Quote:
Originally Posted by ZaraZoteBuccaneer
Ah ha, so now I see the reason why I was losing you. Because I disagree! Well that's too bad.
you're making a case that if there is any kind of saving rapture that takes place, it will be after every judgement that God pours out on earth... I'm not with ya on that and i think your quotations are flawed.
to keep my rebuttal concise, try looking up the following and we can keep talking... you need to understand the context and clarification of Pauls writing. look up 1 thess 5 :9. Also read into the promise to the church given in Rev 3:10. then explain to me what Paul was meaning when he described Christ as a thief in the night - what will he be stealing???
and why???
And sciotamicks, I don't know what version of the Bible you are pulling passages from, but they are not correct translations. the correct phrase is 'the end will come like a flood', not be cut off with a flood.
|
ZZB; I have already looked into those verses and they do not support a pre-trib viewpoint. They have been dealt with recently on some of the other threads, but I will give a genaeral sense once more.
The
thief motif is not for the righteous but the unrighteous. Christ does not come for His own as a thief. It is to
them that are not watching, waiting, prepared for Christ's return. Read I Thess.5 and notice the transition from
'you' to
'them' in Paul's teaching to the Thessalonians. Notice that Paul equates the Day of the Lord with the thief motif. He also says that christians
know perfectly about this day. He also says that christians are not in darkness so that this day should overtake them as a thief. Jesus is not coming for His elect at the begining of the tribulation as a thief. Note Rev.16:15 - Christ comes as a
thief at the
end of the tribulation not the begining. So the context clearly puts the Day of the Lord at the end of the tribulation when Jesus comes as a thief to rob the wicked not the righteous. Now 5:9 is talking about that final day of judgment not the tribulation.
As far as Rev.3:10: I posted the below info on another thread as well.
First: It does not say that God would keep them from the
world or the
Tribulation; it says that God would keep them from
‘the hour of temptation.’ This is in line with Jesus’ prayer in Jn.17:15. The focus is not so much the hour but the temptation. In other words God is keeping them from what the hour represents not an ‘hour’ per-se; it’s a promise to keep them from the temptation of a particular time not to keep them from a moment of time called an ‘hour’ just so they don’t have to experience anymore time.
[1] It is the power of God’s Spirit and promise that they overcome the temptation not a physical removal from a temporal-space-time. Certainly God does not have to remove them to protect, guard, or watch over them in regard to this temptation. So we could say God would
‘…guard you from the hour; that is the trial which is coming upon…’ or simply
‘…the hour; the trial…’
Second: The word
keep does not necessitate a removal even if the preposition ἐκ is used in conjunction with it. The word can and does have the idea of to ‘
guard, to keep watch over, and even
to continue in a given state.’ Even though saints may have to endure the tribulation/temptation of the enemy (not God’s wrath but mans) they will be protected concerning the temptation. The temptation that will come upon the whole world is probably the deception that will prevail through the lying signs and wonders used to deceive people (II Thess.2:1-12) – but certainly not the elect (Matt.24:24).
Third: The preposition ἐκ is very flexible as can be seen by an examination of any Greek grammar. It can even have the idea of
‘because of’ (Jn.6:66)
‘Because of this [what Jesus said]
many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more.’ The word for ‘time’ is not in the text – ‘
from this (ἐκ)
time…’ Now I am not saying that this is what the translation should be in Revelation but I am showing the flexibility of this preposition.
In
general it has the force of 1) Source: out of, from 2)
Separation: away from, from 3) Temporal: from
, from [this point]… on 4) Cause:
because of 5) Partitive (substituting for a Partitive gen.): of 6) Means: by, from.
[2] Now
note the verb that it is used with, it says
nothing about removal
but protection as is seen in its parallel about the Church of Philadelphia guarding and protecting the word of Christ’s
perseverance. This preposition can also have the idea of
‘since’ as in a marker of time from a point in the past. There is no
necessity for spatial or time removal. Jesus could be saying that He ‘…also will guard you,
since or because of the hour of trial is/that is coming upon the whole world.’
Fourth: Does this mean that those to whom Jesus spoke to in the other churches who were not patiently enduring would experience the temptation/trial? Nowhere in the letters to the seven churches does it explicitly say that God would keep them from the tribulation.
In fact there are hints that they will go through it and those that
overcome will be
rewarded with certain
blessings. Note 2:9-10 - now this is not the ‘The Tribulation’ per-se but notice what God allows them to suffer even unto death (cf.v.13) – not by His hands but by the Devil’s; 25-27, notice that it says to hold fast
till I come…till the end… and then they will be
given power over the nations and rule and reign with Him; 3:3 – once again here is the
thief motif, which we know speaks of the great Day of the Lord when He judges the nations and the armies gathered at Armageddon. Notice that those who keep His word will not be taken by surprise when the Lord comes upon them as a thief - that is plundered and judged. This is what Paul said exactly.
[1] See ‘Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics’ Daniel B. Wallace, p.94-96. The grammatical construction fits what is called the Genitive in Simple Opposition, where ‘…both nouns are in the same case (Gen.) and the appositive (Trial) does not name a specific example that falls within the category named by the noun to which it is related (hour). Rather, it simply gives a different designation that either clarifies who [or what] is the one [or thing] named or shows a different relation to the rest of the clause than what the first noun by itself could display. Both words thus have the same referent, though they describe it in different terms.’
[2] Ibid. pp.371-372; Also note, pp.123; 359-360; Page 123, he talks about ἐκ + gen. expressing the beginning of time (cf., e.g., Mark 9:21 - ‘from childhood’). The point is, once again the meaning is flexible. On pages 359-360, he says regarding spatial functions of prepositions – ‘What is the value of this discussion for exegesis? It is simply that too often prepositions are analyzed simplistically, etymologically, and without consideration for the verb to which they are connected. Prepositions are often treated in isolation, as though their ontological meaning were still completely intact. Note for example, the following illustration.’ He then discusses John 1:18 and then list other texts impacted by the discussion including Rev.3:10. 
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ultimately I think you and I agree and still stand on my previous comment, that I like your passion.
