Dorightchristians - The Anon Church And Back Row Baptist

[Standing Firm In Christ]

http://beginningandend.com/what-did-ancient-church-fathers-believe-about-the-rapture/

[Steve Schwenke]

Alimantado

This argument has been going back and forth for YEARS on this forum....yes, you read that correctly...YEARS. 

For several years now, Invicta has been repeating this falsehood that Darby invented this doctrine. 

For several years now, the rest of us have debunked that theory in many - MANY - different ways. 

Yet...

he continues to repeat that lie as if nOBody has ever disproven it! 

It really is absurd.

That is why there is such a strong reaction to him when he drops that line on us repeatedly.  By now, we have sufficiently proven that he is wrong on that point, yet he still continues to repeat the claim. 

[Alimantado]

Well, like I say, I haven't been following these debates very closely, Steve, but I have been on this forum since before Invicta joined, and whenever I've 'popped my head in' and noticed Darby being discussed, the response to Invicta has always seemed to take the form that I described in my last post, just as it has on this occassion too.

[Invicta]

I did correct my earlier post, In that Darby invented dispensationalism.  By that I mean the system known now as dispensationalism.  Historicist writers like E B Elliott and H Grattan Guinnes mentioned dispensations but not as a system.

[Covenanter]

Alimantado

This argument has been going back and forth for YEARS on this forum....yes, you read that correctly...YEARS. 

For several years now, Invicta has been repeating this falsehood that Darby invented this doctrine. 

For several years now, the rest of us have debunked that theory in many - MANY - different ways. 

Yet...

he continues to repeat that lie as if nOBody has ever disproven it! 

It really is absurd.

That is why there is such a strong reaction to him when he drops that line on us repeatedly.  By now, we have sufficiently proven that he is wrong on that point, yet he still continues to repeat the claim. 

I think Invicta has attributed the INVENTION of futurism to a Jesuit - seeking to refute the Protestant teaching that the Pope was the antichrist & man of sin, ex-officio. That doctrine being taken up by Darby & others & popularised by Scofield.

 

NN raised the question in this thread, with a quote from Thomas Ice to the effect that the pre-trib rapture (PTR) was clearly taught in a sermon by Pseudo-Ephraem dating from 400-700 AD. Ice clearly approaches S-Ephraem looking for PTR teaching, & sees it in this line:

"All the saints and elect of God are gathered together before the tribulation, which is to come, and are taken to the Lord, in order that they may not see at any time the confusion which overwhelms the world because of our sins."

That could be understood as teaching PTR, but during the 3 1/2 years trib he sees:

But those who wander through the deserts, fleeing from the face of the serpent, bend their knees to God, just as lambs to the adders of their mothers, being sustained by the salvation of the Lord, and while wandering in states of desertion, they eat herbs.

So, whatever he means by "gathered together before the tribulation, which is to come, and are taken to the Lord," the believers do go through the trib, "being sustained by the salvation of the Lord."

 

In his final section X, he describes the Lord's post-trib coming for resurrection of the saints & destruction of the wicked.

 

The significance of P-E for this forum is the assertion that he taught the PTR a thousand years before Darby & others. That certainly is NOT clear & unambiguous.

 

If forum members accuse Invicta of lying, [which must be against the principles of ths forum] then the accusers are themselves guilty of dishonesty in using P-Ephraem for their accusations. P-E is not an unambiguous teacher of the PTR. Unless, of course the "P" is POST, which is evident from $X of his sermon.

 

I remember another historical argument when many historical writers, including Isaac Watts, were claimed to be dispensationalists. Again the argument was spurious. 

 

Why are people so desperate to establish non-Biblical grounds for dispensationalism & PTR, & to accuse those who disagree with lying? Presumably because the Biblical grounds are inadequate to prove PTR, so you have to discredit the man.

 

We have the Bible. Lets use it.

1 Thes. 4:¹⁶ For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: ¹⁷ then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. ¹⁸ Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. ² For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. ³ For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. ⁴ But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. ⁵ Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. ⁶ Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sOBer. ⁷ For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. ⁸ But let us, who are of the day, be sOBer, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation. ⁹ For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to OBtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, ¹⁰ who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him. ¹¹ Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.

 

Notice - when we meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord the wicked will suffer sudden destruction [cometh upon them,] as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. Read on into 2 Thes. & it becomes clear that Paul is post-trib. 

[Standing Firm In Christ]

I disagree.  Paul was very much Pre-Trib.

[Covenanter]

I disagree.  Paul was very much Pre-Trib.

Your opinion is worthless without Scripture support.

2 Thes. 1:⁶ seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; ⁷ and to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, ⁸ in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that OBey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: ⁹ who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; ¹⁰ when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

 

The tribulation that comes after our Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven is the tribulation of Hell & everlasting destruction.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

You've been given Scrtural support many times over the years, Covenanter. You ignore the proof given

[Steve Schwenke]

That is the entire prOBlem with this conversation - no matter what evidence is cited, scriptural or historical, it is disregarded as "spurious."  This is the classic liberal position on full display.  They insist on the truth of their position, and demean and dismiss anyone who disagrees with them, and then pretend to be pious about it. 

 

You can lead a horse to water....

 

Invicta, If I were you, I would think long and hard about your choice of vocabulary so that you do not bring about so much confusion.  I know I have just to avoid having people choke over my terminology. 

Be more clear in your meaning.

 

The truth is you have brought this up before, and we have dismantled it before - yet you continue to run us back to Darby.  It is extremely dishonest. 

Choose a different line of reasoning!

[Covenanter]

 

SFIC

I disagree.  Paul was very much Pre-Trib.

 

Your opinion is worthless without Scripture support.

2 Thes. 1:⁶ seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; ⁷ and to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, ⁸ in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that OBey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: ⁹ who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; ¹⁰ when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

 

The tribulation that comes after our Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven is the tribulation of Hell & everlasting destruction.

 

SFIC

You've been given Scrtural support many times over the years, Covenanter. You ignore the proof given

Show me where I have been shown a PTR interpretation of 2 Thes. 1. I have quoted it several times, but don't remember ever seeing a reasoned Scriptural response.

 

 

 

 

[Invicta]

I have shown from John's Gospel that the saints would be raised on the last day and the last day is also the Day of Judgment.

 

Someone started a thread some time ago to say that all the church fathers taught the PTR.  I showed that that was completely false.  

 

Many years ago, a Baptist pastor told me that he was a sub editor of Grace Magazine and they were considering publishing and article on Antichrist.  He said he told them that they shouldn't publish it without a counter argument.  "Get on and write one then" they said.  So he asked me if I knew if any of the 'fathers' had considered that the let and hinderance in 2 Thess 2, were the Emperor and the empire.  I said I didn't know, but would look it up.  I went to the library and borrowed all the books I could on the ante Nicene writers, and found the all did teach that.  I supplied him with the information and he wrote the article.   Both articles appeared in Grace Magazine in June 1990.  

 

They taught that once the emperor and the empire were removed, Antichrist would come, then would come the end of all things (Tertullian).  

[Steve Schwenke]

Hilarious!

Covenanter asks for Scriptural proof.

Invicta gives us a lesson on the Church Fathers.

 

Make up your minds, guys!

[DaveW]

I am sick of this....

 

The issue with Invicta is not whether or not pre-tirb, post trib, or amill etc is the right thing.

 

The issue is the he has once again rolled out that it was started with this Darby bloke - which has been shown time and again on this site that such a  claim is blatantly untrue.

 

 

It is not about doctrine in fact, it is about false historical claims - of course the appeal will be to history in this matter, for the claim is not a biblical one but an historical one.

He claims that pre-trib started with Darby - oh wait a bit with that other bloke a few years earlier - oh wait a bit maybe a bloke a few years earlier.

 

In fact, it has been shown already, not just in this thread that pre-trib was known of far far earlier than his repeated claims - yet he continues to make such claims.

 

Either he is right or he is wrong, but he is not "mistaken" - it has been shown, so either he is lying or everyone else is lying.

 

By all means have a biblical discussion on the matter, but his lying claim that "It all started with Darby" holds no water - discuss it on the Bible - like I did with Daniel's 70 years - not on false historical claims......

Remember that it was Invicta who introduced Darby into this thread once again.

[HappyChristian]

And what all of this had to do with the OP article is beyond me...