you are just running in a random direction making points unrelated to those raised. You only spoke on Dan 9:27 in one line and then made a false accusation of what I said about Matt 24:15.

Can I ask that you please, A. properly read before you reply and B. Quote and respond point by point. Otherwise the discussion is all over the show.

 

[B-A-C]

BAC, thanks for your efforted reply but you are just running in a random direction making points unrelated to those raised. You only spoke on Dan 9:27 in one line and then made a false accusation of what I said about Matt 24:15.

Can I ask that you please, A. properly read before you reply and B. Quote and respond point by point. Otherwise the discussion is all over the show.

I have read it, over and over.. it makes less sense each I read it. If I didnt read it, how did I know you used Den 9:27?

I only spoke on 9:27, because thats the only verse YOU gave. (You can use a verse, but I can't use the same verse to respond?)

What is the false accusation I made about you and Matt 24:15, be specific please.

Dan 9:27 "And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate."

Correct me if I'm wrong here.. you said the covenant in Dan 9:27 marks the beginning of the tribulation. Correct or not?
You believe this "one week" corresponds to the 7 years? Yes or no? But the verse above says the sacrifice will change in the middle of the week - yes or no? That would 3 1/2 years later? Correct me, if I got that wrong.

But here's another logic problem... Lets say you're right, and the covenant starts the trib, so then Jesus knows when to come get the church correct?
He gets the church "after" the covenant is signed.. So either way, the rapture happens "after" the covenant begns. Using yur logic, it can't
be pre-trib either way. But according to Dan 9:27 (your verse) this doesn't happen until "the middle of the week", which would be 3 1/2 years according to your time line.

 

[joestue]

[...]

i would advice not wasting any more time

 

[KingJ]

i would advice not wasting any more time

You are lighting a match in an important conversation. That is not very wise or Christian.

 

[KingJ]

I have read it, over and over.. it makes less sense each I read it. If I didnt read it, how did I know you used Den 9:27?

Six points were raised, I even numbered them for you.

I only spoke on 9:27, because thats the only verse YOU gave. (You can use a verse, but I can't use the same verse to respond?)

What is the false accusation I made about you and Matt 24:15, be specific please.

Read what I said in point 2 of post # 25 and you will see it.

But here's another logic problem... Lets say you're right, and the covenant starts the trib, so then Jesus knows when to come get the church correct?
He gets the church "after" the covenant is signed.. So either way, the rapture happens "after" the covenant begns. Using yur logic, it can't
be pre-trib either way. But according to Dan 9:27 (your verse) this doesn't happen until "the middle of the week", which would be 3 1/2 years according to your time line.

You look at my view through your view and that to you is logical. You read scripture with your non-rapture glasses on.

The rapture happens before any calculable date as Jesus is CRYSTAL clear that it is an unknowable by all except Father God date in matt 24:36.

 

[KingJ]

What translation do you have? Where does it say this happens precisely at the start?

Daniel 9:27 does not explicitly use the word “start.” However, the text does define a bounded seven-year period tied to a covenant and a midpoint event.

The covenant is confirmed “for one week,” and in the “midst of the week” sacrifice ceases. Whether one places the Great Tribulation at the beginning or midpoint, the text clearly establishes a measurable seven-year framework.

Let me lay this out plainly, chapter and verse, no assumptions added.

The Core Problem With Pre-Trib Logic

You cited Daniel 9:27 as your foundation. Good — let's stay there. That verse places the abomination of desolation at the middle of the week — not the beginning. So the Great Tribulation, which Jesus himself ties directly to that abomination in Matthew 24:15-21, doesn't even start until 3½ years in. That's your own verse saying that.

But here's the deeper problem. You say the rapture can't be post-trib because you can just add 7 years from the covenant signing date. Simple math, right?

Give me the calendar date. What day does the tribulation start?

If you don't know that date — and you can't, because no man knows — then your "just add 7 years" argument has no starting point. You can't calculate 7 years from an unknown date.

Are you trolling? You say read my OP and post 11?

Just because we do not know the start date right now, does not mean angels and people in heaven don't. Try understand that Matt 24:36 says NOBODY except God the Father knows.

As for ''us'' knowing, for the umpteenth time, In Matt 24:15, Jesus says, “When you see the abomination…” That is a visible, public event. Once that occurs, Daniel 12 gives specific day counts from that moment.

Even if the first day of the covenant were unknown, the midpoint event creates a clear chronological anchor. From that point forward, the remaining days are not undefined, they are numbered.

The Tuesday/Wednesday Problem

You agree with Jesus that no man knows the day or hour. OK. So here's the problem that creates for pre-trib:

Say the tribulation starts on Wednesday. You need to rapture the church on Tuesday. But Jesus doesn't know Wednesday is coming until Wednesday arrives. So He looks back and says "I should have raptured them yesterday." That's not a theological position — that's an impossibility you've built into your own framework.

Post-trib doesn't have this problem. Jesus watches the signs unfold — signs He himself described in Matthew 24. The man of lawlessness is revealed. He takes his seat in the temple. Those are visible, public, undeniable events. From that point the days are countable. Christ acts at the end of a known countdown, not before an unknown start.

What a silly point.

Jesus does know when ''Wednesday'' / tribulation is. Everyone in heaven that can count does! You have re-read my OP and post 11 and you still don't understand this?

Jesus and NOBODY knows when ''Tuesday'' / rapture date is.

Four Witnesses Saying the Same Thing

Scripture establishes truth by multiple witnesses. Here are four saying the same thing:

Matthew 24:29-31 — after the tribulation, the Son of Man appears and sends angels with a trumpet to gather the elect.

Mark 13:24-27 — after the tribulation, He gathers the elect.

2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 — the gathering to Christ will not happen unless the apostasy comes first AND the man of lawlessness is revealed AND takes his seat in the temple.

Revelation 20 — after the tribulation, after the millennial reign — "This is the first resurrection."

Four books. Same word. After.

So because you can find and cherry pick four verses talking to a second coming, there is no rapture.

I believe in both a rapture and a second coming. You are the one ignoring scripture speaking to a rapture and holding on only to those speaking to a resurrection at the end of the tribulation.

The Resurrection Problem

Revelation 20 calls it the first resurrection. If the church was already raptured years earlier, what do we call that event? The pre-first resurrection? Scripture used the word "first" for something that happens after the tribulation. You don't get to invent an earlier unnamed event and still call Revelation 20 the first.

The word 'first' in Rev 20 has context to it.

Revelation 20’s “first resurrection” is not the absolute first resurrection in all history, but the first in a specific category (tribulation martyrs). Christ’s resurrection is the prototype, and the rapture follows the same pattern.

The Trumpet Problem

1 Corinthians 15:52 says the resurrection happens at the last trump. Matthew 24:31 places a trumpet at the gathering of the elect after the tribulation. Revelation has seven trumpets, the last of which in chapter 11 announces the kingdoms of this world becoming Christ's kingdom.

If there's a pre-trib rapture trumpet, name it. Where is it in Scripture? Because Paul already used the word "last" — and you can't have a "last trumpet" with more trumpets coming after it. That would make it the not-last trumpet.

I don't see the relevance. So what if Paul is referencing the last trumpet in Revelations? What am I missing? Trumpets have blown many times throughout scripture for differing events. There will be tribulation saints.

Exodus 19:16; 20:18 - Announce God’s presence at Sinai
Numbers 10:1–10 - Signaling camps to move, gatherings, or battle
Joshua 6:4–20 - Trumpets for Jericho’s walls falling
1 Thessalonians 4:16 - Resurrection of the dead in Christ
Revelation 8–11 - Seven trumpets signaling judgments in end times
1 Corinthians 15:52 - Trumpet signaling resurrection of believers

The Simple Test

Read it at face value. Don't add events Scripture doesn't mention. Don't invent a secret rapture the text never calls secret. Don't create a "pre-first" resurrection the text never names. Don't place a trumpet before the last trumpet.

When you do that — when you just let the text say what it says — post-trib isn't a strained interpretation. It's the plain reading. After means after. Last means last. First means first.

The pre-trib position requires additions to Scripture to survive. The post-trib position just requires reading it.

I agree with not adding to scripture. I think you think reading scripture 'as is' relates only to reading the selected passages you cherry picked in post #2 and ignoring those I gave in post #3.

-----------------------

My central point is narrower than the broader rapture debate: If Daniel provides specific day counts from an identifiable event, and if Jesus tells believers to recognize that event (“when you see…”), then at least part of the tribulation becomes chronologically measurable once underway. If that is true, then Gospel of Matthew 24:36 cannot refer to a return that occurs after those countable markers, because the remaining days would already be defined.

 

[Dave M]

King J ---I have to ask, what if you are wrong? and you stand before God and he says something about this post, basically you're accusing him of something if he does not see it your way.

The greatest minds in theology cannot agree on this topic, yet you are certain you know the truth, you make a post accusing God of something if he does not agree with your interpretation.

Be very careful when use God name like this, I believe it is very dangerous thing and leads to great pride which can blind us to the truth without even knowing we are blind.

 

[joestue]

You are lighting a match in an important conversation. That is not very wise or Christian.

how would a person know if they will not be raptured?

 

[KingJ]

King J ---I have to ask, what if you are wrong? and you stand before God and he says something about this post, basically you're accusing him of something if he does not see it your way.

The greatest minds in theology cannot agree on this topic, yet you are certain you know the truth, you make a post accusing God of something if he does not agree with your interpretation.

Be very careful when use God name like this, I believe it is very dangerous thing and leads to great pride which can blind us to the truth without even knowing we are blind.

Dave, I like your thinking and question. Whenever there is a disagreement on a scriptural topic that is very important, like this one, you need to examine yourself to see which side of the fence you are on. Side A - Defends God as righteous in all His ways. Side B - Incriminates Him.

I would rather be wrong of some technicalities than wrong on incriminating Him.

I have in my OP accused rapture deniers of two spaces that heavily incriminate Him. If I did not believe in a rapture, I would make sure I could give a very sound response to them. As one fact that is not up for debate is that God is righteous in all His ways to the exclusion of none Psalm 145:17, 1 John 1:5.

Imagine standing before God and being guilty of failing at your one job 2 Cor 5:20 of properly representing Him to the lost that He loves and died...........all because you read certain scriptures differently to others...

 

[KingJ]

how would a person know if they will not be raptured?

If you don't hear God speaking to you John 10:27.

 

[KingJ]

The Tuesday/Wednesday Problem

You agree with Jesus that no man knows the day or hour. OK. So here's the problem that creates for pre-trib:

Say the tribulation starts on Wednesday. You need to rapture the church on Tuesday. But Jesus doesn't know Wednesday is coming until Wednesday arrives. So He looks back and says "I should have raptured them yesterday." That's not a theological position — that's an impossibility you've built into your own framework.

Post-trib doesn't have this problem. Jesus watches the signs unfold — signs He himself described in Matthew 24. The man of lawlessness is revealed. He takes his seat in the temple. Those are visible, public, undeniable events. From that point the days are countable. Christ acts at the end of a known countdown, not before an unknown start.

Just re-reading this. It is quite funny to see that in order to make your point you made a 7 year period a "single day wednesday" and a 2000 year period a "tuesday". Then implied that if Jesus knows when Wednesday is, He will know when Tuesday is.

I like your thinking, please can you apply the same logic to Dan 9:27 and Matt 24:15.

Lets say April 2033 is the start of the tribulation. Matt 24:36 mentions day and hour, not year, decade and century. That means that any day and hour from now to April 2033, could be a rapture date. It is not a Tues day, Wednes day issue. That is a dishonest play on words.

The only time your argument would be interesting is if we were one hour or one day from "April 2033". But I don't believe God would do that. He will ensure it is not a knowable time to fulfil Matt 24:36.

 

[KingJ]

The greatest minds in theology cannot agree on this topic,

Re-reading your post I found this line interesting.

A really smart 'non Christian' reads scripture 'as is' and this is where 'great minds' conflict. Some text says A, B and C, other text says X, Y and Z. When you put it all together you have people with A, B and Z, others with C, X and Y and so on.

BUT

When a Christian, someone who KNOWS God reads scripture with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. They KNOW that they need to always read it with the glasses of God being PERFECT, LOVING, RIGHTEOUS, HONEST, JUST....this helps us to clear the fog and correctly identify the A-Z of a topic.

Just the fact that I can identify two material arguments that taint the nature of God proves that your theory is incorrect.

But it seems that rapture deniers do not care that God be portrayed as a liar who abandons His children with someone like a paedophile.

 

[Dave M]

But it seems that rapture deniers

i think its the timing that most question